Anonymous

My feedback

  1. 6,273 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Password icon
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    256 comments  ·  Visual Studio IDE » IDE and Editor  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Anonymous commented  · 

    I'm afraid this won't happen soon for the real VS, if it all, we will get the Xamarin Studio now called VS for Mac on Linux. The real VS is using WPF for UI, which is tightly connected to Windows. Same applies to all the COM based stuff still exiting behind the scene. The real VS would not a complete rewrite of major parts to cut ropes to Windows.

  2. 937 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Password icon
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    66 comments  ·  Visual Studio IDE » Install  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →

    We expect to make significant progress on this front in the upcoming release. There are some components which must be installed to the system drive for various reasons – for example, Windows hotfixes and .NET Framework releases. But we think we will be able to do a better job of honoring the chosen location in the next release.

    To give some transparency into the design process, one interesting wrinkle to this problem is third-party components that we install. If you choose to install Visual Studio to (say) D:\VS, where should we install something like Git for Windows or the Android SDK (if you select those components)? Should we install them into a subdirectory of D:\VS, even though other apps may use them? And should we attempt to secure the directory? C:\Program Files is only writeable by admin users, which presents a security boundary to rogue apps. Tough choices…

    Thanks,…

    Anonymous commented  · 

    "Should we install them into a sub directory of D:\VS, even though other apps may use them?"
    For hotfixes its obvious. But for the rest, I don't get the question. If we tell the installer to install to D:\VS, than just install stuff there. If we use thing like git or Android SDK outside VS, we install it on our own. We cannot rely for 3rd party things to use such things installed by VS, because VS installer chooses to update them at its own random will, breaking things.

    And I can install JVM somewhere else than C: and use it system wide without problems. I don't get why this should not work with .Net frameworks.

  3. 2,954 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Password icon
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    111 comments  ·  Visual Studio IDE » Install  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →

    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

    Anonymous commented  · 

    Yes, please. We have complete Embedded Eclipse/CDT based C/C++ tool chains, including target debugging and many libraries. Installation is just unzipping an archive to a folder, uninstall is just deleting the folder. We do one reference installation, and then just archive it to a ZIP to install it on other machines. Android Studio can do the same, including SDKs. Easy to automate, easy to do manually. As simple as it can get.
    Having VS portable would allow us to do the same.
    The new VS installer brought us some advantages in granularity of what's installed, but is still splatters VS files and registry entries all over the place.

  4. 59 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Password icon
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    4 comments  ·  Visual Studio IDE » Install  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Anonymous shared this idea  · 
  5. 1,754 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Password icon
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    407 comments  ·  Visual Studio for Mac » Source Control  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →

    Hello, all,

    While we are continuing to work on this request, I could use your help. Could you please spare a moment and provide your thoughts to this survey?

    https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/79CKYXZ

    Going forward, please follow along with this issue on our Developer Community site: https://developercommunity.visualstudio.com/content/idea/351809/tfs-version-control.html

    Thanks!
    Jordan, Program Manager, Microsoft Visual Studio for Mac

    Anonymous commented  · 

    There is even TFS support for VS Code now.
    And what is exactly meant with "...for items like integrated work item management."
    Please don't make us ask for each TFS feature as a separate item. TFS support means TFS support.

  6. 2,176 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Password icon
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    172 comments  ·  Visual Studio IDE » Install  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →

    Thanks for the many comments on this topic. We are listening…

    On behalf of the Visual Studio team, I wanted to share a few responses to some of the questions and concerns raised, in the spirit of sharing with transparency the reasons that led us to the current installer options.

    Visual Studio 2017 is a huge product, because we support so many types of development: from Android to UWP to C++ to Unity to Linux. If we were to still offer a ‘full’ install, it would come in at over 50GB. That’s one huge ISO image!

    We surveyed hundreds of people during the previews and RCs, and people told us that they had historically used an ISO for two reasons: (i) because they wanted to download once and create a network install for enterprise deployment; (ii) because they had a shaky internet connection and wanted to be sure they’d downloaded…

    Anonymous commented  · 

    "Lastly, we’re listening to the comments here, and paying attention to the feedback we’re getting."

    No, you don't. First it took 10 Weeks before MSFT showed any reaction here, just to provide some lame excuses and to pretend its the first time you get this request.

    "Because of the nature of our product (rapidly updating, lots of third-party components), an ISO is problematic. We don’t have the rights to redistribute several large components (including Android), "

    If you would listen, you would change your product so can can provide ISOs for the folks you are pretending listening to. And the few people using VS for Android
    Development will be able to install the SDK on their own. The one delivered with VS is outdated anyway.

  7. 11,267 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Password icon
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    under review  ·  512 comments  ·  Visual Studio IDE » .NET  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Anonymous commented  · 

    Its amazing how MSFT fails to see the need for sharing code between client and server. Javascript creaps into server applications just for this reason.

    .Net Core is a great thing. But if there is no way for easy code sharing with browser clients, iOS and Droid Apps, it will have a hard stand.

Feedback and Knowledge Base