hunt@rsts32.dec.com (Phil Hunt) (12/22/86)
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) The philosophy described in #1 above also has an added benefit, no spurious file in the directories causing even slower directory access on the Amiga. 3) 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 on the Mac. 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