Re: [NTLK] Newton packages versus OS X packages

From: Norman Palardy (palardyn_at_shaw.ca)
Date: Sun Feb 20 2005 - 13:27:47 PST


On Feb 20, 2005, at 2:04 PM, Michael J. Hu=DFmann wrote:

> Norman Palardy (palardyn_at_shaw.ca) wrote:
>
>> They are moving to a Unix model.
>> Unix doesn't care about types and creators.
>
> Thankfully, Mac OS X still isn't Unix -- that's why I'm still using a
> Mac.

OS X can be run without the finder and all the other GUI stuff.
It's Unix underneath a pretty candy coating.

> The Unix features already included in Mac OS X (except memory=20
> protection and preemptive multitasking which every modern OS supports)=20=

> are bad enough.

Like ?
As a developer I have to admit that I like the fact it's Unix=20
underneath.
There's a lot of great software in the OSS community that would never=20
make it to OS X that does now because of the similarities between Linux=20=

and Unix.
Things like the Gimp, Postgres, PHP, mySQL, GCC, Apache would never=20
have made it onto OS 9.

There are things that I preferred in OS 9 for sure but OS X has, IMHO,=20=

been a great success and continues to get better.

> Anyway, one can support type and creator codes even with Mac OS X's=20
> Unix
> underpinnings -- provided one wants to. Note that the problem with=20
> Newton
> packages being mistaken for application packages only arises because
> extensions are insufficient for properly differentiating different=20
> types
> of files.
>
Or that type and creator get lost along the way.

-- 
This is the NewtonTalk list - http://www.newtontalk.net/ for all inquiries
Official Newton FAQ: http://www.chuma.org/newton/faq/
WikiWikiNewt for all kinds of articles: http://tools.unna.org/wikiwikinewt/


This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Feb 20 2005 - 17:00:02 PST