Re: New Java Runtime Environment Update (2)
Thank you for your explicit descriptions, Shane.
They show you care and that's being appreciated.
Of course I noticed ignoring the "64" along the way, but when I installed
the new version referred to by Alias, through the built-in update feature, I
received an error message and that threw me off.
Everything fell into place when I uninstalled the older version and replaced
it with the latest. Now I'm up-to-date, thanks to Tom, also.
As you might have noticed already, "they" don't have to worry about "getting
old", it's "automatic", sooner or later. If you play your cards right, it
may even be fun.
Just for informational purposes, last Wednesday I had my right hand carpal
tunnel surgery done (the left hand was done about 6 weeks ago) and I am
performing most of the tasks here left-handed.
Harry.
"Shane" <shanebeatson@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:uM3MQTnxHHA.3400@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> webster72n wrote:
> > "George Gee" <georgegee@nomaps.com> wrote in message
> > news:%23Ld4EhmxHHA.4076@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> >> Harry
> >>
> >> I would've thought "Thank you Tom for pointing out my error"
> >
> > what error???
> > Tom is the one to give me the wrong link.
>
>
> He didn't really need to give you a link, Harry. Your own demonstrates his
> point. Look at the *x64.exe* at the end of it. That means for 64-bit
> operating systems. It seems extremely unlikely that your AMD processor is
a
> 64-bit model, given past discussions here re upgrading. It is doubly
certain
> (that the file is not the one you're using) because you are using Windows
> Millennium Edition. I have a 64-bit AMD processor - but the XP version
it's
> running is a 32-bit one and even I couldn't install the x64 JSE. It
requires
> a 64-bit operating system and XP and later come in 64-bit versions, but
not
> Millennium, nor - of course - will it, not ever.
>
> So, yes, basically, with the x64 in the filename, it is a different file
to
> what you have. I would further presume - given Tom's point of questioning
> their recommending a version with a security flaw - assuming that version
> does indeed have such - that the x64 version does not have it. Meanwhile,
> either the old x86 (32-bit Intel compatible) JSE build has the flaw and
> you're still using it, or it doesn't have the flaw and so what?
>
> I, however, am with Joan on Java. Except that my coffee machine doesn't
work
> anymore.
>
> Shane
>
>