 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Java Forum / First Aid / March 2004JVM For windows
Well, thanks Sun Microsystems. Because of the court case against Microsoft, I can no longer download and install the Microsoft Java Virtual Machine for Windows 2000 SP4. Instead, I only have the option to install yours. WHY? The Sun JVM is a bigger install, slower and the worst of all, you have to have that pathetic icon in the system tray permanently just to use Java. What on earth does it serve? Great, it shows a few outputs from the JVM, but so f.cking what. The MS JVM was invisible and unobtrusive. It was a small download and did the job simply. I don't need all this other crap that you have forced on me. AND, haven't sun now done exactly what they were complaining about from MS? My only option now is to install the Sun JVM just to view some websites. Well, I don't f.cking want to! So much for choice. I am tired of hearing all this bullshit from Sun (and MS) about these issues. As far as I am concerned, I don't care who writes my JVM. I will always choose the one that works simplest and fastest. I don't care who wrote it. I want the smallest download without the clutter. Only MS provided that. The MS download was 5mb. The Sun one is 14mb. So, Sun Microsystems and all involved in this ridiculous court case and bickering, f.ck YOU. Another example of corporate greed. Thanks for forcing your sh.t down my throat. And worst of all, as I use Linux on my other machine, I have to use Sun's JVM as well! Here is a big middle finger to everyone at Sun Microsystems. > Well, thanks Sun Microsystems. Because of the court case against > Microsoft, I can no longer download and install the Microsoft Java > Virtual Machine for Windows 2000 SP4. If claims Sun made in the court case had been found to have no basis, it would have ended there. > Instead, I only have the option > to install yours. WHY? The Sun JVM is a bigger install, Most certainly is not. <http://www.physci.org/test/graph/index.jsp?nm=MS/VM+Size+(10Kb)&lbl=MS1.1.4+Sun1 .1.8&val=575+139> Of course, Sun's VM did not have all those flaws and security holes built in, like MS' effort. P*ss off to some advocacy group where someone might care about your rantings.. Troll.  SignatureAndrew Thompson * http://www.PhySci.org/ Open-source software suite * http://www.PhySci.org/codes/ Web & IT Help * http://www.1point1C.org/ Science & Technology > > Well, thanks Sun Microsystems. Because of the court case against > > Microsoft, I can no longer download and install the Microsoft Java [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > someone might care about your rantings.. > Troll. complete nonsense. you obviously don't have much knowledge about this. Sun is just as bad as Microsoft. They are ONLY complaining because THEY are not on top with their machines on every desk. You can still get it if you are smart about it. Hey even for Windows 2003. And to turn off the icon in the system tray turn off the Java Console. SignatureGeorge Hester __________________________________ > Well, thanks Sun Microsystems. Because of the court case against > Microsoft, I can no longer download and install the Microsoft Java [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > Linux on my other machine, I have to use Sun's JVM as well! Here is a > big middle finger to everyone at Sun Microsystems. > Well, thanks Sun Microsystems. Because of the court case against > Microsoft, I can no longer download and install the Microsoft Java > Virtual Machine for Windows 2000 SP4. You can "no longer download" the Microsoft JVM because there NEVER WAS a Microsoft JVM - Microsoft broke Java and their "JVM" never was actually Java at all. > [snip] The Sun JVM is a bigger install, slower and the worst of all, > you have to have that pathetic icon in the system > tray permanently just to use Java. The Sun JRE is much SMALLER (not larger), FASTER (not slower) and you can just turn off the Java Console if you don't want the icon in the system tray. > [snip] My only option now is to install the Sun JVM just to > view some websites. Well, I don't f.cking want to! No it isn't. You can download from Sun, IBM, BEA (Weblogic) and a number of other sources, all of which offer a true Java JRE. > [snip] I want the smallest download without the > clutter. Only MS provided that. The MS download was 5mb. The Sun > one is 14mb. The Sun provided JRE for Java 1.4.02 is precisely 1.413 Mb. I make that a whole TEN TIMES SMALLER than the Microsft version. > > Well, thanks Sun Microsystems. Because of the court case against > > Microsoft, I can no longer download and install the Microsoft Java [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > > > The Sun provided JRE for Java 1.4.02 is precisely 1.413 Mb. This is misleading as only the installer is 1.413 Mb. The installer then has to download up to 14mb more, the size of the offline installer. > I make that a whole TEN TIMES SMALLER than the Microsft version. Check your math. 1.4 Mb vs. 5 Mb does not seem to be a factor of 10. Greg >>The Sun provided JRE for Java 1.4.02 is precisely 1.413 Mb. > > This is misleading as only the installer is 1.413 Mb. The installer > then has to download up to 14mb more, the size of the offline > installer. I'd agree - but I'm talking about the JRE (not about the full JVM with the lib and src directories etc.) and it really is that small... but it is enough to look at a web page with. >>I make that a whole TEN TIMES SMALLER than the Microsft version. > > Check your math. 1.4 Mb vs. 5 Mb does not seem to be a factor of 10. You could be right there, Greg - I must say that I thought the OP had written "15 Mb" and not 5 Mb and that was what I was counting against. Apologies if I misread the post. >>>The Sun provided JRE for Java 1.4.02 is precisely 1.413 Mb. >> [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > the lib and src directories etc.) and it really is that small... but it > is enough to look at a web page with. I had drafted a response before I saw Gregory's. Since it is already writ, I'll post it. > This is misleading as only the installer is 1.413 Mb. The installer > then has to download up to 14mb more, the size of the offline [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Greg LOL! Maybe he works for Sun Microsystems??? Haven't laughed this much in a while. Now, please follow these instructions. 1 - Take foot 2 - Place in mouth the end ... >> [snip] I want the smallest download without the >> clutter. Only MS provided that. The MS download was 5mb. The Sun >> one is 14mb. >> > The Sun provided JRE for Java 1.4.02 is precisely 1.413 Mb. I make that > a whole TEN TIMES SMALLER than the Microsft version. I suspect your values are in error Mark. Figures for rt.jar's either side of 1.4.0 I have handy show the following sizes.. 1.3.1 - 11,646,454 bytes 1.4.2_02 - 26,429,417 bytes 14 Meg sounds about right for 1.4.0. Mind you, as I pointed out earlier, the 1.1.8 VM* was much smaller than the MS effort. * Which is a fair comparison, given that the MS 'J'VM never went beyond 1.1 As an aside, I was checking download sizes of plug-ins recently and found that the MS .NET plug-in was 27 Meg at the time, and the latest Sun 1.5 beta rt.jar is ..31,971,302 bytes! [ And note, these are the rt.jar files which only contain the core classes, I checked them using WinZip. ] SignatureAndrew Thompson * http://www.PhySci.org/ Open-source software suite * http://www.PhySci.org/codes/ Web & IT Help * http://www.1point1C.org/ Science & Technology well, I always used the java VM anyway, half the stuff wouldnt even run on the MS one. Thats probably why it was smaller and faster ;-) > well, I always used the java VM anyway, half the stuff wouldnt even run on > the MS one. Thats probably why it was smaller and faster ;-) but why does the Sun JVM insist on installing all the other crap? why on earth do i need my system tray branded with the Sun Java logo? At least the MS one was invisible. I never had problems with the MS either. >>well, I always used the java VM anyway, half the stuff wouldnt even run on >>the MS one. Thats probably why it was smaller and faster ;-) [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > least the MS one was invisible. I never had problems with the MS > either. Just install the JRE and switch the console tray icon off. Then it will be both small *and* invisible. SignatureMark A. Preston If you read the install documentation carefully, you will see that the total footprint for the Sun JVM once installed, will be 65mb. What a load of crap. Come back Micrsoft, Sun apologises! > If you read the install documentation carefully, you will see that the > total footprint for the Sun JVM once installed, will be 65mb. What a > load of crap. Come back Micrsoft, Sun apologises! Well, given that *my* copy of the Sun JRE, complete with all documentation, source code and libraries plus Java Webstart comes in a total of 48.8Mb in all, I have to doubt your word somewhat. SignatureMark A. Preston > > If you read the install documentation carefully, you will see that the > > total footprint for the Sun JVM once installed, will be 65mb. What a [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > documentation, source code and libraries plus Java Webstart comes in a > total of 48.8Mb in all, I have to doubt your word somewhat. Then look at the dependancies for the execuatables to find the missing DLL's. Jeez, this is simple. .. >>> ....Come back Micrsoft, Sun apologises! ... > Then look at the dependancies for the execuatables to find the missing > DLL's. Jeez, this is simple. Then DOWNLOAD and INSTALL the (friggin') insecure, obsolete MS JVM and stop whinging!! <http://home.wanadoo.nl/jheroen/VM/> Jeez, this is simple. SignatureAndrew Thompson http://www.PhySci.org/ Open-source software suite http://www.PhySci.org/codes/ Web & IT Help http://www.1point1C.org/ Science & Technology >>>If you read the install documentation carefully, you will see that the >>>total footprint for the Sun JVM once installed, will be 65mb. What a [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > Then look at the dependancies for the execuatables to find the missing > DLL's. Jeez, this is simple. Well, I can see that you certainly are *not* a "fountain of knowledge". > > Then look at the dependancies for the execuatables to find the missing > > DLL's. Jeez, this is simple. > Well, I can see that you certainly are *not* a "fountain of knowledge". LMAO! You twat! Have you got over the fact that your mum is also your sister? >>>Then look at the dependancies for the execuatables to find the missing >>>DLL's. Jeez, this is simple. >> >>Well, I can see that you certainly are *not* a "fountain of knowledge". > > LMAO! You twat! Have you got over the fact that your mum is also your sister? I rest my case. > Then look at the dependancies for the execuatables to find the missing > DLL's. Jeez, this is simple. DLLs are not Java. SignatureMark A. Preston > > Then look at the dependancies for the execuatables to find the missing > > DLL's. Jeez, this is simple. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > -- > Mark A. Preston GREAT! So I can delete: \Program Files\Java\j2re1.4.2_04\bin\awt.dll \Program Files\Java\j2re1.4.2_04\bin\axbridge.dll \Program Files\Java\j2re1.4.2_04\bin\cmm.dll \Program Files\Java\j2re1.4.2_04\bin\dcpr.dll \Program Files\Java\j2re1.4.2_04\bin\dt_shmem.dll \Program Files\Java\j2re1.4.2_04\bin\dt_socket.dll \Program Files\Java\j2re1.4.2_04\bin\eula.dll \Program Files\Java\j2re1.4.2_04\bin\fontmanager.dll \Program Files\Java\j2re1.4.2_04\bin\hpi.dll \Program Files\Java\j2re1.4.2_04\bin\hprof.dll \Program Files\Java\j2re1.4.2_04\bin\ioser12.dll \Program Files\Java\j2re1.4.2_04\bin\jaas_nt.dll \Program Files\Java\j2re1.4.2_04\bin\java.dll \Program Files\Java\j2re1.4.2_04\bin\jawt.dll \Program Files\Java\j2re1.4.2_04\bin\jcov.dll \Program Files\Java\j2re1.4.2_04\bin\JdbcOdbc.dll \Program Files\Java\j2re1.4.2_04\bin\jdwp.dll \Program Files\Java\j2re1.4.2_04\bin\jpeg.dll \Program Files\Java\j2re1.4.2_04\bin\jpicom32.dll \Program Files\Java\j2re1.4.2_04\bin\jpiexp32.dll \Program Files\Java\j2re1.4.2_04\bin\jpins4.dll \Program Files\Java\j2re1.4.2_04\bin\jpins6.dll \Program Files\Java\j2re1.4.2_04\bin\jpins7.dll \Program Files\Java\j2re1.4.2_04\bin\jpinsp.dll \Program Files\Java\j2re1.4.2_04\bin\jpishare.dll \Program Files\Java\j2re1.4.2_04\bin\jsound.dll \Program Files\Java\j2re1.4.2_04\bin\msvcrt.dll \Program Files\Java\j2re1.4.2_04\bin\net.dll \Program Files\Java\j2re1.4.2_04\bin\nio.dll \Program Files\Java\j2re1.4.2_04\bin\NPJava11.dll \Program Files\Java\j2re1.4.2_04\bin\NPJava12.dll \Program Files\Java\j2re1.4.2_04\bin\NPJava13.dll \Program Files\Java\j2re1.4.2_04\bin\NPJava14.dll \Program Files\Java\j2re1.4.2_04\bin\NPJava32.dll \Program Files\Java\j2re1.4.2_04\bin\NPJPI142_04.dll \Program Files\Java\j2re1.4.2_04\bin\NPOJI610.dll \Program Files\Java\j2re1.4.2_04\bin\RegUtils.dll \Program Files\Java\j2re1.4.2_04\bin\rmi.dll \Program Files\Java\j2re1.4.2_04\bin\verify.dll \Program Files\Java\j2re1.4.2_04\bin\w2k_lsa_auth.dll \Program Files\Java\j2re1.4.2_04\bin\zip.dll \Program Files\Java\j2re1.4.2_04\bin\client\jvm.dll \Program Files\Java\j2re1.4.2_04\javaws\JavaWebStart.dll \Program Files\Java\j2re1.4.2_04\javaws\javawspl.dll and Java will still work! Awesome! I wonder why Sun included them in the first place if DLLs are not Java. And yes, I know I could delete several of them and still have a functioning JVM depending on whether or not I use the particular sub-set of functionality provided by one or more of the DLLs listed above - or in the case of msvcrt.dll, have it installed elsewhere. I'm just pointing out the silliness of your statement that "DLLs are not Java" in the context of the original argument that the JRE installation is HUGE. As for the original 68MB figure, it's as silly as your statement. Including the DLL dependancies in the total size of the VM isn't fair if the dependancies are DLLs which already exist as part of the OS installation. The JRE is the size of all files located in (by default) \Program Files\Java, since those are the only ones required to be specifically installed to enable Java applications to be run. On my system, \Program Files\Java is 43,521,507 bytes (not counting cluster slack), or 45,453,312 bytes (including cluster slack). However, this entire argument is silly, since %SystemRoot%\Microsoft.NET\Framework\v1.0.3705 is 35,467,264 bytes and %SystemRoot%\Microsoft.NET\Framework\v1.1.4322 is 39,075,840 bytes. Firefox installed is 16,867,328 bytes, and it's a "simple" Web browser. Face it, I think everyone just has to accept that HD storage requirements will increase (and have increased) over time. Or we could all just return to the days of PC-DOS and Lotus 1-2-3 version 2. -- | Grant Wagner <gwagner@agricoreunited.com Free MagazinesGet these publications absolutely FREE for up to 12 months. There are no hidden fees and no obligation. Simply choose a title, complete the application form and submit it. Read more ...
|
Reply to this Message
|
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.