30 Aug
2006
30 Aug
'06
10:12 p.m.
Mark Tapley wrote:
At 12:03 -0500 8/29/06, Don wrote:
Sure, but that can be done in the "desktop" (I don't consider the
desktop software to be a necessary part of the *OS*) and managed
*by* the desktop in any number of ways. It seems that embedding
the type in the filename is just a naive way of doing it :-/
Unfortunately, something that will probably be around indefinitely
(until MS *invents* the Mac way of doing things... etc.)
IMO, this was a mistake. It forces the OS to
know too much
about the applications that run on it -- instead of being a
resource manager. I.e. it should implement mechanisms, not
policy.
There is at least one reason this may not be a mistake in all
contexts. If the OS knows something about the files, and about the
applications available, it can help me out by connecting the two (or by
notifying me that the needed application is not available). That allows
me to double-click on a .jpeg file and have a jpeg viewer launched
automatically by the OS to open that file.
The alternative is of course for me to find my own jpeg viewer,
launch it, and then open the same file. The advantages here are that
I'll get the *right* jpeg viewer, the OS can be much simpler, and the
file can be smaller and named with greater flexibility.