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

For basilisk (at least) ruffle is able to run flash files -in places such as old movies repos. It doesn't run on kmeleon :(, but probably does in PM.

The desktop app doesn't seem to work in xp, but flash files can be playe in almost all traditional players (vlc, smplayer, MPC 1.7...)

https://ruffle.rs/#releases

 

Edited by dmiranda
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 weeks later...

i've made Java 8 update 291 (the latest one available, April 2021) run under Windows XP after tweaking the binaries with XomPie 0.6.

The procedure consists in installing Java 8 update 152, then copying the 291 files to the program files java folder, replacing the old ones, and then applying PE flags and kernel32.dll to each and ever .exe file, as well as to management.dll. Java 8 update 241 is more easy to install as the binaries are right away compatible with Windows XP, but as the installer doesn't work you have to install another one and replace again. Both seem to work fine after testing a few applications as well as minecraft.

this is further explained on my website: http://neonfloppy.sytes.net/docs/software-winxp/java/

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/27/2021 at 1:51 AM, dmiranda said:

For basilisk (at least) ruffle is able to run flash files - in places such as old movies repos.
It doesn't run on kmeleon :(, but probably does in PM

The Browser Extension "they" provide for "Firefox" is of the WebExtension format, so will only install in FxESR 52.9.x and Serpent 52.9.0/55.0.0; it doesn't run in KM and it won't install/run in New Moon 27/28, because these browsers do NOT support WEs... :(

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, blueclouds8666 said:

i've made Java 8 update 291 (the latest one available, April 2021) run under Windows XP after tweaking the binaries with XomPie 0.6.

The procedure consists in installing Java 8 update 152, then copying the 291 files to the program files java folder, replacing the old ones, and then applying PE flags and kernel32.dll to each and ever .exe file, as well as to management.dll. Java 8 update 241 is more easy to install as the binaries are right away compatible with Windows XP, but as the installer doesn't work you have to install another one and replace again. Both seem to work fine after testing a few applications as well as minecraft.

this is further explained on my website: http://neonfloppy.sytes.net/docs/software-winxp/java/

Thank you very much for this. I will try it soon and report back. Does it provide any significant improvement over previous versions? I am running 8.0.17, and do not use Java apps unless forced to it. But I do run it: for example, I am runnig now docfetcher over a 50+gb chunk of files I want indexed for text searching within those 50+gb of files :P

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, VistaLover said:

The Browser Extension "they" provide for "Firefox" is of the WebExtension format, so will only install in FxESR 52.9.x and Serpent 52.9.0/55.0.0; it doesn't run in KM and it won't install/run in New Moon 27/28, because these browsers do NOT support WEs... :(

I would like to find one for KM, and will report back if I find it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/30/2021 at 8:00 PM, RainyShadow said:

and stumbled upon this patcher. Thought it could be useful for someone.
Unfortunately, it's made for .NET 4.5 and won't run on XP...

The same person who released FlashPatch (which, as you noted, requires Vista+) has been now releasing CleanFlash, a "sanitised" ;) version of Chinese Flash, currently at version 34.0.0.155; the original distribution is batch-file based, so it should be XP-compatible (but I can't test this here...); the second distribution is installer-based, to run it under XP you need .NET FW 4.0+ :)

It is advertised that ALL Chinese telemetry has been removed, along with geo-limitations ("flash.cn" provided files are meant to run in mainland China, only... :( )

Quote

FlashPatch provides the following patches for this (Chinese) version:

1. Patch Chinese region lock on runtime (geo2.adobe.com)
2. Remove dependence on Flash Center Chinese system service
3. Deactivate dormant OOD Macromedia XML killswitch
4. Patch Chinese Enterprise phone-home service
.........
The Clean Flash Player installer will automatically close all browser windows when updating Flash Player.
It will also uninstall all previous versions of Flash Player, as well as the adware Flash Center application (if present).
The installer will also create an uninstaller that you can use to uninstall Clean Flash at any time.

Enjoy! :)

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

@dmiranda i've done some quick benchmaks with this tool: https://github.com/renaissance-benchmarks/renaissance using java 8 update 20 (i couldn't find update 17), update 152 and update 291. test were run with the following commands, picking the best result for each iteration: rx-scrabble -r 16, akka-uct -r 4, fj-kmeans -r 4

i couldn't find any significant performance difference. everything seems within the margin of error. maybe with other applications or tasks there is difference, but for general data processing and I/O seems the same. results are as follows (respectively: rx-scrabble, akka-uct, fj-kmeans):

update 291: 485.814 ms,   49395.213 ms,   7072.282 ms

update 152: 486.348 ms,   48090.700 ms.   7086.101 ms

update 21: 488.517 ms,   51775.709 ms,   6663.593 ms

i guess the advantage of using newer updates is security enhancements and running modern applications that do require newer updates to run at all.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

@Dave-H, BY  MISTAKE POSTED HERE - COULD YOU PLEASE MOVE IT? IT BELONGS TO

 

 

Probably you have it, like me, since forever, and can't get rid of it.  HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Classes\CLSID\{1171A62F-05D2-11D1-83FC-00A0C9089C5A}. A remnant of some of the first versions of flash. EDIT: I was testing xompie around the same time I did this, xompie broke basilisk52, so I was worried this thinghie may have been the cause, It wasn't. In fact, it probably does nothing, other than allowing me to be free of registry errors after almost two decades of watching this key showing up over and over in multiple reg cleaners, with no indication whatsoever on how to delete the damn thing. Now is gone. I'm happy! Ha ha.

The issue -for me at least- was the permissions. Go to the key in regedit, (1) permissions, (2) advanced, where there is an entry (the first one) that says Everyone . Open it and it is set to (3) deny. Change values to (4) allow. Now delete.

1.png.7d89a8e092743baaab0951ec11fd947a.png2.png.5c1d8beec2f9b705b80908266c383279.png

3.png

4.png

Edited by dmiranda
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 5/20/2021 at 3:16 PM, blueclouds8666 said:

@dmiranda i've done some quick benchmaks with this tool: https://github.com/renaissance-benchmarks/renaissance using java 8 update 20 (i couldn't find update 17), update 152 and update 291. test were run with the following commands, picking the best result for each iteration: rx-scrabble -r 16, akka-uct -r 4, fj-kmeans -r 4

i couldn't find any significant performance difference. everything seems within the margin of error. maybe with other applications or tasks there is difference, but for general data processing and I/O seems the same. results are as follows (respectively: rx-scrabble, akka-uct, fj-kmeans):

update 291: 485.814 ms,   49395.213 ms,   7072.282 ms

update 152: 486.348 ms,   48090.700 ms.   7086.101 ms

update 21: 488.517 ms,   51775.709 ms,   6663.593 ms

i guess the advantage of using newer updates is security enhancements and running modern applications that do require newer updates to run at all.

@Dave-H, BY  MISTAKE POSTED HERE - COULD YOU PLEASE MOVE IT? IT BELONGS TO

Hi, I took a first shot. I managed to do the xompie thing in a clean nlited VM. And it seems to work. In my usual pc, though, while working, Xompie breaks a few things -including Serpent. So I xompied java in VM, and copied the converted files to my PC. Will report on use tomorrow. Thanks!

Edited by dmiranda
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 5/20/2021 at 9:50 AM, VistaLover said:

The same person who released FlashPatch (which, as you noted, requires Vista+) has been now releasing CleanFlash, a "sanitised" ;) version of Chinese Flash, currently at version 34.0.0.155; the original distribution is batch-file based, so it should be XP-compatible (but I can't test this here...); the second distribution is installer-based, to run it under XP you need .NET FW 4.0+ :)

It is advertised that ALL Chinese telemetry has been removed, along with geo-limitations ("flash.cn" provided files are meant to run in mainland China, only... :( )

Enjoy! :)

Interesting news.:thumbup

Please consider carefully to have installed in your OS Windows XP in addition to this software also NET FW 4.0.3 (release date 2012).

NET FWs also suffer, unfortunately, from vulnerabilities to be patched:

 

https://www.cvedetails.com/product/2002/Microsoft-.net-Framework.html?vendor_id=26

I decided a few years ago to uninstall all versions of NET FW from my OS.

No problem, but obviously I can't use some softwares that require them.

Edited by Sampei.Nihira
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Sampei.Nihira said:

consider carefully to have installed in your OS Windows XP
in addition to this software also NET FW 4.0.3 (release date 2012).

Yes, if you decide to use the CleanFlash installer, you should update .NET FW 4 to the very last version issued for WinXP, i.e. 4.0.3; however, if you don't want to install .NET FW 4 at all, the .bat based CleanFlash setup should suffice... ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/20/2021 at 3:16 PM, blueclouds8666 said:

@dmiranda i've done some quick benchmaks with this tool: https://github.com/renaissance-benchmarks/renaissance using java 8 update 20 (i couldn't find update 17), update 152 and update 291. test were run with the following commands, picking the best result for each iteration: rx-scrabble -r 16, akka-uct -r 4, fj-kmeans -r 4

i couldn't find any significant performance difference. everything seems within the margin of error. maybe with other applications or tasks there is difference, but for general data processing and I/O seems the same. results are as follows (respectively: rx-scrabble, akka-uct, fj-kmeans):

update 291: 485.814 ms,   49395.213 ms,   7072.282 ms

update 152: 486.348 ms,   48090.700 ms.   7086.101 ms

update 21: 488.517 ms,   51775.709 ms,   6663.593 ms

i guess the advantage of using newer updates is security enhancements and running modern applications that do require newer updates to run at all.

In my usual system, XomPIE breaks directx, and without XomPIE, update 291 would'nt run. For some apps -those that do not require directX- it suffices to copy the required files (errors reporting missing files) can be solved by copying them into the java/bin folder. This doesn't make the trick, again, for apps requiring directX. This is probably due to tweaks, restrictions in my system. In a vanilla -but heavily nlited- system, it seems to work fine. For me, upd152 seems to be the last version. But I wonder if PatchPE may do the trick. I will try some time, and report back in this post. Thanks!

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, dmiranda said:

In my usual system, XomPIE breaks directx, and without XomPIE, update 291 would'nt run. For some apps -those that do not require directX- it suffices to copy the required files (errors reporting missing files) can be solved by copying them into the java/bin folder. This doesn't make the trick, again, for apps requiring directX. This is probably due to tweaks, restrictions in my system. In a vanilla -but heavily nlited- system, it seems to work fine. For me, upd152 seems to be the last version. But I wonder if PatchPE may do the trick. I will try some time, and report back in this post. Thanks!

i don't think PatchPE is enough, as there are also some missing kernel32.dll functions which need to be patched. In any case, you should be able to run 8u241 as it doesn't need patching at all.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, blueclouds8666 said:

i don't think PatchPE is enough, as there are also some missing kernel32.dll functions which need to be patched. In any case, you should be able to run 8u241 as it doesn't need patching at all.

This may be the issue I won't change just for this: https://www.softpedia.com/get/System/OS-Enhancements/DirectX-10-for-Windows-XP.shtml

Link to post
Share on other sites

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...