Jump to content
MSFN is made available via donations, subscriptions and advertising revenue. The use of ad-blocking software hurts the site. Please disable ad-blocking software or set an exception for MSFN. ×

Adobe Flash, Shockwave, and Oracle Java on XP (Part 2)


Recommended Posts

Yes, that's essentially what I have been doing with the normal Java files from here https://www.oracle.com/java/technologies/javase-jre8-downloads.html and it has been working so far, but I never modified the registry. I was lazy, so I simply began to extract the new version inside C:\Program Files\Java\jre1.8.0_144 so that it was going to detect the new version as the registry was pointing to that folder. What I don't like is that this way the folder jre1.8.0_144 has been storing anything but 152 'cause I kept extracting files in there ('till very recently when we also had to replace some files for the reasons I mentioned in other posts). Ideally, I'd like to manually store jre1.8.0_xxx where xxx is the correct name for that version and have it ok in the registry, which is why I hoped that the Azul installer was working. I mean, sure, I can just extract it in the C:\Program Files\Java\jre1.8.0_152 and replace sunmscapi.dll just like I've been doing for the other version of Java so far, but that's not the point. :)

EDIT: Actually I downloaded and extracted it in the fake jre1.8.0_144 and it's working just fine by replacing sunmscapi.dll, as I supposed... Here you can clearly see that I kept every version of Java but then I had to stop and just fill _144 with whatever version was released... :(

0cEGnDo.png

but inside there was 251 and now there's 262 of course...

KFBY9vI.png

Edited by FranceBB
Link to post
Share on other sites

All versions Adobe Flash Player newer than 32.0.0.371 contain a time-bomb.

After 12-Jan-2021 local SWF-files does not playback. The latest working version is 32.0.0.371.

Use a virtual machine to check. Install the Adobe Flash Player and set the clock to January 2021.

Clip509.png

  • Like 6
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well Adobe has said IIRC that Flash will not only be unsupported after the end of the year, but will no longer even work, and I guess they meant it!
I guess versions before 32.0.0.371 will still work though, I don't see how Adobe could retrospectively block them.
:dubbio:

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/25/2020 at 9:18 PM, FranceBB said:

I hope so, so they can report their experience and tell me whether it's only me and my system or not... On my XP x86, the installer does its job and the installation completes successfully. A new folder inside C:\Program Files\ is created called Zulu or something (I don't remember) and inside there's the classic Java folder structure with all the files, however, if I try to open a website to check which version gets reported, I don't get the new one, but the old one from the Java folder. If I try to replace the sunmscapi.dll to get it working and I test it again, nothing happens, it still reports the old version as it's pointing to the old Java folder. It's almost as if it only creates a folder with everything in it but it doesn't update the registry for whatever reason on XP. Perhaps the registry is different on 2008 R2? Perhaps a command is executed but ignored in XP? I don't know, I can't wrap my mind around it. The reason why I'd like the installer to work and do its thing is that this way I don't have to extract the zip and put everything inside the Java folder with a fake name, 'cause ok, so far so good, but I don't really like the idea to have C:\Program Files\Java\jre1.8.0_144 and inside there's 1.8.0_261 instead. I have been doing it for quite some time now, but I don't like it... it's against my mental health as I MUST have everything precise and ordered and I don't really sleep well if things are not the way I want them to be. xD

I guess that's because the Azul installer installs its Java as a standalone installation, it doesn't install it to the system.
As dencorso says, the usual rather tedious registry editing exercise will still have to be done as it was with the newer Oracle files.
The few things I still use which are Java based generally have their own JREs included with them anyway, albeit rather old ones, so I guess I probably won't bother now going beyond 251 on the XP system.
:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

They even cleared the archive page, pfff.

Where should i get the Android and WinCE builds now, lol?!

 

[edit]

v.32.0.0.371 needs a SSE2 capable CPU (at least for the installer).

Is there a version between this and v.29.0.0.171 which works with SSE-only?

Edited by RainyShadow
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, RainyShadow said:

They even cleared the archive page, pfff.

... Well, that was quick of them :angry: : five whole months before actual deprecation... :realmad:
Perhaps that expedited removal was a knee-jerk reaction on their part, caused by recently increased batch-downloading traffic on the hosting CDN:

https://forum.palemoon.org/viewtopic.php?p=193860#p193860

5 hours ago, RainyShadow said:

Where should i get the Android and WinCE builds now

https://web.archive.org/web/20200630185339/https://helpx.adobe.com/flash-player/kb/archived-flash-player-versions.html

... however, expect these web archive snapshots to be hunted down by Adobe, as they do not allow redistribution of their closed-source material... :(

Edited by VistaLover
  • Like 2
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

... Actually, at the time of this writing, DIRECT links from Adobe STILL work, if you know beforehand the correct filename for the .ZIP file:

https://fpdownload.macromedia.com/pub/flashplayer/installers/archive/fp_32.0.0.371_archive.zip

Surely, that won't last for long... :dubbio:

Edited by VistaLover
  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

That's bad... I mean, putting notifications, fair enough, introducing a banner saying that it will be discontinued, fair enough, but removing the whole archive and putting a time-bomb inside an executable?! I mean, c'mon... I know that they're doing it for security concerns, but honestly, they shouldn't take such an extreme measure, 'cause perhaps I'm not on a machine connected to internet, perhaps I wanna run .swf files locally... Adobe shouldn't artificially block Flash, it should be up to the users, really...

Edited by FranceBB
  • Upvote 6
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Dr. Drill said:

All versions (of) Adobe Flash Player newer (than) 32.0.0.371 contain (a) time-bomb

... If you have upgraded past 32.0.0.371 (as I expect most have already), simply uninstalling the newer version and running a backed-up version of the 32.0.0.371 installer won't cut it :realmad:

Adobe, since long ago, have taken extra measures to hinder you from easily downgrading AFP; you have to first uninstall a current version with their special Uninstaller tool: that tool also gets updated with each new AFP release and can uninstall the current version of Flash as well as all preceding ones; but it can't uninstall a fresher AFP version than its own!

https://helpx.adobe.com/flash-player/kb/uninstall-flash-player-windows.html

(BTW, they have removed the check that was present after Flash Player information :angry:; you get:

Issue
Flash Player installation was not successful.

FWIW, version checks still exist on
https://helpx.adobe.com/flash-player.html

https://get.adobe.com/flashplayer/about/  )

https://helpx.adobe.com/flash-player/kb/uninstall-flash-player-windows.html#main_Download_the_Adobe_Flash_Player_uninstaller

Permalink to the executable:

https://fpdownload.macromedia.com/get/flashplayer/current/support/uninstall_flash_player.exe

(currently at version 32.0.0.403) :P

  • Like 5
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Sampei.Nihira said:

It might be interesting to do some tests with Lightspark:

 

https://lightspark.github.io/

 

Well

Quote

Lightspark is still in alpha state, it currently implements around 76% of the Flash APIs

Better than nothing, I guess... Perhaps someone will come up with a registry "defuse" for the Adobe "time bomb" to use on the official installer...

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...

I made the mistake of updating Flash and then arching the offline installer, thinking it would simply work in the future. I had no idea they stooped so low as to actually timebomb it, and simultaneously nuke the archive.

After some brutal digging, I found offline copies of older versions. There's an NPAPI compliant installer of version 27 that works with Firefox and Pale Moon on Internet Archive. It's at version 27.0.0.170. It isn't very clearly labelled, but it shouldn't be hard to locate searching Internet Archive. I'd link it but rules expressly prohibit distributing software outside official vendor source.

I used Adobe's uninstaller tool before installing that version. The Cent Browser website also hosts a PPAPI offline installer for Chromium browsers too. 29.0.0.171 and 32.0.0.363.

Thanks @VistaLover for the instructions and advisory ;)

Edited by docR
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/28/2020 at 8:27 PM, VistaLover said:

... Actually, at the time of this writing, DIRECT links from Adobe STILL work, if you know beforehand the correct filename for the .ZIP file:


https://fpdownload.macromedia.com/pub/flashplayer/installers/archive/fp_32.0.0.371_archive.zip

Surely, that won't last for long... :dubbio:

... Do I get extra points for prophesying:P
Try the above Direct Link now and you'll get the door slammed at your face :angry: :realmad: :

Access Denied
You don't have permission to access "http://fpdownload.macromedia.com/pub/flashplayer/installers/archive/fp_32.0.0.371_archive.zip" on this server.
Reference #18.c46656b8.1600036305.1ef6b01c

 

Edited by VistaLover
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah I didn't act quickly enough, I only discovered the thread about 2 days ago. As such my best archive is a version 27 build, and even that was a b***h and a half to track down. I've always loathed Adobe since CC and the discontinuation of Fw, but I never expected this level of aggression toward the user.

This is on a another level :realmad:

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Dave-H changed the title to Adobe Flash, Shockwave, and Oracle Java on XP (Part 2)
  • Dave-H pinned this topic
  • Dave-H unpinned this topic

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...