Windows XP
--
Questions
--
Followers
Top Experts
SETUP.EXE is not a valid Win32 application ...
Weird problem when running a well known good program (Java MetaFrame) on a copletly Xindows XP SP3 with all MS Updates. Â (see image). Â This is what I have done:
1. Update Windows with all latest updates, etc.
2. PC is a DELL 2.99GHZ with 2GB RAM, working OK with all other programs
3. Downloaded a few times the original EXE directly from Java on different directories, and installing the EXE and it was giving consistant errors --> Unable to execute ... (like it could not create files in the temp directory for the user profile)
4. So, I decided to Uncompress the EXE unto my Desktop and run the Setup.exe manually, then I started getting --> SETUP.EXE is not a valid Win32 application.
5. Also, I spent two hours on the Internet searching for answers on this, found many people having the problem, but solutions like editing the registry ... did not help either.
6. All these was performed as an Administrator to the box, will full rights.
7. I Â have seen this problem before here at my location, and I ended up reinstalling XP from CD in order to be able of installing the setup.exe succesfully.
8. The answer to this question may favor someone here in the future.
9. Attached are two images when running the application compressed and uncompressed.
jmf-error2.jpg
1. Update Windows with all latest updates, etc.
2. PC is a DELL 2.99GHZ with 2GB RAM, working OK with all other programs
3. Downloaded a few times the original EXE directly from Java on different directories, and installing the EXE and it was giving consistant errors --> Unable to execute ... (like it could not create files in the temp directory for the user profile)
4. So, I decided to Uncompress the EXE unto my Desktop and run the Setup.exe manually, then I started getting --> SETUP.EXE is not a valid Win32 application.
5. Also, I spent two hours on the Internet searching for answers on this, found many people having the problem, but solutions like editing the registry ... did not help either.
6. All these was performed as an Administrator to the box, will full rights.
7. I Â have seen this problem before here at my location, and I ended up reinstalling XP from CD in order to be able of installing the setup.exe succesfully.
8. The answer to this question may favor someone here in the future.
9. Attached are two images when running the application compressed and uncompressed.
jmf-error2.jpg
Zero AI Policy
We believe in human intelligence. Our moderation policy strictly prohibits the use of LLM content in our Q&A threads.
the other image ...
jmf-error1.jpg
jmf-error1.jpg
SOLUTION
membership
Log in or create a free account to see answer.
Signing up is free and takes 30 seconds. No credit card required.
John, Â Just renamed to setup22.exe and gives same result --> not valid win32 .. Â I am running malwarebytes right now just in case. Â will let you know. Â
No viruses, nor malware. Â Also, I just installed it on another identical computer and installs fine. Â Weird! Â I am still curious, what is causing the error.
EARN REWARDS FOR ASKING, ANSWERING, AND MORE.
Earn free swag for participating on the platform.
SOLUTION
membership
Log in or create a free account to see answer.
Signing up is free and takes 30 seconds. No credit card required.
SOLUTION
membership
Log in or create a free account to see answer.
Signing up is free and takes 30 seconds. No credit card required.
start>run>"shell:cache\Con
Kill everything in there, and retry......
Kill everything in there, and retry......
Reason I suggest this, if the TIF directories get too full, sometimes they dont read/write to the temp files properly.....
SOLUTION
membership
Log in or create a free account to see answer.
Signing up is free and takes 30 seconds. No credit card required.
Good Try guys (all of you) but no cigar! Â Â
Done: cleaned temp with ccleaner and shell:cache ..., reinstalled teh new WinInstaller, checked for malware ... still the same ... is got to be something easy ... but ???? can figure yet. Â As a plan B, I am preparing another Box (XP) for my user, but I would love to find out the answer for this nightmare ... I have seen this problem at least 3-4 times, out of 120 PC's we have here. Â Most of our PC's are cloned/imaged and we change the SID after all that ... new name, new IP, etc. Â very weird. Â Thanks to you all ...
Done: cleaned temp with ccleaner and shell:cache ..., reinstalled teh new WinInstaller, checked for malware ... still the same ... is got to be something easy ... but ???? can figure yet. Â As a plan B, I am preparing another Box (XP) for my user, but I would love to find out the answer for this nightmare ... I have seen this problem at least 3-4 times, out of 120 PC's we have here. Â Most of our PC's are cloned/imaged and we change the SID after all that ... new name, new IP, etc. Â very weird. Â Thanks to you all ...
Get a FREE t-shirt when you ask your first question.
We believe in human intelligence. Our moderation policy strictly prohibits the use of LLM content in our Q&A threads.
ASKER CERTIFIED SOLUTION
membership
Log in or create a free account to see answer.
Signing up is free and takes 30 seconds. No credit card required.
Ps. to proof that it's not the installation, try to install the latest Java Update, it should be the same type of installer..
Will try ...
SOLUTION
membership
Log in or create a free account to see answer.
Signing up is free and takes 30 seconds. No credit card required.
That's funny, and likely the cause....although ntvdm should allow a 16-bit install to run just fine in Windows XP. Â Also, the author says it works fine on other similar machines.
EARN REWARDS FOR ASKING, ANSWERING, AND MORE.
Earn free swag for participating on the platform.
The page where this file is found, http://java.sun.com/javase/technologies/desktop/media/jmf/index.jsp , mentions  Java Media Framework , not Java Metaframe. I'm totally unfamiliar with Java, but it does look like some confusion. I actually downloaded this package and tried to run in XP x32, and it said that win-16 subsystem does not have sufficient resources.  Try it yourself, it's on the above page.
good try all. but still unknow.  google shows same problem all  over and no results anywhere.  thanks anyway.
wrm-ag, the recommended practice on EE is:
If your problem has been resolved by one or more of the experts' comments, then accept that comment;
If it was not resolved, then the right move is delete the question, regardless of how credible experts' comments sound. This applies even if the problem is not resolved because you don't have time or desire to try
it out.
The reason for the above is that only the solutions that have been really verified, should go into the KB where they will be found by others in the future. Accepting experts' comments just as reward for the effort, is not recommended, especially when these comments contradict each other.
If your problem has been resolved by one or more of the experts' comments, then accept that comment;
If it was not resolved, then the right move is delete the question, regardless of how credible experts' comments sound. This applies even if the problem is not resolved because you don't have time or desire to try
it out.
The reason for the above is that only the solutions that have been really verified, should go into the KB where they will be found by others in the future. Accepting experts' comments just as reward for the effort, is not recommended, especially when these comments contradict each other.
Get a FREE t-shirt when you ask your first question.
We believe in human intelligence. Our moderation policy strictly prohibits the use of LLM content in our Q&A threads.
Windows XP
--
Questions
--
Followers
Top Experts
Microsoft Windows XP is the sixth release of the NT series of operating systems, and was the first to be marketed in a variety of editions: XP Home and XP Professional, designed for business and power users. The advanced features in XP Professional are generally disabled in Home Edition, but are there and can be activated. There were two 64-bit editions, an embedded edition and a tablet edition.