| ActiveMac | Anonymous | Create a User | Reviews | News | Forums | Advertise |
|
|
|
User Controls |
|
New User |
|
Login |
|
Edit/View My Profile |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ActiveMac |
|
Articles |
|
Forums |
|
Links |
|
News |
|
News Search |
|
Reviews |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
News Centers |
|
Windows/Microsoft |
|
DVD |
|
ActiveHardware |
|
Xbox |
|
MaINTosh |
|
News Search |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ANet Chats |
|
The Lobby |
|
Special Events Room |
|
Developer's Lounge |
|
XBox Chat |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ's |
|
Windows 98/98 SE |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Windows Me |
|
Windows "Whistler" XP |
|
Windows CE |
|
Internet Explorer 6 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Xbox |
|
DirectX |
|
DVD's |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TopTechTips |
|
Registry Tips |
|
Windows 95/98 |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Internet Explorer 4 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Windows NT Tips |
|
Program Tips |
|
Easter Eggs |
|
Hardware |
|
DVD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Latest Reviews |
|
Applications |
|
Microsoft Windows XP Professional |
|
Norton SystemWorks 2002 |
|
|
|
Hardware |
|
Intel Personal Audio Player 3000 |
|
Microsoft Wireless IntelliMouse Explorer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Site News/Info |
|
About This Site |
|
Affiliates |
|
ANet Forums |
|
Contact Us |
|
Default Home Page |
|
Link To Us |
|
Links |
|
Member Pages |
|
Site Search |
|
Awards |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credits |
 |
MSJVM Removal Tool 1.0 | |
|
||
| Time: 02:19 EST/07:19 GMT | News Source: Microsoft | Posted By: Jonathan Tigner | ||
|
The Microsoft JVM Removal Tool can be used to remove the MS Java Virtual Machine (MSJVM). Use of this tool is the only supported method for removing the MSJVM from a Microsoft operating system. | ||
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 323 Last | Next |
The time now is
6:07:42 AM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
| #1 By 2960 (68.101.35.196) at 3/7/2004 9:24:55 AM |
|
I'd prefer an INSTALLER, not an uninstaller.
But, Microsoft foisted this mess upon us by not following the rules. Dammit. If they would have just followed the Java Guidelines, we wouldn't be in this mess. But nooooo, they HAD to have it their way or no way. TL |
| #2 By 143 (64.108.91.99) at 3/7/2004 11:59:49 PM |
|
SUN's Java S U C K S...
Technically speaking of course. |
| #3 By 2201 (194.205.219.2) at 3/8/2004 5:35:36 AM |
| #2 and why does it suck? Please qualify your "rash" statement. Sun was the original developers of Java and therefore are the ones who comes up with the purest version of it, unlike Microsoft who have to pollute it. I know which I'd rather have on my system. |
| #4 By 1295 (216.85.97.98) at 3/8/2004 8:02:50 AM |
| #3 Most people don't need #2's statement qualified for them over and over again. The case for how bad Sun's JVM sucks has been discussed and proven time and time again on this and other sites. Just because you refuse to believe it does not put the burden of proof on those who make those statements. That's kind of like someone asking people to prove or make an argument to the statement... "Windows 98 sucked cause it blue screened all the time". Both statements are themselves statements of fact. The only way it will stop is if Sun produces something that doesn't suck. |
| #5 By 2960 (156.80.64.137) at 3/8/2004 8:11:22 AM |
|
The #1 reason why I prefer the Microsoft JVM over Sun's ?
Sun's _feels_ intrusive. Microsoft's does not. Microsoft's is also much faster to load. TL |
| #6 By 2459 (24.175.141.98) at 3/9/2004 1:44:17 AM |
|
Sun's Java didn't succeed client side because its performance was lacking and it didn't offer access to native platform services.
Corel put 50% of their R&D behind developing a Java framework to allow them to create apps that ran on other platforms as well as Windows. They dropped it. John Carmack evaluated Java for handling extensions to Quake 2 and 3. He didn't use it. There are many other clientside developers that didn't use Java for a variety of reasons. Most came down to performance versus C/C++/VB. Java largely killed itself due to no one wanting non-native UI and (again) lacking performance. Sun having one of the worst implementations and lacking dev tools didn't help matters either. It's probably true that if MS invented Java, it would be mainstream now, but that's because MS understood that you can't go strictly least common denominator and expect everyone to be satisfied. Nor can you expect them to use one language for everything they do. Nor can you expect everyone to give up their legacy code and rewrite everything in Java. |
| #7 By 2459 (24.175.141.98) at 3/9/2004 1:54:05 AM |
|
Sun, themselves, never really offered compelling reasons to use Java for clientside development. Why isn't Star Office developed using Java? Where's Sun's Java OS? Where are examples from them of high-performance, compelling, clientside applications developed using 100% "pure" Java?
Clientside Java is a joke if even Sun won't use it for clientside application development. |
| #8 By 2201 (194.205.219.2) at 3/9/2004 5:20:31 AM |
| So I can take it that no one likes Java then :) and just to think I had to do it for my final year project as well :( |
| #9 By 12071 (203.173.25.170) at 3/9/2004 6:32:19 AM |
|
#10 "Why isn't Star Office developed using Java?"
I'm just *guessing* here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/StarOffice)... but I would say that it has something to do with StarOffice being originally written by Star Division and bought by Sun in 1999. Rather that re-writting the whole suite, the released it as open-source instead - maybe you've heard of OpenOffice? "Where's Sun's Java OS?" Probably in a similar place to where their network computer is. But with the speed of computers these days it's amazing how quickly a company like Microsoft have taken aboard Sun's ideas! "Where are examples from them of high-performance, compelling, clientside applications developed using 100% "pure" Java?" Eclipse - http://www.eclipse.org/ Netbeans - http://www.netbeans.org/ (another application that Sun has open-sourced) Borland JBuilder - http://www.borland.com/jbuilder/ IntelliJ IDEA - http://www.jetbrains.com/idea/index.html Oracle JDeveloper - http://otn.oracle.com/software/products/jdev/index.html Jext - http://www.jext.org/ jEdit - http://jedit.org/ But you are indeed correct, in general there aren't many 100% clientside Java applications. The reasons for this probably have 90% to do with the fact that SWING was slow for such a long time. Whilst the rest of Java is fine it's the UI that's suffered the most, its only now that computers are fast that SWING is becoming less of a problem - of course by now most users are using IBM's SWT and toolkits like that instead. |
| #10 By 9589 (66.57.146.41) at 3/9/2004 11:05:50 AM |
|
#12 You named a list of tools to develop,"high-performance, compelling, clientside applications developed using 100% "pure" Java," not the applications themselves.
Its OK, you can level with us. There aren't any are there? lol By the way, can you tell us how much McSqueally's "development" platform has contributed to ever deeper losses at Sun Microsystems and sub $5 share price? McSqueally saw that Microsoft had a development platform and so he had to have one (its the same with the office system). No matter that neither one contributes a wit to its bottom line. What McSqueally failed to realize is that the Microsoft development platform has always been a major factor in its profitability. Not only are there millions of developers making money creating Windows-based applications (to include many billion dollar revenue producing blockbusters that run on Windows) and custom code, but many products further enhance Microsoft's own products. The more important question, for Sun, requires some specificity. Namely, what,"high-performance, compelling, clientside applications developed using 100% "pure" Java," have or are being developed for the Solaris OS. Again, the answer is that there are none. |
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 323 Last | Next |
The time now is
6:07:42 AM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
