Home Dashboard Directory Help
Search

Bug: apps created with CRT and MFC vNext (11) cannot be used on Windows XP SP3 by Mike


Status: 

Closed
 as Fixed Help for as Fixed


247
15
Sign in
to vote
Type: Bug
ID: 690617
Opened: 9/24/2011 4:38:35 AM
Access Restriction: Public
Moderator Decision: Sent to Engineering Team for consideration
5
Workaround(s)
view
34
User(s) can reproduce this bug

Description

Any app that you create with Visual C++ 11 Beta cannot be used on a widely used operating system, Windows XP. This effectively prevents its use for any serious work.
Details
Sign in to post a comment.
Posted by Microsoft on 6/27/2012 at 2:33 PM
Mike is correct - please refer to the link below (in his comment) for full details.

thanks, and thank you for letting us know how important this was to you.

Doug Turnure - Visual Studio PM.
Posted by Mike on 6/15/2012 at 12:21 PM
Good news - this item can be put to rest - there will be an XP targeting update - official announcement at
http://blogs.msdn.com/b/vcblog/archive/2012/06/15/10320645.aspx
Posted by hector santos on 5/31/2012 at 8:01 PM
I agree with others, This is UNACCEPTABLE. Microsoft is now causing problems for supporting customers with Mission Critical operations. We have customers who will stick a box in a corner and will not upgrade it and if any of our maintenance updates now requires 2003, this will cause us to LOSE CUSTOMERS. MS can now use use MIDDLE WARE WRAPPERS that forces a dependency on a specific OS like this. WIN32 is the PROMISE Support. We are doing that and if a ISV intentionally avoids an API function that does not require 2003 then MS CAN NOT enforce it with a backend dependency. I serious feel this has some legal repercussions that MS has gotten away in the last few years and they need to be reminder that the OS and Application business needs to be remain separated - this was all part the ANTI-TRUST decree. Please don't force people to begin raising this legal issues.
Posted by Mike on 5/19/2012 at 6:12 PM
new statement about XP targeting http://blogs.msdn.com/b/visualstudio/archive/2012/05/18/a-look-ahead-at-the-visual-studio-11-product-lineup-and-platform-support.aspx

"Separately, we are evaluating options for C++ that would enable developers to directly target XP without requiring a side-by-side installation of Visual Studio 2010 and intend to deliver this update post-RTM."

- still evaluating
- "directly" target XP
- post-RTM

it's official, no XP support in RTM VC11 but still evaluating solutions for post-RTM to either use a variant of native-multitargeting (maybe with SDK 7.1) or making CRT and MFC 11 run on XP (hopefully the latter)
Posted by Adrien de Croy on 5/13/2012 at 8:59 PM
p.s. in terms of how people think about usage and what threshold should be used to decide to ditch an OS.

Compare it with your profit margin. If 4% of your users use XP, but your profit margin is only 5%, then losing those customers is 80% of your profit.

I think 5% threshold to drop an OS is way too high, should be more like 0.5%
Posted by Adrien de Croy on 5/13/2012 at 8:55 PM
Like everyone else, our customer OS usage breakdown precludes us from adopting any tool we can't use to target XP/2k3. These are our numbers from 1 Jan this year

Win2k    0.72%
XP    43.20%
2k3    11.67%
Vista    4.29%
Win7 / 2k8    40.11%

So of course there's no way we're going to tell 60% of our customers to get lost.
Posted by JamesJohnston on 5/10/2012 at 9:46 AM
Also I just read a rumor from an employee that VS11 RTM won't even support Windows Vista any more. That means our shiny new apps won't even run on anything older than a computer sold in the last couple years.

Evidence: http://www.microsoft.com/visualstudio/11/en-us/downloads/go-live - has no mention of Windows Vista.

Even Apple offers better support than this for their older platforms, which is really saying something.

You people are out of touch with reality. Do you really think we are going to rush out to buy and use your compiler and drop support for 50% of the PC market in the process? Your product will be a flop - especially if most of the new features (e.g. WinRT language extensions) are for Windows 8, which may flop as well (which many predict it will). http://www.netmarketshare.com/operating-system-market-share.aspx?qprid=11

This matches with my personal experience - most people I know aren't made out of time and money, and they regularly use computers a few years old. That included me until a couple months ago when my hard drive crashed. Until then, I used Vista for my home/personal computer, and was perfectly happy with it.
Posted by JamesJohnston on 5/10/2012 at 9:35 AM
Completely unacceptable, for the same reasons outlined by everyone else here.

A large number of our customers use Windows XP. We can't afford to drop them. We would love for them to move on, but we can't force them. Windows XP is still going to be used for a few more years in countless companies until they get their act together and move on. (Maybe when XP stops getting security patches?)
Posted by Mike on 4/27/2012 at 12:47 PM
Good news, Steve Teixeira (PM of Visual C++) said recently in the vcblog comments - "Based on all of the feedback offered on this thread as well as in places like UserVoice and Channel9, it's clear that a large number of VC++ customers would really like to see Dev11 support XP targeting. I deeply appreciate the opportunity for this conversation and the feedback. The ball is now in our court, and we will follow up on this issue in the coming weeks to talk about our plan for Dev11 RTM."
Posted by SteelBytes on 4/23/2012 at 10:52 PM
boycotting. will stay with vs2010.
Posted by Swapnil99pro on 4/22/2012 at 1:07 AM
Unacceptable. I am sticking on with Visual C++ 2010 - I don't care about anything in VC++ 11 if I cannot make a Windows XP compatible application as simply as in VC++ 2010.

BUT remember this decision will cost you, Microsoft guys more than us, Windows XP users. Visual Studio 11 won't be sold that extensively as Studio 2010 was - because C++ application developers would simply refuse to stop supporting more than 24% of people's computers. And 24%-30% is only the number of Windows XP-based computers that browse the Internet.
Posted by Jaukku on 4/17/2012 at 5:22 AM
This is unacceptable. When VS10 dropped Win2k support, the percentage of Win2k users was well below 5%. Now, with VS11, XP still has over 30% market share.

Microsoft, please wake up to reality.
Posted by deiruch on 4/16/2012 at 2:09 PM
This is laughable. How hard can it be to let me create a simple DLL for XP with VS2011? I (currently) don't care for the Metro stuff, because XP has a large installed base, W8 not so much.
Posted by BenPeterMorris on 4/12/2012 at 5:32 PM
I don't care if VS11 doesn't itself run on XP--but the decision to prevent VS11-compiled executables from running on XP is ludicrous, ridiculous, indefensible.

I fully support Microsoft dropping tech support for XP and encouraging ITS OWN customers to move toward its newer operating systems. I tell anyone who listens that they should ditch XP and move to Windows 7.

Despite all of that, Microsoft can get stuffed if they think I'm going to ditch a chunk of my customer base just so that I can use their latest development tools.
Posted by Jalf1 on 4/12/2012 at 6:58 AM
@sevenacids: there are many new features of VC11 that are not about Windows 8. I'm not sure what gives you the idea that it is "all about Win8. And it is not about letting XP die. I'd love for XP to die. But practically everyone who sells software needs it to run on XP. I know we do, which is a shame because honestly, our developers (including me) are itching to use the (slightly) improved C++11 support, the static analysis tools and the many other improvements in VC11. Clearly *you* don't have this problem, which is great for you. But it is narrow-minded to claim to "not see the problem".
Posted by sevenacids on 4/12/2012 at 6:28 AM
Oh, yes. A hen-party of so-called "power-users"...

Seriously, I don't see this as a bug, nor do I understand all the complaints. If you still want to develop for an almost dead (from a support perspective) operating system like Windows XP, you should stick with Visual Studio 2005, 2008, or 2010. I mean, seriously. Visual Studio 11 is all about developing apps that target Windows 8 and the new Windows Runtime, you don't even have to upgrade from Visual Studio 2010 when you develop applications for Vista/7/Server 2008 because the changes are not that dramatic in this case.

Windows XP is almost 10 years old. Please, let it die and replace by newer technology (Windows 7, for example) instead of keeping it alive and alive.
Posted by Martin Ba. _ on 4/4/2012 at 10:36 PM
An interesting point is that this is the first time in recent history, that MS drops as OS from VC++ that *still has active support* for at least another year. (see here: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/8476655/is-the-dropped-support-for-windows-xp-in-vs11-comparable-to-prior-visual-studio/10020328#10020328 for the details)
Posted by Mike on 3/15/2012 at 3:40 PM
Thanks Chris, I published a fix for the ConCRT runtime initialization stuff at my skydrive link found at the blog: http://tedwvc.wordpress.com/
Posted by Mike on 3/15/2012 at 8:32 AM
Hi Chris, thanks, yes it's funny how both of us stumbled upon the same thing at the same time. I was thinking about the same workaround too (hack GetVersionExW) but I only want to hack it during the call made here, and return 5 after this particular call is done. Any good ideas on how to do that, other than, of course, making a global variable then instantiate something (like creating a thread) that calls the ResourceManager initialization.
Posted by Chris Yaz on 3/14/2012 at 10:57 AM
They've gone quite far with attempting to limit the CRT to Vista+. The PPL (on which std::thread is built) attemps to use some W7+ functions when running W7 (by using GetProcAddress). However they've written some nasty code so that pre-Vista OSes still attempt to load those functions. The solution here is to hook GetProcAddress or GetVersionExW.

Nasty code:

switch (osvi.dwMajorVersion)
{
case 6: // Vista
    switch (osvi.dwMinorVersion)
    {
        case 0:
            s_version = ::Concurrency::IResourceManager::Vista;
            break;
        case 1:
            s_version = ::Concurrency::IResourceManager::Win7OrLater;
            break;
        default:
            s_version = ::Concurrency::IResourceManager::Win8OrLater;
            break;
    }

    break;

default:
    s_version = ::Concurrency::IResourceManager::Win8OrLater;
    break;
}
Posted by Microsoft on 3/13/2012 at 12:52 PM
Hello Mike,

Thanks for the report. This behavior is by design in MFC and CRT for Visual Studio 11 Beta. The minimum supported operating systems are Windows Server 2008 SP2 and Windows Vista. Windows XP is not a supported operating system for the Beta release (design-time or run-time).

Pat Brenner
Visual C++ Libraries Development
Posted by Mike on 3/12/2012 at 5:51 PM
Ok all, based on comments by Herb Sutter on his blog comments: http://herbsutter.com/2012/02/29/vc11-beta-on-feb-29/
"It was marked “closed as by design” for the September Developer Preview, not for RTM; " I've reopened this bug and changed the reported version from Visual Studio vNext, to Visual Studio 11 Beta. Ignore my previous comment as it was made in haste.
Posted by Mike on 3/12/2012 at 5:18 PM
@Chris Yaz, it makes sense but I think having them consolidated may have more impact (the user voice thread and this thread). Even though this is marked as by design, Microsoft is well aware of this connect item. The only negative is that it doesn't show up on the "most voted" items dashboard since it's resolved. But there is currently an embargo on officially stating what platforms that VS11/VC11 supports currently. Once the official word is "out" (i.e. confirmation in a carefully worded PR coming from Sinofsky or Soma) then we can move to the next phase of getting the word out.
Posted by Chris Yaz on 3/12/2012 at 1:19 PM
@Mike

I did something similar myself a few days ago. However Microsoft should provide a solution themselves.

Also. I'm wondering if someone should re-submit this bug. No Microsoft employee has replied here ever since it was closed "as by design" (which is nonsense). Perhaps closed bugs don't show up for them and that's why this issue isn't getting any attention from them.
Posted by Mike on 3/11/2012 at 9:03 PM
I created a brand new workaround, see link on the workarounds tab. Please test it out and leave feedback on the blog page.
Posted by Agustin Eloy on 3/9/2012 at 11:55 AM
The Workarounds do not work for me, The idea is use the C++11 features, I can use the old MFC but the real reason to upgrade is C++11. Please fix it.
Posted by Olaf vander Spek on 3/6/2012 at 6:34 AM
If XP isn't supported, my use of VC11 will be limited to developing server apps that'll run on Linux. Desktop apps that don't run XP are just not an option.
Posted by Dani9 on 3/6/2012 at 4:32 AM
This will prevent us from upgrading. We need to support WES (esentially Win XP SP3) for years to come!
Posted by Azarien on 3/6/2012 at 1:16 AM
The question is, will it at least support Vista? Because VS11 Beta does not install on Vista. What about running VS11-compiled applications on Vista?
Posted by Mike on 3/3/2012 at 8:21 AM
Just for completeness: still happens with Visual Studio 11 Beta (released at the same time as the Windows 8 consumer preview)
Posted by johanbondeson on 3/2/2012 at 4:54 AM
Unless XP is a supported target we cannot upgrade to vNext: a sufficiently large portion of our users still have it and can not upgrade. And using multi-targeting would not be worth it as the new c++ features would be the reason to upgrade. We really wold like to use VS 2012 but we cannot do without XP support for now.
Posted by Josue Andrade Gomes on 3/1/2012 at 12:17 PM
Also Windows 2003 is affected.
Posted by Vardenis on 3/1/2012 at 1:42 AM
One question - why XP is not supported? We can't drop XP support because it used by our customers. It is used by our customers, because it is supported by MS until 2014 (critical updates I mean. And there is an additional "extended support" after the date, but this is another story)
Posted by GregM on 2/29/2012 at 5:19 PM
Windows XP SP3 is less than 4 years old, and until very recently you could still buy PCs with XP pre-installed. It is unlikely that we will be able to drop support for XP for several years to come, which means that we will be unable to move to the newest compiler. Using multi-targeting doesn't help, as that just gets us the newest IDE, not the newest compiler.
Posted by Aaron Wishnick on 2/24/2012 at 3:06 PM
Like the others who commented here, my company still has a large percent of customers using XP, so we absolutely must support XP. We are a C++ shop, and we would love to move to VC11 as soon as possible to take advantage of new language features. However, If VS11's CRT does not support Windows XP, we will be unable to use it at all, and we will also be unable to upgrade to any following versions of Visual Studio for several years.

Using VC11 with the VC10 toolchain would not be useful for us, since we are interested in VC11 mainly for the new C++11 features, so without the ability to be able to use C++11 features while building applications for Windows XP, we will have to stick with VC10.

I do understand that Windows XP is very old, but that doesn't change the reality that we must support our customers who use it, and I hope Microsoft will reconsider and allow us to do this.
Posted by jensa79 on 2/24/2012 at 8:05 AM
I know others have already said this, but maybe it helps to get MS to reconsider. Our company uses Windows XP embedded, and we cannot replace that easily with a new operating system. Having VS11 stop supporting XP means that we will be stuck with VS2010 for the next years. This means that alternatives to MS have gained a strong point for future decisions. In short: Why not support Windows XP for the C++ compiler without any fancy WinRT/Metro stuff?!?
Posted by Synergex International Corp on 2/23/2012 at 4:37 PM
I understand Microsoft want to see XP go away - but over 50% of our 10's of thousands of windows client systems use XP so this precludes any future development using Visual Studio 11 probably for 10 years. our maintenance revenue is dependent on us supporting older operating systems with new releases of our software. So as much as I would like XP to go away it will not. I notice even my doctors and dentists offices still have systems that run on XP....
Posted by Zaslow at Flexi on 2/22/2012 at 10:03 AM
I think that what I want to say has already been said by others. I just wanted to leave a written response to highlight that this is a significant problem for our company.

Like others this restriction will force us to stay with VS 2010 because of the needs of our customer base. I was looking forward to some of the additional C++ features that are part of vNext (CLI Intellisense, C++ 11 features, etc.).

If what was said about the changes that you'd have to make to support XP being minor are true it is a shame that so many of us would miss out due to such an easily remedied problem. I think that the least that you could do would be to explain why you are choosing not to support XP.
Posted by Anna-Jayne Metcalfe on 2/10/2012 at 9:52 AM
Like many vendors, we have absolutely no control over the OSs our customers used, so until the market share of XP among our customer base drops to a negligible level there is absolutely no way we can consider dropping support for it.

The main attraction for us in VS11 is the (more C++ 11 compliant) compiler and standard library, but we're not about to adopt it if it means leaving our customers out in the cold...it would quite simply be commercial suicide to do so.

Hence we cannot adopt VS11 (or its successors, for that matter) until the market share of XP among our customer base drops to a negligible level or the daft decision to drop runtime support for XP is reversed.
Posted by xpclient on 2/3/2012 at 11:03 PM
Please support Windows XP for at least runtime, if not design time or else I won't buy VS 11. You can't force us to drop our XP customers even if you don't support your own products on Windows XP.
Posted by johnwbyrd on 2/2/2012 at 11:50 AM
This is not a sane decision. Any real-world app developer, armed with this information, will pin their development tools to Visual Studio 2010 for the next five to ten years at least.

We can't afford to alienate our customers by breaking our product on XP. So we'll be skipping 2011 until Microsoft figures this one out.
Posted by Diego Vallone on 1/25/2012 at 9:27 PM
What about those of us that develop for Windows Embedded Standard 2009 (which essentially is a XP SP3), a product which lifecycle ends on 1/8/2019 ??
Seven years of oblivion?

Please Team, reconsider this. Please...
Posted by Mike on 1/23/2012 at 1:44 PM
One big thing that works against us having any sort of nice workaround for this, is the fact that as of Visual C++ 2010, the CRT and MFC rebuild makefiles are no longer included with the source code. In 2008 and earlier, it was so easy to rebuild CRT and MFC DLLs because there was a clear set of makefiles included. Now all there is, is a silly "these are the compiler and linker switches we use, go find your own solution to rebuild these" web page. So as a compromise, keep the source the same, but re-introduce the ability to rebuild the CRT and MFC by providing the MSbuild/VCbuild/makefiles what ever they may currently be.
Posted by AshleyScirraLtd on 1/12/2012 at 9:20 AM
There would be absolute mutiny with our customers if we dropped XP support. We can't even consider this until XP is ignorable. By the looks of things by the time XP is ignorable, another version of Visual Studio will be out! So it seems a strange decision for you to make, Microsoft, since the solution is just to skip buying vNext and buy vNext + 1, when we would have bought both if you kept XP support in vNext!
Posted by Paul Grunau on 1/2/2012 at 9:39 AM
Microsoft's official end-of-life date for XP is irrelevant - what matters to developers shipping software is the size of the installed base, and the rate at which it's shrinking. This graph indicates that XP's current installed base is 34% of all OS's (as of January 2012).
http://gs.statcounter.com/#os-ww-monthly-201001-201201

What's interesting is that while it's 34% now, a year ago it was 49% and a year before that it was 63%. So it's share has been dropping at a consistent rate - a straight linear projection means XP share will be 19% in Jan 2013 and about 5% in Jan 2014 (though this number will likely be higher, since the projection line will flatten as it approaches 0).

My conclusion from this is that any software shipping in 2012 needs to support XP, and the real transition year will be in 2013, where new software can start to drop XP support. After January 2014, there will likely be little reason to support XP in new software releases.

If Microsoft wants developers to start using VS.Next in 2012 for native development, they need to support XP targeting with CRT and MFC. If they maintain their current stance to not do this, then I think it's best to just ignore VS.Next until sometime in 2013.
Posted by M. Richards on 12/29/2011 at 12:12 PM
Yet another decision that puts Microsoft's desires above the needs of their customers and developers.

This guarantees that a good percentage of us won't be able to use vNext in any capacity.
Posted by unsalted-pretzel on 12/28/2011 at 2:52 PM
What is the cost to Microsoft for funding someone to add the #ifdef's in the CRT to target XP v.s. the (unseen) cost on all the rest of us? (I have recollections of spending some time myself to hack the VS EXE output to run on Win2000.)

Using another compiler just to target XP also has a cost. I've been doing some work with the Intel C++ compiler, which has plugins for VS, and maybe this is something to consider in the future. I also know projects that stay with mingw due to the (different) headache of CRT binary incompatibility for DLL's compiled between VS versions -- described in http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms235460.aspx ; http://planet.jboss.org/view/post.seam;jsessionid=7DAEE574F8150631850C69069245BBB2?post=fighting_the_msvcrt_dll_hell .

Yes, Win7 is where it's at for most users wanting a secure desktop connected to the Internet, but certain applications that are more isolated from external security concerns will still be using XP beyond its EOL (e.g. instrument control or virtual machines hosting non-Internet facing applications).
Posted by Demented Devil on 12/27/2011 at 9:43 PM
Stopping compiler support a full two years prior to the end-of-support date is really not cool
By all means restrict the developer environment to a minimum of Windows Vista if you wish but limiting the runtime support goes against the pail - like many others here I too have many customers still running Windows XP systems.

Please, please, please reconsider this decision
Posted by Aidtopia on 12/12/2011 at 10:20 AM
Windows XP is supported until April 2014[1,2], so it seems a bit premature to deprecate support for Windows XP in the compiler and related tools.

[1]: http://windows.microsoft.com/en-US/windows/help/end-support
[2]: http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/endofsupport.aspx
Posted by thatsalok on 12/8/2011 at 6:04 AM
Agree with all of developer who are supporting inclusion of window XP here. Take my case, my application customer base consist of mainly of WindowXP. I can't expect all of my client to update, because I am updating my source code for latest version of Visual Studio.

they are happy with what they have. i would like to request MS to please reconsider there decision


Posted by K Stefan Gartz on 12/6/2011 at 11:04 AM
I'll add my voice to the chorus asking you to support XP in vNext.
Posted by tkc5443 on 12/6/2011 at 5:03 AM
This is very bad. Other Microsoft teams always try to go the extra mile wrt compatibility with previous versions of Microsoft products, so dropping compatibility of the CRT (!) with Windows XP (!) is unthinkable!

Windows XP is at the moment the most used version of Windows. By the time VC11 is issued it might be the second most used version of Windows, but that's it. It will still be used by 20% - 25% systems, conservatively. We, the C++ developers writing for Windows simply can not afford losing this audience.

This is a huge blunder. Microsoft, please reconsider. Please use the functionality that doesn't exist in Windows XP via LoadLibrary. We are doing this in our code, why can't you?
Posted by small_mountain_0705 on 12/1/2011 at 10:42 AM
I'm with Microsoft on this one. XP users can use previous versions of my product that supported XP. If you want the latest version, it's time to move forward. I want the Windows dev tools to be optimized for current versions of the operating system and not have Microsoft have to continue to expend resources testing on XP. Vista, Win7 and Win8 are enough versions for Microsoft to continue supporting.
Posted by Martin Ba. _ on 11/30/2011 at 10:57 PM
Interesting decision on MSs part. It simply means *we will not buy Visual Studio 11* (or, well, probably v12 and v13 as well). Maybe, just maybe, by the time v14 comes out, we won't have to support Windows XP anymore.
It's just lost revenue for Microsoft. (And a tad annoying for us, but maybe I'll learn to live with VS10.)
Posted by Phil Barila on 11/28/2011 at 9:13 AM
I'll add my voice to the chorus asking you to support XP in vNext. Your (and our) customers haven't put that OS out to pasture yet, no matter how badly you want them to. Love to move beyond XP/Server 2003 generation, customers haven't gone there yet.
Posted by Mihai Maerean on 11/18/2011 at 12:36 PM
why wouldn't a C++ RunTime and MFC library work on Windows XP?
it makes no sense (other than MS's stupid marketing, i.e. screw the customers and their needs that they pay for to have them fulfilled)
Posted by JohanRade on 11/16/2011 at 9:43 AM
According to

http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_os.asp
http://gs.statcounter.com/#os-ww-monthly-201010-201110

Windows XP still has about 1/3 of the operating system market.
So dropping support for XP is madness.

The workaround described on this page

"the native multi-targeting feature, which requires you to have both vNext and 2010 (licensed) installed on the machine, will allow you to build XP apps from vNext, but not use the new libraries, compilers, and headers."

just does not make any sense. What is the point of upgrading if you can "not use the new libraries, compilers, and headers"?


Posted by RAB36 on 11/16/2011 at 1:06 AM
I cannot believe this. If this is really true, this is by far the biggest disappointment with VS vNext so far. There is no point in even looking into the new features when we cannot produce programs for Windows XP any mor.

There is a huge number of machines world wide running still Windows XP and I absolutely cannot understand how Microsoft can think, that we can afford not supporting all those customers any more.

Best regards,
Bernd
Posted by JohanRade on 11/15/2011 at 10:28 AM
Many of our customers still use XP. If Visual Studio 11 can not build C++ applications that run on XP, then we will not be able to upgrade.
Posted by Unque on 11/13/2011 at 2:09 AM
But Most of users in the world uses Windows xp. If VC++ 11 not supported We can't make commercial applications for Most of user. Please Reconsider this again.
Posted by David Webber on 11/6/2011 at 8:29 AM
Some of us still have an active client base using XP. If MFC11 does not run on XP, this will make it impossible to use it commercially for quite some time to come. Please reconsider!
Posted by Steven Bone on 10/21/2011 at 5:08 AM
Please reconsider your position on this 'design' choice. I personally have not checked VS11 runtime issues against Windows Embedded, but it is based on XP SP3, and I believe the support lifecycle on that is another 8 or so years for that OS.

I had to support code running on NT4 up until just a few years ago (sort of embedded systems), and the C++ runtime is certainly NOT where I would expect to have issues with compatibility.
Posted by Mike on 10/13/2011 at 11:14 AM
Looking at the internals of the implementation of the CRT and MFC (source code provided by vNext public release), I hazard a guess that there is no turning back now. There are fundamental changes to the CRT, such as using locale name instead of locale ID, and calling Vista only functions such as GetTickCount64, that I can no longer imagine that there will ever be a vNext version of the CRT that supports XP SP3. It's time for me to start work on making other workarounds (at least for the statically linked CRT so it can function on XP).
Posted by GregM on 10/9/2011 at 3:53 PM
XP SP3 is still a supported operating system, so support it.
Posted by GP Smith on 10/4/2011 at 7:07 AM
Although, in a perfect world, all our customers would upgrade to the latest and greatest OS, we provide products for users in the academic community and we have to support what they actually run. Windows XP is still a major system in use by our customers. We will not be able to use vNext if it does not support all the OS that our customers use.
Posted by JohnCz on 9/29/2011 at 8:26 AM
I wholeheartedly second Mike's suggestion to reexamine this decision.
Posted by Mike on 9/26/2011 at 11:59 AM
Thanks, Pat. I suspected as such. It's my hope that anyone that sees this bug item will express their vote in favor of reexamining this decision sometime before release of Beta 1.
Posted by Microsoft on 9/26/2011 at 10:34 AM
Hello Mike,

Thanks for the report. This behavior is by design in MFC and CRT for Visual Studio vNext. The minimum supported operating systems are Windows Server 2008 SP2 and Windows Vista. Windows XP is not a supported operating system for the release (design-time or run-time).

Pat Brenner
Visual C++ Libraries Development
Posted by MS-Moderator07 [Feedback Moderator] on 9/25/2011 at 7:05 PM
Thanks for your feedback.

We are rerouting this issue to the appropriate group within the Visual Studio Product Team for triage and resolution. These specialized experts will follow-up with your issue.

Posted by MS-Moderator07 [Feedback Moderator] on 9/25/2011 at 7:05 PM
Thanks for your feedback.

We are rerouting this issue to the appropriate group within the Visual Studio Product Team for triage and resolution. These specialized experts will follow-up with your issue.

Posted by MS-Moderator01 on 9/24/2011 at 4:43 AM
Thank you for your feedback, we are currently reviewing the issue you have submitted. If this issue is urgent, please contact support directly(http://support.microsoft.com)
Sign in to post a workaround.
Posted by Jaukku on 4/17/2012 at 5:21 AM
Pray that Microsoft wises up.
Posted by sevenacids on 4/12/2012 at 6:33 AM
Use Visual Studio 2005, 2008, or 2010 if you want to develop for Windows XP/Server 2003.
Posted by Mike on 3/11/2012 at 9:02 PM
New workaround for both CRT and MFC apps posted by me at http://tedwvc.wordpress.com. Enjoy :)
Posted by Mike on 11/24/2011 at 8:33 PM
I've been informed you can use the free Windows 7 SDK 7.1 (as an alternative to VC2010) with vNext and native multi-targeting, but of course the limitation of not getting to use the new libraries, compilers, and headers still exists, meaning you can't take advantage of any of the new features of vNext (except IDE features of course)
Posted by Mike on 9/27/2011 at 4:17 AM
the native multi-targeting feature, which requires you to have both vNext and 2010 (licensed) installed on the machine, will allow you to build XP apps from vNext, but not use the new libraries, compilers, and headers.