Jump to content


Java update


7 replies to this topic

#1 OFFLINE   JDPower

    Cydonian Knight

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,952 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:England

Posted 03 April 2007 - 03:52 AM

Java version 6.1 (1.6.0_1) just released - Java Runtime Environment (JRE) 6.1 (Fourth download in the list)

Just a bugfix but near 100 bugs fixed - Changelog

Don't know why the main Java site hasn't even got Java version 6 listed when its been on the Sun site for months though :huh:

#2 OFFLINE   CeeCee

    Wait a minute, who am I here?

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,210 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Finland
  • Interests:Movies, my computer

Posted 04 April 2007 - 02:03 AM

There's no any security updates. I think i stick with 6.0.

#3 OFFLINE   Andavari

    Captain Spectacular

  • Moderators
  • 13,327 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Shadow Moses

Posted 04 April 2007 - 02:31 AM

View PostCeeCee, on Apr 3 2007, 09:03 PM, said:

There's no any security updates. I think i stick with 6.0.
It is v6.0 it's 6.0 with an update, more specifically all these bugs listed here which I think is worth updating as bugs can cause unexpected behaviour.
Complexity of incoherent design.

#4 OFFLINE   pwillener

    ドラえもん

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 662 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tokyo, Japan

Posted 06 April 2007 - 09:28 AM

Don't forget to uninstall any previous versions; the JRE installer still doesn't uninstall earlier versions. It should at least give an option to automatically uninstall older versions.

#5 OFFLINE   Andavari

    Captain Spectacular

  • Moderators
  • 13,327 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Shadow Moses

Posted 06 April 2007 - 09:44 AM

View Postpwillener, on Apr 6 2007, 04:28 AM, said:

Don't forget to uninstall any previous versions; the JRE installer still doesn't uninstall earlier versions. It should at least give an option to automatically uninstall older versions.
Which is the reason why more software titles need to utilize one directory without version numbering them, etc., and they just need to do what Microsoft does and have hotfixes without having to remove a previous version at all
Complexity of incoherent design.

#6 OFFLINE   pwillener

    ドラえもん

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 662 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tokyo, Japan

Posted 07 April 2007 - 07:56 AM

There seems to have been a reason for this in the past; some applications needed very specific JRE versions, otherwise they wouldn't run correctly. (I have one app that needs JRE 1.3.7!)

However, generally (since 1.5) there is no longer a need to keep multiple versions, so at least they could offer the automatic removal of older versions when a new JRE is installed.

On the other hand, Microsoft has started a similar confusing game with .NET Framework. I am still not sure what versions I actually need to keep, and which are obsolete - 1.0, 1.1, 2.0, 3.0...? Up to 2.0 you needed all previous versions, but I am unsure about 3.0 - I seem to be unable to find any definite answers :blink:

#7 OFFLINE   Andavari

    Captain Spectacular

  • Moderators
  • 13,327 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Shadow Moses

Posted 07 April 2007 - 01:56 PM

I have some applications that require .NET Framework v1.0 to work and removing v1.0 breaks those applications. I've installed 1.0, 2.0 and 3.0. The only reason I even installed 3.0 was because an up and coming Paint.NET version is going to require it.
Complexity of incoherent design.

#8 OFFLINE   rridgely

    I hate computers

  • Moderators
  • 8,858 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 07 April 2007 - 05:04 PM

I really like the latest version of paint.net. Its one of the few programs that seems to actually keep getting better with each update.
All I want is a magnetic lasso to easily cut stuff out, once it has that it will do everything I want. :D