From: strobl@gmd.de (Wolfgang Strobl)
Subject: Re: Macintosh bigots
Organization: GMD, Sankt Augustin, Germany
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 22:17:55 GMT

In <s0x191c@rpi.edu> johnsd2@jec326.its.rpi.edu.its1 (Daniel Norman Johnson) writes:

>In article 722090974@gmd.de, strobl@gmd.de (Wolfgang Strobl) writes:
>>In <lkx1lgl@rpi.edu> johnsd2@jec327.its.rpi.edu.its1 (Daniel Norman Johnson) writes:
>>
>>>In article 722000906@gmd.de, strobl@gmd.de (Wolfgang Strobl) writes:
>>>>In <#aw1bwg@rpi.edu> johnsd2@vccsouth16.its.rpi.edu.its1 (Daniel Norman Johnson) writes:
>>>>
>>>>>In article 7M8@news.cso.uiuc.edu, rvenkate@ux4.cso.uiuc.edu (Ravikuma Venkateswar) writes:
>>>>
>>>>[...]
>>>>>>
>>>>>>From Byte Magazine October 92:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Dell 466DE i486DX2 66 MHz 
>>>>>>8 MB RAM, 230MB IDE HDD, 6 EISA slots, 128K cache, accel. video,
>>>>>>15" 1024X768 .28 monitor, one floppy drive, MSDOS 5.0 -------------$3899
>>>>
>>>>>How deep is that monitor? 
>>>>
>>>>The color depth is a feature of the video interface, not the monitor,
>>>>right?
>>
>>>Right, sorry. How deep is the card? :)
>>
>>No idea. 8 bit, probably.

>Hmm, thats 2 votes for 8 bit and 1 for 24 bit now, I think. :)

Most of these cards have 1MByte video memory, so for 1024x768
its 8 bit deep, probably. For smaller resolution, it may be
more.

>>>>>What sort of floppy drive? 
>>>>
>>>>Most probably a 1,44 MByte 3-1/2" drive.
>>
>>>Hmmm... which formats can those guys read?
>>>(I get confused with all the PC formats. This is probably
>>>common knowledge, but I dont have it anyway..)
>>
>>There are two standard DOS formats for 3-1/2" disks: 720 KByte
>>(DD) and 1,44 MByte (HD). The 1,44 M drive used in PCs can read
>>and write both formats. I.e. it physically supports these formats,
>>the BIOS supports it, and MSDOS supports these formats. If the
>>BIOS isn't broken, it is possible to read a lot of tweaked
>>formats, too, but I would't recommend to create such disks.
>>The standard software (i.e. MSDOS, Windows) cannot create
>>nonstandard disks, but is able to read or write them, so this
>>isn't much of a problem.

>"tweaked"? What is a "tweaked" format?

There are people who like to put 10 instead of 9 or
20 instead of 18 sectors on their floppies. This works
because the original floppy format specs made worst
case assumptions about the speed variation of floppy
drives, which arent't true, anymore. MSDOS supports
this quite well - with a correct format descriptor
on the first sector, it can read almost everything.

A tweaked format is created by making the gaps between
sectors a bit smaller, adding one sector per track
and writing an adjusted descriptor into the first
sector of track 0. There are various PD and shareware
programs which do that. I know about similar programs
for the Atari ST. Doesn't the Mac have similar programs?

>>>>>It doens't
>>>>>include windows? What warranty and suchlike? How's the documentation
>>>>>and setup and so on for this computer? Mouse? What ports
>>>>>does it have (if any)?
>>>>
>>>>Most Dell computers have one parallel and two serial interfaces. 
>>>>This may have changed - I bought my last DELL computer years ago -,
>>>>but I doubt it. Add another 50 $ for these interfaces, if you like.
>>
>>>Ok.
>>
>>I just got a new ad from Dell in the mail. Most of the machines
>>(the above one isn't included) have 1P, 2S.
>>
>>The price of a machine includes repair at your home (or where
>>the machine happens to be) for one year for free, the next
>>working day. All the machines come with mouse and MSDOS 5
>>and Windows 3.1, preinstalled. And all but one have a
>>single floppy disk drive for both 3-1/2 and 5-1/4" disks.

>How did they manage THAT? That sounds, well, geometrically challenging! :)

It is. They put two drives into one, half height 5-1/4" case, operating
from the same power and interface connectors. From an installation
point of view, it's identical to a standard 5-1/2" drive. 
Electrically and logically, its works as if there where two 
different drives installed.

These drives where built because there was a demand: many PC
cases have space for three half-height 5-1/4" drives, usually
occupied by two floppies and one disk drive. By sqeezing both
floppies into the space of one bay, you get the space for
a second HD.

>[deletia- 'nother, very similar clone, and a Quadra]>

>>>>>>>And I meant that programs can't edit their own resources, or use
>>>>>>>resources in the files they make. They are actually rather handy
>>>>>>>little things.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>They can.
>>>>
>>>>>I dont think so. MS-DOS does not have a resource fork, right?
>>>>
>>>>Doesn't matter. A program can't attach a resource to a data file,
>>>>that's true, because MSDOS doesn't have multiple streams of data in
>>>>one file. But you specifically said "can't edit THEIR OWN RESOURCES",
>>>>i.e. resources attached to the executable. The New Executable format
>>>>used for Windows and OS/2 programs is quite well defined, and 
>>>>has both a code and a resource part.
>>
>>>Oh ok; You just said "they can" and I thought you meant all of that
>>>stuff.
>>
>>>So apps can change their own resources; I understand there is no
>>>system support for this- wouldn't that make it quite tricky?
>>>Is it done much?
>>
>>No. I know no program which does it, and consider that to be an
>>advantage, because - as you already mentioned earlier - self-
>>modifying programs make sharing (on a server, for example)
>>difficult. It has other disadvantages, too.

>Im still a bit surprised the Mac does not support shared resource forks.
>They would make sharing files much easier! Surely Windows could do this
>right.

??? I'm a bit lost. Please explain.

>>There are resource editors (Borlands Resource Workshop, for example), 
>>which modify other programs resources.

>Good; how does these stack up to ResEdit, btw? Ive never seen one.

I know ResEdit (from the books), but have never seen it working,
so I can't compare the two.

>>Modifying resources can be done using the standard file system
>>interface. Just read that part of a program file, which contains
>>the resources and interpret it yourself.

>But you need to interpret the format..

True. Just like a compiler has to do it.

>>On the macintosh, a single implementation concept (resources)
>>is used for three different purposes: to contain the programs
>>code, to contain the user interface part (i.e. dialog templates),
>>and for program parametrization. 

>Its used for a lot more than that. Virtually anything you
>want can be stored there. Its very handy. Things like
>control definitions, color tables, all the strings in your
>program (officialy, you are supposed to do that), any internal
>data you want to keep there.

There is a string table in the collection of the standard
Windows resource components, too, and its use is recommended,
likewise. It's of course part of the user interface.

>>Windows does it differently. It uses a similar concept for
>>user interface components, but has other mechanisms for 
>>organizing code and for program parametrization.

>Just what do you mean by program parametrization? I do not think
>you are meant to do this with resources alone on the Mac..

I'm thinking of things which are remembered from program 
invocation to program invocation, but aren't fixed at
compilation time. The font name and size used in an 
editor by default, for example. 

Wolfgang Strobl
#include <std.disclaimer.hpp>
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy