Jump to content
Strawberry Orange Banana Lime Leaf Slate Sky Blueberry Grape Watermelon Chocolate Marble
Strawberry Orange Banana Lime Leaf Slate Sky Blueberry Grape Watermelon Chocolate Marble

MSFN is made available via donations, subscriptions and advertising revenue. The use of ad-blocking software hurts the site. Please disable ad-blocking software or set an exception for MSFN. Alternatively, register and become a site sponsor/subscriber and ads will be disabled automatically. 


  • Content count

  • Donations

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About celeron64

  • Birthday 12/31/1987

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
  1. Desktops 2012

    图片失效了。。。 Translation: Link to the picture is expired... Comment: Which picture?
  2. VCACHE fix attempt

    [报价名称=galahs'日期= 2007年10月15日,下午8时43'后= '701788] 有趣的我做了再次进行测试,试图与超负荷运行应用程序和再次DiskCache在103.8MB高峰前收缩系统! 难道103.8MB一个内置的限制与256MB的RAM?的系统 我将进行一些测试,看看我是否能复制这种行为。[/报价]
  3. SP2 vs. SP3

    SP2 stability of better than SP3.
  4. Image viewer for 98SE?

    I'm using ACDSee 2
  5. Windows 7 RTM Programs Compatibility List

  6. Visual Studio 2008 and Windows 9x

    Would something like $29.95 (individual developer license) be too much in your opinion? Some corporate developers might not even take it seriously at that price, while for others anything more than free would be too expensive. I exchanged ideas about the possible pricing. A small price would still give customers technical support and updates, i.e. if new functions emerge, they would likely be added to the library, etc. Legacy Extender is not as vast as KernelEx. It focuses on what Visual Studio adds or breaks that the developer did not want in the first place. If the developer used some other XP-only functions on purpose, Legacy Extender will not help much. On the other hand, Legacy Extender is great if you already have a "legacy" project, and simply want to update the compiler, and you thought the only way was to run two different versions of Visual Studio. I doubt that Microsoft would be interested (as a customer), because they have demonstrated that they do not care about legacy compatibility. To the contrary, it seemed to me that they introduced or at least supported incompatibility on purpose. Do you remember how Visual Studio 2005 became incompatible with Windows 95? At the time it did not really break much. It would not have taken more than a few hours of work for Microsoft to retain compatibility by just not using certain functions. Lots of programmers had proposed solutions, patches, etc. I proposed one to Microsoft myself after I filed a bug report (I thought it was a bug!), they filed the "bug" as something like "by design" and closed the case! As for whether it works or not, it's currently being tested in public. Anyone can access it. You are free to decide for yourself, provide feedback, etc. Just my two cents! yes