For the general amusement of the world
 

I'll reply to the intemperate Madamimadam. I began by asking the mildest of questions and was roundly told that he was indifferent as to why his solution worked. Now it seems I must answer his own question for him to prove something (whether to him, the world or myself). We cannot change the fact that Limewire is based on Java 1.3.1 so whether the machine actually has Java 1.4.1 on board would seem to be irrelevant to the operation of Limewire. Indeed, that would always be the case when Limewire is running on older operating systems not upgraded to include the later Java upgrade.

Java 1.4.1 (actually 1.4.2 is available now) is bundled into the later Mac OSs. If this component was, for some reason, missing or corrupted this could inhibit the working of the general operating system. The symptoms might be a slower than usual operation of some applications or problems with memory allocation, etc. So reinstalling Java 1.4.1 might be useful to cure some general OS inefficiencies. However, let us consider what the download actually comprises. It is an upgrade and a series of fixes for earlier versions of Java. So, when you download a copy of Java 1.4.1 you are also downloading components of and improvements to, Java 1.3.1 and Java 1.2.2. Given that some inefficiencies in the earlier versions of Java are being retrospectively fixed, this may also enhance the operation of the machine in general and of Limewire in particular. However, since the purpose of this forum is to offer advice in an appropriate sequence, I consider it better to begin with general fixes like reinstalling Limewire and repairing permissions before going on to the more remote possibilities apparently favoured by Madamimadam as the first and only defensible step.

I apologise to the forum for going off-topic but, since the other contributor has two personalities, one discourteous and the other potentially constructive, I shall address these remarks to the latter and hope for the best.

Re: For the general amusement of the world
 

Firstly, your own post suggests my idea was far less than remote considering that "when you download a copy of Java 1.4.1 you are also downloading components of and improvements to, Java 1.3.1 and Java 1.2.2". I still believe there is a Java problem since no one has been able to prove differently; you can not claim your correctness until you have solved the problem. Secondly, I have had this problem myself and I have fixed this problem myself so I think that, no matter how remote you think my answer is, it obviously can work.

Tell me, what are you going to do if it turns out that I am correct? I have never shut-down any of your ideas, instead I have embrased them in my posts, yet you never gave mine a chance. I seriously doubt I will be receiving an appology if I am right.

Oh, you're SUCH a diplomat :rolleyes:

My final thoughts on this matter
 

There is an example, much beloved by those who write introductory books to Statistics. It shows a direct correllation over time between the rise and fall of sunspot activity and the hem lengths of ladies skirts. You talk as if the concepts "rightness" or "correctness" are somehow absolutes and relevant to our activity in this place. Most philosophers would say that "rightness" is at best relative or culturally normative and, in this place, we have probably defeated the rationale of its existence because our disagreement seems to have driven away the one person we were supposed to be helping. So my sincere apologies are due to sneekee_d.

I have never been afraid to offer up my own pretence of knowledge for comment and criticism because that is the way I take responsibility for who I am. Simply claiming to be "right" or offering one example of a successful outcome with no satisfactory explanation of context or methodology is never enough. To earn respect from your peers you have to offer a full and proper explanation. In default, why should we think that your success was anything more than blind luck or the result of sunspot activity? When I gently asked for the opportunity to learn from you, all you offered was a discourteous rebuff. Perhaps when you grow older and more confident in your knowledge, you will become more consensual. As it is, your aggressive unilateralism seems to me unhelpful in a place where helpfulness is supposed to be the prime virtue.

Go Go Go
 

Thank you, David91...

Certainly one of the most cogent posts in the history of these forums.
I hope that many of the members of Gnutella Forums are able to read the above AND benefit from doing so.

We are all here to have fun and hopefully benefit one another---

For many it is far too easy to forget that this is ALL about an hobby...
It is NOT about satisfying the needs of under-developed sandbox bullies.

:eek:

Re: My final thoughts on this matter
 

At the beginning of your post you make an allusion to correlation not equating to causation...then later in what is a blatant attempt at a pseudo-intellectual flame make a reference to sun spot activity resulting in my result...that is a causal attribution...idiot!

You also throw around the concept of philosophy as if there is a philosophy of what is right and how to act... speaking form a 'philosophical' standpoint and yet talking in truisms...where is the rational argument and methodology you call for yourself? I suppose you found out about philosophy in an introductory philosophy text...

Oh and the whole intellectual flame thing goes to pieces when you take such a gauche swing at my maturity: surely you should be able to note the hypocrisy in attributing maturity and logical replies to age.

BTW, you might notice that sneekee_d is still here but the messages of are being over-shadowed by a certain conflict of interest. Then again, I'm still waiting for sneekee_d to actually try out a few suggestions.

Oh, and lets just say for a second that my "success was (nothing) more than blind luck", what the hell would that matter, someone has a problem and they want to fix it... I am sure sneekee_d would be more interested in a working copy of Limewire than a run down on how Java works and what install does what.

Firstly, you are saying that my install of 10.2.6 had no java and, secondly, you are suggesting that I was able to run WebObjects without a copy of Java 1.3.1.

HHHHHHMMMMMMM..... interesting concept.

I mentioned before that I don't care why things work but if I was to make a guess, I would say that David worked it out himself when he said that it is very likely that the install of 1.4.1 updates 1.3.1 and 1.2.2.

Re: Go Go Go
 

Out of interest, how is it that there can be so many moderators on a forum for a program that in-directly supports corruption that can be fixated on "sunshine and lollypops" at all costs?

The continuation of this thread
 

It seems that you are labouring under a terrible curse — that of some intelligence but no idea how to use it constructively. There will come a time when you get into difficulties and need other people's help. They will look at your track record and, if you have continued as here, decide that you are deserving only of pity as you fail. But you will dismiss this along with every other piece of well-intentioned advice that has no doubt come your way. After all, I am no more wise than the "...guy who tells you you ought to have had your brakes relined last week before you smashed..."

I am too tired on a Friday to argue with ANYONE to I'll just comment on your last point... we don't know whether it would work for sneekee_d or not because they have not attempted to reinstall Java (be it 1.4.1 or 1.3.1). I have admitted MANY times already that installing 1.4.1 probably does just patch 1.3.1 but sneekee_d has patched java with a developer version of 1.4.1 and then patched the developer version to make full 1.4.1. This is can cause disaster... most of the time it is not the fault of user that this problem is there but it is, unfortunately, up to the user to fix it.

Oh, David, can you please get your head out of your ****... you're killing me here.

Quote:

Did ya miss me?

I am going to deal with this first..... I'm sorry... who the hell are you? I have only just joined this forum, how could we have ever met before, I have never been here before in my life? Time to get off the crack

I love how it is "LIKELY" that it was not associated yet you read the whole thread. And if you had read the whole thread you would have noticed that I have already pointed out that I don't see a need to back up my ideas because it does not matter if I studied for 2 years to come out with the answer or if I caught a virus that installed Java for me, the point is that it can work in situations. The funny thing here is that everyone has their heads so far up their arses that they are not willing to trial my idea in case it works.

You are in a position to make a claim like that... surely you understand that only certain types of people post in discussions like this while everyone else sits back and makes a silent opinion.

You want me to relax... oh, well, in that case, no problem. Let's go get a beer together. :rolleyes: Don't stick your nose in where it doesn't belong.