Stan Brown wrote:

VanguardLH wrote:

Just another version of Microsoft C run-time. Most C-coded programs do
not roll up all libs they call into the .exe as that would enlarge the
size of that file. Since (the assumption) the C run-time libs are
already on the Windows hosts, the program author can reduce the size of
his .exe file.

I have only one data point, but it goes against what you said.

I work for a company whose software depends on MSVC++ runtimes, and
it includes them in the installer. Testing in clean Windows systems
from Windows XP to Server 2012, I pretty much always see those
runtimes getting installed, which wouldn't happen if they were
already there.

I thought I said that. "Sometimes installers include the run-times on
which the program depends but that bloats the size of the installer.
For those that do not bundle the run-times with their program, ...".
End-user programs, from my experience, usually do not include the
run-time upon which the program is dependent. Enterprise software
targets customers with bigger budgets so their install package includes
all run-times, ancilliary software, and any other software the program
might need in special scenarios. When a customer is buying an $80K
program, you don't skimp on the install package.

If there is no concern over download bandwidth or in file server space
then the installer might include the run-times. If file server space is
limited, especially when hosting the installer elsewhere (e.g., download
site), or there is a concern about bandwidth (how big, how long the
download takes, not all download sites support resume), then the
installer might include the run-time. In the latter case, it is assumed
that you already have the required run-time version, or already have a
later version that is usable, or the installer may offer to retrieve the
run-times for you and start their installs, or the site tells you about
having to download other software to get the program to function.

KB2999226 says it delivers the "universal" C run-time. Universal? This
article had a link to another about the Win10 SDK. Instead of mandating
a user be using Windows 10 as a minimal platform to run an app that was
written to run under Windows 10, it looks like the Win10 CRT and Win10
SDK are designed not only to allow running a "universal" app on
desktops, notebooks, pads, and mobile devices but also run them under
Windows 7, 8, and 10. An app that can only run under Windows 10 would
have a limited audience compared to the same app that can run on all
those hardware platforms under Windows 7, 8, and 10. However, to do
that means the support framework (e.g., run-times) must be available for
those operating systems.

Windows 7 and 8 users are probably leery of anything saying it is for
Windows 10, and rightly so considering the so-called updates that are
not for Windows 7/8 but are for migration to or lures for Windows 10 or
to convert Win7/8 setups to adware platforms for Win10. Win7/8 users
are getting tired of the Win10 bait updates. Time might disprove my
assumption but it looks like Microsoft is trying to widen the audience
for Win10 apps so they can run back on Win7/8 by not restricting a
version of CRT to Windows 10, or later, but allowing distribution and
use of the newer CRT on older versions of Windows. While this looks
noble of Microsoft, this does have a marketing ploy as another lure as
to why Win7/8 users should be using Win10. As I mentioned, I hope the
Win10 version of the CRT doesn't cripple itself when used under Win 7/8;
else, this would be like freeware that is a crippled version of the full
program. If freeware is so crippled as to be merely a demo of the full
program then that freeware is really lureware.