Ever sense i first used VS 4, well VB4 at the time, up until Visual Studio 2010. Things have been getting better, things just work.

But with VS 2012 this thing a joke, its buggy and slow. But i guess that's what happens when a dev team focuses on changing colors and icons instead of working on real features.

Intellisense stops working, auto formatting stops, things that worked before just stop working out of the blue and new things like search stops being clickable.

Maybe its just me but this lately all of Microsoft's major products just feel like there getting worse not better.

But apparently that's just me. I guess I'm out of touch with what the kids think is cool these days.

41 minutes ago, JoshRoss wrote

@cbae: +1

+1

It crawled initially because it was first time and probably doing a lot of preparation and installing stuff in the background (similar to Office CP). After that, it's been a lot smoother than VS 2010.

26 minutes ago, BitFlipper wrote

It's not the slow and buggy that bother me, it's the fugly.

But apparently that's just me. I guess I'm out of touch with what the kids think is cool these days.

http://visualstudiogallery.msdn.microsoft.com/366ad100-0003-4c9a-81a8-337d4e7ace05

...VS 2010-like theme is an option.

I personally love the dark theme in VS 2012.

This is what you get when you develop software in an Agile manner. Steve Jobs would never have let these products ship. It must be like warfare with all the smart people in Redmond being told to just code to make things work.

12 minutes ago, vesuvius wrote

This is what you get when you develop software in an Agile manner.

Really? That's the methodology that Microsoft used for Windows 8?

Steve Jobs would never have let these products ship.

Keep in mind that the iPhone 5 (and its iOS 6 ilk) was still managed by Jobs (product development cycles are between two and three years). I'm sure he had no input whatsoever on the Maps app.

Well, besides his hate on Google, of course.

Face it, Jobs shipped a lot of crap software. Good one as well, but you can't airbrush history this way.

 It must be like warfare with all the smart people in Redmond being told to just code to make things work.

That's what they're told? Seriously, who are your sources?

15 minutes ago, vesuvius wrote

@Harlequin: Windows 8 and Visual studio really do feel rushed out the door, I have less trouble at work on my Windows 7 PC.

This is what you get when you develop software in an Agile manner. Steve Jobs would never have let these products ship. It must be like warfare with all the smart people in Redmond being told to just code to make things work.

Whoa... huh?  Agile doesn't foment bad code. I guess you think it does.

You're the first critic I've heard go negative on Agile Development... I'll start another thread...

4 minutes ago, JohnAskew wrote

Whoa... huh?  Agile doesn't foment bad code. I guess you think it does.

If anything, performance issues and defects usually decrease with an emphasis on TDD in agile dev.

Really? That's the methodology that Microsoft used for Windows 8?

Everything I have heard or seen from Soma, Zander and Brian Harry seem to indicate that they have adopted Agile methodologies. Microsoft have become quite secretive in a the last couple of years, so it is hard to be sure

Keep in mind that the iPhone 5 (and its iOS 6 ilk) was still managed by Jobs (product development cycles are between two and three years). I'm sure he had no input whatsoever on the Maps app.

Well, besides his hate on Google, of course.

Face it, Jobs shipped a lot of crap software. Good one as well, but you can't airbrush history this way.

The maps app was huge news, making the headlines, because in general the iPhone and IPad have been quite good whenever new versions come out. Yes Apple have shipped crap, but when they get things wrong, it's on the front page. I say this because I was discussing Windows 8 with an absolute Apple fanboi I work with today, I told him that Windows 8 presents a much needed improvement in software, I just think he would pick out too many bugs at present, so it would be best to wait for at least a service pack.

I do see the real value of Agile development (I have been agile for the last few years), especially if its my money being spent, but in releases prior to you leaving Microsoft, people almost dared you to find a bug, I don't get that feeling anymore, and just feel that I need to check for updates more. In some ways Microsoft used to produce beautiful operating systems and IDE's that had a few huge security holes in them, now their OS's are secure almost by default, and the holes are in trying to do more with the same or less staff levels.

17 hours ago, Harlequin wrote

No, it's crashed on me as well quite a few times. Blend for Visual Studio is also very sub-par in terms of quality. The new Blend does feel like it was rushed out the door...

I think the whole Blend situation is laughable in any case. 

It's now 11 months since Silverlight 5 shipped, and yet there is still no official version of Blend to support it; only previews.

And I do agree that it looks ugly. The whol Metro thing is ruining Microsoft. I also use Office 2013 Preview, and its Metro sucks too. Everything became flat (I like 3D shapes, because they are more realistic and distinguishable) and rectangular... Why force Metro to every product?

I think Aero on Windows 7 looks far more attractive than the flat Windows 8's chrome. When Microsoft announced Windows 7, I  actually thought it looked better than OS X (I use OS X). Now with Windows 8?... It just looks like a failed iOS. Could it be possible that somehow Microsoft throws the whole Metro thing away, and goes back to the Windows 7's style?

I missed Areo too. I have a very good gaming machine desktop and yet I am forced to use less fancy theme. I mean, why not just keep Areo, it is already done several years ago.

10 hours ago, jh71283 wrote

*snip*

I think the whole Blend situation is laughable in any case. 

It's now 11 months since Silverlight 5 shipped, and yet there is still no official version of Blend to support it; only previews.

That's probably because Silverlight is dead.

3 hours ago, YourGod wrote

*snip*

but I feel like Visual Studio 2012 is slower than 2010. Especially when it comes to start up time and the XAML UI designer loading.

This was my biggest complaint of VS 2010. It seems like every version the designers get slower and slower. I guess Microsoft just doesn't care; maybe they suffer from "Real programmers don't use designers" mentality. If anything they are useful as a preview without having to launch the app. Not looking forward to moving to VS 2012...

It crashes several times a day.. when it has a bad day (like today), it crashes almost every 20 minutes or so. It is sometimes slow down, sometimes freezes while searching properties, sometimes doesnt show intellisense help.. xaml renderer window sometimes does not render the content.. it is hell to use.

I am considering to go back to VS2010.

Oct 30, 2012 at 11:50 AM, DeathBy​VisualStudio wrote

*snip*

This was my biggest complaint of VS 2010. It seems like every version the designers get slower and slower.

Agreed. For several of our WinForms projects, we still use VS2008 because the tooling and IDE are much more productive. We'll use VS2012 with ASP.NET applications, but often times have to revert back to VS2010 because something in the VS2012 editor is not working right.

Also not a fan of the washed out looking UI in VS2012. I know they want us to be able to "focus on our content", but I also want to be able to focus on the IDE's tools. I've never had a problem focusing on my content in past releases of Visual Studio. It's strange to me that they thought changing most of the icons to black and white glyphs would improve productivity.

For example, I waited 1 minute after trying to open my project in VS2012, then opened the same project in VS2010.  VS2010 came up first, I made my changes, while still waiting for VS2012 to open up.  Since my VS2010 comes up with Team Explorer visible, once that was available in VS2010, I saw both VS2010 Team Explorer and VS2012 UI flicker at the same moment.  Then VS2012 started on the project.

Oct 28, 2012 at 2:17 PM, wsdotnet wrote

Just venting here BTW. 

Ever sense i first used VS 4, well VB4 at the time, up until Visual Studio 2010. Things have been getting better, things just work.

 

But with VS 2012 this thing a joke, its buggy and slow. But i guess that's what happens when a dev team focuses on changing colors and icons instead of working on real features.

 

Intellisense stops working, auto formatting stops, things that worked before just stop working out of the blue and new things like search stops being clickable.

 

Maybe its just me but this lately all of Microsoft's major products just feel like there getting worse not better.

My coding is essentially writing a line or two, f5, modify the line, f5 etc. So if pressing F5 to get the results of this iterative cycle takes much longer, that's easy to notice. I'm not saying that I do F5 so much that it really matters in time spent but when taking time from the moment you have made a change and then want to see the result, and only count that time, over the period of getting an app finished with this style, the comparative difference to VS2008 is massive.

In order to find the more subtle differences when editing, since I don't really remember every subtle difference, one would really need to capture the keystrokes and stuff while editing and compare them side by side on a video to 2008. I recall there were some annoying things in 2008 as well but now it's just more annoying rather than if the 2008 annoyances were improved.

Perhaps the most annoying code editing thing to me is when in C#, I make some edit and the editor doesn't make sure that the code is indented properly, so I feel as if great deal of editing time is spent shuffling code around with copy paste and TAB in order to get the editor to indent it properly, or just have to go and do select and format to get it formatted as otherwise.

eg. lets say I have a block like this

if (true)

{

if (true)

{

*

}

}

When the cursor is at *, it should *always* be correctly indented, and editor should not allow the cursor to go to the indent level of previous block or the left edge, unless I press # to create a #define or // or /*. So only key press of # or / would cause the cursor to go to left border where I could then manually with single TAB press (automatically add enough tab to match the block indent level) make it go to the correct indentation (position of { + 1 tab).

edit: I just checked this to make sure- it appears that if the mouse click is on left of the correct indent, the cursor will go to left edge and doing a ; will move the text to correct indent level.

I verified what I was talking about above - it seems the problem is more subtle:

Annoyance #1:

It just throws me off into "distracted by wrong indentation" state when it's possible that if I don't happen to click mouse right of the correct indent level, it can go to the left most position (as if you pressed Home)

Annoyance #2:

When editing correctly indented code:

if (true)
{*
    if(false)
    {
    }
}

if my cursor is at the * location or left of it, then I press down-key to go edit the code at the if(false) block, the cursor does not automatically shift right to the correct indent level!

First I had to comment #include <initializer_list> from stdafx (though maybe this was not necessary even in 2010)

Then I'm getting this error in Errors tab:

 2 IntelliSense: more than one conversion function from "lambda []void (std::pair<const int, std::string> &x)->void" to "<error-type>" applies:
            function "lambda []void (std::pair<const int, std::string> &x)->void::operator void (*)(std::pair<const int, std::string> &x)() const"
            function "lambda []void (std::pair<const int, std::string> &x)->void::operator void (*)(std::pair<const int, std::string> &x)() const"
            function "lambda []void (std::pair<const int, std::string> &x)->void::operator void (*)(std::pair<const int, std::string> &x)() const" 

(notice, three times the exact same line, and I have no idea what is wrong based on that message)

Yet, in Output tab, no errors or warning:

========== Build: 1 succeeded, 0 failed, 0 up-to-date, 0 skipped ==========

Code giving this is:

 unordered_map<int, string> m;

...

 for_each(begin(m),end(m), [](decltype(*begin(m)) x) {
...

 });  

When I comment or uncomment that for_each loop, the error goes away or comes back within about 1 second. This sort of "lagged surprise response" is kinda annoying but I don't think there's much you can do about it if you have to background compile things to see if there's any error. 

I'd like a modern C++ & C# replacement that's more like C# in syntax & libraries but with C's native abilities and no JIT compile option and no header files and can link direct with C & C++ libs without interop work/wrappers and such. It would be nice also to have super high performance in-process permanent storage (with failure resiliency & continous runtime versioned remote backup ability) in it, I mean, the highest perf that is theoretically possible. I read that in 80's there were some proprietary languages with such things and banks still use them because they just have got faster and faster with new processors since they performed good enough in 80's.

And of course easy way to modify the running code without stopping it entirely (I mean, modify/create methods during execution and only suspend execution for milliseconds to add the compiled modifications back into native code at runtime) . I re-checked, and the language with these capabilities was mumps, created in 60's but became common in healthcare/finance later.

That's what's missing from next VS!

The one thing I will complain about though is that the XAML designer still, well, it sucks.  That's not 2012 specific though.  It's *always* loading no matter how fast the machine I'm running.  My other problem with the XAML editor is frequently has exceptions that give no detail that lock it up, I have to close out of it and re-open it working again.

I just thank the heavens that we still have menus in VS2012 and not the Ribbon.

I noted and reported a specific scenario where Intellisense just gives up the ghost. Don't know if it might be affecting you. It seems that if the namespace arrangement of your project does not necessarily mirror the folder arrangement of the files themselves, Intellisense gets a bit wonky at least in those files that are in the folders where the namespace does not match...

Of course it compiles fine and did not have that issue in VS2010....

In my case the issue arises because initially the project was all in a flat namespace with all the files in a single place. As its grown some things were moved into folders to keep sanity. The namespace was kept flat just because of ease. Now however on those source components and classes in the affected files (an all their references and uses everywhere else) we have to make the namespace adjustments to mirror folder arrangement, to get Intellisense to work properly with these items...PITA....

The funny thing is, Blend is still actually installed. I thought Blend was required for xaml work but decided to try leaving it out anyway because these xaml issues are such a major problem. Now if  run change programs on VS 2012, Blend is checked - I uncheck it, it appears to uninstall, but it remains installed.

Maybe LightSwitch is the culprit? I tried it in VS 2010 and it was unusable slow so I never used it but left it installed and I always had issues with xaml designer in 2010 too.

Jan 09, 2013 at 9:24 AM, Harlock123n​ew wrote

@wsdotnet:

I noted and reported a specific scenario where Intellisense just gives up the ghost. Don't know if it might be affecting you. It seems that if the namespace arrangement of your project does not necessarily mirror the folder arrangement of the files themselves, Intellisense gets a bit wonky at least in those files that are in the folders where the namespace does not match...

Of course it compiles fine and did not have that issue in VS2010...

 

I think intellisense in VS 2012 is just very flaky generally in ways that it never was in 2010.

My whole team has moved over to 2012 and on the whole are very happy with it (except the new TFS window - whoever decided that combining all the TFS stuff into one panel that you constantly have to switch context of and also change the 'pending check in files' view from using checkboxes to having to drag between 'included changes' and 'excluded changes' needs beating with a long 2 x 4!). The amount of extra work and mistakes my team have made using this is very annoying.

Adding more memory to our PC's definitely helped with some early perf issues and we've moved to SSD's now to really make it fly.

But, intellisense is one area that needs work. It constantly just stops working - 2 or 3 times a day for most of us. Sometimes closing the source code file and reloading it helps, but most times it's a full restart of Visual Studio. We have noticed various scenarios that can induce this, most of which involve having syntax errors in your code - my guess is that there's some unhandled errors going on in the Intellisense functionality for certain scenarios that just crashes or disables intellisense, but that's just a guess. It may be a coincidence, but things seem to have become better since update 1, but it does still happen daily.

I'm sure Microsoft will get it fixed, but it's annoying nonetheless.

EDIT: And while we are complaining about VS... When will MS fix VS so Debugger Visualizers work with Windows Phone development? The argument that debugger visualizers require a different security model is bogus when you realize the debugger has access to all the same objects and data that the debugger visualizer is trying to display. Just saying...

And that's not the worst story, every 1 minute or so, it starts saying "parsing the solution" or "update intellisense & browsing..." then the whole program hang for a while... how can we work with such a half-baked product like this?

7 hours ago, chickensoup wrote

And that's not the worst story, every 1 minute or so, it starts saying "parsing the solution" or "update intellisense & browsing..." then the whole program hang for a while... how can we work with such a half-baked product like this?

If you are using DevExpress it may be their Unit Test Runner bits causing the slowdown. Disabling it seems to fix the problem. I'd look at any other extensions you have installed to see if they may be contributing. 

The new UIs are not easy on the eyes and cause a drop in productivity, and just because you don't experience a full on Blue Screen or AppCrash doesn't men things have gotten better.

The negatives far outway the positives, just search the web for VS feedback or read social.microsoft.com posts, or worse the connect.microsoft.com feedback that MS ignores.

14 minutes ago, arnoldSmith wrote

Hi All. I am experiencing the same problems with VS 2012 responsiveness. It's a big hit in productivity watching VS 'think' before I can safely type again. I'm also seriously weary of comments that sum to: Hey, it must be your fault.

I had a meeting with one of the senior PMs of VS's user-experience this week, we're due to have another, larger,  meeting to discuss all of the little issues that, in our esteemed opinions, plague VS 2012 - I will raise these points. I'm with the "VS2012 haters" camp, honestly

However, remember that while Windows' system requirements haven't been raised since Windows Vista (to increase Windows' installbase size) Visual Studio's has, and you can't really blame them for following Moore's Law. However VS2012 does run adequately on my older machines, even a 2006 ThinkPad X60 with a Yonah Core Duo - they key thing is RAM - just throw lots of memory at the problem and things will improve. I really recommend at least 8GB of RAM if you're running 2012, even if it still does run as a 32-bit process.

Access to the path'C:\Program Files (X86)\COMMON FILES\MICROSOFT\EXTENSIONMANAGER\EXTENSIONS\Microsoft\Windows Kits\8.0\Desktop SDK' is denied.

Ownership had not been assigned. When I assigned ownereship to the administrators group, of which I am a member, VS performance improved 500%.

I hope this information helps someone else.

Just venting.

12 minutes ago, MarkStega wrote

As for the xaml designer, I'd say it is the worst performer and frequently crashes. 

I love when drag a button onto the XAML designer and all cores of your processor spike like you're encoding video right before you get into a "Designer process terminated unexpectedly!" spiral (I assumed it was creating a dump file or something but the processor spikes well before I get the process terminated error). 

I almost never use the XAML editor these days though.  Sounds about like I remember it though.

I assumed it was creating a dump file or something but the processor spikes well before I get the process terminated error

The dump file is taken before the process is torn down. Otherwise all of the memory and thread contexts and so on that you probably want to put in the dump file will have gone before you've started creating the crashdump.

8 hours ago, evildictait​or wrote

*snip*

The dump file is taken before the process is torn down. Otherwise all of the memory and thread contexts and so on that you probably want to put in the dump file will have gone before you've started creating the crashdump.

That makes sense.  Thanks for pointing that out.

So I decided to try VS 2012 (with Update 2 installed) and opened the project. It didn't import the Setup project since it seems MS removed the MSI installer and now there is only InstallShield Limited Edition as a setup project type. Well, not a big deal, I can create a new installer later, it is only an internal test application after all.

So when I try to do mixed debugging, things are even more unstable. Of the 20 or so times I started debugging the application, I believe I was only able to not have VS hang once. When it hangs, I have to end-task the test app, after which VS comes back. But then if I start debugging again, it starts the test app but then says it can't start it. The test app then needs to be end-tasked again. To get VS to be able to debug the app again, I have to exit VS, delete the *.suo file and restart VS. Only then will it successfully start the application, ready to hang as soon as I dare debug unmanaged code.

Eventually I was able to figure out that if I go to Options > Debugging > General and uncheck "Managed C++ Compatibility Mode", I can successfully debug mixed-mode code. However, my application starts about 5 times slower than with the option enabled (test app takes 32 seconds to start up vs 6 seconds) . I guess it is still better than not being able to debug at all.

Supposedly when you uncheck the option, it enables a new mixed-mode debugger that is supposedly more stable, and supposedly faster, which it clearly isn't in my case.

Managed C++ Compatibility Mode enabled means Visual Studio will use the legacy debug engine for mixed mode debugging of Classic Apps (not Windows Store Apps).  In general, the new debug engine tends to be faster and more stable.  The drawback to using it is inspection for C++/CLI variables will be degraded when mixed mode debugging.  This is why Managed C++ Compatibility Mode is checked by default.
If you find it works better for you and you don't really care about C++/CLI variable inspection, go ahead and uncheck it.  My personal preference for my own debugging is to uncheck it.

Well I guess the good news is now I can debug mixed-mode. The bad news it is now 5 times slower. You win some, you lose some.

Once you go through the install process, you can select it as project in VS. There is a confusing wizard that has 85% of its functionality disabled, telling you how you need to pay for the Express, Professional or Premiere if you want to do anything.

Next I tried to go through the wizard steps as best I can, but still ended up with about 5 compiler errors. Had to Google each one of them to figure out what it is supposed to mean and how to fix it. The last one basically told me InstallShield is too stupid to know the difference between 32-bit and 64-bit and I have to create a unique setup project for each. Unbelievable. Oh, and the Crippled Edition isn't smart enough to detect dependencies - you have to go and select them manually (C++ Runtimes, .Net versions etc for both 32-bit and 64-bit).

Wow, so after my company paid a crapload for my MSDN subscription you still need to pay more to do what used to be free/easy previously? It used to take me no more than 5 minutes to create a Setup project - now I have to fight with a crippled install project that has so many features disabled that it is essentially worthless. Yes the MSI installer was clunky but still pretty powerful.

I really wonder what is happening to MS. They used to go out of their way to create awesome dev tools. I just don't see that any more.

-5008: Intel64 or AMD64 must be specified in the template of the Summary Stream

After spending time trying to figure out what it means from the Flexera online help, I got to the conclusion they don't have any help for the Limited Edition version since the steps they describe to resolve the issue is impossible to follow in the version I have. More searching around the web indicates that the area where you are supposed to make this change is DISABLED IN THE LIMITED EDITION.

Is this a joke? This is absolutely unacceptable after MS supplied a perfectly functional installer up until VS 2010. Think about it: They actually had to PAY someone to complete the following task: "Remove the Visual Studio Installer Template. Replace with shovelware".

I'll take a look at Advanced Installer but a quick look at it shows it also has a free and paid versions. That is usually a red flag that you won't get a functional product for free, but I refuse to pay for this functionality after a huge amount of money was already paid for my MSDN subscription.

19 minutes ago, exoteric wrote

@BitFlipper: I am using this and the free version works fine for my project! There are some caveats, like no custom install experience (picture) and some things like COM registration missing in the free version -- so for some requirements, yes, you will have to pay. I would also choose the paid version if this was for a non-free project - but it isn't, at the moment. I'd rather they had bundled Advanced Installer free than this Install Shield CE.

MS says that InstallShield Limited Edition replaces most of the previous Visual Studio Installer functionality, but if you try to do anything more complex than a Hello World app, you quickly find out that ISLE is incapable of even simple things. ISLE is an over-engineered POS that has practically every feature grayed out, constantly nagging you to pay in order to get a simple installer working. Once again I refuse to pay 1c due to the fact that my expensive MSDN subscription should allow me to install my applications on Windows. Looks like MS is selling developers down the river.

I'm currently testing out WiX and it looks promising however it is a whole set of new XML tags to learn just to get a basic installer working. At least it doesn't have anything disabled so while it isn't intuitive, at least I know I would eventually be able to do what I want.

15 minutes ago, ZippyV wrote

The weird thing is: Visual Studio's installer is written using WiX so why don't they replace that stupid trial version of Installshield with WiX?

We couldn't find a way to build a polarizing flat user-interface with monochrome icons for it.

Oh, and...

• Visible demand. A lot of software is distributed by zip file, or by custom-made installer - a surprisingly small number of installers are made using VS. Then there's competition, including InstallShield and Nullsoft Installer - the people who actually used the VS Setup project simply weren't visible enough when the decision was made to remove it.
• Localization - every component that ships with VS must be localized
• Testing - every component that ships with VS must have solid test coverage
• And a whole load of killjoy reasons, mostly surrounding time and money.

Fortunately, there is precedent that if enough people complain, a feature will be brought-back. My favourite example is the removal of ASP.NET Web Applications from VS2005 when it was replaced with Websites; Web Applications were brought back in SP1.

7 hours ago, ZippyV wrote

The weird thing is: Visual Studio's installer is written using WiX so why don't they replace that stupid trial version of Installshield with WiX?

Because, for the average developer. WiX IS HARD

1 hour ago, davewill wrote

@blowdart: True. But once you get it, you also get the additional benefit of the root Windows Installer knowledge.

Yeah like we want to piss away valuable developer's time learning the root of Windows Installer knowledge. It's like Oracle DBAs & devs touting the crappiness of their tool-set as a sign of how powerful Oracle is.

I'd gladly pay more for my MSDN subscription if Microsoft would have invested the dollars in continuing the setup project rather than foisting yet another unnecessary thing for us to learn. 

16 hours ago, PopeDai wrote

*snip*

We couldn't find a way to build a polarizing flat user-interface with monochrome icons for it.

Oh, and...

• Visible demand. A lot of software is distributed by zip file, or by custom-made installer - a surprisingly small number of installers are made using VS. Then there's competition, including InstallShield and Nullsoft Installer - the people who actually used the VS Setup project simply weren't visible enough when the decision was made to remove it.
• Localization - every component that ships with VS must be localized
• Testing - every component that ships with VS must have solid test coverage
• And a whole load of killjoy reasons, mostly surrounding time and money.

Fortunately, there is precedent that if enough people complain, a feature will be brought-back. My favourite example is the removal of ASP.NET Web Applications from VS2005 when it was replaced with Websites; Web Applications were brought back in SP1.

 

So Microsoft forgoing spending tens of thousands of dollars on continuing the setup project means developers (the aggregate of all) end of spending hundreds of thousands of dollars learning WiX and the root of Windows Installer knowledge. You can scale the dollars in that sentence any way you want but its still has the same net effect.

Good point about the metro theme'd stuff though. That's a deal breaker.

17 hours ago, blowdart wrote

*snip*

Because, for the average developer. WiX IS HARD

Having once gone through the horror of writing my own installer from scratch (before InstallShield even existed), WiX is easy.

58 minutes ago, davewill wrote

@DeathByVisualStudio: Sorry to have upset you. The context of my thoughts was around the existence of Windows Installer versus the time prior to that when the installation norms were absolute chaos.  Regardless your point of productivity still stands.

No need to apologize. I didn't mean to sound upset. I thought you were being sarcastic and I just chimed in with my own.

At least no one is suggesting we benefit from "skills transfer" like XAML.

59 minutes ago, Jim Young wrote

@blowdart:

*snip*

Having once gone through the horror of writing my own installer from scratch (before InstallShield even existed), WiX is easy.

I've poked the WiX bear a bit and kept thinking this would be great if someone built some tools for constructing the XML files, etc.

2 hours ago, Jim Young wrote

@blowdart:

*snip*

Having once gone through the horror of writing my own installer from scratch (before InstallShield even existed), WiX is easy.

Yea, but not for people used to drag and drop installer dev

2 hours ago, blowdart wrote

*snip*

Yea, but not for people used to drag and drop installer dev

It's not about whether it is easy or not. It's about how much time is wasted creating an installer for even a simple project, let alone a complex one (and learning how to do it - as if that is where I can afford to spend my time). You can go ahead and be sarcastic about people only knowing how to drag and drop, however I've wasted days now investigating various alternatives to something that literally used to take me 5 minutes. And I still need to spend more time on it to get it to the level where the VS 2010 installer used to be.

EDIT: Maybe that mentality is the problem with MS in general... Completely ignorant about the impact of their choices.

50 minutes ago, BitFlipper wrote

*snip*

EDIT: Maybe that mentality is the problem with MS in general... Completely ignorant about the impact of their choices.

You mean like Windows 8?

It had the effect of cheapening the whole experience, made harder by the fact changing the default image involves some non-obvious steps.

If we're going to have an offiical WIX toolkit, it needs to generate installers that are sexy.

I almost never have a need to make complicated installers though so I can't speak to how it would be to produce something very intricate.  Mine are mainly, copy a few program files and libraries, create start menu entry, done.