I suggest you ...

Make the installation of Visual Studio light-weight and fast

What?
Installing Visual Studio takes too long

Why?
There's a lot of stuff that the VS installer installs that I probably never is going to use.

Proposal:
Make modules and packages install when needed. The Office-install has had this option for ages, where you can deceide whether you want to install a feature a) now, b) when needed, or c) never. That way the basic install will probably be a lot faster and it will take up less space on our drives (how many terabytes of never-used-features do you think VS is accumulating worldwide?).

I belive you already have the package system to handle this (nuget), so eat some of your own dogfood and show us that the package system can handle app installs as well :)

1,655 votes
Vote
Sign in
Check!
(thinking…)
Reset
or sign in with
  • facebook
  • google
    Password icon
    I agree to the terms of service
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    Kjetil KlaussenKjetil Klaussen shared this idea  ·   ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Peter LewisPeter Lewis shared a merged idea: Visual Studio installation sequencing guide Microsoft App-V 5  ·   · 
    Anonymous shared a merged idea: stop visual studio eating hard drive space  ·   · 
    Justin ChaseJustin Chase shared a merged idea: Remove All Features from VS (and make them optional extensions)  ·   · 
    jeffpiersonjeffpierson shared a merged idea: Make it feasible to use Visual Studio as a programmers notepad replacement  ·   · 
    Rudi LarnoRudi Larno shared a merged idea: Use Nuget to install most of the components  ·   · 
    Martin MacPhersonMartin MacPherson shared a merged idea: Make it a lot more lightweight and modular  ·   · 
    started  ·  Visual Studio TeamAdminVisual Studio Team (Product Team, Microsoft) responded  · 

    An update on this front: we’re starting work here. It’s a thorny problem, but this demo from our recent Connect event shows some of the work we’re doing in this area:
    https://channel9.msdn.com/Events/Visual-Studio/Connect-event-2015/010/player#time=0h26m22s

    We want to make installing Visual Studio a much quicker experience, where you can get up and running quickly with the core components you need. As we grow Visual Studio to support more and more scenarios, it inevitably gets bigger and more complex – but as the demo shows, we have some ideas on how we can rein this in while continuing to enable new workloads.

    63 comments

    Sign in
    Check!
    (thinking…)
    Reset
    or sign in with
    • facebook
    • google
      Password icon
      I agree to the terms of service
      Signed in as (Sign out)
      Submitting...
      • Mike ValerianoMike Valeriano commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Whoa... that Visual Studio VNext thing actually looks.... very promising.

        I REALLY REALLY hope they do keep it small like that, and give us OPTIONS as to what install. That's probably the main thing.

        For instance, at first, I'll most likely use the "new" VS only for C#. And that's exactly what I expect to be able to install: ONLY C# TOOLS. NOTHING ELSE. No Azure ****, no SQL Server, no freaking VB! ONLY C#, and if I do need something else, I can just fire up the setup again, and add it later.

        If they manage to do that, I'll gladly go back to C#. Because Java is getting to my nerves, but Netbeans is everything (setup wise, startup wise) VS isn't right now.

      • Talley OuroTalley Ouro commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        This issue needs to be a priority for MS VS developers.VS 2015 Update 1 took more than 6 hours to complete which does not make sense.You need to make VS installation or Updates fast like others IDE.For example installation of Netbeans IDE take around 30mn and Netbeans IDE contains a lot of languages like Visual Studio.

      • Anonymous CowardAnonymous Coward commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        I think the real problem is the architecture of the Visual Studio IDE. The installation is awful because the architecture is too complicated. There are too many interconnected moving parts, and too much legacy baggage. I don't think it can be fixed incrementally -- It's time for a code burning party!

        Explicitly renounce compatibility with existing extensions and plugins.

        Use 100% managed code. If you really need native code for something, put it in a DLL with a "C" API, and P/Invoke it.

        Get rid of anything related to COM. 1995 is calling -- they want their technology back!

        All VS assemblies should be "app local" -- don't use the GAC. Also, don't dribble your bits over half the filesystem.

      • mrozmroz commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        And, for god sake, why VS installer needs LanmanServer service for installation ??? If this service is disabled, installer fails...

      • andrewandrew commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        I use and like the Modular based extensions and updates for python and node tools. SSDT as a downloadable addon works well too. Not a fan of having these options as part of the setup installer though.

        Not sure about the office install 'when you need it' approach mentioned above- I had a situation with office in the past (either version 2007/2010) where the installer was broken - modification and repair just didn't work. It was **** to fix.

        Can dependency resolution be more visible the way node does it with package.json or nuget package managers for example?. Probably too hard as I bet there is a ton of com/registry stuff.

        Seems to me that challenge goes beyond initial install though - if something doesn't work and a repair is called for e.g. intellisense for razor views not working, then how robust and easy is a repair to do?

        As far as where VS is physically installed I really like the way eclipse does it, basically unzipped into a folder and run from there. You have complete control and choice.

        The approach used by android sdk manager to update and add packages although time consuming is more bearable to use as you can choose what to install on demand and view the entire process. Much easier to live with.

        I think this installer / module re-evaluation should be reviewed in the context of the licensing module and what the product should be in the future and to whom. Maybe pay for added modules/features as and when we need them moving away from the tiered sku idea completely.

        Visual Studio Code is superb for angular development but I still like a full IDE!
        The keynote demo looked to be on the right track.

      • mrozmroz commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Somasegar has said goodbay to MS, maybe it's good time to make major changes in VS installation process and some system integration rules.

        1. Do something with "c:\ProgramData\Package Cache" - 5GB of cab-s and .msi-s. Let us choose whether Installer should keep cache packages on HDD or get packages from source ISO/DVD or download packages when necessary.

        2. Let us to exclude all SQL Server stuff, except SQL Server Compact Edition which you use for IntelliSense

        3. Keep all settings in %Appdata% instead of Windows Registry, now you write all of IDE settings to registry, despite you keep all these ones in CurrentSettings.xml

        4. make VS installation less system intrusive and less registry intensive/dependent - now you register megabytes(!) of GUID, COM and other entries to the windows registry, that makes whole product very fragile and makes windows ROT. There is no other product on Windows that is able to compete with mess VS Installer makes.

      • Mark HurdMark Hurd commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        With the merger of this with the suggestion to "make it possible for VS to be a Programmer's Notepad", I just want to confirm, I don't mind (much) if it takes an hour to install VS: I want the start-up time to editing a stand-alone file to be fast.

      • Tim Sneath [MS]Tim Sneath [MS] commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Thanks Peter - merging this one with the broader piece of feedback around making VS lighterweight and easier to install.

      • Tim Sneath [MS]Tim Sneath [MS] commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        We hear you loud and clear. Visual Studio is a complex tool that includes multiple external dependencies (emulators, third-party SDKs, runtimes, extensions) - but many of you tell us that it takes too long to install and the default / minimum options are too heavy. This isn't an easy problem to solve, unfortunately - and has less to do with the installation technology and more to do with being able to componentize installation packages that have been integrated for many years. We've made good progress in Visual Studio 2015 - the minimum installation is significantly smaller than in previous releases and we're doing work with the out-of-box feeds to make it easier to add new features to an existing installation and update them without tampering with the core product. Merging multiple variants of this idea together so that it gets the visibility it deserves; and stay tuned for more news on this front!

        Tim Sneath | Visual Studio Acquisition & Ecosystem Team

      • RidiRidi commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Hello, the installation is the slowest since Visual Studio 2000. Please consider to do several things such as
        - please includes all the installation on the DVD or the ISO, includes the third party one.
        - never download the installer in the middle of installation process, it is error prone and make the user experience very worse on limited bandwidth. if it is not avoided, please give us an option to download or not to download just like SQL Server installation
        - give us estimation time left for installation, rather than just giving moving animation. You can learn how Web Platform Installer works.

      • Maxim KamalovMaxim Kamalov commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        I believe this suggestion is a bit obsolete, because of VS Code introduction, removing my vote.

      • Peter LewisPeter Lewis commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Please make it as easy to deploy Visual Studio as it is to Deploy Microsoft Office with App-V 5.

        E.g Cannot find sequencing recipe for Visual Studio 2013 Express Windows Desktop Sequencing guide. Many companies are using APP-V to deploy applications and it is a Microsoft Product

      • Anonymous commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        There is obviously too much rubbish in there if an IDE needs over 10gb for its most basic installation. Furthermore, it should NOT be installing ANYTHING to the C: drive if another installation path is specified. The installation size was supposed to be 15gb for the components selected, which is excessive in itself, but it decided to install to C:, which only had 8gb free, rather than to F: which had 50gb free. It also refuses to remove from C: without restarting first, despite failing to install everything. There is no option to remove it without doing so.
        Please trim the excess from the files, so that it has a reasonable footprint. Allow different components to be selected, so that, for example, a C++ developer doesn't have VB components eating space. And fix the install location. Sometimes simple isn't best. It's an IDE for programmers, I think that putting in some more complex choices can be accepted here, most will know what they're doing and be happier to customise their installation.

      • Eric SkaggsEric Skaggs commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        I fully support this. I've gone back and forth between Notepad++ and Sublime Text for years. Each has its pros/cons and I'd really like to see Visual Studio Code become my go-to text editor and bridge that gap. As a developer, I typically have one or more running Notepad++ instances and it would ideal to have one lightweight, robust text editing tool.

      • AnonymousAnonymous commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Yes! Please make it more modular!
        I have a VS2013 Ultimate license from my university, and I like some of the extra features, but most of them are useless to me. For example, I don't need Azure, Silverlight, Team Foundation, LightSwitch, and a lot of other components.
        I have a laptop with a 70GB SSD, VS2013 needs about 10GB...

        As a workaround, I can recommend this application: https://totaluninstaller.codeplex.com/

      • AnonymousAnonymous commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Yes! Please make it more modular!
        I have a VS2013 Ultimate license from my university, and I like some of the extra features, but most of them are useless to me. For example, I don't need Azure, Silverlight, Team Foundation, LightSwitch, and a lot of other components.
        I have a laptop with a 70GB SSD, VS2013 needs about 10GB...

        As a workaround, I can recommend this application: https://totaluninstaller.codeplex.com/

      • Noel AbrahamsNoel Abrahams commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Why is the VS installer installing language packs in French, Italian other languages? I only want English.

        Waiting 2 hours for an install is absurd.

      • Gerdi BotGerdi Bot commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Please add this. Its such a heavy install. It still includes redistributables for 2005 x86 even though i am on a x64 machine. Now i am sure there are edge cases to have this, but not for what i am doing. And why does it insists to install blend?! I think alot of people are getting to the point where they can feel this product is becoming blotted and heavy. The alternatives of webstorm (who might i add create reshaper , which a lot of those features should be in the IDE by default considering some people pay + $1000 for it )

      • Petr VonesPetr Vones commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        I wish I could get rid of the NuGet at all. It is not acceptable to have a build server to download something from somewhere without any control of that. Especially when an unsigned powershell script is downloaded and executed. The nuget site might be offline, corrupted, compromised etc. Also I don't need tons of target verions of single library (for example log4net 1.1 to 4.0), I just need the exact one.

        As for disk space, it would be much better if Visual Studio provided customizatoin of what to install (like older versions did) instead of almost no option that installs 8 GB of **** without any control of that.

        Having small base framework install and optional high level libraries downloads that are being updated every month might bring "faster release cycle" but from developer's point of view it is rather disaster. It also means end of meaningful documentation and examples.

      ← Previous 1 3 4

      Feedback and Knowledge Base