From: rvenkate@ux4.cso.uiuc.edu (Ravikuma Venkateswar)
Subject: Re: Macintosh bigots
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 13:14:54 GMT

johnsd2@jec316.its.rpi.edu.its1 (Daniel Norman Johnson) writes:

>In article 722125075@gmd.de, strobl@gmd.de (Wolfgang Strobl) writes:
>>In <s0x191c@rpi.edu> johnsd2@jec326.its.rpi.edu.its1 (Daniel Norman Johnson) writes:
>>
>[deletia- lots of >s]
>>
>>>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.

>Right. Same for the Mac. Gotta question now tho- how does
>a Windows card/driver/etc know what the "right" resolution is?
>(after all, you wouldn't want 640x480 on a 21 inch monitor most of the
>time, no?)

It doesn't. _You_ have the freedom to set whatever resolution you want.
If you really wanted, (and if your monitor supported it), you could
do 1600X1200 on a 14" monitor.

>[deletia- floppy drives]
>>>"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?

>Not that I know of. Should be possible to do tho, as the Mac
>floppy drives are pretty flexible in things like speed. (have
>to be to read the 800k format)

>[deletia- warantee and floppies]
>>>> 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.

>Oh, I see. I thought you had just one slot in the case sort
>of thing. :)

>>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.

>Pretty spiffy. (too bad you need to mess with that sort
>of thing, but that's a neat solution to the problem)

>[deletia- resources]
>>>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.

>Why should it not be possible to share resource forks? The Mac doesn't do
>it because each computer gets a copy of the resource map, adn if one changes
>it and the other doesn't but both try to right the file gets
>corrupted. They'd need some way to synchronize maps. But it would
>be an easier way to manage shared files- you doint lock byte ranges. Its
>a question of whose looking at what resouces.

>[deletia- resedit]
>>>
>>>>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.

>Doesn't the linker do that?

Yes.

>>>>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.

>Hmm? All strings are in the ui? Anyway, the point was just that
>you can (and do) put all sorts of rediculous things in there,
>just cuz it easier.

What's ridiculous about a string table?

>>>>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. 

>That shouldn't be fixed, but changable. I should hope.

>---
>			- Dan Johnson
>And God said "Jeeze, this is dull"... and it *WAS* dull. Genesis 0:0

>These opinions have had all identifiying marks removed, and are untraceable.
>You'll never know whose they are.
-- 
Ravikumar Venkateswar
rvenkate@uiuc.edu

A pun is a no' blessed form of whit.
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy