Take a step back from the programing point of view and consider run time files.
From a system point of view some run times may not be such a bad thing. I think that if the "standard" microsoft runtimes were installed with windows we may have fewer problems. It is my understanding that I can distribute the VB6 runtime without microsoft royalties. So why doesn't microsoft just include it with windows and update it with the windowsupdate website?
I have written six vb programs that are in use in my department. one runtime will service all six programs. I would think that this is more efficient for the system. Why include the same code in six programs?
I don't think that runtimes would be such a problem if we did not need to include all of them in the package. Custom DLL files will still need to be included but if you wrote them then you chose to make them DLL's in the first place.
I respect others opinions and I have read the fusion article and seen their web site.
I think that this may be an example of a good idea implemented poorly.
My programs are simple and I only use/depend on a few standard microsoft DLL files. If these were all installed by windows then my distribution would not need an install program. I may want an install program to put shortcuts and create a fixed directory structure but it is possible to do without it.
In my situation all the programs are on a network server so I can update only one file to effect my whole department. Granted my case is not the software developer selling a program to the masses, but this is my point. If every windows install had all MS standard runtimes then the masses would be at a baseline level.
Done rambling.
I think that runtimes are not inherintly a bad thing they have just been implemented poorly.
thank you for your time and have a good day