12 Dec
2011
12 Dec
'11
8:21 a.m.
On 12 December 2011 14:22, Cameron Kaiser <spectre at floodgap.com> wrote:
Definitely. One of the many areas where OS X is poorer than "classic"
MacOS was. I also miss the old Finder, the customisable Apple menu,
Drawers and the System folder that you could productively furtle
around in.
OTOH, OS X delivers a very solid OS with great dev tools, a fantastic
array of apps, including lots of FOSS (because it's Unix underneath)
and solid networking, filesystems support and so on.
I miss a lot of the old stuff, but overall, it was worth it.
And it saved the company, too, which isn't incidental.
Even people who never use Apple S/W or H/W benefit because of the
competition it provides for the PC-compatible industry, from MICROS~1
to Ubuntu.
--
Liam Proven ? Info & profile: http://www.google.com/profiles/lproven
Email: lproven at cix.co.uk ? GMail/GoogleTalk/Orkut: lproven at gmail.com
Tel: +44 20-8685-0498 ? Cell: +44 7939-087884 ? Fax: + 44 870-9151419
AIM/Yahoo/Skype: liamproven ? MSN: lproven at hotmail.com ? ICQ: 73187508
Extensions are
extensions. All the above is just interpretation. File
association is not rocket science (though it's been reinvented too many
times). The interesting exception is classic MacOS with its type/creator
codes independent of extension (and where extensions were initially
absent, though like Unix, supported as part of the file name).
I have always loved type/creator codes, and was very unhappy with Apple for
removing them in 10.6 (but I'm 10.4 forever, so I guess it's not really my
concern).
The gap was that the core OS did not provide an easy way to manipulate this
consistently, requiring a cavalcade of minitools (or a trip to ResEdit) to
set them the way you wanted. But I loved being able to force certain files to
automatically open in different apps if I wanted to, and at least for a time
OS X gave you the choice.