From: johnsd2@jec326.its.rpi.edu.its1 (Daniel Norman Johnson)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Macintosh bigots
Date: 18 Nov 92 17:56:37 GMT
Article-I.D.: rpi.s0x191c
Reply-To: johnsd2@jec326.its.rpi.edu.its1
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc.

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. :)

>>>>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?

>>>>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! :)

[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.

>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.

>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..

>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.

>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..

---
			- 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.
Organization: Sophomore, Math/Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA