3 ms·

I don't understand why Microsoft puts it on the user/dev to make sure their own dependencies and "VC redistributables" are installed. Like shouldn't Windows 11

I don't understand why Microsoft puts it on the user/dev to make sure their own dependencies and "VC redistributables" are installed. Like shouldn't Windows 11 just either have that already or pull it down as needed as it's an official MS library. Feel I always hit a roadblock when setting up a new PC where one of the things needs that but the dev didn't provide it and I have to get it myself. Which feels weird when it's an official MS thing from their official dev tools.

HumblyTossed 2y ago
> Like shouldn't Windows 11 just either have that already or pull it down as needed as it's an official MS library. In this day and age of everything always connected, some things still aren't always connected.
- estebank 2y ago
  The app manifest could state "I need this runtime installed". The OS can know whether it is already installed or not. The OS also knows whether it is internet connected or not. If a runtime that isn't installed is needed and internet connectivity isn't available, the OS could state that, with information about how to procure the runtime manually. That would stop people that have copied thr application from a pendrive in an air gapped system, that's true. One could make the case that someone meeting all of those requirements for would be technically minded enough to figure it out. This wouldn't help developers who want to distribute a small application that won't ever require a download, but would be an improvement for anyone already distributing .Net applications over the web.
  - whywhywhywhy 2y ago
    The OS presumably also knows where I should get it from as the same company hosts the installer as ships the OS. Yet IIRC the error is just an obtuse thing complaining a DLL isn't there and through googling and hopefully finding your way to Microsoft.com not some malware site you have to find the installer yourself. Mild annoyance for someone with 28 years Windows experience, complete roadblock or malware vector for someone who just wants to use a computer rather than understand a computer.
WorldMaker 2y ago
Microsoft's solution to DLL hell was installing lots of DLLs side-by-side. The problem with WinUI and VC redistributables is that we've now got a combinatorial explosion of them and teaching an installer to know and understand the complex network of dependencies is a lot of work. Microsoft's intended solution to this was to write one last Installer platform to try to rule them all. That's where AppX and MSIX installers came from. Unfortunately for us all, that Installer platform was synonymous with the Windows Store/Microsoft Store for just long enough that everyone assumes that is all that AppX/MSIX were intended to be. Today MSIX supports everything you want to do in a Win32 application, plus all the Dependency Fu of getting a WinUI application correctly installed. Just about the only left that you can't install directly in an MSIX is kernel-level drivers and even then there are options depending on your hardware vendor relationship with Microsoft. The article dismisses MSIX packaging out of hand, but given it is still referred to as AppX packaging in the article, the author might not be aware of how much MSIX packaging has advanced in a bunch of years and still makes some assumptions of MSIX limitations based on early Store-intended AppX restrictions.

HumblyTossed 2y ago

> Like shouldn't Windows 11 just either have that already or pull it down as needed as it's an official MS library. In this day and age of everything always connected, some things still aren't always connected.

estebank 2y ago
The app manifest could state "I need this runtime installed". The OS can know whether it is already installed or not. The OS also knows whether it is internet connected or not. If a runtime that isn't installed is needed and internet connectivity isn't available, the OS could state that, with information about how to procure the runtime manually. That would stop people that have copied thr application from a pendrive in an air gapped system, that's true. One could make the case that someone meeting all of those requirements for would be technically minded enough to figure it out. This wouldn't help developers who want to distribute a small application that won't ever require a download, but would be an improvement for anyone already distributing .Net applications over the web.
- whywhywhywhy 2y ago
  The OS presumably also knows where I should get it from as the same company hosts the installer as ships the OS. Yet IIRC the error is just an obtuse thing complaining a DLL isn't there and through googling and hopefully finding your way to Microsoft.com not some malware site you have to find the installer yourself. Mild annoyance for someone with 28 years Windows experience, complete roadblock or malware vector for someone who just wants to use a computer rather than understand a computer.

WorldMaker 2y ago

Microsoft's solution to DLL hell was installing lots of DLLs side-by-side. The problem with WinUI and VC redistributables is that we've now got a combinatorial explosion of them and teaching an installer to know and understand the complex network of dependencies is a lot of work. Microsoft's intended solution to this was to write one last Installer platform to try to rule them all. That's where AppX and MSIX installers came from. Unfortunately for us all, that Installer platform was synonymous with the Windows Store/Microsoft Store for just long enough that everyone assumes that is all that AppX/MSIX were intended to be. Today MSIX supports everything you want to do in a Win32 application, plus all the Dependency Fu of getting a WinUI application correctly installed. Just about the only left that you can't install directly in an MSIX is kernel-level drivers and even then there are options depending on your hardware vendor relationship with Microsoft. The article dismisses MSIX packaging out of hand, but given it is still referred to as AppX packaging in the article, the author might not be aware of how much MSIX packaging has advanced in a bunch of years and still makes some assumptions of MSIX limitations based on early Store-intended AppX restrictions.