[OT?] Why so many versions of 'Microsoft Visual C ++ 2008Redistributable version?

Having just migrated to Win 10, and I was looking through the list of
installed programs.

There are a large number (8) of instances of 'Microsoft Visual C++
(year) Redistributable blah blah version' in the list?
Why is this? Is Microsoft Visual like .NET? Does it needs to keep back
issues for backword compatibility reasons? Or is it just sloppy cleanup
management on behalf of MS?

(P.S. I am aware these are not new to Win 10. I had noticed them going
back to Win 7, but I am surprised that they are still there, after a
fresh start with Win 10. )

"occam" wrote in message ...
Having just migrated to Win 10, and I was looking through the list of
installed programs.

There are a large number (8) of instances of 'Microsoft Visual C++
(year) Redistributable blah blah version' in the list?
Why is this? Is Microsoft Visual like .NET? Does it needs to keep back
issues for backword compatibility reasons? Or is it just sloppy cleanup
management on behalf of MS?

(P.S. I am aware these are not new to Win 10. I had noticed them going
back to Win 7, but I am surprised that they are still there, after a
fresh start with Win 10. )



I think you've hit the nail on the head- no backwards compatibility. As a
long time gamer, it seems every game required its own installation of C++.
On my Win10Hx64, I have (2) 2005, (4) 2008, (2) 2010, (2) 2012, and (2) 2013
(what happened to all the years in between LOL?). Each year besides 2005
lists an x86 and x64 installation. Curious tough, I have no .NET installed.
BTW, this is an upgrade from Win7HPx64.
--
SC Tom

SC Tom wrote:


"occam" wrote in message
...
Having just migrated to Win 10, and I was looking through the list of
installed programs.

There are a large number (8) of instances of 'Microsoft Visual C++
(year) Redistributable blah blah version' in the list?
Why is this? Is Microsoft Visual like .NET? Does it needs to keep back
issues for backword compatibility reasons? Or is it just sloppy cleanup
management on behalf of MS?

(P.S. I am aware these are not new to Win 10. I had noticed them going
back to Win 7, but I am surprised that they are still there, after a
fresh start with Win 10. )



I think you've hit the nail on the head- no backwards compatibility. As
a long time gamer, it seems every game required its own installation of
C++. On my Win10Hx64, I have (2) 2005, (4) 2008, (2) 2010, (2) 2012, and
(2) 2013 (what happened to all the years in between LOL?). Each year
besides 2005 lists an x86 and x64 installation. Curious tough, I have no
.NET installed.
BTW, this is an upgrade from Win7HPx64.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visual_studio

History

Visual Studio 97
Visual Studio 6.0 (1998)
Visual Studio .NET (2002)
Visual Studio .NET 2003
Visual Studio 2005
Visual Studio 2008
Visual Studio 2010
Visual Studio 2012
Visual Studio 2013
Visual Studio 2015

There's bound to be a few DLLs.

And for the years they aren't listed, they're fixing
the bugs from the previous year.

A VCREDIST can be installed globally, in the system folder
or such. If you are using Microsoft WordView or PowerPoint Viewer,
there is at least one set of VCREDIST for those. And there are
also patched versions you would get if connected to Microsoft Update
instead of Windows Update. If you download and run the MBSA
(Microsoft Baseline Security Analyzer) as a Windows Update user,
it can warn you about stuff you might have got by using
Microsoft Update instead. My Office Viewer software, such as
it was, needed fifteen security updates, just to give you some
idea how the free viewers need to be patched.

The DLLs in question can also ship with an application
and are typically not a full set. For example, if
Visual Studio had three DLLs, maybe the application
built only binds to two of them, so you package
the two necessary DLLs with your download/install
packages. To save download bandwidth, some developers
don't include the DLLs, instead leaving a "the check
is in the mail" README file, telling you to download
a VCREDIST of your very own.

So, yeah, that stuff could be all over the place.

The naming conventions leave a lot to be desired,
when a home user tries to figure out what needs
to be added. It's a special form of DLL Hell.

Paul

On 12/2/2015 8:04 PM, SC Tom wrote:

I think you've hit the nail on the head- no backwards compatibility. As
a long time gamer, it seems every game required its own installation of
C++. On my Win10Hx64, I have (2) 2005, (4) 2008, (2) 2010, (2) 2012, and
(2) 2013 (what happened to all the years in between LOL?). Each year
besides 2005 lists an x86 and x64 installation. Curious tough, I have no
.NET installed.

It's called Don't Blame Me!

--
@~@ Remain silent. Nothing from soldiers and magicians is real!
/ v \ Simplicity is Beauty! May the Force and farces be with you!
/( _ )\ (Fedora release 23) Linux 4.2.6-301.fc23.x86_64
^ ^ 01:03:01 up 2 days 7:25 0 users load average: 0.00 0.01 0.05
�借貸! ��騙! ��交! �打交! �打劫! �自殺! 請考慮綜� (CSSA):
http://www.swd.gov.hk/tc/index/site_...sub_addressesa

"Mr. Man-wai Chang" wrote in message
...
On 12/2/2015 8:04 PM, SC Tom wrote:

I think you've hit the nail on the head- no backwards compatibility. As
a long time gamer, it seems every game required its own installation of
C++. On my Win10Hx64, I have (2) 2005, (4) 2008, (2) 2010, (2) 2012, and
(2) 2013 (what happened to all the years in between LOL?). Each year
besides 2005 lists an x86 and x64 installation. Curious tough, I have no
.NET installed.

It's called Don't Blame Me!

Or, "It's not MY fault!" :-)