Wouldn't it be nice if Visual Studio could work like PortableApps from a thumbdrive?
Visual Studio needs a portable option to enable working off of a USB key. This would really help in being able to move around and code on the go, for example moving your configuration, plugins and all, between home and school, or home and work.
It would be great if you could run a small version of just the debugger from Visual Studio on a USB key or network share in order to more easily debug issues on production machines without installing Visual Studio or setting up remote debugging.
I wanted to update the status to make sure you know that we hear you. This isn’t straightforward to deliver for obvious reasons: Visual Studio installs a disparate variety of tools, runtimes and SDKs, many of which come from third parties or other parts of Microsoft. We recognize that developers would love to see something lighter and while we have nothing new to announce at this stage, we are spending a lot of time thinking about how we can improve Visual Studio installation.
Thanks for the feedback!
Tim Sneath | Visual Studio Team
Tim Sneath [MS] commented
@Peter Ritchie - is this what you were looking for? http://visualstudio.uservoice.com/forums/121579-visual-studio-2015/suggestions/4750782-make-the-installation-of-visual-studio-light-weigh
We have a new team working on this installer space, and we have spent some time working to merge tightly related ideas together - not to 'get rid of them' but to make it easier to vote for an idea and get it to bubble up above the fold. In the meantime, please also feel free to add some further commentary to this page - we're following this space closely.
Best wishes, Tim Sneath | Visual Studio Team
Peter Ritchie commented
Is it worth adding another suggest about a stripped-down version of visual studio? For example, I don't use SQL Server, Entity Framework, Sync Framework, etc. It would be nice if my Programs and Features wasn't completely assaulted on a Visual Studio install.
Yes. With every news system operative upgrade you needs more permissions thant olders system operatives and is every time is more dificult to do installations.
I think that the net framework and binaries there is enought to do the installation.
Dale Preston commented
Portable Visual Studio would be very helpful. I code in .net and in Java and I train others in both. I don't run any installers for anything except Microsoft. I use apps like Eclipse, NetBeans, Maven, ActiveMQ, RabbitMQ, Erlang, and more. I have an Apps folder and a Java folder I copy from PC to PC and I have a batch file with a bunch of SETX commands to set environment variables. Completely configuring a new test or training VM takes about 5 minutes after doing updates - other than Visual Studio.
@kiranpal: you might want to contact support: this forum is for submitting ideas and suggestions to the Visual Studio team. Visual Studio can be downloaded from https://www.visualstudio.com/
Bertrand Le Roy - .NET - Program Manager
hey please help me out. as soon as possible
i have os 32 bit, vs2013 is not working. can you sent me link to download right version for windows7 32 bit
Pablo S Velazco commented
It would be very handy to have a portable edition.
I love this idea! portable version plis!
Martin Lafrance (kinologik) commented
I always prefer portable applications. Even if it gets a performance hit from running from an external drive instead of my SSD, I'll go portable if I have a choice. ATM, I run PHPStorm Portable, Photoshop CC Portable, VirtualBox Portable.
I like the feel of having my OS/Registry as clean and lean as possible. Portability has really become a feature that makes me seriously consider alternative applications, and I regularly search online for ways to "hack" my non-portable applications into making them work that way.
So a big YES to Visual Studio portable... and SQL Server portable... and MS Office portable... and Microsoft Edge portable... and Hyper-V portable. I can easily run competing portable applications of all these products already, so I really hope Microsoft will eventually follow this trend
Scott D commented
What Paul said...
I have an equally large solution that makes VS hit memory barriers and results in slowness and crashes.
Paul Kent commented
I would definitely like to see Visual Studio x64. I have a very large solution with over 172 projects and over 1M+ lines of code. Frequently it runs into the 2GB memory barrier every day and then eventually things just get to the point where Visual Studio crashes.
Thomas V commented
Yes this would be great especially as it may lead to:
 Developers not needing need full workstation admin rights to do everything or just add simple components (ok local debugging I can understand - can we elevate for just that ?)
 You can run multiple VS versions side by side (and actually have them work !) The shared or even user specific registry keys are painful and not easily portable.
 You could run this nicely on a terminal services (ok remote desktop) system close to your TFS back end and testing infrastructure.
 Better performance - hey we can put it on a portable USB3 SSD if we want together with Projects
 x64 has been the future for a decade or more. Bout time I stopped seeing *32 against the flagship Visual Studio components.
James Hood commented
"Wouldn't it be nice if Visual Studio could be x64 and work from a self-contained folder like Xcode and NetBeans and Eclipse and ..."
Use Visual Studio from a thumbdrive ? Just like you can do with VB6 programming ?
Microsoft has/had a slim version of Visual Studio that was thumbdrive-able called Rascal. Worked wonders for those very few times I had to debug something in production with ports locked down. Even if it wasn't the full fledged version of Visual Studio, at least a thumbdrive version of Community Edition would be nice.
Portable is necessary. I use windows to go, but I can't install my visual studio into my flash drive, now I code by sharpdevelop.
On my fresh and clean Windows 8.1 Pro, I exported binary dump of HKLM/Software key (reg save HKLM/Software d:\hklm_soft.key) - it took 62MB, then I installed Visual Studio 2013 Community Edition to check what is it, and again I export the same key - it took 89MB. Almost 30MB of COM/GUID/Settings and other bloat hit my registry... bloat my computer, bloat registry, defragment system partition and system begins to work as if it was installed one year ago, not a few hours ago.
The same time I "install" Eclipse and the procedure of this is a simply unzipping downloaded pack, and run.
When something break down in Eclipse, I copy settings file, delete old instance and unzip new one and work - it takes 5 minuts. When the same thing happen in VS i.e. broken one of the component due to registry fail or something else - you need reinstall all VS - it takes eons compared to unzip a pack.
We know that is Windows specific behavior, and the most of MS's products don't use %appdata% and files for keeping theirs settings - even Windows Explorer keeps tray's icons cache as kilobytes of binary data in registry...
Try to make this bloated way of installing VS less registry dependent and less registry intense and in consequence less fragile and less intrusive for whole system. Look at Eclipse - it has poor UX compared to VS, but this is not a point, the point is that it proofs that installation of quite complex IDE can be done without even touching the registry.
Portable isn't terribly important to me, but x64 is HUGE.
Some people have asked for the case to be made for x64. Here are a few thoughts:
1) Memory space. Much like Firefox, Visual Studio uses plugins that run in the same memory pool as the parent app. There are some plugins that cache a lot of things in memory for performance (Resharper, for example). I frequently see VS grind to a HALT because it is doing garbage collection trying to satisfy a request for more memory. Sure, we can say "Jetbrains, fix your stuff". That might even be something that they work on daily, for all I know. But... I have a 24GB machine. Often, the only things running on it are VS and a web browser.
2) Performance - may or may not be more performant. x64 has more registers for the compiler to play with, but (as noted) pointers take 2x as much memory. Reducing the quantity of (emergency) garbage collection, though, is always a significant win.
3) X64 is the future. Microsoft hasn't said so yet, but I would not be surprised at all if Windows 10 didn't have a 32 bit edition. Really, when was the last x86 ONLY PC made?
I think porting to x64 would eliminate the visual developer error:
"Design view is unavailable for x64 and ARM target platforms."
THIS IS A BIG PAIN FOR ME AS I HAVE TO REMEMBER TO SET TARGET BACK TO x64 BEFORE EVERY PUBLISH.