Talk:Microsoft Windows SDK

Old SDK link no longer works. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.222.7.2 (talk) 20:38, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

The section: "Top 10 things you can do..." Sounds like a lot of marketing drivel. Suggest this section be removed. 63.102.230.194 19:37, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I was going to say that about the whole article. It really reads like an advertisement. PeterOMalley 22:54, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

--I understand that the previous content may have been too promotional in nature, but now we don't know what you can do; how does the SDK differ from/complement Visual Studios? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.105.144.129 (talk) 18:07, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

"...obtaining the SDK requires that the copy of Windows be validated." -- this is no longer true for the very latest version (6.1.6000.16384.10), but this might just be an oversight on Microsoft's part (it's described as an "Update" to the SDK, but is a full release and requires the previous version to be uninstalled). Also, the latest version appears to include the C++ compiler from Visual Studio 2005 Team Edition, which might be noteworthy, if any verification of the exact version can be found (it includes the "/analyze" command-line option which MS lists as only included with the Team Edition compiler). 216.184.0.30 04:04, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Win-SDK rgb.png

Image:Win-SDK rgb.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 12:18, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

SDK without IDE

Is it possible to develop Windows XP/C++ applications using the Microsoft Platform SDK without installing any IDE at all (like Java 6 SDK without NetBeans IDE)? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.200.37.118 (talk) 19:34, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

I just downloaded and installed the Windows SDK. I figured out how to compile C# and Visual Basic code via the command line (as simple as with Java) but cannot figure out C++ for my life. I'm starting to think this thing doesn't have a C/C++ compiler. Maybe I'm right. I can't find jack shit about this SDK on Google either. There's little enthusiasm about it I guess. Someone enlighten us please. 162.83.178.109 (talk) 09:32, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

You can in fact develop without the IDE, the C/C++ compiler driver is called "cl.exe" which it has been since at least Microsoft C Version 7.0 for DOS and Windows 3.11. There are also the "Debugging Tools for Windows" available for free, which allow you to debug from the console or the GUI (even kernel-level stuff). Actually the SDK version of the C++ compiler is one of the best, it is the full optimizing, profiling version of the compiler you get with the full Visual Studio, and can even generate 64-bit executables and libraries. I think the only thing lacking is MFC. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.117.170.126 (talk) 00:30, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Supported versions

There seem to be an inconsistency on the description of which platforms are supported between: The latest Windows SDK is the Microsoft Windows SDK for Windows Server 2008 and .NET Framework 3.5, released February, 2008. This SDK release supports Windows Server 2008, .NET Framework 3.5, and Windows Vista SP1 ... and: The Windows SDK for Windows Server 2008 and .NET Framework 3.5 (SDK for Windows Server 2008/Windows Vista/Windows Server 2003/Windows XP) ...

I understand that the first list is really part of the name of the release, while the second one shows the platforms that are supported, but I believe this can be better clarified. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Otodoran (talk • contribs) 19:35, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

SDK Release vs Platform compatibility

Just a suggestion, but there seems to be unclearance about which SDK is compatible/supported with which Windows version. It would be handy for readers to know which platform the SDK is meant for by adding a table to the article page; with vertically the SKDs being shown and horizontally the Platforms; which shows green for supported, red for unsupported and gray with ? for unknown, of course these could be later filled in since this table would be new. Windows SDKs don't take Windows 9x and Windows NT separately, so only one compatibility table is required. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kevincrans (talk • contribs) 16:50, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

Latest version

It is unclear what is the latest version of the SDK.

On one side, the MSDN download page states "version 7, released 2009-07-24" (http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=c17ba869-9671-4330-a63e-1fd44e0e2505&displaylang=en).

On the other side, the page referenced in the "version history" table states an earlier version number with a later release date: "version 6.1.7600.16385, released Aug-09" (http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/windowsserver/dd146047.aspx).

Does anyone know which is correct? It should be updated both in the version histroy table and in the summary table on the top-right. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wiggin15 (talk • contribs) 09:54, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Yea, in general, the various MS references and dates are confusing. I think we could go with the dates MS page with the MS version table, rather than the individual download pages, but will certainly cause confusion. --Christopher G Lewis (talk) 03:30, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Copied from msdn

The following paragraph quoted from msdn is almost identical to the paragraph under the "Win32 (unmanaged code) samples" heading.

"The Windows samples demonstrate Windows operating system features primarily using native code. These unmanaged Win32 samples are not included in the documentation. They are installed as loose files to subdirectories of \Program Files\Microsoft SDKs\Windows\v6.1\samples. This content can be deselected during SDK setup. A few samples with some managed code (PowerShell, Tablet PC) install with the Win32 samples. The Win32 samples directory layout for the Windows SDK for Windows Server 2008 and .NET Framework 3.5 is:"

I'm not sure what the license of msdn content is but I presume that it does not allow copying directly, so the paragraph should be paraphrased or it should be made clear that it is a quote. --Segmented (talk) 16:59, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Windows SDK support for XP?

Near start of article it says "Windows SDK is the successor of the two and supports developing applications for Windows XP...", however according to the following page only platforms from Vista onward are still supported as targets:

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/hh852363.aspx

About half way down, under "The Windows SDK can be used to build applications that target the following operating systems". XP is not in the list nor mentioned anywhere in the article.

Has support for XP as a target been removed since the wiki article was written? Or is it possible that the Microsoft page is incorrect? This is beyond my expertise, so I hope someone else can answer and update the page if necessary.

Thanks, RobertCWebb (talk) 00:59, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Early History

There were version prior to 3.1, but the table would indicate otherwise. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.125.179.206 (talk) 17:15, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Microsoft Windows SDK. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090926202739/http://msdn.microsoft.com:80/en-us/windows/dd187216.aspx to http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/dd187216.aspx

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 06:20, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Microsoft Windows SDK. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111008233209/http://mssdk.orderport.net/22221848/showall.asp to http://mssdk.orderport.net/22221848/showall.asp

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:36, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

Visual Studio Platform SDKs

Any reason why they're not included? specifically 2003 and 2005. 2003 includes v5.0 actually.(?) needs confirming Would appreciate some assistance in sourcing more official stuff if possible. Juest (talk) 20:29, 10 November 2019 (UTC)

Actually, most Visual Studio/Visual C++ versions include at least one of the SDK versions it needs. No version of the Windows SDK includes the Visual Studion/Visual C++ IDE, but a few versions included command line compilers for C/C++. Specifically the SDK released with the x86_64/amd64 editions of Windows (NT 5.02), included prerelease compilers for that platform and the other Windows platforms. This was continued until a few years after the official release of the corresponding Visual Studio IDE, according to the current article text. 2A01:4F0:4018:F0:FCBE:52CC:2157:85D0 (talk) 01:30, 5 October 2021 (UTC)