Java SE Runtime Environment (JRE) 8 Build 132

3.4 out of 5 stars 3.4 (891 votes)

()

Linux, Mac, Windows (All) / Freeware / 161,351 downloads

Java Platform, Standard Edition (also known as Java 2 Platform) lets you develop and deploy Java applications on desktops and servers, as well as today's demanding Embedded and Real-Time environments. Java SE includes classes that support the development of Java Web Services and provides the foundation for Java Platform, Enterprise Edition (Java EE).

Reviews of Java SE Runtime Environment (JRE)

  1. 1 out of 5 stars
    NetaS AMEBA

    Reviewing 8 Build b51 Preview (Oct 29, 2013)

    HI. THIS WILL BE ABOUT 64 BIT JRE FOR GOOGLE CHROME. ON HAM RADIO WEB SDR'S 64 BIT JRE : 7U25, 7U40 & 7U45 VERY UNSTABLE- CRASHING EVERY TIME. LAST PRETTY STABLE FOR G. CHROME IS 64 BIT JRE 7U21. GL & 73 !

  2. 1 out of 5 stars
    johnusa

    Reviewing 8 Build b47 Preview (Jul 19, 2012)

    Ever since Oracle took over Sun, Java is going downhill at an alarming rate.
    May Larry Ellison and company just go to hell.

  3. 1 out of 5 stars
    Music4Ever

    Reviewing 8 Build b40 Preview Release (May 31, 2012)

    When Ii can get by without Java I will ~ That day is fast approaching ~

    @borisf98 - going to try your system today ~

  4. 1 out of 5 stars
    CyberDoc999

    Reviewing 8 Build b40 Preview Release (May 29, 2012)

    Mark my words in less than 10 years they will ban Java and make it illegal.

  5. 1 out of 5 stars
    Firenze

    Reviewing 8 Build b40 Preview Release (May 28, 2012)

    Paired with Adobe's Flash, the biggest pest in computer history.

    Wanna run something at the speed of a Commodore64, use Java !

  6. 1 out of 5 stars
    borisf98

    Reviewing 8 Build b40 Preview Release (May 28, 2012)

    Is not needed anymore unless you use Java standalone apps. I deleted JRE a week ago and had no problems with browsing.

  7. 1 out of 5 stars
    Young Strider

    Reviewing 8 Build b24 Preview Release (Feb 8, 2012)

    This is the software that will make your Intel Core I7 Extreme system behave and feel like a 25Mhz Intel 80486 system.

  8. 4 out of 5 stars
    Input Overload

    Reviewing 8 Build b19 Preview Release (Jan 6, 2012)

    Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr :-)

  9. 1 out of 5 stars
    Input Overload

    Reviewing 8 Build b17 Preview Release (Dec 21, 2011)

    Not again, this is getting stupid.

  10. 2 out of 5 stars
    Input Overload

    Reviewing 8 Build b16 Preview Release (Dec 9, 2011)

    Having to use the final Java is bad enough & although I use a lot of Beta software I draw the line at Java. The day I can get by without it is the day it's gone for ever on any of my PC's.

  11. 1 out of 5 stars
    arossetti

    Reviewing 8 Build b14 Preview Release (Nov 20, 2011)

    Wow. Java 7 hardly works with ANYTHING yet, and they're pushing 8? They must be taking lessons from Mozilla, though at least Firefox works, more or less..

  12. 5 out of 5 stars
    Zoroaster

    Reviewing 7 Update 1 (Oct 19, 2011)

    At the same time, this very day, you have a "Java SE Runtime Environment (JRE) 6 Update 29" which has been released, so frankly if you understand something to the way Oracle is distributing its updates, give me a hint if you please!
    5 stars because I prefer java to tango ...

  13. 3 out of 5 stars
    anomoly

    Reviewing 7 Update 1 (Oct 19, 2011)

    What's retarded is that you have to have java installed in order to use the oracle site to download it. Java is a pita for sure. There should be a quick on off button as most web sites can be navigated without it at all.

  14. 4 out of 5 stars
    wpure93

    Reviewing 7 (Aug 16, 2011)

    no problem with me. It works well enough.

  15. 3 out of 5 stars
    Zoroaster

    Reviewing 7 (Aug 2, 2011)

    Problem with Java SE Runtime Environment (JRE) 7
    Neither OpenOffice nor LibreOffice find (recognize) the installed JRE 7, though path to bin folder modified (C:\Program Files\Java\jre7\bin here on XP)
    Back to JRE 6 up 26
    And it seems this new JRE 7 is problematic on higher levels for quite a few techies according to what I've read on the Web.

  16. 1 out of 5 stars
    FatBastard

    Reviewing 7 (Jul 30, 2011)

    I hate JAVA. I wish people would stop using it.

  17. 5 out of 5 stars
    LakotaElf

    Reviewing 7 (Jul 29, 2011)

    Had no problem at all, I uninstalled java 6 first before installing this as this installation as said below, does NOT uninstall java 6. For those of you who might be having problems, visit this page for for newest java applications, x32 and x64. http://www.java.com/en/download/manual.jsp you need this software for all things to work correctly.

  18. 5 out of 5 stars
    nvic

    Reviewing 7 (Jul 29, 2011)

    It's Java...you need it for quite a bit these days.

    One thing to note here though: JRE7 doesn't remove JRE6 during installation.

  19. 1 out of 5 stars
    TROLL

    Reviewing 6 Update 26 (Jun 10, 2011)

    this action is only valid for product that are currently installed

  20. 5 out of 5 stars
    Input Overload

    Reviewing 6 Update 26 (Jun 9, 2011)

    Installed without issue yesterday on 5 PC's. I don't particularly like having Java on any PC but unfortunately at times it's needed. So giving I’m a five for the fact it installed OK.

  21. 1 out of 5 stars
    SoundMix

    Reviewing 6 Update 25 (Apr 28, 2011)

    Basically unnecessary.

  22. 3 out of 5 stars
    Input Overload

    Reviewing 6 Update 25 (Apr 27, 2011)

    I had a problem installing this release on a decent lappy running XP that remains unresolved at the moment, no problems with 7 or Vista.

  23. 3 out of 5 stars
    ericthexton

    Reviewing 6 Update 24 (Apr 20, 2011)

    I also had the copy paste problem after upgrading to java 6u24.
    I found the solution to this here >
    http://www.sqlinform.com/forum4/read.php?3,467
    Kudos to that guy.

  24. 4 out of 5 stars
    camlawnman

    Reviewing 6 Update 24 (Feb 25, 2011)

    me and 2 other people i know have the exact same problem. cant copy paste links in java chat with update 24doesnt matter if its xp or vista. Works fast and well for me EXCEPT copy and paste in Java apps seems to be broken for me with 6u24, but was working with 6u23. I've tried it now on 3 different PCs, XP SP3 32 bit, Win 7 SP1 32 bit, Win 7 SP1 64 bit. In each case as soon as I revert to 6u23, copy and paste in Java apps is working again....

  25. 3 out of 5 stars
    mike_diack

    Reviewing 6 Update 24 (Feb 17, 2011)

    Works fast and well for me EXCEPT copy and paste in Java apps seems to be broken for me with 6u24, but was working with 6u23. I've tried it now on 3 different PCs, XP SP3 32 bit, Win 7 SP1 32 bit, Win 7 SP1 64 bit. In each case as soon as I revert to 6u23, copy and paste in Java apps is working again....

    Can anyone else confirm/deny this apparent bug I've found?

  26. 1 out of 5 stars
    Phat Esther

    Reviewing 6 Update 23 (Jan 17, 2011)

    just error message
    his action is only valid for products that are currently installed
    no help from official homepage

  27. 5 out of 5 stars
    Input Overload

    Reviewing 6 Update 23 (Dec 8, 2010)

    Fast install, no problems, fit & forget it.

  28. 5 out of 5 stars
    sn0wy82

    Reviewing 6 Update 22 (Oct 13, 2010)

    It does what it's supposed to do.

  29. 1 out of 5 stars
    anomoly

    Reviewing 6 Update 22 (Oct 12, 2010)

    1 for simply being a troll software which I DETEST
    http://java.com/en/download/manual.jsp
    Direct down for win
    http://javadl.sun.com/we...d/AutoDL?BundleId=42732

  30. 5 out of 5 stars
    Input Overload

    Reviewing 6 Update 22 (Oct 12, 2010)

    No problems, web site link mentioned below now fixed.

  31. 5 out of 5 stars
    nvic

    Reviewing 6 Update 22 (Oct 12, 2010)

    Quality software as always.

    Betanews needs to fix their site though. I clicked download and got stuck in an infinite redirect. Also, the filesize is only 15.6MB.

  32. 5 out of 5 stars
    bopb99

    Reviewing 6 Update 21 (Jul 9, 2010)

    Very good runtime environment.
    Makes a lot of applications possible without headaches.

    That it doesn't come standard is only a sign that it works everywhere and is of high quality.
    If you have a professional in some field, he's not going to come to you. (It's going to be the other way around.

  33. 5 out of 5 stars
    soldier1st

    Reviewing 6 Update 21 (Jul 9, 2010)

    Java is an awesome language though it may take more memory it is worth it.

  34. 5 out of 5 stars
    Input Overload

    Reviewing 6 Update 21 (Jul 8, 2010)

    No problems, seems a little faster. Fast download servers.

  35. 1 out of 5 stars
    ChipChop

    Reviewing 6 Update 21 (Jul 8, 2010)

    Yes, it's getting better and better, if they would stop supporting it it would be even better.

  36. 1 out of 5 stars
    Betachecker

    Reviewing 6 Update 20 (Apr 16, 2010)

    Believe or not, I live without it since it was not native in IE anymore

  37. 5 out of 5 stars
    uzi

    Reviewing 6 Update 20 (Apr 15, 2010)

    As I mentioned earlier, the importance of JAVA JRE is mainly in the fact that it has become a de-facto standard. The only difference between this version (20) and the former one (19), is that they fixed a critical security hole, which allowed any web site to get full access to your computer.

    It is thus that if you have an earlier version of JAVA it is highly recommended to update it to this version.

  38. 4 out of 5 stars
    us3r

    Reviewing 6 Update 20 (Apr 15, 2010)

    Yeah, it's getting better and better. They need all-in-one JRE installation package for Windows including 32 bit & 64 bit versions as well as better autoupdate process.

  39. 5 out of 5 stars
    beelzebub360

    Reviewing 6 Update 20 (Apr 15, 2010)

    I am very pleasantly surprised
    Java really gets better and better
    Good job!
    Significantly faster than the last JRE,
    every bit as stable.
    Makes a huge performance difference

  40. 1 out of 5 stars
    mjm01010101

    Reviewing 6 Update 20 (Apr 15, 2010)

    Actually just uninstalled this two days ago. Here we go again!

  41. 4 out of 5 stars
    Lsavagejt

    Reviewing 6 Update 20 (Apr 15, 2010)

    This is an out of cycle patch addressing a critical vulnerability in Java Web Start.

  42. 5 out of 5 stars
    Banquo

    Reviewing 6 Update 19 (Mar 31, 2010)

    Time to update the publisher, it's now Oracle Java.

  43. 4 out of 5 stars
    Input Overload

    Reviewing 6 Update 19 (Mar 31, 2010)

    Galifray, you need to uninstall the previous Java before installing a new version or you will in time have heaps of Java's on your PC. Also after uninstalling it leaves a Java file in 'Program Files', & another in 'Users' (Vista) or elsewhere in other Windows. Remove that too.

  44. 5 out of 5 stars
    konno

    Reviewing 6 Update 19 (Mar 31, 2010)

    Uhum, like you would know about it.

    I would belive these resources more then a yell of some YourNick.

    http://langpop.com

    http://duartes.org/gusta...mming-and-the-recession

  45. 1 out of 5 stars
    FatBastard

    Reviewing 6 Update 19 (Mar 30, 2010)

    Java is yesterday's news...

  46. 2 out of 5 stars
    Galifray

    Reviewing 6 Update 19 (Mar 30, 2010)

    Java is such a weird piece of software. I have JRE 17 and 18 installed, but the updater claims I have the latest version (so what is this 19 then?) And why do I have two copies of Java installed, shouldn't Java force earlier versions to uninstall??? Most programs do. No wonder Java gives me fits..

  47. 4 out of 5 stars
    x-ray

    Reviewing 6 Update 19 (Mar 30, 2010)

    changelog

  48. 5 out of 5 stars
    mjm01010101

    Reviewing 6 Update 19 (Mar 30, 2010)

    Installed fine here on XP-32 and 7-64 bit clients.

  49. 1 out of 5 stars
    Phat Esther

    Reviewing 6 Update 18 (Mar 27, 2010)

    Install aborted error 1714
    all previous install fine.

  50. 5 out of 5 stars
    Zoroaster

    Reviewing 6 Update 18 (Jan 14, 2010)

    I'm giving it five stars because, as uzi, Sun JRE is essential nowadays, but also because its packaging and deployment have significantly improved compared to what they were at one time.

  51. 4 out of 5 stars
    x-ray

    Reviewing 6 Update 18 (Jan 14, 2010)

    why does this be a part of winndows update

  52. 5 out of 5 stars
    uzi

    Reviewing 6 Update 17 (Dec 7, 2009)

    It is like a drug. You may hate it but you will have hard time working without it, as it became a de-facto standard for too much code.

    I will give it five stars not because it is a good software, but because it is essential, and with no compatible alternatives.

  53. 3 out of 5 stars
    Galifray

    Reviewing 6 Update 17 (Nov 6, 2009)

    If OpenOffice and my webmail app didn't require this, I wouldn't install it. Especially now that Java Quick Start is running as a service. So I have to modify services to stop it, as the Java control Panel app setting no longer works. So I cannot give this ever larger and ever more unnecessary program a good rating.

  54. 3 out of 5 stars
    Artem S. Tashkinov

    Reviewing 6 Update 17 (Nov 5, 2009)

    Silently installs JAVA update application which I hate to see on all of our corporate PCs.

    That's plain wrong.

  55. 3 out of 5 stars
    us3r

    Reviewing 6 Update 17 (Nov 4, 2009)

    JavaTM SE 6
    Update Release Notes

    http://java.sun.com/javase/6/webnotes/6u17.html

  56. 2 out of 5 stars
    mjm01010101

    Reviewing 6 Update 17 (Nov 3, 2009)

    I like and use Open Office. But I also don't want Open Office support requests from various friends and family that don't want it or don't know how it got on their system. When you install one app, you expect updates to that app, and not a default checkbox for another app that adds to support costs and user frustration.

  57. 4 out of 5 stars
    anomoly

    Reviewing 6 Update 16 (Aug 11, 2009)

    All it asks is if u'd like to try open office. Hardly crapware, though I do use GoOO myself. Problem I see is the consistent reenabling of the updater/quick starter which (where am I?) never once ever updated and is reinstalled & enabled as an automatic service. This in itself IS pathetically rediculous. This sideways BS of buddying up with your isp and your login is getting boring. reminds me of mp3tag's portability and what it takes to remove all the paypal crap

  58. 2 out of 5 stars
    mjm01010101

    Reviewing 6 Update 16 (Aug 11, 2009)

    An insecure POS that prompts to install unrelated, crapware programs on every upgrade.

    Stop the madness. We should not be getting prompts for crapware on every security release. And JAVARE's have thousands of them!

  59. 1 out of 5 stars
    mjm01010101

    Reviewing 6 Update 15 (Jul 28, 2009)

    JQS re-enables on every upgrade of the JRE, regardless of how you set the service. JQS is a buggy, memory/CPU sapping service than needs to be turned off by default.

  60. 1 out of 5 stars
    johnusa

    Reviewing 6 Update 14 (Jun 2, 2009)

    Something unusual and fishy has happened since this update 14 was released.
    Sun has removed this new update from their servers soon after releasing it, and reverted back to the previous update 13 version.
    There is absolutely no news or explanation for this action.
    Why?
    My only guess is that update 14 was buggy, and not ready for prime time.
    If someone knows the reason, please post it here.

  61. 5 out of 5 stars
    robertmc8

    Reviewing 6 Update 14 (May 30, 2009)

    Finaly works with Windows 7 Thanks Java :D I send them email about issue they fix right away thats great support woot! Now we need get Shockwave work with windows 7 does anyone know there email support?

  62. 5 out of 5 stars
    craigun

    Reviewing 6 Update 14 (May 29, 2009)

    Download and install went fine. No issues to report!

  63. 5 out of 5 stars
    Zoroaster

    Reviewing 6 Update 14 (May 29, 2009)

    @mjm01010101 > JQS is an option within the Java control panel, which can be easily disabled, no need to get angry.
    As for JRE, installed nicely, n problem.

  64. 1 out of 5 stars
    mjm01010101

    Reviewing 6 Update 14 (May 29, 2009)

    Java Quick Start is a buggy Service and needs to be removed.

    Sun continually adds new features instead of fixing old ones.

    I beg the United States Patent Office PAIR people to please, please get rid of java RE as a requirement for using your system. I hate this crap!

  65. 5 out of 5 stars
    karlo

    Reviewing 6 Update 13 (May 26, 2009)

    Everything works great!

  66. 1 out of 5 stars
    Morningdove

    Reviewing 6 Update 13 (Mar 27, 2009)

    In addition to the "updater and quick start cr@p", this version dumps JavaFX onto your system. On the final page of the installer you are rudely advised that you are now going to the Java website to have JavaFX downloaded and installed on your system. Since the installer asked for internet access on the first step of the installation it is difficult to avoid if you don't want it. This is covert; you need to have the choice. Fortunately internet access was denied since I didn't see a reason why this installer needed it in the first place.

    If "I" ever decide JavaFX is needed, then "I" will choose to install. It is "my" system and "my" right to decide what is put on it, not Sun Microsystems'.

    Incidentally, Windows Add/Remove programs only does what it is instructed to do by the program's uninstaller, therein lies the blame.

  67. 3 out of 5 stars
    us3r

    Reviewing 6 Update 13 (Mar 25, 2009)

    They should fix uninstaller for Windows which basically does not unistall anything. I don't need 10 outdated copies of JRE. Also there should be an option while installing to disable these silly processes like updater or quick start cr@p which is hoging cpu and wasting resoures for nothing. I gave it 3 because there are a few good apps out there written in this language.

  68. 1 out of 5 stars
    Betachecker

    Reviewing 6 Update 13 (Mar 25, 2009)

    Believe me or not, I live without it.

  69. 2 out of 5 stars
    emanresU deriseD

    Reviewing 6 Update 13 (Mar 24, 2009)

    I know you're not supposed to have to remove old JRE versions, but do it anyway. I've never had a problem with Java. But still, Java is slow, and it's just a pain in the a** to deal with.

  70. 4 out of 5 stars
    grinch89

    Reviewing 6 Update 13 (Mar 24, 2009)

    Hmm,installed with no problem,never had a problem with Java.

  71. 1 out of 5 stars
    Galifray

    Reviewing 6 Update 13 (Mar 24, 2009)

    Got to say I'm loving update 13. It's so, so...
    Not there. Seriously, It simply will not install anything. No crash, no error code, nothing. What a program.

  72. 3 out of 5 stars
    mjm01010101

    Reviewing 6 Update 13 (Mar 24, 2009)

    Yep the java Quick Start is buggy and can consume 100% CPU. I disable immediately on systems I install on.

    emanresU deriseD - There's no need to uninstall java anymore. The installer removes the previous version.

  73. 1 out of 5 stars
    Morningdove

    Reviewing 6 Update 12 (Feb 4, 2009)

    The last time I updated JRE it secretly placed a quick start program in my Firefox add-ons. To make matters worse it didn't include an uninstall button. Java starts fast enough when needed without the prestart add-on. I resent this covert behavior and would completely uninstall Java if it were not for that rare occasion when it is needed.

    I don't want to go through the hassle of removing the quick start add-on again, so this update will not get installed, especially since I could find very little information on what's new in this version.

  74. 5 out of 5 stars
    mjm01010101

    Reviewing 6 Update 12 (Feb 2, 2009)

    iggy - It's a problem with your setup. No issues with java for a while. I use on Server 2003/R2/Vista 32/64/XP32

  75. 1 out of 5 stars
    iggy67

    Reviewing 6 Update 11 (Jan 26, 2009)

    This java update has a major bug in it. If you are running Vista you will get this error message every-time. "Error 25099: Unzipping core files failed"
    Even after uninstalling all older versions of java. I even tried JavaRa
    to uninstall it and I still get the error. I ran as Administrator and it didn't work.
    I have plenty of hard-drive space 320GB. I'm not acquired a corrupt zip file.
    All I can conclude is that there is a bug with the Beta JRE that only
    manifests itself on Windows Server 2003 machines. You can not run any web page or program that requires java including some online virus scanners.
    Please Sun Microsystems, Inc. fix this issue.

  76. 1 out of 5 stars
    Betachecker

    Reviewing 6 Update 11 (Dec 17, 2008)

    I live without it

  77. 5 out of 5 stars
    Pkshadow

    Reviewing 6 Update 11 (Dec 16, 2008)

    Does what it is suppose to do.
    No install problems or after in my 2 systems nor in another that was not mine.
    If your having browser problems then it's sorta obvious I would think to un-install the browser, clean up the registry and re-install the browser/s.
    I would also think DirectX problems try November release and update if is a IE problem.
    As for why this is on this page a week after release is beyond me and left to higher website authorities but it should have been pulled or put in news section rather than waste program space.

  78. 3 out of 5 stars
    LakotaElf

    Reviewing 6 Update 11 (Dec 16, 2008)

    This release and the one before it had problems, crashes all browsers quite often in fact, especially if looking at any cam or movie, etc. I have uninstall it and reinstalled it twice and still get the same error. It needs work, but you can not really do without it, I know of no alternative to this.

  79. 3 out of 5 stars
    Esquire

    Reviewing 6 Update 11 (Dec 16, 2008)

    Bug remains if installed on Vista: Java Control Panel applet does not retain any customization to settings.

    and on a different note: why is Betanews posting this just now when it was released over a week ago?

  80. 4 out of 5 stars
    mjm01010101

    Reviewing 6 Update 11 (Dec 16, 2008)

    yes! No more uninstall needed for previous version!

    no: Stupid random program included with JRE. When will bundling stop?

  81. 5 out of 5 stars
    po4ko

    Reviewing 6 Update 10 (Dec 9, 2008)

    Starting from version 6 Update 10, it is no longer needed to download a whole distribution package in order to update to a newer version.

    If you have JRE 6U10, just go to Control Panel->Java->Update and it will be updated to JRE 6U11 with less than 1Mb download.

    Also, this kind of update procedure will no longer result in multiple JRE version being stacked up in your system.

  82. 4 out of 5 stars
    rseiler

    Reviewing 6 Update 10 (Oct 15, 2008)

    Installer error (25099) for me as well on Vista and XP. I've installed these updates countless times before and have never seen this happen.

    Something's changed, since it was always possible before to install on top of the previous version. Now it's not--or it's a bug, hard to tell.

  83. 5 out of 5 stars
    Yakumo

    Reviewing 6 Update 10 (Oct 15, 2008)

    Uninstall fully before installing final, always the best way to go.

    Best version of Java so far, and best installers and installers, no reboots required as long as you don't have any Java apps or web browsers open when you run them.

  84. 5 out of 5 stars
    mjm01010101

    Reviewing 6 Update 10 (Oct 15, 2008)

    Works fine in my 34 seconds worth of testing.

  85. 3 out of 5 stars
    AlphaBetaGamma

    Reviewing 6 Update 10 (Oct 15, 2008)

    Doesn't work for me when upgrading from RC2. I get an install error on both WinXP and Vista.

  86. 5 out of 5 stars
    Diam0nd

    Reviewing 6 Update 10 RC1 (Sep 15, 2008)

    There's already RC2 available.

    http://java.sun.com/java...rcDownload.jsp#6u10JREs

  87. 1 out of 5 stars
    McAleck

    Reviewing 6 Update 10 RC1 (Sep 14, 2008)

    23 MB to NOT optionally install additional languages? what?

  88. 5 out of 5 stars
    osric

    Reviewing 6 Update 10 RC1 (Aug 15, 2008)

    Well now that java is open source, you can expect lots of bug fixes.

  89. 1 out of 5 stars
    Bull

    Reviewing 6 Update 10 RC1 (Aug 15, 2008)

    As slow as ever....

  90. 1 out of 5 stars
    jcunews

    Reviewing 6 Update 10 RC1 (Aug 15, 2008)

    Added this, added that. Good if you have lots or RAM. But for those who don't, it's a RAM hogger even when running a simple sample, text based "Hello world!" Java application.

  91. 4 out of 5 stars
    mjm01010101

    Reviewing 6 Update 10 RC1 (Aug 14, 2008)

    Fixes that should have been in java... oh... say 4 years ago?

    If I didn't need it for work I never would consider this POS software.

  92. 5 out of 5 stars
    iLLz

    Reviewing 6 Update 10 RC1 (Aug 14, 2008)

    To Jaimee...

    Nowhere on there site does this say it was released on August 14th... It clearly states on the RC1 download page it was July 21, 2008 it is even shown that in the file name directly from Sun Microsystems.

  93. 4 out of 5 stars
    jamie198402

    Reviewing 6 Update 10 RC1 (Aug 14, 2008)

    good to see a build update but why does this say released July when on the homepage it has 14th August? is this a old build?

  94. 1 out of 5 stars
    The MAZZTer

    Reviewing 6 Update 10 Beta (May 1, 2008)

    Both this installer and the older build available on Java's website is bad. Fails with error 25099, "Unzipping core files failed", which isn't documented anywhere on the site.

  95. 4 out of 5 stars
    Yakumo

    Reviewing 6 Update 10 Beta (May 1, 2008)

    why not b22?: because b10 is the one sun is pushing to the public - http://java.sun.com/deve...ase/java6u10/index.html

  96. 4 out of 5 stars
    mjm01010101

    Reviewing 6 Update 10 Beta (Apr 30, 2008)

    Just an FYI... this is a massive update to the java runtime. Test this diligently before putting into production.

  97. 5 out of 5 stars
    yokozuna

    Reviewing 6 Update 10 Beta (Apr 30, 2008)

    Java ain't bad at all. In the matter of fact I like the runtime. Thank to it many fine apps like JaRef or RSSOwl is able to run.

    However, one thing is mysterious. Why all portals publish JRE 1.60_10 build 12 if there is
    jre-6u10-beta-bin-b22-windows-i586-p-16_apr_2008.exe file available from the website of Sun?

  98. 5 out of 5 stars
    Diam0nd

    Reviewing 6 Update 10 Beta (Apr 30, 2008)

    Well, jave is java :) It sucks, but we need it :|

    And of course nevermind ignorant people like mjm01010101. Often updates is a PLUS, not a con of a program, since
    1. It shows that the program is being developed and taken care of
    2. They add features and fix bugs
    3. NOBODY is require to update, if you dont like the "hassle", dont update. Simple as that

  99. 5 out of 5 stars
    tbresson

    Reviewing 6 Update 5 (Mar 7, 2008)

    http://java.com/en/download/manual.jsp

  100. 4 out of 5 stars
    wognum

    Reviewing 6 Update 5 (Mar 5, 2008)

    Thx benyahuda

  101. 5 out of 5 stars
    benyahuda

    Reviewing 6 Update 5 (Mar 5, 2008)

    If you end up at a page asking you to sign in or register, that page will not lead you to this update.

    Try this url instead. It takes you directly to the updates download page.

    http://java.sun.com/javase/downloads/index.jsp

  102. 4 out of 5 stars
    mjm01010101

    Reviewing 6 Update 5 (Mar 5, 2008)

    Changes:
    http://java.sun.com/java...eleaseNotes.html#160_05

    A 4 because this app is updated too often. Hassle.

  103. 5 out of 5 stars
    mjm01010101

    Reviewing 6 Update 4 (Jan 12, 2008)

    It's on there now...
    Changes here:
    http://java.sun.com/java...eleaseNotes.html#160_04

  104. 4 out of 5 stars
    ThumperZ1

    Reviewing 6 Update 4 (Jan 10, 2008)

    Sun had v4 up on it's site, then took it down and put v3 back up.

  105. 5 out of 5 stars
    b0mmel

    Reviewing 6 Update 4 (Jan 10, 2008)

    This file was signed on December 14, 2007. Are you sure it's the final update? Suns site shows u3 to be the current one as well.

  106. 3 out of 5 stars
    Philidor

    Reviewing 6 Update 3 (Oct 7, 2007)

    When will Sun include an uninstaller for superceded versions with the install? Each version is more than 100MB, and people who don't know they have to remove prior versions can be wasting a significant amount of space.

    Also, the install includes more than one Opt-out for products from Google et al. Small point, but such choices should be Opt-in.

  107. 4 out of 5 stars
    mjm01010101

    Reviewing 6 Update 3 (Oct 3, 2007)

    I like how the "Java SE What's New" page hasn't been updated since July. GG Sun.

  108. 5 out of 5 stars
    Shadowkahn

    Reviewing 6 Update 3 (Oct 3, 2007)

    Seems to be working fine, and really this is not a beta release - it is official. You can find it on the Java SE download page, and even Java.com reports that this is the latest Java build: http://java.sun.com/javase/downloads/index.jsp

  109. 4 out of 5 stars
    pozgayboi

    Reviewing 6 Update 3 (Oct 3, 2007)

    Don't want to stir shyt up, But, I was obviously stating that it was a beta and not showing up on the site (www.java.com/en). The "1" score is the lowest I could go and is required to post. Don't know u betta axe somebody.

  110. 5 out of 5 stars
    Paul Skinner

    Reviewing 6 Update 3 (Oct 3, 2007)

    @pozg**boi:

    No need to rate it a 1 if you haven't bothered to find out if it's a beta or not.

    It is a final version as it is posted here:

    http://java.sun.com/javase/downloads/index.jsp

    This is always the most accurate place to find the newest version of Java available.

    The main java site takes forever to update to the newest version number.

    P.S. This version works perfectly for me.

  111. 5 out of 5 stars
    Diam0nd

    Reviewing 6 Update 3 (Oct 3, 2007)

    Worls flawlessly for me. Opera > *

  112. 5 out of 5 stars
    speedwaystar

    Reviewing 6 Update 2 (Oct 3, 2007)

    JRE 6 Update 3 is now out via autoupdate

  113. 1 out of 5 stars
    jspratjr

    Reviewing 6 Update 2 (Jul 6, 2007)

    Crashes Opera 9.22 when using radar loop from noaa.gov - no problems with 1.5_11.

  114. 4 out of 5 stars
    Argai

    Reviewing 6 Update 2 (Jul 5, 2007)

    If oyu go to this page you'll see it's a final version.

    BTW I'm using both Java 1.5 and 1.6 and that works just perfectly. 1.5 works better with Firefox 3 en Opera 9 works better with 1.6.

  115. 1 out of 5 stars
    pozgayboi

    Reviewing 6 Update 2 (Jul 5, 2007)

    Seems when I go to www.java.com, there is no update past JRE 6 update 1. I'm not sure if this has not passed the beta stage or not.

  116. 2 out of 5 stars
    MichaelDHam

    Reviewing 6 Update 2 (Jul 5, 2007)

    Seems I had to revert to Update 1 as everytime I tryed to start Internet Explorer 7 with Update 2 it automatically shutdown the browser everytime! Anyone out there have that problem,and/or know how to fix this problem?

  117. 5 out of 5 stars
    mjm01010101

    Reviewing 6 Update 2 (Jul 5, 2007)

    I've had gobs of issues with .net. Dependencies, security issues, slow apps (the new .net version of HP Jetadmin is very frikkin slick, but it's slow as molasses to start up, also.) I adore paint.net, but where are the apps promised three years ago? I'm thinking end-user here, not developer.

    Java v 6 is the best yet. That ain't saying much. The idea that you have a platform independent RE is silly if you must update that client install (for security/features) every 3 months.

    MichaelDHam (above)
    log out, log back in, go to c:\documents and settings\username\application data\ and move the sun directory to another location. Then restart IE.

  118. 5 out of 5 stars
    RaGhul

    Reviewing 6 Update 1 (Apr 20, 2007)

    Honestly, I'm a bigger fan of the .NET Framework (even though it's Microsoft). I have many more apps that require .NET than Java. (And many of them are VERY useful: Paint.NET, nLite, Torrent Harvester, jcarle's Windows Updater, etc...)

    Truth be told, I only use Java for two things:
    Cabos, and a handful of webpages.

    Yes, it's a must in today's PC world. That's a fact.

    I personally haven't had any noticeable compatibility problems. The new package seems to install more cleanly as well. But like I said, I don't use it as much.

    I've read about Java6 problems on many forums, and they DO need to fix 'em. Backwards compatibility is a HUGE pain... Sun Microsystems, welcome to Microsoft's world!!

  119. 1 out of 5 stars
    saadsaleem

    Reviewing 6 Update 1 (Apr 11, 2007)

    I had to replace jvm.dll from jre 1.5._11 version of JRE to make MATLAB display text in "help navigator". I believe that Sun really needs to see if they are not deprecating any functionality of a previous JRE when optimizing their JREs.

  120. 2 out of 5 stars
    mjm01010101

    Reviewing 6 Update 1 (Apr 11, 2007)

    This version broke compatibility with the USPTO's online filing.

    After upgrading machines, we had to delete users' appdata\sun directory before it would work.

  121. 5 out of 5 stars
    maria9961999

    Reviewing 6 Update 1 (Mar 31, 2007)

    i think landfish or leena_zz or sajjansinghania do not mean to describe Java SE Runtime Environment (JRE) as a bad software. Java is a must to stay alive in todays computer world more so internet and Sun beats all others in Java.

    i agree with the above three for following reasons:

    1. Sun didnt provide FileForum with downloadable copy at their site, instead requests for download are directed to Sun site.

    2. Even when you are forced to go to Sun site, you are tortured with unfriendly screens, useless options, unfriendly language, ununderstandable options.

    3. Unless Cooler (see below) provided link, it is impossible to fetch download under such difficult conditions in Sun site.

    4. Instead of blaming doctorsmith, because there are many who think they know it all others none, I would request Sun, who are pioneers in Java, to consider making users life a bit more easy. I think they are very competent to do this.

    Best software and a must for Computer user.

  122. 4 out of 5 stars
    landfish

    Reviewing 6 Update 1 (Mar 30, 2007)

    doctorsmith, you, you, sun guy you, don't you realize how difficult it is to download java, why I had to click my mouse 3 times before I could download this. Man 3 mouse clicks is way beyond me ......... chuckle chuckle.

  123. 1 out of 5 stars
    leena_zz

    Reviewing 6 Update 1 (Mar 30, 2007)

    doctorsmith looks more like either a sun guy or a self proclaimed expert doesnt care for average users

  124. 4 out of 5 stars
    doctorsmith

    Reviewing 6 Update 1 (Mar 30, 2007)

    @ sajjansinghania, if you think seriously that to download this is tricky you need to give up computers and go back to pencil and paper.

  125. 4 out of 5 stars
    rseiler

    Reviewing 6 Update 1 (Mar 30, 2007)

    Person-before-last, you must be looking at the wrong one. Java Runtime Environment (JRE) 6u1 is about 13MB. The latest update for v5 is about 15MB.

  126. 1 out of 5 stars
    sajjansinghania

    Reviewing 6 Update 1 (Mar 30, 2007)

    i do not understand why sun has to be so tricky in downloads. if they do not want everyone to use sun java they defeat their own cause. they must make downloads user friendly.

  127. 3 out of 5 stars
    InSuboRdiNaTioN

    Reviewing 6 Update 1 (Mar 30, 2007)

    Why on earth is the install size up 40megs for this update? The reduced size of JRE 6 was a welcome addition, but now it's even bigger than JRE 5!

    Update: rseiler- If you read carefully, you'll notice I said INSTALL size. Not download size.

  128. 5 out of 5 stars
    Cooler

    Reviewing 6 Update 1 (Mar 30, 2007)

    No , You don't have to create Sun account. Here is the link:

    http://java.sun.com/javase/downloads/index.jsp

    Just scroll down to Java Runtime Environment (JRE) 6u1 and DOWNLOAD :)

    Runs fast and stable.

  129. 1 out of 5 stars
    horsecharles

    Reviewing 6 Update 1 (Mar 30, 2007)

    Need a Sun account to download this one.....

  130. 1 out of 5 stars
    saadsaleem

    Reviewing 6 (Feb 11, 2007)

    Its performance is really good, but it doesn't work well with Matlab "Help browser" (in R2006b). I believe that making something faster doesn't mean that older applications shouldn't work. :(

  131. 4 out of 5 stars
    Deedstyger

    Reviewing 6 (Dec 14, 2006)

    is it faster than 6.0 beta 2?

    i ll install according to that.

  132. 4 out of 5 stars
    TGB72

    Reviewing 6 (Dec 13, 2006)

    Is faster and more stable than previous versions but the uninstall don't work rightly since only allow to modify the component but not to remove the entire application. I tried from add/remove in control panel and also running the installer, in both cases with the same problem, If anyone knows how to remove the app plase let me know it.

  133. 5 out of 5 stars
    ds0934

    Reviewing 6 (Dec 12, 2006)

    Noticably faster loading than any prior versions I've used. Very nice!

  134. 5 out of 5 stars
    mjm01010101

    Reviewing 6 (Dec 12, 2006)

    Agree with the others. we only had to put up with 5+ years of crap clients to get this.

    Good work Sun!

  135. 5 out of 5 stars
    gate1975mlm

    Reviewing 6 (Dec 12, 2006)

    I agree version 6 is much faster! :)

  136. 5 out of 5 stars
    yokozuna

    Reviewing 6 Release Candidate (Nov 15, 2006)

    This version is very fast, much faster than JRE 1.50_10 (aka 5.10). I tested both versions with JabRef and Spamato 4 Thunderbird. The difference of speed is very visible.

  137. 5 out of 5 stars
    Tene

    Reviewing 6 Release Candidate (Nov 15, 2006)

    A great improvement over 5.* in both execution speed and size.

    It doesn't hurt that it's under the GPL now either, and embodies Rhino. ;)

  138. 5 out of 5 stars
    InSuboRdiNaTioN

    Reviewing 6 Release Candidate (Nov 15, 2006)

    Install size has been cut by 30MB from version 5, which is a welcome change.
    I don't run many java apps, but so far things are rock solid.

  139. 5 out of 5 stars

    Reviewing 6 Beta 2 (Jul 25, 2006)

    i've been installing this on more and more computers recently and it seems to work normally.

    i'm weary using it on an important system because it is beta software but i haven't heard or experienced anough complaints to justify not using it yet.

    great stuff!

  140. 3 out of 5 stars
    digital_phantom

    Reviewing 6 Beta 2 (Jun 28, 2006)

    I tried this and it actually breaks some of the java-based applications I have installed.

  141. 5 out of 5 stars
    Don Juan

    Reviewing 6 Beta 2 (Jun 25, 2006)

    Significantly faster than JRE 5, every bit as stable. Makes a huge performance difference in OpenOffice.org.

  142. 5 out of 5 stars
    photonboy

    Reviewing 6 Beta 2 (Jun 22, 2006)

    Works awesome in Vista. Like someone else said, this is the solution if you are running java apps like Azureus and don't want to keep losing your Aero Glass interface.

    I don't know if it's worth a 5, but I don't have any issues that I'm aware of so I can't penalize it. I'm just wondering if Java is going to last or whether the .NET or some other Vista feature will make it obsolete? (I only use it to run Azureus anyway)

  143. 5 out of 5 stars
    The MAZZTer

    Reviewing 6 Beta 2 (Jun 21, 2006)

    Mustang is also for Windows Vista.

    Infact, I recommend using it on Vista, as Java applications will be able to run under Aero Glass (running with older Java builds results in Glass deactivating until Java quits).

    I assume that feature made it into this beta (it wasn't in beta 1), but if not downloading the latest nightly build will have it.

  144. 3 out of 5 stars
    aokromes

    Reviewing 6 Beta 2 (Jun 21, 2006)

    Easy, because this is BETAnews, not FINALnews.

  145. 4 out of 5 stars
    RoSmecher

    Reviewing 6 Beta (Jun 7, 2006)

    you know they have 5.0 Update 7 available. i don't see why betanews already jumped to beta for version 6 when they are still updating 5.0 versions.

  146. 3 out of 5 stars
    bunghole

    Reviewing 6 Beta (May 27, 2006)

    My main gripe is that the fonts are too small. I run 1600x1200 res and trying to play games at Yahoo or such is a pain. At least the old MS version has readable fonts.

    Other than that, it's ok. A few security holes here and there but it's the only game in town now so there's not much that can be done choice-wise.

  147. 5 out of 5 stars
    PJPoon

    Reviewing 6 Beta (Feb 16, 2006)

    Note that this is based off of a 3 month old build.

    http://blogs.sun.com/rol...ry=and_why_in_the_world

  148. 5 out of 5 stars
    jonspencerbx

    Reviewing 5.0 Update 6 (Feb 11, 2006)

    Haven't had any problems with this one. Runs smooth.

    @ RADicalSatDude, opera is not a Java program. Opera can use the Java plugin to run java applets in websites, but that's about it.

  149. 4 out of 5 stars
    RADicalSatDude

    Reviewing 5.0 Update 6 (Dec 3, 2005)

    This crap as some misguided souls call it, runs extremly well coded apps like Opera, Azureus and LimeWire.

    Most of the time I'm running only these three programs.

    Granted there update mechanism needs serious rework.

  150. 5 out of 5 stars
    avdven

    Reviewing 5.0 Update 6 (Dec 2, 2005)

    It's really interesting how so many people comment on Java as a language when in reality they're discussing JavaScript and webpages that use it. Java and JavaScript are two completely different beasts. Yes, they are both based upon the Java programmng language but have very different uses. I have developed across many platforms with a variety of languages and still find Java to be one of the best, especially when developing for more than one platform. I am personally not a fan of Java applets (for many of the reasons stated, especially speed), but I (as well as people I've developed for in the past) use the J2RE to run various Java-based applications. There's a lot more to Java than most of you realize and until you get some programming experience (and learn the difference between a truly object-oriented programming language and imperative or hybrid languages such as C and C++) you have no right to attack Java as a whole.

  151. 2 out of 5 stars
    horsecharles

    Reviewing 5.0 Update 6 (Dec 1, 2005)

    This version's subpar-- takes several tries, some of which stall the system, before the install takes, control panel icon crashes, when is it going to uninstall previous versions instead of accumulating them on one's system, how about a smaller upgrade-only package, plus an auto-updater, & a dedicated website so as not to get lost in the convoluted Sun jungle? We've only been asking for several years now, maybe someday..........

  152. 5 out of 5 stars
    yagood

    Reviewing 5.0 Update 6 (Dec 1, 2005)

    "Java shouldn't be considered as a serious programming language, it was designed to cut corners which we all know you can't do in the real world." - LOL, you "experts" really should learn something before talking about it.

  153. 1 out of 5 stars
    GimieGimieGimie

    Reviewing 5.0 Update 6 (Dec 1, 2005)

    I also agree with mjm01010101's comments.

    Java shouldn't be considered as a serious programming language, it was designed to cut corners which we all know you can't do in the real world.

  154. 1 out of 5 stars
    EarlyMorningHours

    Reviewing 5.0 Update 6 (Dec 1, 2005)

    I wouldn't even bother with this crap if it weren't for Cisco and HP hardware that I need to access.

  155. 2 out of 5 stars
    guti

    Reviewing 5.0 Update 6 (Dec 1, 2005)

    Same opinion as mjm01010101.

  156. 2 out of 5 stars
    mjm01010101

    Reviewing 5.0 Update 6 (Dec 1, 2005)

    I don't know if it's the manufacturer's of embedded devices, like HP jetdirect and HP and cisco Switching gear, or Sun's java, but in 5 years of using Java I've yet to see:
    1. Improvements in speed to access java applets.
    2. Improvements in stability to access java applets.

    Now I realize many of you play java games on your cells and you plays games online with java and it works fine, but my experience in the field shows that the java platform is just craptastically written. It may be platform independent but then why does it have 6+ updates a year for fixing bugs to it's client? Doesn't this negate the benefits?

    Some of the behaviors are also grating, like putting that popup icon in the taskbar *every* time, and how it doesn't give you the option to uninstall the previous version. How it will throw error messages with logfiles on the desktop of users, accumulating over time.

    In general, I think the Java dream has not turned out very well.

  157. 4 out of 5 stars
    Jose

    Reviewing 5.0 Update 6 (Dec 1, 2005)

    By the way...

    The "Update" is missleading, everytime you install an JRE Update it does a complete install.
    check: c:/Program Files/java
    To save some diskspace you can remove the old versions over system>software

  158. 3 out of 5 stars
    UTAKER

    Reviewing 5.0 Update 6 (Dec 1, 2005)

    one app runs on all, thats the only positive part of it
    otherwise it's slow and useless
    where is the changelog for this update?

  159. 2 out of 5 stars
    matt2971

    Reviewing 5.0 Update 6 (Dec 1, 2005)

    java's abilities are great, but it's performance is poor. Say what you like about Microsoft, when we all used VM, at least it was quick ;-)

    I'm a sysadmin, and I don't really understand why companies are moving away from windows apps to manage their software, and towards web based java apps - they look and feel the same - which sure, is really clever and obtains operability between different platforms, but they are just SLOW SLOW SLOW - even on the fastest hardware.

  160. 2 out of 5 stars
    ghammer

    Reviewing 5.0 Update 6 (Dec 1, 2005)

    Memory hungry, piggishly slow.
    Only a true fanatic would find good with Java or apps that run within it.

    Shouldn't Sun go out of business soon? They have outlived whatever purpose they once may have had.

  161. 3 out of 5 stars
    husky87

    Reviewing 5.0 Update 5 (Oct 8, 2005)

    java consumes far to much memory i wish sun would somehow optimise it :)

  162. 5 out of 5 stars
    Shaga

    Reviewing 5.0 Update 5 (Sep 17, 2005)

    Windows Offline Installation, Multi-language

    Shorcut link:
    http://tinyurl.com/9loa6

    The Original link:
    http://192.18.97.222/ECo...0_05-windows-i586-p.exe

  163. 5 out of 5 stars
    xrayspex

    Reviewing 5.0 Update 5 (Sep 16, 2005)

    Working fast and smooth in both IE and Firefox.

  164. 5 out of 5 stars
    rotjong

    Reviewing 5.0 Update 5 (Sep 16, 2005)

    The new Java IS on the website. Go to http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.5.0/download.jsp and scroll down. It's right there. I see no differences either good or bad through my use so far. It's been 3 months since Update 4 was released.

  165. 5 out of 5 stars
    Zygi

    Reviewing 5.0 Update 5 (Sep 16, 2005)

    I need this mainly for Azureus, thats all !!!

    Update: Dead link, no new java on sun website...
    That only shows that none of you rating it, didn't even bother to download and test..... Yeah lets bash everything we hate - codec packs, java, microsoft .net and all others that isn't free... :-/
    Losers get a life, go outside, play ball or run around park. I'm giving it 1 because of broken link, when there will be real update 5, i'll change my vote.

    Edit: Thanks rotjong for a link, in the main section, manual download there is still 1.5 update4.

  166. 1 out of 5 stars
    donpacman

    Reviewing 5.0 Update 5 (Sep 16, 2005)

    Java is bloatware!

  167. 1 out of 5 stars
    DarkMana

    Reviewing 5.0 Update 5 (Sep 15, 2005)

    gah.. i wish poeople quit using jaba it for what doing not to good. learn to use teh computer right, stupids.

  168. 3 out of 5 stars
    arossetti

    Reviewing 5.0 Update 5 (Sep 15, 2005)

    Well, it beats JVM... Then again, you can't get JVM anymore, so I guess it has to.

    *YAWN*

  169. 3 out of 5 stars
    mjm01010101

    Reviewing 5.0 Update 5 (Sep 15, 2005)

    Get your monthly update here. enterprises shudder.

  170. 5 out of 5 stars
    AlphaBetaGamma

    Reviewing 5.0 Update 5 (Sep 15, 2005)

    I uninstalled Update 4 first and installed Update 5. Maybe it is my imagination, but browsing with Firefox 1.06 seem smoother, and I don't see any hangups.

  171. 5 out of 5 stars
    mfarmilo

    Reviewing 5.0 Update 4 (Jun 24, 2005)

    This link doesn't work right - takes you to a login / registration page. I went back to the Sun downloads page, then located it from there.

    Program seems fine once you get it.

  172. 5 out of 5 stars
    xrayspex

    Reviewing 5.0 Update 4 (Jun 24, 2005)

    Fast and smooth here. No trouble at all installing.

  173. 1 out of 5 stars
    donpacman

    Reviewing 5.0 Update 4 (Jun 24, 2005)

    Memory leaks, unstable and just slow.

    "Time to update the code"

  174. 5 out of 5 stars
    mutara

    Reviewing 5.0 Update 3 (May 3, 2005)

    What shall I say: The best programs are the ones that work silently in the background and doing their job without needing the attention of the user. I'm simply used to having it and don't want to be without it anymore. Or does anyone has an alternative?

  175. 4 out of 5 stars
    utomo

    Reviewing 5.0 Update 3 (May 3, 2005)

    Need to clean many bugs.
    Need to change the License type, so many people can distribute this. instead of must download it

  176. 5 out of 5 stars
    CyberHobo

    Reviewing 5.0 Update 3 (May 2, 2005)

    Update works fine here. Slow system? Overclock.

  177. 5 out of 5 stars
    robertguda

    Reviewing 5.0 Update 3 (Apr 30, 2005)

    java...slow to install ? writing for java when saying something good about it ? what is this ? a review ? I dont write for java and I hardly use it besides the web applets it provides...maybe its my machine or maybe its my karma ? installs without a glitch and never slowed down my computer or its functioning...so maybe I am just lucky ? or maybe one should be a bit more tolerant regarding issues one does'nt like ? seems pretty stupid to assume all those thousands of men and women dedicating their time to java being on a wasted trip eh ?

  178. 5 out of 5 stars
    cooldude7273

    Reviewing 5.0 Update 3 (Apr 29, 2005)

    Exactly what avdven said...
    And be sure to uninstall old versions!

  179. 5 out of 5 stars
    avdven

    Reviewing 5.0 Update 3 (Apr 29, 2005)

    DarkMana:
    "Oh dear God no.... Java is a huge piece of garbage; and yeah, it takes AGES to load properly in browsers and thats just about the only place it pops its ugly, greasy little head. Oh and those who praise it so much; lemme guess; you get paid to write in Java... good job defending it while completely discounting all the cons of this atrocious waste of CPU time. Next time you want to write something, just use C like a real man."

    Wow. You really don't program much do you. If you did, you'd realize that Java does much more than just web applets. While that may be the only place you see it, I have developed a number of enterprise applications in Java simply because it is the only language that works across multiple platforms (*nix, Windows and OS X) without having to re-write the programs. I also write in mutliple other languages, including C++ (C is too outdated), C#, VB.NET, among others, but Java is the only one I use when having to develop for mutliple platforms. Also, your comment about C doesn't even apply to your argument because you can't develop web applets (which is what you say is the only thing Java is good for) in C.

    While I'm personally not too big on Java Applets, but I've never had a problem with them. For those who complain that Java runs slow in their browsers, I use both Opera and IE on multiple computers (from 800 MHz laptops to to a dual 3.6 GHz Xeon workstation) and have no problems with speed on any of the systems, including the slower ones. Maybe you should check your system configurations and uninstall all those damn apps you have running in the background taking up most of your memory and swap file.

  180. 1 out of 5 stars
    DarkMana

    Reviewing 5.0 Update 3 (Apr 29, 2005)

    Oh dear God no.... Java is a huge piece of garbage; and yeah, it takes AGES to load properly in browsers and thats just about the only place it pops its ugly, greasy little head. Oh and those who praise it so much; lemme guess; you get paid to write in Java... good job defending it while completely discounting all the cons of this atrocious waste of CPU time. Next time you want to write something, just use C like a real man.

  181. 5 out of 5 stars
    wincement

    Reviewing 5.0 Update 3 (Apr 29, 2005)

    theheff:
    "As cool as java is, there's no reason for it to run as poorly as it does. I don't understand why firefox/IE nearly freezes whenever java loads, all on different computers I've tried. Java is outdated and needs to fade out soon."

    You clearly have no programming experience whatsoever. Java isn't just for browser plugins. Anyone will tell you that Java is just about THE MOST stable OOP language. In order to be that stable though, it has to check and handle a lot of excpetions.

    C and/or C++ are much faster, but a programmer can blow your leg off if they miss just one thing. It's all about which aspect of performance is most important: speed or stability. Both have their places, which is why we still have the different languages.

  182. 5 out of 5 stars
    skonrad

    Reviewing 5.0 Update 3 (Apr 29, 2005)

    People don't seem to get it, this is not a release, it's an update that addresses mostly bugfixes and issues that did not make it into the final release anymore.

    When your Java runs fine and you have no problems with it, then you don't need to install this update, as you won't have any benefit from it. On the other hand, people dealing wit a specific bug in Java are more than grateful when it finally gets fixed.

    Everybody who ever developed software, especially something like Java that is used by a lot of people to build applications on, knows that it is inevitable to have bugs. I am very happy with the way Sun handles and fixes it, releasing updated version of the old JVM while progressing towards a new one.

  183. 2 out of 5 stars
    mjm01010101

    Reviewing 5.0 Update 3 (Apr 29, 2005)

    Sorry. One release a year, then I'm happy.

    You guys that criticize me don't even address my points. Good work!

    This version is incompatible (again, earlier versions have worked, even older versions have not worked,) with many of HP's management tools. For example, HP webjetadmin, out on the market a good 9 months, crashes with this version of the VM.

    # EXCEPTION_ACCESS_VIOLATION (0xc0000005) at pc=0x77f82097, pid=6448, tid=6620

    THANKS SUN!

  184. 5 out of 5 stars
    xrayspex

    Reviewing 5.0 Update 3 (Apr 29, 2005)

    Update 3 is working smooth as silk here. Installation was flawless.
    Fast and speedy..Sun Java keeps getting beter and better :)

  185. 1 out of 5 stars
    theheff

    Reviewing 5.0 Update 3 (Apr 29, 2005)

    As cool as java is, there's no reason for it to run as poorly as it does. I don't understand why firefox/IE nearly freezes whenever java loads, all on different computers I've tried. Java is outdated and needs to fade out soon.

    It's not just a problem on my computer.. I have a fresh XP SP2 installation on a new machine. Why is it 15MB?? It just seems very innefficient to me, that's all.

  186. 5 out of 5 stars
    KAK

    Reviewing 5.0 Update 2 (Mar 15, 2005)

    nice work from © SUN-MicroSystems

    Run now 100 % P E R F E C T

    tested on

    Windows 2000 SP-4
    Windows XP Professional SP2
    Windows XP Media Center 2005

    Best Regards °_°

  187. 5 out of 5 stars
    yokozuna

    Reviewing 5.0 Update 2 (Mar 15, 2005)

    I am very pleasantly surprised by SUN. Java really gets better and better. Good job!

  188. 5 out of 5 stars
    Caleb

    Reviewing 5.0 Update 2 (Mar 15, 2005)

    mjm01010101 you are a complete retard.

  189. 5 out of 5 stars
    GoodThings2Life

    Reviewing 5.0 Update 2 (Mar 14, 2005)

    They complain because they have nothing else to complain about... if it weren't for the updates, they'd complain about the bugs and security holes.

    This product does its job and has several bug fixes and security updates. Good product!

  190. 5 out of 5 stars
    Mike162005

    Reviewing 5.0 Update 2 (Mar 14, 2005)

    I can't see why people complain about updates??

    That's the whole damn point, to fix things.

    If you like old things, so be it, let the rest of us be safe.

  191. 5 out of 5 stars
    rotjong

    Reviewing 5.0 Update 2 (Mar 14, 2005)

    I'm glad to see another update. SUN is dedicated to Java. I don't see how anyone can complain about SUN released updates for Java. Microsoft JVM was a bas****ized version of Java and MS was slow to release security updates let alone add any functionality whatsoever. It was total junk. Now we have .NET framework which is better than MS JVM. It's been updated as well since it's release. Should we badmouth MS because they released updates to the .NET framework. That's a lame argument to say the very least. SUN is doing their job by releasing an update. I'm stunned to see someone bash SUN for this yet give props to Microsoft.

  192. 2 out of 5 stars
    mjm01010101

    Reviewing 5.0 Update 2 (Mar 14, 2005)

    Too many releases still. I've lost a lot of confidence on a VM that was supposed to negate the need for software updates on local clients. What is the advantage/point of JAVA if you must just update the clients every 2 freakin' months??! And now it's got gobs of security issues that we must deal with.

    Sick of it. I want a stable client and I want it tested up the wazoo.

    /me considers disabling all java across our WAN.

    Some other flaws:
    1. Often will require a reboot. No reason given, you can have two identical clients configured, and one will want a reboot after installing a new client.
    2. Doesn't remove older clients that are installed. If newer versions are released to address security vulnerabilities, why aren't older versions removed? a huge security problem. You can have 3+ java clients installed, and vulns from any of them can be used.
    3. Massive security problems in previous versions. Java actually held up the release of firefox 1.0.1 because they wanted to debate making the newest version of java mandatory.
    4. Bloatware: 117 megs EACH release. Fine for home users, but the msi and transforms must take into account changes so you have a very difficult time rolling this out without heavy testing in a corporate environment.
    5. Doesn't respect my preferences. if you install a new client after you've told it you don't want to be notified of new versions, it ignores your preferences. Same goes for the annoying tray icon.

  193. 5 out of 5 stars
    skonrad

    Reviewing 5.0 Update 2 (Mar 14, 2005)

    Some people really don't know what they are talking about. Sun does what they are supposed to do, they fix bugs that arose after publishing the final release. No new features, no major changes, just bugfixes. If you use a previous JRE and have no problems, then stick to it. Like in the last update, most changes are more interesting to developers than users.

    MS abandoned Java because they did not like a technology that does not belong to them. The MS Java VM that people installed with their XP (no SP) is the buggiest thing ever and also not supported by MS anymore. MS is pushing now C#, which is similar to Java in many respects and optimized towards Microsoft platforms, while Java remains platform independent. MS incoporated a lot of things into .NET that they learned from their initial Java experiences. Java and C# are definitely the future, so people better get used to the .NET framework and the Java VM.

  194. 2 out of 5 stars
    ds0934

    Reviewing 5.0 Update 2 (Mar 14, 2005)

    Yes, some of us like to complain. Without complainers, there wouldn't be software. Why? Because we complained about hardware, and before that, stone tablets. If new cars came out every week, people would get sick of hearing about them. Same with software. Quarterly would be nice, but monthly? Geez.

  195. 3 out of 5 stars
    Metshrine

    Reviewing 5.0 Update 2 (Mar 14, 2005)

    MS Abandoned their java platform because of sun, and sun's JRE is the ONLY other java runtime environment that exists. They really need to iron out the incompatibilities in 5.0 because its broken alot of the sites i use at work.

  196. 5 out of 5 stars
    pyridox

    Reviewing 5.0 Update 2 (Mar 14, 2005)

    Microsoft abandoned their version of Java. Sun Java is an alternative. You need Java to view a lot of web pages. A lot of websites where you purchase stuff, requires Java enabled.

  197. 3 out of 5 stars
    GeneralLeoFF

    Reviewing 5.0 Update 1 (Feb 8, 2005)

    Well Java does suck but it has it's uses :)

    3 is a neutral score and I give Java a neutral score cuz it's the kind of thing you kinda need to install but as a user you may not directly interact with it. I mean it's not like it's a game or a word processor or media player. It's Java :)

  198. 3 out of 5 stars
    MMPD

    Reviewing 5.0 Update 1 (Dec 23, 2004)

    Decent, all in all Microsoft Java is faster even if it is a bit more unsecure/buggy.

  199. 5 out of 5 stars
    AlanS2001

    Reviewing 5.0 Update 1 (Dec 23, 2004)

    Does what is supposed to. More secure than M$'s version. What else can you ask for?

  200. 5 out of 5 stars
    brotherS

    Reviewing 5.0 (Dec 23, 2004)

    No complaints!

  201. 2 out of 5 stars
    bunghole

    Reviewing 5.0 (Oct 28, 2004)

    slow and buggy. tries to take over IE. crappy web start "features". unfortunately I have to use it if I want java in opera. its too bad since MS's version is a lot better.

  202. 5 out of 5 stars
    robmanic44

    Reviewing 5.0 (Oct 3, 2004)

    I have no complaints. Thus far it has performed flawlessly.

  203. 5 out of 5 stars
    zatoichi

    Reviewing 5.0 (Oct 2, 2004)

    Sun did a really good job on this one.

  204. 5 out of 5 stars
    Shadow Wing

    Reviewing 5.0 (Oct 2, 2004)

    It's been working flawlessly since I installed it yesterday. I visit sites that use Java for ticker-type news and score updates, so if something were not right, I would see it right away.

    Good job Sun on the new Java.

  205. 5 out of 5 stars
    allsiante

    Reviewing 5.0 (Oct 2, 2004)

    To sn0wflake: that has to be more than their fault, some of us never had trouble finding what we want on their pages :P

    On J2SE5: works like a charm, no trouble so far. Hope they put in just as much effort in improving Java though, as they did in the past.

  206. 5 out of 5 stars
    Win2kPro

    Reviewing 5.0 (Oct 1, 2004)

    o this is nice love it works betta then the old version well for me it dose lol :)

  207. 4 out of 5 stars
    harrisben

    Reviewing 5.0 (Oct 1, 2004)

    It is no fault of Java that HP have bound their software to a specific release of Java, although this is increasingly common for anything Java.

  208. 3 out of 5 stars
    sn0wflake

    Reviewing 5.0 (Oct 1, 2004)

    To allsiante: Visiting www.java.com doesn't prompt me to install the latest Java edition. Browsing the webpage listed on the Betanews page directs me to a confusing webpage with something like five editions of Java. Which one should I choose?!? For now I'll just go with the 1.4.2 edition until Sun makes it easy. No reason to waste time when all my apps work anyway.

  209. 1 out of 5 stars
    mjm01010101

    Reviewing 5.0 (Oct 1, 2004)

    This version of the JRE is incompatible with HP's Jetdirect printer management software, and I had to revert back to the earlier version. I'm sorry but that is horrible. You should never break compatibility, sun, as the WHOLE POINT of JAVA is compatibility!

  210. 5 out of 5 stars
    voloda

    Reviewing 5.0 (Oct 1, 2004)

    Why do you people give bad ratings because of screewed up version number of the product ??? This is so wrong, JAVA Platform Rocks :) and I dont really care how they call it.

  211. 1 out of 5 stars
    donpacman

    Reviewing 5.0 (Oct 1, 2004)

    "we don't get fooled again" :))

  212. 4 out of 5 stars
    Zulithe

    Reviewing 5.0 (Oct 1, 2004)

    To all wondering. Java 1.5 is the same thing as 5.0 1.5 is the internal version number but 5.0 is the official version (don't ask me why Sun has all these very strange versioning problems, since also these are all considered "Java2") Anyway, Java 5.0 is the best Java yet, and also runs a tad faster, it is worth the upgrade ESPECIALLY if you use programs made in Java (Azureus comes to mind)

  213. 3 out of 5 stars
    RaveN-FH-

    Reviewing 5.0 (Oct 1, 2004)

    Does anybody know why they changed it from J2SE 1.5 to J2SE 5.0? It's really confusing to jump ahead 3.5 versions.

  214. 1 out of 5 stars
    Pizda

    Reviewing 5.0 RC (Sep 9, 2004)

    guti:

    Heck, even faster than binary! ;)

  215. 2 out of 5 stars
    mjm01010101

    Reviewing 5.0 RC (Sep 4, 2004)

    Sun needs to slow down the release of these to 1-2 a year, MAX, and focus on quality control. As a sysadmin I cannot afford to roll these out and take time to test every 2-3 months. The compatibility between previous versions and newer java apps is horrible as is the compatibility between newer apps and older clients. This is the antithesis to java goals.

  216. 2 out of 5 stars
    guti

    Reviewing 5.0 RC (Sep 4, 2004)

    Jaja Caleb.

    Probably it is even faster than assembly language!

    :-)

  217. 4 out of 5 stars
    zatoichi

    Reviewing 5.0 RC (Sep 4, 2004)

    It is obvious that ghammer hasn't a clue when it comes to Java. JDK1.5 is faster and had had some very nice features added to the language. Sun is also including some very nice utility programs with the JDK. I think competition with MS is a good thing and Java is showing it. Sun even accepted a "bug" to remove deprecated items to remove the cruft. Very cool. Good job Sun.

  218. 2 out of 5 stars
    ghammer

    Reviewing 5.0 RC (Sep 4, 2004)

    Java, and in particular Sun's java suck. Slow, buggy, a neat toy for MS haters who would praise interpreted BASIC as long as it did not come from Redmond. Benchmarks? Duh! I actually run things here and Java suck rocks. When I decide I want to run benchmarks I may give it another look.

  219. 5 out of 5 stars
    Caleb

    Reviewing 5.0 RC (Sep 4, 2004)

    Java has been proven to be much faster than C++.
    But since by default it is installed as Client, the Client is slower.
    The server on the other hand is really fast, but it takes more memory (and a bit larger startup times)

    Java rocks!

  220. 4 out of 5 stars
    CyberInferno

    Reviewing 5.0 RC (Sep 4, 2004)

    It's a bit slower than Microsoft's (although I don't know why), but it's cross-browser and cross-OS compatible. What other software can be compiled on one machine and run on any platform? C++ may be portable to other OS's, but you can't take one compiled file and distribute it to multiple OS's. That's the beauty of Java. The .jar file will work as long as java is installed. No need to recompile.

    Anyway, I give it a 4 because it's a tad slow. Other than that, it's a solid coding language.

    Here's a download link for those of you who don't want to sign up for anything: http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.5.0/download.jsp

  221. 5 out of 5 stars
    jrepin

    Reviewing 1.5.0 Beta 2 (Jun 6, 2004)

    I like Java a lot. I don't think that apps written in it are slow. They seam just as fast as apps written in Object Pascal or C++. And this new version also brings support for 64-bit OSes optimized for AMD64 and it is really fast there. Als this new beta has for the first time hardware acceleration of 2D function using OpenGL and your fast 3D graphics card. Just awsome.

  222. 5 out of 5 stars
    agent2killa

    Reviewing 1.5.0 Beta 2 (Jun 6, 2004)

    Whoa..totally agree with cosmotic.Java rocks!

  223. 5 out of 5 stars
    cosmotic

    Reviewing 1.5.0 Beta 1 (Feb 24, 2004)

    Benchmarks don't lie, java is faster than c++. How can you say its not? In almost every case, java is faster than c++ and everything else. Java optimizes the bytecode AS ITS RUN... ALL THE TIME!!! GOD!!! GO LOOK AT THE BENCHMARKS BEFORE YOU SAY ANYTHING!
    http://www.kano.net/javabench/

  224. 5 out of 5 stars
    blackpages

    Reviewing 1.5.0 Beta 1 (Feb 6, 2004)

    the most compatible reliable java

  225. 1 out of 5 stars
    thexfile

    Reviewing 1.5.0 Beta 1 (Feb 6, 2004)

    The fact is Microsoft is ran on most machines and SUN is putting out a product that runs slow on those machines.
    SUN can't sue every PC user to change to something that will run Java faster...that's called bad business.

  226. 2 out of 5 stars
    guti

    Reviewing 1.5.0 Beta 1 (Feb 5, 2004)

    softssa, Opera, Mozilla, and OpenOffice are not written in Java, althought they can use it as a feature extension!

  227. 4 out of 5 stars
    EViL3

    Reviewing 1.5.0 Beta 1 (Feb 5, 2004)

    ROFLMAO.. some of you guy can't even see past the end of your noses. Java doesn't profess to be faster than C++ or VB, and besides it NEVER could be, if you had any clue you'd realise that native applications will always execute faster than any VM system and this includes .NET - don't knock something just because you don't understand it.

    What it does offer though is a robust set of tools that allow cross platform compatability with no need for modification or re-compilation. Java has never been very good when it comes to desktop applications, while it is capable of some fatastic feats (just take a look at JBuilder), its future definitely lays in Server-side applications.

  228. 3 out of 5 stars
    softssa

    Reviewing 1.5.0 Beta 1 (Feb 5, 2004)

    The apps that run on java, Opera, Mozilla, and i think OpenOffice all take ages to load, even though you have a 2.53Ghz, with 512 ram with splendid maintenance. Tje SUN guy have to improve on the speed cause honestly that is all that counts nowadays, don't you think. Perhaps design is important too, and yeah opera has accomplished that. But it such eats resources it loads slow. When i click on a url I want opera to start within a tenth of a second and that't it!!

  229. 5 out of 5 stars
    newjamie

    Reviewing 1.5.0 Beta 1 (Feb 5, 2004)

    To bsr500:

    Why don't you think about what you're posting before spouting cr*p? Java is SSSLLLLOOOWWWW no matter what browser you call it from. The JVM is a software based translator to enable Java to run on any platform and therefore has to do much more work than a compiled platform specfic program such as C++.

  230. 5 out of 5 stars
    dr_goodbytes

    Reviewing 1.5.0 Beta 1 (Feb 5, 2004)

    Works well in opera, has some "issues" with firebird, but i think i can fix that...when i get around to it :)
    and no it's not slow.

  231. 4 out of 5 stars
    BoNeLeSS

    Reviewing 1.5.0 Beta 1 (Feb 5, 2004)

    I still have to see a C++ app running on every OS/processor platform in market. Yes, maybe is not lightning fast, but Java has found its way on the server niche rather than GUI apps.

  232. 5 out of 5 stars
    bsr500

    Reviewing 1.5.0 Beta 1 (Feb 5, 2004)

    You dumb people, its running slow because your using it with IE, this java is made more for opera and mozilla.

  233. 1 out of 5 stars
    donpacman

    Reviewing 1.5.0 Beta 1 (Feb 5, 2004)

    You don't have to be a brain surgeon to get a clue about SUNs Java! Just use it once and you to will say "Java 2" SUCKS...technically

  234. 1 out of 5 stars
    ghammer

    Reviewing 1.5.0 Beta 1 (Feb 5, 2004)

    Finally, an app that makes my P4 run like a 486!
    Thanks for this nasty very unix-like piece of garbage.
    I wouldn't run this on my boss' machine...

  235. 2 out of 5 stars
    virtorio

    Reviewing 1.5.0 Beta 1 (Feb 5, 2004)

    Java is dead, and sun should let it go gracefully, before they completly destory their reputation.

  236. 3 out of 5 stars
    Jeffsoft

    Reviewing 1.5.0 Beta 1 (Feb 4, 2004)

    finally an update!!

  237. 5 out of 5 stars
    cooldude7273

    Reviewing 1.4.2_02 (Oct 30, 2003)

    Java RULES!

  238. 1 out of 5 stars
    softssa

    Reviewing 1.4.2_02 (Oct 23, 2003)

    It still keeps eating all of my resources.
    This resource intensive environment still keeps programs developed in Java way behind other.

  239. 5 out of 5 stars
    Anthracks

    Reviewing 1.4.2_02 (Oct 23, 2003)

    Until Firebird has an official installer, you have to manually edit the registry or use an unofficial (but perfectly funcitonal) installer such as Seb's (http://seb.mozdev.org/firebird/). After that, it should have no problem recognizing the Java plug-in.

  240. 2 out of 5 stars
    guti

    Reviewing 1.4.2_02 (Oct 23, 2003)

    Still slow and with lots of memory leaks in the GC.

  241. 5 out of 5 stars
    dr_goodbytes

    Reviewing 1.4.2_02 (Oct 23, 2003)

    i did get it working in firebird, i got the latest nightly build (unofficial exe installer) works great.

  242. 5 out of 5 stars
    Treize

    Reviewing 1.4.2_02 (Oct 23, 2003)

    I have Firebird, and it works perfectly for me!

  243. 1 out of 5 stars
    Pizda

    Reviewing 1.4.2_02 (Oct 22, 2003)

    Does not work with Firebird, Opera, and it crashed my IE while loading a java applet. Startup improvement is marginal; would not waste my time on this release, if I was you. Sun is going down the tubes if they keep this up.

  244. 1 out of 5 stars
    jackxia

    Reviewing 1.4.2 (Oct 8, 2003)

    simple take too much memory and slow

  245. 2 out of 5 stars
    kbyron

    Reviewing 1.4.2 (Jun 29, 2003)

    I would give it a much higher rating if only it worked with Opera 6.06. You simply cannot enable Java 1.4.2 within that browser. (Don't say I should use Opera 7. I simply don't like it.)

  246. 2 out of 5 stars
    scots

    Reviewing 1.4.2 (Jun 28, 2003)

    Couldn't get it to work with Mozilla Firebird. Had to go back to 1.4.1.

  247. 5 out of 5 stars
    Zulithe

    Reviewing 1.4.2 (Jun 28, 2003)

    Very good, this is the best version of Java ever released. Practically every bug has been removed in this version, and it's faster than ever before.
    If you use Java in your web browser (instead of the Microsoft JavaVM) or have any applications that use Java, this is a highly recommended upgrade for you.
    If you plan on programming in Java though, you should probably look at www.java.com since it has a seperate version which you can download that includes a Java IDE for programming in Java, all for free! Though the download is over 77megs. :x

  248. 4 out of 5 stars
    ricsal

    Reviewing 1.4.2 Beta (Apr 4, 2003)

    i hope that BufferedInputStream.available() can now detect propretly connections lost and send the exception!

  249. 5 out of 5 stars
    keystroke

    Reviewing 1.4.2 Beta (Apr 4, 2003)

    Cool... comes with an autoupdater now (for which you can specify WHEN and how OFTEN it will try to update), as well as Mozilla support :) Although I had to reinstall the current moz 1.4a after installing it.. as well as uninstall the other javas, and reboot, to get it to work. Then again it is a beta, but it seems good so far.

  250. 5 out of 5 stars
    dr_goodbytes

    Reviewing 1.4.2 Beta (Apr 3, 2003)

    my mistake...the link doesn't work if you open it in a new window. it works fine if you just click on it. anyway like i was saying, sun java is great, much better than the bug-ridden "microsoft virtual machine".

  251. 3 out of 5 stars
    WRFan

    Reviewing 1.4.1_02 (Mar 1, 2003)

    what kind of an update is that? it still says "netscape 6", although netscape 7 came out a long time ago. can't they even update one single number in their programme?

  252. 5 out of 5 stars
    jrepin

    Reviewing 1.4.1_02 (Mar 1, 2003)

    Vorking fast and stable here. Both SDK and JRE.

  253. 5 out of 5 stars
    trapanator

    Reviewing 1.4.1_02 (Mar 1, 2003)

    best!

  254. 1 out of 5 stars
    BootBlock

    Reviewing 1.4.1_02 (Mar 1, 2003)

    Impressively slow. I'm also pretty certain there are memory leaks happening..

  255. 5 out of 5 stars
    mbear

    Reviewing 1.4.1 (Oct 12, 2002)

    "RC" stands for "Release Candidate", a standard industry term. Often there's an RC1, RC2, etc. as installer and the like bugs are worked out.

  256. 4 out of 5 stars
    keystroke

    Reviewing 1.4.1 (Oct 12, 2002)

    Is this any different than the last version posted? Still reads b21 in my Control Panel app.

  257. 1 out of 5 stars
    guti

    Reviewing 1.4.1 (Oct 12, 2002)

    Slowwwwwwwwwwwww

  258. 5 out of 5 stars
    purush

    Reviewing 1.4.1 FCS (Oct 10, 2002)

    For the information of someone above RC stands for Rich Client, whatever that means. The link is definitely not working

  259. 5 out of 5 stars
    sthulin

    Reviewing 1.4.1 FCS (Sep 18, 2002)

    um, ok, i guess sun decided to pull this release off their website cause thelink doesn't work anymore. Anyone willing to mirror the file so others can download it?

  260. 5 out of 5 stars
    doren

    Reviewing 1.4.1 FCS (Sep 18, 2002)

    Actually, FCS means "First Customer Ship" (found it on java.sun.com).

  261. 5 out of 5 stars
    eddie

    Reviewing 1.4.1 FCS (Sep 18, 2002)

    Anthracks: I think FCS means Final Candidate "sumthin"

  262. 5 out of 5 stars
    WRFan

    Reviewing 1.4.1 FCS (Sep 17, 2002)

    The final version ROCKS! at least 100 times faster than previous versions! all java applications and applets start very fast, as opposed to previous versions of java, where one had to wait for 10 seconds for the java to load and to start the app/applet.

    Here's an order: Everyone go immediately to sun and download!

  263. 5 out of 5 stars
    Anthracks

    Reviewing 1.4.1 FCS (Sep 17, 2002)

    Would someone please explain what FCS means?

  264. 1 out of 5 stars
    scots

    Reviewing 1.4.1 RC (Aug 27, 2002)

    Am I doing something wrong or what? When I install this (or any previous version of Sun's Java 2 Runtime), all the Java sites I go to quit working. Uninstall it, and they all work fine again. What's up with that?? I've talked to a couple friends of mine, and they have the same problem.

  265. 5 out of 5 stars
    WRFan

    Reviewing 1.4.1 RC (Aug 26, 2002)

    what does RC mean? release candidate? and what does it mean? is it equivalent to beta? I am not going to install beta software on my pc. But I use java sun 1.40_01, and I like it. ok, it takes 2 sec. to load, when I visit a website with java applets, so what? why is everyone complaining about this? 2 sec. isn't much.
    it's true, however, java based applications take much time to load. a normal app loads immediately, for a java based app you have to wait for 5 sec. till it starts.

  266. 1 out of 5 stars
    woodengod

    Reviewing 1.4.1 RC (Aug 26, 2002)

    The same could be said for JRE1.1x, 1.2.x, 1.3.x and 1.4.0 which I don't like (big OO mess, constantly changing API, slow, memory and CPU resource monster). What's new then?
    To me Microsoft and Sun are like USSR and Nazi Germany in the WWII: two sides of the same evil.

  267. 3 out of 5 stars
    yohimbe9

    Reviewing 1.4.1 RC (Aug 26, 2002)

    i haven't been happy with java since 1.3.x. everytime i visit a site with java i hear my machine crunching away as it loads the java runtime. and this is on several machines. i don't deal with non-web apps so i can't speak about that at all. i can say that sun needs to push java developers more to create cross-platform code. we run into all the time at work where java will run fine on the PC but not on the Mac. i know this is the developer's fault, but i think sun needs to raise some more awareness on the topic.

  268. 5 out of 5 stars
    fguarnie

    Reviewing 1.4.1 Beta (Aug 7, 2002)

    If you compare a native GUI windows application with a java GUI app Ok, no doubt. But i don't think 10~20 ms (more or less) change my life... The "slow" java GUI app it's enough for me? YES! Do the job like the windows app? YES! Works without changes (and without recompile) on several different platforms? YES! If you work -only- with Windows, perhaps, .NET is the solution. You can go fast as you want :-) . But you must spend a lot of $$$ to pay Windows. I prefer a free OS and invest in a language that works really fine on several platforms. I don't believe -at all- the novel that say ".NET is cross platform".
    On the server side Micro$oft is far away from J2EE on several platform, on the client side Micro$oft wins only on its S.O.
    There are a lot of free (cross platform) IDE for J2EE: Netbeans, Eclipse or very good editor (with plugins) like Jedit.
    Also Mr. Gates has said ".NET Won't Happen Overnight"
    the link is:
    http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,3959,426247,00.asp

  269. 1 out of 5 stars
    guti

    Reviewing 1.4.1 Beta (Aug 7, 2002)

    I do not have a 100 Mhz Pentium, it is a 1400 Mhz Athlon instead.
    Have you compared a simple application using C# with one using Java? The first is almost twice faster. That is a fact.
    .NET is a free and open plattform. You can download the .NET framework consting you 0. Visual Studio is a commercial software, as JBuilder or JDeveloper are.

  270. 1 out of 5 stars
    CyberDoc999

    Reviewing 1.4.0_01 (Jun 21, 2002)

    Full of Bugs!!!!

  271. 5 out of 5 stars
    Tux0Racer

    Reviewing 1.4.0_01 (Jun 19, 2002)

    Very nice. Good speed imporovment over previous versions. :)

  272. 1 out of 5 stars
    guti

    Reviewing 1.4.0_01 (Jun 19, 2002)

    Still bloated and very slow.
    Use .net instead!

Discuss Java SE Runtime Environment (JRE)

  1. Dec 5, 2011 - 9:15 AM
    kiloret45

    Mobile Tracker