Tweak DNS for faster access in XP.

[Lisandro]

We don't need an unfriendly help here...

What's so unfriendly? It's truthful, correct and straight to the point.

Why Bob you've started to be against me?
Ask Polonus and Frank what was unfriendly. I never said MasterTech had not posted usefully and worthfully.
For some reason you've started to be against any opinion of mine... read your last quotes of mine...

[szc]

Why Bob you've started to be against me?
...
...

I don't see where he is against you... no really ?

He just mentioned how Mastertech's posts are useful and full of wisdom... I don't see anything else. You feel threatened for no reason Tech...

[Umath]

Some people like to think there is a clear distinction between right and wrong but some others are not happy with this way of thinking.   So, between these two personality archetypes, conflicts are common.  Just search for "personality test" and "Jung," probably, there will be some hits.  Hope this tip will let your social lives easier whether on the net or not. 

Or should I say just relax?

[bob3160]

Why Bob you've started to be against me?

Technical,
To not agree with a person isn't the same as being against a person.
For me to agree with everything you say, (or visa-versa) would make us the same person.
We may be a band of brothers in this forum but even brothers sometimes disagree.

[polonus]

Well, well folks,

I like to go to the bottom of the problem here. The first one to point me out to the dangers of not updating, and using the latest Sun Java updates was FWF. I like to listen if there is usefull information from "a new kid on the block", but we want the full story, and not something, a minority has to regret later. I personally remember, in the days that I did not know all aspects of it, I uploaded my IE version and was stuck with older drivers and a persisting dibeng.dll HUGE PROBLEM, making it impossible to run programs on my computer. Incompatibility problems are no problem, if Windows let you go back on your tracks, but that is not possible, and just that policy made them fortunes. If a car vendor would do this thing we would not accept this, saying you are just running an older platform, upgrade or buy something else, we only hold the spare parts for say 5 years. But in the computer world you have to comply, at least if you are using MS products. So I now say: "look before you leap". I check all scripts running in MWSH with AVX Script Wall, and run NoScript.
I agree with FWF that the dangers are in the implementation of the Java engine. Why did not Microsoft provide us with a solution?  No to create build after build in order to wipe old persistent insecurity under the carpet, is what MS  does.  The NT platform was safe and secure, what they did with it later was not. And now some come and say we have been using an OS  for years with an insecure Java module. To be able to use these holes  against Java users you must be a very crafty programmer, so the danger is not immanent there, but known spyware uses the same old exploits over and over again.

What is wisdom here?

polonus

[bob3160]

Why did not Microsoft provide us with a solution?

They did they told us to update our systems and install Sun JRE.

[Mastertech]

Polonus,

What are you talking about. What does updating IE (vague reference to some older version) have to do with removing MSJVM? Nothing.

You issue with dibeng.dll sounds like one from 98/ME which was a video driver issue. Temp workaround was simple, boot in safe mode and set the video driver to VGA then go online and get the updated video driver. Nothing to do with Java.

The only serious application that was ever dependant on MSJVM was IE 5. If you are still running IE 5 then your security worries have much more to do then just MSJVM. 99% of the workarounds listed required using IE 6 (which you should anyway) and Sun JVM.

Any properly written Java application will work better with the REAL Java not just the botched MSJVM. Don't you understand this? There is no "other side" of the story. I'm tired of people making this out like there is some remote danger. It is irresponsible to make some correlation with a video driver or any driver issue that absolutely NOTHING to do with Java or how it works. The only thing affected by Java is Java applications or ones that use IE for Java. This is like trying to scare people about not updating Flash. Please.

Please post some proof of something, anything.

[polonus]

Hi Mastertech,

I just wanted to be sure about not getting any aftermath.
The general story of the MS hick ups has nothing to do with Java as such. It was just to explain, where inexperienced users land with reference to the Microsoft philosophy. It is not user friendly software, it is Microsoft friendly software. The other things aside like BSODS, hung ups, bad compatibility with other software, why did Microsoft started this MSJVM adventure in the first place, like with the ActiveX (nothing to do with Java though!!). Explain this to me, and isn't it so, the boys in Redmond are often running behind the facts?  If they  had not done this, you would not be here to having to tell  everyone, just like with default settings being bad, people surfing with super admin rights, lively dangerous. Why don't they come up with something out of the  box that is pre-installed safe for the Neophyte users  so the crap is not there in the first place and the million zombie nets are not there any longer? Or do we have to undergo two years of forum bootcamp to come to our senses security wise?  Not everybody does that or has the will to do so.

greets,

polonus

[Mastertech]

"The Microsoft Philosophy"?

FYI BSODs and hangs ups are virus, driver and hardware related in 2000 and XP.

Your problems with Microsoft and the background story with MSJVM only complicates a relatively simple process for inexperienced users regarding protecting themselves.

I "surf" daily with "super" admin rights. Your point? I don't understand how the Linux/Unix ideology always works it's way into Windows discussions.

Vista will seriously improve system security out of the box but for the last three years Microsoft has been deadly serious about security with their constant monthly security patches, antispyware and antivirus aquisitions, improvements like SP2 ect...

You don't need to go to any "boot" camp, you can simply read my guide: Secure XP and start telling people to uninstall MSJVM without worrying about explaining to them unfounded "consequences" and other nonexistent nonsense.

Why not be part of the solution? We can all gripe but it solves nothing.

[FreewheelinFrank]

start telling people to uninstall MSJVM without worrying about explaining to them unfounded "consequences" and other nonexistent nonsense.

We have been telling people to switch to Sun Java and keep it updated for a long time. (Those of us who believe in Java at all- there are those who recommend ditching it completely, of course.)

Nobody is saying anything other than that MSJVM is a security risk and has to go. I believe this whole thing started with me saying that Encyclopedia Britannica ceased to work when MSJVM was no longer present, even though Sun Java was (Yes, correctly) installed.

I also said that I ditched the program rather than have the security risk of MSJVM on my computer.

This doesn't seem to have been an unfounded consequence or non-existent nonsense. My point was that some applications may not work if MSJVM is removed, which has to be borne in mind when removing MSJVM, which, to repeat, I accept is vital for security.

You have made some stark claims here:

How does that effect your OS and other programs?
It doesn't, just install Sun's Java instead.

What are the dangers?
None.

I have simply made there may in fact be consequences to removing MSJVM. I was quite surprised at your reaction, considering that the Microsoft site says the same thing.

What software? You say some, show me a list that includes no workaround. I have no way to test EB to see if it will work with Sun's Java properly installed. This is the problem you are making declarations as if some huge list of applications exists that breaks. This not even remotely true. So far you have mentioned one unconfirmed application, that doesn't even relate to "some".

So again please provide proof of your claims.

You have NO proof it is dependant to begin with. You have no proof there are other applications out there that are.

I don't claim to be an expert here, but I believe that some applications are dependent on MSJVM.

It seems to be freely admitted by MS that developers may have some work to do in 'migrating MSJVM-based applications':

Third-party Java Runtime Environments  These may also be an option. Be aware that these solutions are not supported by Microsoft. Depending on the amount of MSJVM-specific dependencies within the application (for example, WFC, JavaCOM, ms.*), there may be varying degrees of manual conversion that you will be required to perform.

The Microsoft Journal for Developers

http://msdn.microsoft.com/msdnmag/issues/04/10/EndBracket/

This is perhaps why there may be a problem. Microsoft as usual did not implement specifications but decided to do things its own way:

Microsoft VM for Java
The Microsoft VM for Java provides a complete implementation of Sun's JVM specification. However, it provides extensions to the specifications that target Windows platforms. The VM extends the standard JVM to provide the capability to load component object model (COM) classes and expose COM interfaces of Java classes.

http://jdj.sys-con.com/read/36072.htm

It's not hard to find evidence that some applications have not been able to migrate:

Why the product is Free? What is the catch?
There is no catch. From the beginning of year 2004 Microsoft does not support its Java Virtual Machine (MSJVM) any longer. Since "ZBit Zip-Unzip Component lite" relies on MSJVM we feel that we can not charge money for product that requires a platform that is not being supported anymore. That is because honesty and integrity are fundamental principles of ZBit Inc. (see our mission statement). However, component still works fine on machines with MSJVM installed and many people find it very useful for basic zipping unzipping functionality on their web sites and in standalone applications. So, we decided not to discontinue the product but rather give it away for free.

http://www.zbitinc.com/faq.asp?p=2

I respect your experience in the field of moving computer users away from MSJVM. I'm quite sure that any problems with applications ceasing to work are very, very rare and very, very minor.

However, as with my encyclopedia, it's not inconceivable that somebody might experience a problem. It don't believe it's worth making a big deal of the issue. Everybody here is in agreement that MSJVM has to go, and that there's no reason to keep it, even if it means finding a work-around for old software, or even ditching it completely.

[galooma]

I support thousands of customers and end users and have no had a single remote incident related to doing this properly
For someone who has adopted such a highly qualified "Title" and has apparently such a broad range of responsiblity, It appears there`s a misplaced need to bash people over the head with solutions rather than suggest options. you would think he would have learned just a tad more about how to relate to people .I for one can see where Frank is coming from .

[bob3160]

There happens to not be a difference between Franks and Mastertech's point of view.
Both agree that MSJVM has to go.

[Mastertech]

My point was that some applications may not work if MSJVM is removed, which has to be borne in mind when removing MSJVM

Again what applications? Do you have a list? I can only find IE 5.x. of which no one should be running for other security reasons. MSJVM is Java. Microsoft licensed it from Sun then tried to modify it, got sued for violating the licensing agreement and had to release a compliant version. Outside of Microsoft next to no one wrote applications for the botched version of MSJVM, they write them for Java which means it will work with Java. There is only one software developer of Java = Sun. This isn't complicated. The only reason IE 5.x breaks is because Microsoft coded it to only accept MSJVM not that it could not easily work with Sun's version as 6.x clearly can as should any browser with Java support.

I have simply made there may in fact be consequences to removing MSJVM. I was quite surprised at your reaction, considering that the Microsoft site says the same thing.

There are consequences to everything. But what are the factual consequences? How many Java related applications broke after SP2 or SP1a for that matter? Do you have a list, does anyone? How long has SP1a been out? Microsoft has to say everything "as if" to protect themselves legally.

Did you read the Zbit page? The program was a pay program and they dumped the dependant one for free. If you paid for it now the Zbit Full version works. The version they discontinued was the one dependant on MSJVM and thus gave it away for free. No one is effected by this. Not to mention who uses it to begin with?

For someone who has adopted such a highly qualified "Title" and has apparently such a broad range of responsiblity, It appears there`s a misplaced need to bash people over the head with solutions rather than suggest options. you would think he would have learned just a tad more about how to relate to people .I for one can see where Frank is coming from .

With MSJVM there is no "option" if you remotely care about security. My stance on this will not change unless convincing evidence is provided. This is more about proving me wrong then worrying about what a new reader may get out of this discussion. You start giving people the 0.00000000001% issues with everything and they will never do it out of fear it is really 50% or some other nonsense. This is extremely irresponsible, especially the way it is trying to be presented as "common".

Should a big deal be made the Freedom Force does not work with SP2? When it is the only game that does not? You would word it as "When you upgrade to SP2 Freedom Force and possible many other Games will not work" would but massively irresponsible. This is my point about MSJVM.

[FreewheelinFrank]

This discussion has gone on long enough. Anybody reading the thread can make up their own minds.

[Mastertech]

Which will be to uninstall MSJVM.