Jump to content

Welcome to MSFN Forum
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. This message will be removed once you have signed in.
Login to Account Create an Account



Photo

Java versions

- - - - -

  • Please log in to reply
36 replies to this topic

#1
cannie

cannie

    Advanced Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 464 posts
  • Joined 04-June 08
  • OS:Windows 7 x86
  • Country: Country Flag
I use the Java 1.5.0.07, which I can install or uninstall with no probems at all, but am not able to load any version after that.

Java works perfect, but for some apps like Limewire it is neccesary to install the 1.5.0.17.

I've followed all instructions given by Sun, but no results at all.

Anybody has had this experience? How did you sort it out?

Thanks.

Edited by cannie, 13 December 2008 - 09:44 AM.



How to remove advertisement from MSFN

#2
98Guy

98Guy

    Junior

  • Banned
  • Pip
  • 69 posts
  • Joined 24-August 08

I use the Java 1.5.0.07, which I can install or uninstall with no probems at all, but am not able to load any version after that.

What do you see when you go here:

http://javatester.org/version.html

I'm currently using 1.6.0_07.

I thought that Sun was going to stop supporting 1.5.x at update 16, but it seems there is an update 17.

Does anyone really know the difference between the 1.5 stream and the 1.6 stream of JRE?

Is it true that any version of 1.5.x (including update 17) is "approved" for win-98, whereas 1.6.x is not?

Who here knows the real dirt about all these different versions of JRE?

#3
rainyd

rainyd

    Advanced Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 386 posts
  • Joined 04-April 05
  • OS:98SE
  • Country: Country Flag
I think, that Sun will be updating Java 5 because it reached EOL on October 2009:

http://java.sun.com/...eol.policy.html


Yes, Java 5 is for Win98/ME and Java 6 for Windows 2000 and above.

Java 6 update 7 is the last version you can install on Win9x (they have changed/modified installer since update 10).

Btw, cannie, you have complete changelog here: http://java.sun.com/...leaseNotes.html

Edited by rainyd, 13 December 2008 - 12:17 PM.


#4
oc_dt

oc_dt

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 101 posts
  • Joined 12-December 08
I've updated to JRE 5.17 without problem. I'm using the http://www.java.com website though.
OC

#5
cannie

cannie

    Advanced Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 464 posts
  • Joined 04-June 08
  • OS:Windows 7 x86
  • Country: Country Flag

I've updated to JRE 5.17 without problem. I'm using the http://www.java.com website though.


I can't, using the same adress. I wonder if I may have deleted anything in my comp which is needed to use the new versions. It is strange, because the difficulty occurs not only using Windows 98 but also under XP (doubleboot).

Thank you oc_dt, rainyd and 98Guy!

Edited by cannie, 13 December 2008 - 01:42 PM.


#6
98Guy

98Guy

    Junior

  • Banned
  • Pip
  • 69 posts
  • Joined 24-August 08

I think, that Sun will be updating Java 5 because it reached EOL on October 2009:
http://java.sun.com/...eol.policy.html

I could have sworn that a month or two ago, that JRE-5 was EOL at the end of October *2008*. Was I wrong, or did they give JRE-5 another year of life?

Yes, Java 5 is for Win98/ME and Java 6 for Windows 2000 and above.

So what exactly does that mean?

How will my "internet experience" or my "java experience" be different if I have a machine with JRE-5 versus JRE-6 ?????????

#7
rainyd

rainyd

    Advanced Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 386 posts
  • Joined 04-April 05
  • OS:98SE
  • Country: Country Flag

I could have sworn that a month or two ago, that JRE-5 was EOL at the end of October *2008*. Was I wrong, or did they give JRE-5 another year of life?

So what exactly does that mean?

How will my "internet experience" or my "java experience" be different if I have a machine with JRE-5 versus JRE-6 ?????????


I'm not sure but quite possible that they have extended period of the support.


As to the your second question: that was some sort of exaggeration from my side - of course you can install Java 5 on Windows XP/2000 but Java 6 is optimized for the newer OSes (as you know Win9x isn't supported).

From tests which I've seen, Java 6 is quite significantly faster but personally I prefer to stick with older, recently updated version (until we resolved problem with Java 6 installer).

Edited by rainyd, 13 December 2008 - 05:42 PM.


#8
cannie

cannie

    Advanced Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 464 posts
  • Joined 04-June 08
  • OS:Windows 7 x86
  • Country: Country Flag
After reading your posts at last I came to the conclusion that my registry had been altered by a registry cleaner that I used long ago

To repair the damage the procedure has been as follows:


1.- I made a simple fresh install of Windows 98 in drive H (to be deleted afterwards), loaded Java 5.17 without any problem at all (in an external own folder D:\Java). It worked OK.

2.- I got all references in the registry concerning to the word "Java" using Registry Crawler and with them I created the text file "java.reg"

3.- I edited this file using Notepad++, to change every mention to H:\\Windows into D:\\Windows.

4.- I deleted all the newly created C:\ root files, restored my old ones and booted normally D:\Windows.

5.- I opened Registry Crawler, searched all mentions to Java in the D:\Windows registry and deleted them. Then I clicked once on "java.reg" to introduce in it the new values. Everything worked OK.

6.- Having doubleboot, I edited java.reg again to change all mentions to D:\\Windows into C:\\Windows (my XP directory) and all mentions to \\System\\ into \\System32\\.

7.- I booted Windows XP unit C:\, I opened Registry Crawler, searched all mentions to Java in the registry, deleted all, and afterwards I clicked once on "java.reg". Everything is working OK now also on XP.

The problem is over now.

Thanks to you all for your help!

#9
thydreamwalker

thydreamwalker

    teddybearguru7

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 226 posts
  • Joined 14-November 07
  • OS:Windows 7 x86
  • Country: Country Flag
:rolleyes: Has anyone noticed Java version 1.5.0.16.....becoming bloated to 600+mb's and 360+mb's respectively(@ 1gb total for jdk1.5.0.16 files) is this extreme??? or normal??? :blink:
thydreamwalker

#10
CharlotteTheHarlot

CharlotteTheHarlot

    MSFN Master

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,048 posts
  • Joined 24-September 07
  • OS:none specified
  • Country: Country Flag

I think, that Sun will be updating Java 5 because it reached EOL on October 2009:

http://java.sun.com/...eol.policy.html


Yes, Java 5 is for Win98/ME and Java 6 for Windows 2000 and above.

Java 6 update 7 is the last version you can install on Win9x (they have changed/modified installer since update 10).

Btw, cannie, you have complete changelog here: http://java.sun.com/...leaseNotes.html

@rainyd, I was wondering if you know anything else about JRE6 + Win9x? Specifically, what the heck is the last version that runs?

Maybe if you get a chance you could take a look at this thread where we started sorting this out.

I have JRE 1_6_0 on Win9x which is used by Opera (as well as others). Can't remember if I used the installer or manually did it though. I would like to know exactly which JRE is the fastest and bestest!

... Let him who hath understanding reckon the Number Of The Beast ...


#11
rainyd

rainyd

    Advanced Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 386 posts
  • Joined 04-April 05
  • OS:98SE
  • Country: Country Flag

@rainyd, I was wondering if you know anything else about JRE6 + Win9x? Specifically, what the heck is the last version that runs?

Maybe if you get a chance you could take a look at this thread where we started sorting this out.

I have JRE 1_6_0 on Win9x which is used by Opera (as well as others). Can't remember if I used the installer or manually did it though. I would like to know exactly which JRE is the fastest and bestest!


Sorry, I've made mistake: Java 6 update 6 is the last version you can run on Win9x (they modified installer of update 7). :blushing:

You can get it from here: http://java.sun.com/products/archive/ or http://www.oldapps.com/java.htm

As to the speed: on Windows XP, Java 6 should be faster than Java 5 but I'm not sure it will happen on Win98/ME too.

#12
Drugwash

Drugwash

    MSFN Expert

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,344 posts
  • Joined 21-June 06
  • OS:98SE
  • Country: Country Flag
Java 1.6.0 update 7 can very well be installed on 9x and the procedure has already been explained. It only takes letting the installer unpack the .msi within to the Temp folder and then run the .msi manually to install.
Make sure you copy the .msi to another location before closing the error dialog, otherwise it will be deleted.

I have u7 installed on my 98SE machine following this procedure, as the only available version of Java.

Edited by Drugwash, 14 December 2008 - 10:17 AM.


#13
rainyd

rainyd

    Advanced Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 386 posts
  • Joined 04-April 05
  • OS:98SE
  • Country: Country Flag

Java 1.6.0 update 7 can very well be installed on 9x and the procedure has already been explained. It only takes letting the installer unpack the .msi within to the Temp folder and then run the .msi manually to install.
Make sure you copy the .msi to another location before closing the error dialog, otherwise it will be deleted.

I have u7 installed on my 98SE machine following this procedure, as the only available version of Java.


OK, Drugwash, thank you for the info. :)

#14
cannie

cannie

    Advanced Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 464 posts
  • Joined 04-June 08
  • OS:Windows 7 x86
  • Country: Country Flag

Java 1.6.0 update 7 can very well be installed on 9x and the procedure has already been explained. It only takes letting the installer unpack the .msi within to the Temp folder and then run the .msi manually to install.
Make sure you copy the .msi to another location before closing the error dialog, otherwise it will be deleted.

I have u7 installed on my 98SE machine following this procedure, as the only available version of Java.


BTW I wonder, if the update is valid for W98 and we are really being compelled to abandon it and buy new soft/hardware, what confidence may we have it the content of the update itself? Maybe the prevailing interest in the "improvements" which are introduced in this "freeware" is not exactly a better service to the user.

#15
CharlotteTheHarlot

CharlotteTheHarlot

    MSFN Master

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,048 posts
  • Joined 24-September 07
  • OS:none specified
  • Country: Country Flag

Java 1.6.0 update 7 can very well be installed on 9x and the procedure has already been explained. It only takes letting the installer unpack the .msi within to the Temp folder and then run the .msi manually to install.
Make sure you copy the .msi to another location before closing the error dialog, otherwise it will be deleted.

I have u7 installed on my 98SE machine following this procedure, as the only available version of Java.

Yeah, I was wondering which is the latest that will run, not install.

So, to be clear, you are successful with JRE 1_6_7 then? I wonder if anyone has pushed it further.

I believe there is reason to explore this on Win9x because I think I noticed speed improvements with 1_6_0 over my previous 1_5_something.

But, then again I could be wrong. SWF has certainly gotten bloated and slower lately.

Edited by CharlotteTheHarlot, 15 December 2008 - 11:15 PM.

... Let him who hath understanding reckon the Number Of The Beast ...


#16
cannie

cannie

    Advanced Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 464 posts
  • Joined 04-June 08
  • OS:Windows 7 x86
  • Country: Country Flag

I have u7 installed on my 98SE machine following this procedure, as the only available version of Java.


Hi, Drugwash, here I am once again:

I have installed u7 following your instructions and it works perfect, no problem at all in my comp.

If I had only known it earlier it would have saved me a lot of time and efforts.

Thank you very much!

#17
Drugwash

Drugwash

    MSFN Expert

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,344 posts
  • Joined 21-June 06
  • OS:98SE
  • Country: Country Flag
If anything, I haven't stumbled into any Java-related problems so far, but can't vouch for u7's perfect behavior on any and all Java-based site. Second opinions would be welcome.


Oh, sorry cannie, had the page open for a while before replying, couldn't notice your post above. Glad to be of help. :)

Edited by Drugwash, 15 December 2008 - 03:46 PM.


#18
98Guy

98Guy

    Junior

  • Banned
  • Pip
  • 69 posts
  • Joined 24-August 08
Getting answers out of the Java community is like pulling teeth.

They look down on questions relating to web-applets and end-user issues and they live in their own world of java application programming. They are largely unaware that older versions of the JRE are not un-installed when an update is installed, and they have no clue (or they sweep it under the carpet) or are in denial when it comes to how that can make a system vulnerable to exploits.

With regard to the differences between 1.5.x and 1.6.x, there probably is no need to seek 1.6 because no web applets likely exist at this point that depend on 1.6. With regard to any change in the installer after 1.6.07, they deny it, don't know about it, or ignore the question.

There is some mention that 1.6.x is faster than 1.5.x, but it's scanty. Anyone know of any java performance benchmark software that runs on win-98?

Someone did post this:

-----------------
>> I don't know if it was possible before in a Java applet to select JRE
>> version, but it is now (I think as of SE 6 Update 10).

> Just x.y.z or x.y.z update w ?

You can get as specific as update. From:

http://java.sun.com/...tion/index.html

The new Java Plug-In provides a new platform- and browser-independent mechanism for selecting a JRE version upon which to launch an applet: the java_version applet parameter. This new parameter supports:

a.. Selection of a particular JRE version ("1.5.0_11")
b.. Selection of a particular JRE family ("1.5*")
c.. Selection of a particular JRE family or later ("1.5+")
-----------------

The way I read that, if you install 1.6.10 or higher, then you're opening up your system to any vulnerable Java web-code that can request a specific version be used to process the code. So an exploit for a particular version can be launched with that method.

What I don't know is if you have to have the specific older version installed, or does the 1.6.10 version come pre-packaged with ALL PREVIOUS JRE VERSIONS built inside it (perhaps that's why it's so large) ???

#19
cannie

cannie

    Advanced Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 464 posts
  • Joined 04-June 08
  • OS:Windows 7 x86
  • Country: Country Flag

Getting answers out of the Java community is like pulling teeth.


By definition, anything made by a great corporation and given to you as "freeware" is always paid by somebody else, and that someone's interests and not yours are the main motive for any "improvement". He who pays is the only one who deserves an explanation.

You may eventually be the scapegoat if you are naïve. That's why I always keep a .rar or .zip backup on CD of the OS before introducing any main changes: you never know the real truth but afterwards, and it may be too late if you "burn your ships after landing", as it happens since a year ago to many people after buying a new preinstalled computer.

That's also the reason why I doubleboot and will never abandon Windows 98 for as long as I can. You may always rebuild any of both from scratch using the other.

#20
98Guy

98Guy

    Junior

  • Banned
  • Pip
  • 69 posts
  • Joined 24-August 08

:rolleyes: Has anyone noticed Java version 1.5.0.16.....becoming bloated to 600+mb's and 360+mb's respectively(@ 1gb total for jdk1.5.0.16 files) is this extreme??? or normal??? :blink:


Thanks for the mis-information.

jre-1_5_0_16-windows-i586-p.exe (16.13 mb)

jre-1_5_0_17-windows-i586-p.exe (16 mb)

jre-6u11-windows-i586-p.exe (15 mb)

Where do you see any of them listed as being > 300 mb ?

#21
Sfor

Sfor

    Senior Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 578 posts
  • Joined 01-July 07
  • OS:Windows 2000 Professional
  • Country: Country Flag

With regard to the differences between 1.5.x and 1.6.x, there probably is no need to seek 1.6 because no web applets likely exist at this point that depend on 1.6. With regard to any change in the installer after 1.6.07, they deny it, don't know about it, or ignore the question.


But, there are java applications compiled to be working on the 1.6. A good instance is one of the Polish govermental programs. According to documentation java 1.5 is required. But, at some point, a programmer compiled some modules with 1.6 requirement. As the result the application stopped working on java 1.5.

#22
jason_brown1977

jason_brown1977
  • Member
  • 7 posts
  • Joined 10-December 09
I would like to note that I have Jave 6 update 17 installed and running on Windows 98 SE. Not sure if anyone else has tried or done this, but I havent found any information as of yet on here for it. Java control panel lists it as Platform 1.6 Product 1.6.0_17. I had update 16 running which came as part of the latest release version of Open Office 3. Updated to 17 with no problems. Java testing site found it to be version 17, Suns site found it to be 13?! and did a virtual machine test and it was up and running fine as well. If anyone else has any feedback on this, I would be greatly appreciative. System is Windows 98 SE running unofficial service pack 3 beta 4 and 98se2me. Have KernelEX installed as well.

#23
rainyd

rainyd

    Advanced Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 386 posts
  • Joined 04-April 05
  • OS:98SE
  • Country: Country Flag

I would like to note that I have Jave 6 update 17 installed and running on Windows 98 SE.


I'm running that version too - no problem at all (Win98 SE + SP 2.1b + KernelEx 4.0 Final 2).

Edited by rainyd, 10 January 2010 - 03:49 PM.


#24
jason_brown1977

jason_brown1977
  • Member
  • 7 posts
  • Joined 10-December 09

I would like to note that I have Jave 6 update 17 installed and running on Windows 98 SE.


I'm running that version too - no problem at all (Win98 SE + SP 2.1b + KernelEx 4.0 Final 2).


Sweet, thank you. I brought another 9x system back from the brink this weekend. The owners had installed XP SP3 on a Dell L700cx and used up almost all of the hard drive, sans like 400 meg and the 256 meg memory was horrible for it. I explained the situation to them and told them about everyones work here and that ive been running that as my main system for a month now without any issues. They told me to go for it. I think they will be happy. =) Thanks again to everyone here that has put so much hard work into keeping Windows 9x alive. =)

#25
rainyd

rainyd

    Advanced Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 386 posts
  • Joined 04-April 05
  • OS:98SE
  • Country: Country Flag
I've installed Java 6 update 18 and it works OK but for proper detection you need (at least that was in my case) to disable Java next-generation plugin (it wasn't necessary in update 17).

Btw, one important info: NOTE: The Firefox 3.6 browser requires Java SE 6 Update 10 or later. Otherwise, Java-based web applications will not work.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users