Java #5

Firefox downloaded some updates this morning.  When I tried to use a 
Java using site, I got, "Your browser is not Java enabled".  I 
downloaded jre-8u121-windows-i586-iftw, but when I tried to use the same 
site again I got the same message.
-- 
Myth, after all, is what we believe naturally.  History is what we must 
painfully learn and struggle to remember.  -Albert Goldman
0
Martin
3/17/2017 8:58:38 AM
mozilla.support.firefox 23575 articles. 4 followers. Post Follow

25 Replies
60 Views

Similar Articles

[PageSpeed] 22

Martin Edwards wrote:

> Firefox downloaded some updates this morning.  When I tried to use a
> Java using site, I got, "Your browser is not Java enabled".

That's expected ...

<https://www.java.com/en/download/help/firefox_java.xml>

<https://support.mozilla.org/t5/Problems-with-add-ons-plugins-or/Why-do-Java-Silverlight-Adobe-Acrobat-and-other-plugins-no/ta-p/31069>
0
Andy
3/17/2017 9:23:37 AM
  On 17.03.2017, Martin Edwards wrote in
     <mailman.410.1489741132.10543.support-firefox@lists.mozilla.org>:

> Firefox downloaded some updates this morning.  When I tried to use a Java 
> using site, I got, "Your browser is not Java enabled".  I downloaded 
> jre-8u121-windows-i586-iftw, but when I tried to use the same site again I 
> got the same message.

Support for the Java plugin (as well as all other nsapi plugins except 
flash) is gone. Means: No more Java browser plugin in FF and this is 
most likely not going to change ever again.

This effectively ends the era of the most epidemic and potentially 
un-fixable security hole ever found.

-- 
"Let's make ethanol green this afternoon."
		      - R. Friesen Chemistry 124
0
Alex
3/17/2017 10:03:21 AM
On 3/17/2017 5:03 AM, Alex S. wrote:
>  On 17.03.2017, Martin Edwards wrote in
>     <mailman.410.1489741132.10543.support-firefox@lists.mozilla.org>:
>
>> Firefox downloaded some updates this morning.  When I tried to use a
>> Java using site, I got, "Your browser is not Java enabled".  I
>> downloaded jre-8u121-windows-i586-iftw, but when I tried to use the
>> same site again I got the same message.
>
> Support for the Java plugin (as well as all other nsapi plugins except
> flash) is gone. Means: No more Java browser plugin in FF and this is
> most likely not going to change ever again.
>
> This effectively ends the era of the most epidemic and potentially
> un-fixable security hole ever found.

  While I understand exactly why Firefox has done this, the unfortunate 
side effect is that with a large amount of Enterprise web applications 
still requiring Java to function, it will just lead to a further slide 
in market share for Firefox.

  If only the Internet would adhere to Firefox security standards...

0
Ryan
3/17/2017 1:09:11 PM
"Alex S." <alexs.nospam@yahoo.com> wrote

| This effectively ends the era of the most epidemic and potentially
| un-fixable security hole ever found.
|

  Actually, if you don't count enabling script, then Flash is by
far the worst security problem.

https://www.recordedfuture.com/top-vulnerabilities-2015/
https://www.recordedfuture.com/top-vulnerabilities-2016/

  Java is a problem, but it's rarely used anymore outside
corporate intranets, so there's little reason to target it.

  The essential problem is executable code in webpages.
Script, Flash, Silverlight, javascript-enabled PDF plugins,
and now WebAssembly. Executable code *cannot* be made
safe.


0
Mayayana
3/17/2017 1:13:05 PM
  On 17.03.2017, Mayayana wrote in
     <mailman.398.1489756435.10544.support-firefox@lists.mozilla.org>:

>   Actually, if you don't count enabling script, then Flash is by
> far the worst security problem.

The reason, Flash has more incidents is that there were times where 
Flash was on close to 100% of all web browsers. A working flash attack 
was much more likely to succeed.

In general, Java had the more dangerous attack vectors, but since 
Java's great days as a browser plugin are long gone, damage was 
limited.

>   Java is a problem, but it's rarely used anymore outside
> corporate intranets, so there's little reason to target it.

Nowadays, it's pretty much dead in the open world, that's true. Unlike 
flash, which is still in use on quite a number of normal web sites. So 
disabling it was a good idea. In corporate and enterprise networks, 
solutions can be found. If you block all access to the outside, an 
older Version of Firefox (+ Java) could do it. Even IE could (and does 
in many business networks).

>   The essential problem is executable code in webpages.
> Script, Flash, Silverlight, javascript-enabled PDF plugins,
> and now WebAssembly. Executable code *cannot* be made
> safe.

Yeah, WebAssembly opens up a whole new can of worms. Not exactly a fan 
of it either, particularly because modern JavaScript is good and fast 
enough for almost everything. But wasm is what many content providers 
ultimately want. They don't want us to read their code easily :)

-- 
"What I've done, of course, is total garbage."
		      - R. Willard Pure Math 430a
0
Alex
3/17/2017 1:49:01 PM
On 3/17/2017 9:49 AM, Alex S. wrote:
>  On 17.03.2017, Mayayana wrote in
>     <mailman.398.1489756435.10544.support-firefox@lists.mozilla.org>:
>
>>   Actually, if you don't count enabling script, then Flash is by
>> far the worst security problem.
>
> The reason, Flash has more incidents is that there were times where
> Flash was on close to 100% of all web browsers. A working flash attack
> was much more likely to succeed.
>
> In general, Java had the more dangerous attack vectors, but since Java's
> great days as a browser plugin are long gone, damage was limited.
>
>>   Java is a problem, but it's rarely used anymore outside
>> corporate intranets, so there's little reason to target it.
>
> Nowadays, it's pretty much dead in the open world, that's true. Unlike
> flash, which is still in use on quite a number of normal web sites. So
> disabling it was a good idea. In corporate and enterprise networks,
> solutions can be found. If you block all access to the outside, an older
> Version of Firefox (+ Java) could do it. Even IE could (and does in many
> business networks).
>
>>   The essential problem is executable code in webpages.
>> Script, Flash, Silverlight, javascript-enabled PDF plugins,
>> and now WebAssembly. Executable code *cannot* be made
>> safe.
>
> Yeah, WebAssembly opens up a whole new can of worms. Not exactly a fan
> of it either, particularly because modern JavaScript is good and fast
> enough for almost everything. But wasm is what many content providers
> ultimately want. They don't want us to read their code easily :)
>
I don't think Java is supported by Edge or Chrome.  I had to put it on 
for IE to access a desktop of a consulting client.  Old IE is included 
in Win10 but you have to look for it.  I'm not a computer person, tried 
to use IE for something that needed Java but could not do it as client 
configured IE such that it only access their site.
0
Frank
3/17/2017 4:10:16 PM
  On 17.03.2017, Frank wrote in
     <mailman.416.1489767056.10544.support-firefox@lists.mozilla.org>:

> I don't think Java is supported by Edge or Chrome.  I had to put it on for IE 
> to access a desktop of a consulting client.  Old IE is included in Win10 but 
> you have to look for it.  I'm not a computer person, tried to use IE for 
> something that needed Java but could not do it as client configured IE such 
> that it only access their site.

Chrome dropped NPAPI long ago, so no Java there. No Java in Edge 
either, but IE11 still supports it. Edge is pretty much "bare bone" and 
doesn't even support ActiveX controls. They've learned their lesson.

So if one really _NEEDS_ Java, the options are either IE11 _OR_ an 
older Firefox. For a reasonably well secured corporate network, this 
shouldn't be a problem. Others must decide themselves. Since FF allows 
multiple installations with separated profiles, I could imagine to keep 
an older version for the very few cases that still won't work without 
Java. Personally, I have not seen public webpages relying on Java for 
quite a while.

-- 
"If that makes any sense to you, you have a big problem."
		      - C. Durance Computer Science 234
0
Alex
3/17/2017 4:56:39 PM
On 3/17/2017 12:56 PM, Alex S. wrote:
>  On 17.03.2017, Frank wrote in
>     <mailman.416.1489767056.10544.support-firefox@lists.mozilla.org>:
>
>> I don't think Java is supported by Edge or Chrome.  I had to put it on
>> for IE to access a desktop of a consulting client.  Old IE is included
>> in Win10 but you have to look for it.  I'm not a computer person,
>> tried to use IE for something that needed Java but could not do it as
>> client configured IE such that it only access their site.
>
> Chrome dropped NPAPI long ago, so no Java there. No Java in Edge either,
> but IE11 still supports it. Edge is pretty much "bare bone" and doesn't
> even support ActiveX controls. They've learned their lesson.
>
> So if one really _NEEDS_ Java, the options are either IE11 _OR_ an older
> Firefox. For a reasonably well secured corporate network, this shouldn't
> be a problem. Others must decide themselves. Since FF allows multiple
> installations with separated profiles, I could imagine to keep an older
> version for the very few cases that still won't work without Java.
> Personally, I have not seen public webpages relying on Java for quite a
> while.
>
It's been about 6 months since I installed the clients software on my 
computer.  Java was a bit of a PITA and I recall I had to remove all 
traces of it and install new.  I tried with no avail to get their 
program set up on FF, Edge and Chrome.
0
Frank
3/17/2017 5:11:13 PM
Ryan P. wrote:
>   While I understand exactly why Firefox has done this, the unfortunate 
> side effect is that with a large amount of Enterprise web applications 
> still requiring Java to function, it will just lead to a further slide 
> in market share for Firefox.
> 
>   If only the Internet would adhere to Firefox security standards...


It doesn't mean that Java applications are dead, just that you can't get 
to them from Firefox.  I haven't followed development tracks for other 
browsers, but it would not surprise me if they're also planning eventual 
phase-out of Java support, in the way that Flash support is eventually 
going away.

There's plenty of Java applications out there, it's just that Java 
developers are learning how to deploy their stuff without forcing it 
through the browser.

Smith

0
NFN
3/17/2017 5:45:21 PM
In article <mailman.410.1489741132.10543.support-
firefox@lists.mozilla.org>, big_mart_98@yahoo.co.uk says...
> Firefox downloaded some updates this morning.
> 

I presume that was version 52.0.

You will need either an earlier version of Firefox or Firefox 52 ESR 32-
bit release. (The 64-bit on Windows has never supported Java.)

For example, see: https://www.java.com/en/download/help/firefox_java.xml

This article has a link to:
https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/organizations/

That page has a link to download the Firefox 52 ESR releases. Again, 
please note that if running Windows one would need a 32-bit version.

Also note that this will buy you about a year, because on the next ESR 
release (expected release on or about March 2018) the ESR release then 
is expected to drop NPAPI plugins (except flash?).

Internet Explorer 11 can also run Java, one of the reasons why it is 
also included in Windows 10.

Even then, Oracle plans to depreciate the Java plug-in in the next major 
JDK (for developers) and JRE (for us mere mortals) releases, expected in 
July, and, though not announced yet by Oracle, one article I read 
speculated that the Java plug-in would actually be removed in about two 
years. If so, web developers would have to either convert their sites to 
use Java Web Start or use other technologies and have them deployed 
within two years.
0
Mark12547
3/17/2017 6:41:47 PM
Ryan P. wrote:

> On 3/17/2017 5:03 AM, Alex S. wrote:
>>  On 17.03.2017, Martin Edwards wrote in
>>     <mailman.410.1489741132.10543.support-firefox@lists.mozilla.org>:
>>
>>> Firefox downloaded some updates this morning.  When I tried to use a
>>> Java using site, I got, "Your browser is not Java enabled".  I
>>> downloaded jre-8u121-windows-i586-iftw, but when I tried to use the
>>> same site again I got the same message.
>>
>> Support for the Java plugin (as well as all other nsapi plugins except
>> flash) is gone. Means: No more Java browser plugin in FF and this is
>> most likely not going to change ever again.
>>
>> This effectively ends the era of the most epidemic and potentially
>> un-fixable security hole ever found.
> 
>   While I understand exactly why Firefox has done this, the unfortunate 
> side effect is that with a large amount of Enterprise web applications 
> still requiring Java to function, it will just lead to a further slide 
> in market share for Firefox.
> 
>   If only the Internet would adhere to Firefox security standards...

Java *web applications* are not the same as Java applets.  You sure
those "Enterprise web applications" haven't been using Java Web Start
(since it was introduced back in 2001)?

Chromium (e.g., Google Chrome) dropped NPAPI plug-in support a year ago.
0
VanguardLH
3/17/2017 7:58:31 PM
Martin Edwards wrote:

> Firefox downloaded some updates this morning.  When I tried to use a 
> Java using site, I got, "Your browser is not Java enabled".  I 
> downloaded jre-8u121-windows-i586-iftw, but when I tried to use the same 
> site again I got the same message.

Java developers have had over 2 years to prepare moving away from
relying on the NPAPI plug-in for Java (which Mozilla has announced for
quite awhile that they are discontinuing after Chromium already dropped
it) and were told to move to Java Web Start.

https://docs.oracle.com/javase/tutorial/deployment/webstart/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Java_Web_Start

Java Web Start has been around a lot longer than when Mozilla announced
dropping the old NPAPI plug-in scheme.  I remember seeing it over 8
years ago (back to 2001 when we had some Sun workstations for testbeds).
The launcher runs as a background process on your computer to launch the
Java apps.  It also communicated with a server to push updated versions
of Java apps to the client host (so they would already be available to
the user and admins could ensure the employees were using the latest app
version).

The Java plug-in won't install in Firefox.  It won't install in
Chromium-based web browser (e.g., Google Chrome).  I don't and don't
care about Internet Explorer, and I doubt Microsoft granted permission
for the Java plug-in in their Edge web browser.  Any site using Java
applets that haven't migrated to web applications and using Java Web
Start are *way* behind the curve, and now they got caught with their
pants down with Firefox (and got exposed a year ago with Chromium).

https://blog.chromium.org/2013/09/saying-goodbye-to-our-old-friend-npapi.html
https://blog.chromium.org/2014/11/the-final-countdown-for-npapi.html
https://blog.idrsolutions.com/2015/09/what-chrome-45-dropping-npapi-plug-in-support-means/

It's not Oracle's fault.  It's the fault of the Java developers and web
admins that haven't bother switching to Java Web Start.  Chromium did it
first.  Mozilla is catching up.
0
VanguardLH
3/17/2017 7:58:38 PM
On 3/17/2017 11:41 AM, Mark12547 wrote:
> In article <mailman.410.1489741132.10543.support-
> firefox@lists.mozilla.org>, big_mart_98@yahoo.co.uk says...
>> Firefox downloaded some updates this morning.
>>
> 
> I presume that was version 52.0.
> 
> You will need either an earlier version of Firefox or Firefox 52 ESR 32-
> bit release. (The 64-bit on Windows has never supported Java.)
> 
> For example, see: https://www.java.com/en/download/help/firefox_java.xml
> 
> This article has a link to:
> https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/organizations/
> 
> That page has a link to download the Firefox 52 ESR releases. Again, 
> please note that if running Windows one would need a 32-bit version.
> 
> Also note that this will buy you about a year, because on the next ESR 
> release (expected release on or about March 2018) the ESR release then 
> is expected to drop NPAPI plugins (except flash?).
> 
> Internet Explorer 11 can also run Java, one of the reasons why it is 
> also included in Windows 10.
> 
> Even then, Oracle plans to depreciate the Java plug-in in the next major 
> JDK (for developers) and JRE (for us mere mortals) releases, expected in 
> July, and, though not announced yet by Oracle, one article I read 
> speculated that the Java plug-in would actually be removed in about two 
> years. If so, web developers would have to either convert their sites to 
> use Java Web Start or use other technologies and have them deployed 
> within two years.
> 

SeaMonkey still supports all NPAPI plugins, including Java.  The latest
version is 2.46 available from
<https://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/seamonkey/releases/2.46/>.  In the near
term, the SeaMonkey developers will be basing new versions on the ESR
versions of Firefox, which will also support NPAPI plugins for the near
term.

-- 
David E. Ross
<http://www.rossde.com>

Consider:
*  Most state mandate that drivers have liability insurance.
*  Employers are mandated to have worker's compensation insurance.
*  If you live in a flood zone, flood insurance is mandatory.
*  If your home has a mortgate, fire insurance is mandatory.

Why then is mandatory health insurance so bad??
0
David
3/17/2017 8:02:35 PM
Alex S. <alexs.nospam@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:mailman.437.1489769833.10543.support-firefox@lists.mozilla.org: 

> ...if one really _NEEDS_ Java, the options are either IE11 _OR_ an
> older Firefox. 

32-bit Firefox ESR 52 (Extended Support Release) is the last one that 
will support the Java Plugin.  

https://support.mozilla.org/t5/Firefox/What-is-the-latest-version-of-
Firefox-ESR-that-will-support-Java/td-p/1355062

https://blogs.oracle.com/java-platform-
group/entry/further_updates_to_moving_to
0
Mark
3/18/2017 12:28:45 AM
On 3/17/2017 8:02 PM, David E. Ross wrote:
> On 3/17/2017 11:41 AM, Mark12547 wrote:
>> In article <mailman.410.1489741132.10543.support-
>> firefox@lists.mozilla.org>, big_mart_98@yahoo.co.uk says...
>>> Firefox downloaded some updates this morning.
>>>
>>
>> I presume that was version 52.0.
>>
>> You will need either an earlier version of Firefox or Firefox 52 ESR 32-
>> bit release. (The 64-bit on Windows has never supported Java.)
>>
>> For example, see: https://www.java.com/en/download/help/firefox_java.xml
>>
>> This article has a link to:
>> https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/organizations/
>>
>> That page has a link to download the Firefox 52 ESR releases. Again,
>> please note that if running Windows one would need a 32-bit version.
>>
>> Also note that this will buy you about a year, because on the next ESR
>> release (expected release on or about March 2018) the ESR release then
>> is expected to drop NPAPI plugins (except flash?).
>>
>> Internet Explorer 11 can also run Java, one of the reasons why it is
>> also included in Windows 10.
>>
>> Even then, Oracle plans to depreciate the Java plug-in in the next major
>> JDK (for developers) and JRE (for us mere mortals) releases, expected in
>> July, and, though not announced yet by Oracle, one article I read
>> speculated that the Java plug-in would actually be removed in about two
>> years. If so, web developers would have to either convert their sites to
>> use Java Web Start or use other technologies and have them deployed
>> within two years.
>>
>
> SeaMonkey still supports all NPAPI plugins, including Java.  The latest
> version is 2.46 available from
> <https://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/seamonkey/releases/2.46/>.  In the near
> term, the SeaMonkey developers will be basing new versions on the ESR
> versions of Firefox, which will also support NPAPI plugins for the near
> term.
>
Thanks to all who repliied.

-- 
Myth, after all, is what we believe naturally.  History is what we must 
painfully learn and struggle to remember.  -Albert Goldman
0
Martin
3/18/2017 7:46:43 AM
On 3/17/2017 6:56 AM, Alex S. wrote:
>    On 17.03.2017, Frank wrote in
>       <mailman.416.1489767056.10544.support-firefox@lists.mozilla.org>:
>
>> I don't think Java is supported by Edge or Chrome.  I had to put it on for IE
>> to access a desktop of a consulting client.  Old IE is included in Win10 but
>> you have to look for it.  I'm not a computer person, tried to use IE for
>> something that needed Java but could not do it as client configured IE such
>> that it only access their site.
>
> Chrome dropped NPAPI long ago, so no Java there. No Java in Edge
> either, but IE11 still supports it. Edge is pretty much "bare bone" and
> doesn't even support ActiveX controls. They've learned their lesson.
>
> So if one really _NEEDS_ Java, the options are either IE11 _OR_ an
> older Firefox. For a reasonably well secured corporate network, this
> shouldn't be a problem. Others must decide themselves. Since FF allows
> multiple installations with separated profiles, I could imagine to keep
> an older version for the very few cases that still won't work without
> Java. Personally, I have not seen public webpages relying on Java for
> quite a while.
>
What abut Netalyzer?  Still needs Java.
0
Desiree
3/18/2017 10:14:55 AM
On 3/17/2017 6:56 AM, Alex S. wrote:
>    On 17.03.2017, Frank wrote in
>       <mailman.416.1489767056.10544.support-firefox@lists.mozilla.org>:
>
>> I don't think Java is supported by Edge or Chrome.  I had to put it on for IE
>> to access a desktop of a consulting client.  Old IE is included in Win10 but
>> you have to look for it.  I'm not a computer person, tried to use IE for
>> something that needed Java but could not do it as client configured IE such
>> that it only access their site.
>
> Chrome dropped NPAPI long ago, so no Java there. No Java in Edge
> either, but IE11 still supports it. Edge is pretty much "bare bone" and
> doesn't even support ActiveX controls. They've learned their lesson.
>
> So if one really _NEEDS_ Java, the options are either IE11 _OR_ an
> older Firefox. For a reasonably well secured corporate network, this
> shouldn't be a problem. Others must decide themselves. Since FF allows
> multiple installations with separated profiles, I could imagine to keep
> an older version for the very few cases that still won't work without
> Java. Personally, I have not seen public webpages relying on Java for
> quite a while.
>
What abut Netalyzer?  Still needs Java.
0
Desiree
3/18/2017 10:14:55 AM
[snip]

> Personally, I have not seen public webpages relying on Java for quite a
> while.
>

I have, but only on a certain online gaming site that I'd rather not 
use. I know someone who used to be "addicted" to pogo.com and a game 
called "Tumble Bees". It requires both Flash and Java, and has an 
excessive amount of *dv*rt*s*ng (even with AdBlock+).It was a lot of 
work keeping it working on my Firefox setup. I hope I won't be asked to 
keep doing it.

-- 
Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.us/

"The idea of the sacred is quite simply one of the most conservative
notions in any culture, because it seeks to turn other ideas
--uncertainty, progress, change -- into crimes." --Salman Rushdie
0
Mark
3/18/2017 6:06:22 PM
In
<news:mailman.486.1489860118.10543.support-firefox@lists.mozilla.org>,
Desiree <melelina@medscape.com> wrote:

> On 3/17/2017 6:56 AM, Alex S. wrote:

> > So if one really _NEEDS_ Java, the options are either IE11 _OR_ an
> > older Firefox. 

> What abut Netalyzer?  Still needs Java.

What's the question about it?

0
UTF
3/18/2017 6:27:53 PM
On 3/18/17 6:14 AM, Desiree wrote:
> On 3/17/2017 6:56 AM, Alex S. wrote:
>>    On 17.03.2017, Frank wrote in
>> <mailman.416.1489767056.10544.support-firefox@lists.mozilla.org>:
>>
>>> I don't think Java is supported by Edge or Chrome.  I had to put it 
>>> on for IE
>>> to access a desktop of a consulting client.  Old IE is included in 
>>> Win10 but
>>> you have to look for it.  I'm not a computer person, tried to use IE 
>>> for
>>> something that needed Java but could not do it as client configured 
>>> IE such
>>> that it only access their site.
>>
>> Chrome dropped NPAPI long ago, so no Java there. No Java in Edge
>> either, but IE11 still supports it. Edge is pretty much "bare bone" and
>> doesn't even support ActiveX controls. They've learned their lesson.
>>
>> So if one really _NEEDS_ Java, the options are either IE11 _OR_ an
>> older Firefox. For a reasonably well secured corporate network, this
>> shouldn't be a problem. Others must decide themselves. Since FF allows
>> multiple installations with separated profiles, I could imagine to keep
>> an older version for the very few cases that still won't work without
>> Java. Personally, I have not seen public webpages relying on Java for
>> quite a while.
>>
> What abut Netalyzer?  Still needs Java.

Use Chrome or Edge.

-- 
Go Gonzaga and WVU!
Coexist <https://www.coexist.org/>
National Popular Vote <http://www.nationalpopularvote.com/>
Ubuntu 16.04LTS

0
WaltS48
3/18/2017 10:28:32 PM
In article <mailman.492.1489876143.10543.support-
firefox@lists.mozilla.org>, thalionusa@REMOVEaol.com says...
> > What abut Netalyzer?  Still needs Java.
> 
> Use Chrome or Edge.
> 
> 

Neither of those can use the Java plug-in.
0
Mark12547
3/18/2017 10:33:42 PM
On 3/18/17 6:33 PM, Mark12547 wrote:
> In article <mailman.492.1489876143.10543.support-
> firefox@lists.mozilla.org>, thalionusa@REMOVEaol.com says...
>>> What abut Netalyzer?  Still needs Java.
>> Use Chrome or Edge.
>>
>>
> Neither of those can use the Java plug-in.

Exactly.

-- 
Go Gonzaga and WVU!
Coexist <https://www.coexist.org/>
National Popular Vote <http://www.nationalpopularvote.com/>
Ubuntu 16.04LTS

0
WaltS48
3/18/2017 10:45:45 PM
On 3/17/2017 7:58 PM, VanguardLH wrote:
> Martin Edwards wrote:
>
>> Firefox downloaded some updates this morning.  When I tried to use a
>> Java using site, I got, "Your browser is not Java enabled".  I
>> downloaded jre-8u121-windows-i586-iftw, but when I tried to use the same
>> site again I got the same message.
>
> Java developers have had over 2 years to prepare moving away from
> relying on the NPAPI plug-in for Java (which Mozilla has announced for
> quite awhile that they are discontinuing after Chromium already dropped
> it) and were told to move to Java Web Start.
>
> https://docs.oracle.com/javase/tutorial/deployment/webstart/
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Java_Web_Start
>
> Java Web Start has been around a lot longer than when Mozilla announced
> dropping the old NPAPI plug-in scheme.  I remember seeing it over 8
> years ago (back to 2001 when we had some Sun workstations for testbeds).
> The launcher runs as a background process on your computer to launch the
> Java apps.  It also communicated with a server to push updated versions
> of Java apps to the client host (so they would already be available to
> the user and admins could ensure the employees were using the latest app
> version).
>
> The Java plug-in won't install in Firefox.  It won't install in
> Chromium-based web browser (e.g., Google Chrome).  I don't and don't
> care about Internet Explorer, and I doubt Microsoft granted permission
> for the Java plug-in in their Edge web browser.  Any site using Java
> applets that haven't migrated to web applications and using Java Web
> Start are *way* behind the curve, and now they got caught with their
> pants down with Firefox (and got exposed a year ago with Chromium).
>
> https://blog.chromium.org/2013/09/saying-goodbye-to-our-old-friend-npapi.html
> https://blog.chromium.org/2014/11/the-final-countdown-for-npapi.html
> https://blog.idrsolutions.com/2015/09/what-chrome-45-dropping-npapi-plug-in-support-means/
>
> It's not Oracle's fault.  It's the fault of the Java developers and web
> admins that haven't bother switching to Java Web Start.  Chromium did it
> first.  Mozilla is catching up.
>
Thanks for the update.  Is there any sign that they will do that?

-- 
Myth, after all, is what we believe naturally.  History is what we must 
painfully learn and struggle to remember.  -Albert Goldman
0
Martin
3/19/2017 7:39:22 AM
In
<news:mailman.501.1489909170.10543.support-firefox@lists.mozilla.org>,
Martin Edwards <big_mart_98@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

> On 3/17/2017 7:58 PM, VanguardLH wrote:
> > Martin Edwards wrote:
> >  
> >> Firefox downloaded some updates this morning.  When I tried to use
> >> a Java using site, I got, "Your browser is not Java enabled".  I
> >> downloaded jre-8u121-windows-i586-iftw, but when I tried to use
> >> the same site again I got the same message.  

> > It's not Oracle's fault.  It's the fault of the Java developers and
> > web admins that haven't bother switching to Java Web Start.
> > Chromium did it first.  Mozilla is catching up.
>   
> Thanks for the update.  Is there any sign that they will do that?

Java Web Start has always worked fine with Firefox.  I'm not sure what
was meant by 'Mozilla is catching up', unless it was that Firefox
doesn't support Java *plugins* any more.


0
UTF
3/19/2017 7:58:00 PM
�Q� wrote:

> Java Web Start has always worked fine with Firefox.

Which is fine for apps that are pure java, but there are plenty of web 
apps with html pages that include chunks of java (and probably bits of 
javascript that tie them together) those are going to cause problems 
after the ESR ditches java too.

0
Andy
3/19/2017 8:12:58 PM
Reply: