rthomson@mesa.dsd.es.com (Rich Thomson) (01/23/91)
In article <6388@exodus.Eng.Sun.COM> work@dgh.Eng.Sun.COM (David G. Hough at work) writes: >The comp.arch problem for the 1990's is how to provide >a way for consumers to benefit from the power of Unix without actually >knowing anything about it, and without diminishing the availability or >the underlying power for the craftsmen. How about what the people at NeXT have done? Although their interface is proprietary, they do have a really easy way to interact with Unix. Admittedly it steals alot from the Mac, which in turn stole alot from the Xerox PARC work, but it seems easy to use. I have heard of several prodcuts that claim to make unix easy to use and work on top of X windows; I haven't used any of them, but there doesn't seem to be any clear market winner. I think the world likes the desktop metaphor, but Unix won't be really taking off until something better (and more aligned with Unix's capabilities and strengths) comes along. For instance, o How do I create a symbolic link in the icon-based world? o How do I connect multiple programs through pipes in the icon world? etc., etc. The Mac-like interface just gets you one visualization of the file system mostly (I am discounting things like menus and desk accessories because they aren't as relevant to the unix community where things like window managers and widget sets handle alot of this stuff). What is needed to make unix easy is a visualization of the interaction of system programs, the file system, and shell commands. -- Rich -- ``Read my MIPS -- no new VAXes!!'' -- George Bush after sniffing freon Disclaimer: I speak for myself, except as noted. UUCP: ...!uunet!dsd.es.com!rthomson Rich Thomson ARPA: rthomson@dsd.es.com PEXt Programmer
baum@Apple.COM (Allen J. Baum) (01/24/91)
[] >In article <1991Jan23.003505.21615@dsd.es.com> rthomson@dsd.es.com (Rich Thomson) writes: >I think the world likes the desktop metaphor, but Unix won't be really >taking off until something better (and more aligned with Unix's >capabilities and strengths) comes along. > >For instance, > >o How do I create a symbolic link in the icon-based world? The Mac's system 7.0 has symbolic links. You create a 'copy' of a file, and drag it whereever you want. -- baum@apple.com (408)974-3385 {decwrl,hplabs}!amdahl!apple!baum
davidsen@crdos1.crd.ge.COM (Wm E Davidsen Jr) (01/24/91)
In article <48388@apple.Apple.COM> baum@apple.UUCP (Allen Baum) writes: | The Mac's system 7.0 has symbolic links. You create a 'copy' of a file, | and drag it whereever you want. Could you explain a little more? I can't guess what a Mac filename would look like, and from articles I thought they were hard links. If they are symbolic, what happens when I double click on a link to a file which isn't there? Do I toast the finder, or ...? -- bill davidsen (davidsen@crdos1.crd.GE.COM -or- uunet!crdgw1!crdos1!davidsen) "I'll come home in one of two ways, the big parade or in a body bag. I prefer the former but I'll take the latter" -Sgt Marco Rodrigez
baum@Apple.COM (Allen J. Baum) (01/26/91)
[] >In article <3148@crdos1.crd.ge.COM> davidsen@crdos1.crd.ge.com (bill davidsen) writes: >In article <48388@apple.Apple.COM> baum@apple.UUCP (Allen Baum) writes: > >| The Mac's system 7.0 has symbolic links. You create a 'copy' of a file, >| and drag it whereever you want. > > Could you explain a little more? I can't guess what a Mac filename >would look like, and from articles I thought they were hard links. If >they are symbolic, what happens when I double click on a link to a file >which isn't there? Do I toast the finder, or ...? No, it just says that it couldn't find the original- tough luck (it uses nicer words than that) -- baum@apple.com (408)974-3385 {decwrl,hplabs}!amdahl!apple!baum
ksand@Apple.COM (Kent Sandvik) (02/01/91)
In article <48503@apple.Apple.COM> baum@apple.UUCP (Allen Baum) writes: >[] >>In article <3148@crdos1.crd.ge.COM> davidsen@crdos1.crd.ge.com (bill davidsen) writes: >>In article <48388@apple.Apple.COM> baum@apple.UUCP (Allen Baum) writes: >>| The Mac's system 7.0 has symbolic links. You create a 'copy' of a file, >>| and drag it whereever you want. >> Could you explain a little more? I can't guess what a Mac filename >>would look like, and from articles I thought they were hard links. If >>they are symbolic, what happens when I double click on a link to a file >>which isn't there? Do I toast the finder, or ...? >No, it just says that it couldn't find the original- tough luck (it uses >nicer words than that) Another neat feature with these 'user-friendly' links are that they mount file systems to which the link points to - usually in the background without any user intervention (if the user don't have to give a new passwd for the server). This is for instance a feature that we don't have with symbolic links over NFS networks. Regards, Kent SAndviK -- Kent Sandvik, Apple Computer Inc, Developer Technical Support NET:ksand@apple.com, AppleLink: KSAND DISCLAIMER: Private mumbo-jumbo Zippy++ says: "Read my lips, no more C++ syntax..."
barmar@think.com (Barry Margolin) (02/02/91)
In article <48748@apple.Apple.COM> ksand@Apple.COM (Kent Sandvik) writes: >Another neat feature with these 'user-friendly' links are that they mount >file systems to which the link points to - usually in the background without >any user intervention (if the user don't have to give a new passwd for >the server). This is for instance a feature that we don't have with >symbolic links over NFS networks. It depends on the client software. The Symbolics Lisp Machine NFS client software has always automatically mounted servers in the background as needed. Unix systems running an automounter also do this. It's completely independent of the NFS protocol. -- Barry Margolin, Thinking Machines Corp. barmar@think.com {uunet,harvard}!think!barmar
vjs@rhyolite.wpd.sgi.com (Vernon Schryver) (02/02/91)
In article <48748@apple.Apple.COM>, ksand@Apple.COM (Kent Sandvik) writes: > ... > Another neat feature with these 'user-friendly' links are that they mount > file systems to which the link points to - usually in the background without > any user intervention (if the user don't have to give a new passwd for > the server). This is for instance a feature that we don't have with > symbolic links over NFS networks. This feature has been available with the NFS "automounter" for at least a year. The remote file system is mounted when you refer to it and unmounted a configurable time after your stop using it, all without any action on your part. The only noticable effect is that the first reference through the symbolic link can take a second or two to resolve, as all of the network stuff happens behind the scenes. Minor creativity with scripts to create automount YP (eeerr--NIS) "maps" such as "home" supports literally thousands of UNIX home directories following people around to literally thousands of UNIX workstations from literally thousands of other UNIX worstations. The connection to computer architecture in this long thread is tenuous. Discussions about NFS would find additional knowledgable people in comp.protocols.nfs. Several news groups in comp.unix.* are read by UNIX shell and kernel partisans. Vernon Schryver, vjs@sgi.com
sef@kithrup.COM (Sean Eric Fagan) (02/02/91)
In article <48748@apple.Apple.COM> ksand@Apple.COM (Kent Sandvik) writes: >Another neat feature with these 'user-friendly' links are that they mount >file systems to which the link points to - usually in the background without >any user intervention (if the user don't have to give a new passwd for >the server). This is for instance a feature that we don't have with >symbolic links over NFS networks. amd. It (or the other one, there are two of them that I know of) was described at the summer '88 usenix, I believe (I'm not positive, though). As for "usually in the background": uhm... I click on a file which isn't mounted, it attempts to mount it "in the background." Does that mean it tries to guess what the file looks like, and give me what it hopes is correct data? -- Sean Eric Fagan | "I made the universe, but please don't blame me for it; sef@kithrup.COM | I had a bellyache at the time." -----------------+ -- The Turtle (Stephen King, _It_) Any opinions expressed are my own, and generally unpopular with others.