VS2005: Why keep forcing J#?

I fail to understand why Microsoft STILL insists on installing the J# runtime with Visual Studio. Why can't it be an option? Would it really be that hard to add a check box to the setup routine? I'm never going to use it. I'm never going to develop in it. Why do I have to go through the extra work of uninstalling it later?

IMO that's as bad as the "bundling" that MS gets attacked for with things like WMP in Europe.

7 Comments

  • You're assuming the J# runtime is being installed for your use, perhaps VS itself needs it?

  • Rob,



    My same thoughts. Why install something I *never* plan to use.



    d,

    And why in Gods name would VS.Net need J#?



    Maybe this has something to do with the settlement with Sun Microsystems?



  • Because some parts of Visual Studio utilize the GZip library, which is part of the J# runtime.

  • It's also the first thing I uninstall after installing Visual Studio.



    If it was because of the GZip support, why wouldn't they use the new GZip stream class (GZipSteam) within the System.IO.Compression namespace?



  • I don't know how you can say you'll "never use" it. Software that was written in J# requires the J# runtime. It provides the ability to coding for both .NET and Java platforms with one code base (for the most part), and I would be surprised if more vendors didn't start realizing the benefits of this soon.

  • If that is the case, why not just make it a part of the .NET Framework? Why do we need the VB runtime redux?

  • Good question! I agree the redistributable package is troublesome, but that doesn't take away from the merits of J# itself. I'm all for making it part of Framework.

Comments have been disabled for this content.