hunt@firqb.dec.com (Phil Hunt) (12/23/86)
I am sorry, but I don't understand the problem with storing ALL icons in one file. I currently own a Mac+ and an Amiga. The Mac+ concept seems to work so much better. Everyone has described problems using a 1 file for icons format, but, look, Apple has done just that for 2-3 years on the Mac and it works very well! Some of the features/error recoveries::::: 1) The icons are stored in the executable or data file along with the data. Now we know Apple stores them in items called resources, but it is only 128 bytes to hold a 32x32 icon, so it could just be stored in the file header or appended after or something...That seems like a simple change. A file can also NOT contain an ICON, then a 'generic' one appears when the file is put on a disk the first time. The file contains a 'bundle' bit that says (if set) to place the icon or (icons) into the desktop file when the file first shows up on the disk. 2) If the desktop file is ever "BLOWN" away, then the FINDER (OS file finder) will recreate it by looking at ALL files on the disk and doing the icons again. Yes, on a 30 meg hard disk with 1000+ files, this can take 2-3 minutes, and I have heard of it taking 20 minutes, but IT ONLY OCCURS DURING ERROR RECOVERY. I myself have NEVER had to rebuild the desktop file. I see nothing wrong with Apple's desktop stuff. With caching internal to the OS now, the desktop (Workbench) screen can come up from nothing (unlike the Amiga, the Mac doesn't do multitasking, a MAJOR shortcoming) in a few seconds. I am not putting down the Amiga or the Mac. I like them both, but why not use a tried and true method that has worked very well for years now.... Phil Hunt
sean@ukma.ms.uky.csnet (Sean Casey) (12/25/86)
Come to think of it, icons are something that should probably be stored with the rest of the directory information for the file. Think of it. There is (should be) exactly one icon for each file. Most icons should be about the same size, implying they should use about the same amount of storage. The icon should always move with the file. Common sense says make it part of the file or part of the directory entry for the file. I'd say make it part of the directory entry. This would speed things up quite a bit. As long as you went through AmigaDos, you could force the icon to move with the file. The obvious disadvantage is that copying the file suddenly gets more complicated. Whether my ideas are stupid rambling or not, I would like to see this discussed a bit more. I hate how slow the Amiga is when dealing with the things. Sean -- =========================================================================== Sean Casey UUCP: cbosgd!ukma!sean CSNET: sean@ms.uky.csnet ARPA: ukma!sean@anl-mcs.arpa BITNET: sean@UKMA.BITNET
flaps@utcsri.UUCP (Alan J Rosenthal) (01/02/87)
In article <5403@ukma.ms.uky.csnet> sean@ukma.ms.uky.csnet (Sean Casey) writes: >Come to think of it, icons are something that should probably be stored with >the rest of the directory information for the file. Think of it. There is >(should be) exactly one icon for each file. There should not! I almost always use the CLI interface. I have no .info files at all on most of my disks. If I had to store icons in the headers of all my files, the amount of space available to me on a disk would be significantly decreased. ajr