During the installation of DirectX, I found it painfully slow for me to wait until I get to a part where I can select a location to unzip all the DirectX SDK installation files... Urgh...it is slow!
When I get to DirectX SDK Setup, I saw that sample programs that showcases DirectX's features require 741MB--[whe-wha--]--_why_ does samples require 741MB! Well I'm not trying to complain but because 741MB have already taken up by samples in my C:\DirectXSDKAugust\ that I unzipped for installation, it's going to take another 741MB to install Samples in C:\Program Files\DirectX SDK...\ directory, and I plan to zip up the installation folder for keeping it.
Now, I have a question. Can you seperate DirectX 10-related parts from DirectX 9 SDK Surely you can call it DirectX 10 SDK Beta since I found it makes more sense to have all the DirectX 10-related files away from DirectX 9 SDK, keeping the file size low.
Plus, how about seperating samples away from the main installation of DirectX SDK Those who don't need samples can quickly download DirectX SDK without any samples; thus, developers can jump-start on continuing developing games with DirectX. Those who need samples for DirectX SDK can download an additional setup file for installing sample files into their hard drives. I know that they can uncheck the samples part of the DX SDK installation but seperating samples from the main installation file of DirectX SDK saves developers' time.
The utilities, redistributables, and all the others can stay with the main installation of DirectX SDK, so I don't see a problem with the file size of a download file.
It's all about hard drive space management, after all. :) Unneeded files, like samples, can leave fragmented and hog up hard drive space.
These are my suggestions I'm offering--not to complain about the bulkyness of Microsoft DirectX SDK's file size or whining. :)
Thanks.
Can you kindly seperate Vista-only parts (like samples) from DX 9 SDK August 2k6 Update?
Kannan.B
Well, it uses up physical and virtual memory. I have my virtual memory set for 1.5GB and I have 512MB of physical RAM. I know I should upgrade my memory but how can an installation file suck up 500MB of free space in physical/virtual memory I plan to upgrade to 1GB but I'm holding off because I'm saving my money for apartment (living with my family right now). I have an 80GB 4500RPM hard drive plus a 2GHz AMD Athlon64 3200+ processor. It took me about an hour to extract the dxsdk.exe file from the beginning.
I didn't say "I want to zip my installation directory." Maybe you didn't read my post clearly I may try zip/unzipping with the compression/uncompression utility to see how this compaires with the downloaded executable file for unzipping the installation directory.
I didin't say I want to keep the old samples... But why would I want DirectX 10 Preview in my Windows XP computer Only Vista supports DirectX 10! Well I wasn't complaining, like I said in my started thread... Well I have broadband but that doesn't mean I have 15Mbps fiber-optic download speed! :) Well Microsoft could at least compile an installation file/directory for the features selected for download. So you can take the directories with all the files in a flash drive to other computers for installing selected parts of DirectX SDK that you've made from when you downloaded the DirectX SDK features from your Internet-connected PC. Well I understand and I agree but the statement looks kinda generic to me. Since specifically for DirectX SDK, I don't have any problems if the samples are included as a seperate download file since I treat samples as an extra.For example some developers don't think they need samples and some developers might want samples. About those who don't need samples, some developers may found that including samples may not be worth included with the SDK--in other words, those who needed DirectX SDK, for example, may found that it's not worth downloading an SDK if it includes samples which requires lots of space in a hard drive. Those who want it can download from the Internet.
This is just my point of view
cb3431
Thanks for the input, Grayson. We're hearing these complaints more an more now, and are investigating ways to reduce the download sizes.
Nikhil Vaghela
I think this question has been asked before on these forums or a directx newsgroup.
1) u say the install is so slow .... i don't have that problem, i download every release and never had the problem
2) u say u want to zip the installation folder for keeping it ... why don't u just keep the downloaded install file
3) Why would u want to keep the samples from the previous installs ... the samples are the same, might be new ones in it or existing samples might be improved.
4) U want microsoft to separate directx 10 .... I totally agree with that. I think they will do that, but currently directx 10 aint announced as beta but its just a preview
The full sdk download/install has nothing to do with drive space management .... if u don't like the size of the downloaded sdk installation ... delete it, if u think there are files in the sdk like the samples u don't need or want and take to much space ... delete them ... nobody will stop u from delete files on your harddisk that are part of the sdk.
The only issue i can see with the file size of the sdk download is for people with slow connections or small transfer limits ... i have seen a question before on this forum of someone who din't have broadband available in his country, so the download was to big for him.
If they want microsoft could make a webinstall of it, where u download a small installer and the content of the selected features is downloaded during install. I would complain about this kind of install cause i download the sdk once and install it on different pc's. Some of these are test machines and have no direct access to the internet.
Conclusion:
Microsoft makes all the sdk's (directx sdk / platform sdk, ...) as 1 big install. Some SDK's including the DirectX is updated every 2 month. This doesnt mean people using the SDK must download each release to keep theyre work running. There aint much changes between these releases.
Will Merydith
Grayson, seeing on your reply i seem not to been reading your post good enough.
Seems like u don't really like my answer.
Still some things i want to reply on :)
A hour to extract the sdk install is really a lot. I think the reasson for this will be your hd instead of ram. U have allmost the same config as mine.
AMD 64 3000+ / 1GB Ram and a SATA harddisk. I download and extract the install to the SATA disc and it only takes my few minutes (max 15).
Maybe ure right about the DX10 previeuw, people without vista can't do anything with it.
The best solution for this should be a web install (hope it doens't remove the downloaded content so it can be copied to other pc's) or separate downloads.
Maybe this would be a good solution (like microsoft does with some other projects)
- Full install (the sdk like it is now)
- Express install (web installation)