EDN Admin
Well-known member
I want to use vcredist_x86.exe for VC2010 SP1. However, I tried running it on XP SP2 and it fails with this message "Windows Installer version 3.1 or higher is required to perform this installation".
I downloaded it from http://www.microsoft.com/download/en/details.aspx?id=8328
http://www.microsoft.com/download/en/details.aspx?id=8328 and it says there: "Windows Installer 3.0 Windows Installer 3.1 or later is recommended." It doesnt say that it is required, but clearly it is.
The whole System Requirements section seems very misleading to me. It says, for example, that it supports Windows XP. You have to follow a link to another "read me" page (listed under Additional Information) to discover that actually it only
supports XP with SP3 and doesnt support the Starter Edition of XP at all. This is vital information and MS have buried it.
Byt the main thing is that I dont want to have to tell users that they need particular service packs of their operating systems, because very few of them will have a clue what service packs are or which they have. This is very low-level stuff for
most ordinary users many of whom cant even tell you which version of Windows they have. Cant Microsoft bring out a release of vcredist_x86.exe which supports
all editions and all service packs of the supported operating systems?
Incidentally, at the bottom of the page mentioned above it says: "Important: Make sure you have the latest service pack and critical updates for the version of Windows that you are running. To find recent security updates, visit Windows Update."
That is ridiculous. It reads as if vcredist_x86.exe is only going to be used by people downloading it from this site. It is a
redistributable package . Yes I can make sure that I have the latest service packs - but so what? How much is that going to help me? Not at all. I run this package as part of the installation for my
software on my customers PCs. If they run it and it doesnt work with their service pack they are going to be very unhappy and I am going to get lots of support calls about it. Please Microsoft - fix this. Quickly.
<hr class="sig Simon
View the full article
I downloaded it from http://www.microsoft.com/download/en/details.aspx?id=8328
http://www.microsoft.com/download/en/details.aspx?id=8328 and it says there: "Windows Installer 3.0 Windows Installer 3.1 or later is recommended." It doesnt say that it is required, but clearly it is.
The whole System Requirements section seems very misleading to me. It says, for example, that it supports Windows XP. You have to follow a link to another "read me" page (listed under Additional Information) to discover that actually it only
supports XP with SP3 and doesnt support the Starter Edition of XP at all. This is vital information and MS have buried it.
Byt the main thing is that I dont want to have to tell users that they need particular service packs of their operating systems, because very few of them will have a clue what service packs are or which they have. This is very low-level stuff for
most ordinary users many of whom cant even tell you which version of Windows they have. Cant Microsoft bring out a release of vcredist_x86.exe which supports
all editions and all service packs of the supported operating systems?
Incidentally, at the bottom of the page mentioned above it says: "Important: Make sure you have the latest service pack and critical updates for the version of Windows that you are running. To find recent security updates, visit Windows Update."
That is ridiculous. It reads as if vcredist_x86.exe is only going to be used by people downloading it from this site. It is a
redistributable package . Yes I can make sure that I have the latest service packs - but so what? How much is that going to help me? Not at all. I run this package as part of the installation for my
software on my customers PCs. If they run it and it doesnt work with their service pack they are going to be very unhappy and I am going to get lots of support calls about it. Please Microsoft - fix this. Quickly.
<hr class="sig Simon
View the full article