kim@feynman.valid.com (Kim Helliwell) (03/15/91)
I have a question (or two) for those of you who are actually using
MacOS 7.0 now. I remember being told _YEARS_ ago that v 7.0 would
do away with DA's (and maybe INTIs, too!). So the question is, is that
true? And if so, what do I do with my favorite DAs that I just can't
get along without? Obviously, the same question applies to INITs as
well.
"Never let work interfere with your reasons for working."
Kim Helliwellphaedrus@milton.u.washington.edu (Mark Phaedrus) (03/15/91)
In article <258@valid.valid.com> kim@feynman.valid.com (Kim Helliwell) writes: > I have a question (or two) for those of you who are actually using > MacOS 7.0 now. I remember being told _YEARS_ ago that v 7.0 would > do away with DA's (and maybe INTIs, too!). So the question is, is that > true? And if so, what do I do with my favorite DAs that I just can't > get along without? Obviously, the same question applies to INITs as > well. System 7 doesn't do away with DAs; they're not necessary, and they work differently, but they're still there. Basically, DAs are not installed in the System file anymore, and Font/DA Mover is gone. When you double-click on a font or sound suitcase, it opens like a folder, and you can see the invididual fonts and DAs inside. To install a font, you drag it from the suitcase into the System file's icon, which can also open to show the fonts and sounds installed. DAs don't go in the System file at all anymore; you drag the DA you want out of its suitcase file, and it becomes a separate, double-clickable "application". The Apple menu works on a completely new principle. Anything you put in the "Apple Menu Items" subfolder in the System Folder immediately shows up in the Apple menu. Applications, DAs, folders, whatever. Note that with the aliasing capability of 7.0, you can add anything anywhere on any disk to the Apple menu by just putting an alias of it in the Apple Menu Items folder. In short, DAs still work just fine. But with MultiFinder always on, full-fledged applications as easily accessible as DAs, and virtual memory available on most machines (so the small size of the average DA isn't as much of an advantage), there's not as much incentive to use them. INITs and cdevs (now called "Extensions" and "Control Panels") work as well, though there's changes there as well, and anybody who reads this group knows that I've had my share of problems with incompatibilities. (I'm now sending off for new versions of every INIT I own. :) ) INITs now go in the "Extensions" subfolder of the System Folder instead of in the System Folder itself, and cdevs go in the "Control Panels" subfolder. There's no longer any such thing as "the Control Panel"; if you double-click on a cdev file, it just opens up into its own little window like an application, sorta like DAs do now. So the "Control Panels" option on the Apple menu is just an alias of the Control Panels folder; when you choose it from the Apple menu, the folder opens, and you double-click on the cdev you want to adjust. There's one other handy System Folder subfolder. "Set Startup" is gone; instead, anything in the "Startup Items" subfolder gets executed at startup time. Again, aliases work just as well as the real thing. I did find this name confusing at first; "Startup Items" sounds like a good place to put INITs. System 7's Finder does have one nifty feature that helps to stop this sort of confusion. If you try to drag, say, an INIT into the System Folder, a dialog comes up to the effect of "This thingy belongs in Extensions. Do you want me to put it there for you?" It won't stop you from putting something straight into the wrong subfolder, though, like dragging an INIT into Startup Items.) -- Internet: phaedrus@u.washington.edu (University of Washington, Seattle) The views expressed here are not those of this station or its management. "If you can keep your head while those about you are losing theirs, consider an exciting career as a guillotine operator!"
dorner@pequod.cso.uiuc.edu (Steve Dorner) (03/15/91)
In article <18440@milton.u.washington.edu> phaedrus@milton.u.washington.edu (Mark Phaedrus) writes: >... virtual memory available on most machines What planet are *you* from :-)? On my planet, the majority of macs have 68000's, for whom system 7.0 virtual memory is useless, and for whom System 7 will EXACERBATE, not solve, their memory woes. Of course, by the time system 7 is actually released, this may change (and the US's conversion to the metric system may be complete). -- Steve Dorner, U of Illinois Computing Services Office Internet: s-dorner@uiuc.edu UUCP: uunet!uiucuxc!uiuc.edu!s-dorner
kiran@copper.ucs.indiana.edu (Kiran Wagle) (03/15/91)
Mark Phaedrus writes: >INITs now go in the "Extensions" subfolder of the System Folder >instead of in the System Folder itself, and cdevs go in the "Control >Panels" subfolder. I suppose INITs with cdev resources (or is it the other way round?) go in the extensions folder with aliases in the control panels folder? (or is it the other way round?) -- ...kiran __________kiran@copper.ucs.indiana.edu________(812) 331-1710 From the corrections column in a July Fresno, CA _Bee_: "An item in Thursday's [issue] about the Massachusetts budget crisis made reference to new taxes that will help put Massachusetts 'back in the African-American.' The item should have said 'back in the black.'"
dwal@ellis.uchicago.edu (David Walton) (03/16/91)
In article <kiran.669026353@copper> kiran@copper.ucs.indiana.edu (Kiran Wagle) writes: >Mark Phaedrus writes: > >>INITs now go in the "Extensions" subfolder of the System Folder >>instead of in the System Folder itself, and cdevs go in the "Control >>Panels" subfolder. > >I suppose INITs with cdev resources (or is it the other way round?) go >in the extensions folder with aliases in the control panels folder? >(or is it the other way round?) In System 3.2 - 6.0.x, the System would search for and execute INIT resources in files of type INIT and cDEV (as well as a couple of other types). The same thing is true under 7.0; the System simply looks in a different place. > ...kiran -- David Walton Internet: dwal@midway.uchicago.edu University of Chicago { Any opinions found herein are mine, not } Computing Organizations { those of my employers (or anybody else). }
ml27192@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Mark Lanett) (03/16/91)
kim@feynman.valid.com (Kim Helliwell) writes: > > I have a question (or two) for those of you who are actually using > MacOS 7.0 now. I remember being told _YEARS_ ago that v 7.0 would > do away with DA's (and maybe INTIs, too!). So the question is, is that > true? And if so, what do I do with my favorite DAs that I just can't > get along without? Obviously, the same question applies to INITs as > well. It was System 8 that was going to do away with DAs, according to David Ramsey on CIS (who got fired for saying so, because of the storm that comment caused). I wouldn't worry about it for a _long_ time :-). -- //----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mark Lanett ml27192@uxa.cs.uiuc.edu
meltsner@crd.ge.com (Kenneth J Meltsner) (03/16/91)
Now that 7.0 is nearly in sight, when can we expect all the neat things that got left out to be finished? Things like the new print manager, the new Script manager, etc. And beyond that, when will rumors about System 8.0 start to leak out? Hey, I'm never satisfied because I like the Mac too much -- the last few annoyances really grate on my nerves. =============================================================================== Ken Meltsner | meltsner@crd.ge.com (518) 387-6391 GE Research and Development Center | Fax: (518) 387-7495 P.O. Box 8, Room K1/MB207 | Nothing I say should be attributed Schenectady, NY 12301 | to my employer, and probably vice-versa =================Dep't of Materials Science, ACME Looniversity=================
anders@verity.com (Anders Wallgren) (03/16/91)
It doesn't keep you from using DA - they work just like applications now - you launch them by double-clicking in the Finder. You don't have to install them in the System (or use SuitCase) anymore, because the System Folder has a folder in it called "Apple Menu Items" which will cause anything put in there to be put into the Apple Menu. anders
umh@vax5.cit.cornell.edu (03/16/91)
In article <18440@milton.u.washington.edu>, phaedrus@milton.u.washington.edu (Mark Phaedrus) writes: > The Apple menu works on a completely new principle. Anything you put in > the "Apple Menu Items" subfolder in the System Folder immediately shows up in > the Apple menu. Applications, DAs, folders, whatever. Note that with the > aliasing capability of 7.0, you can add anything anywhere on any disk to the > Apple menu by just putting an alias of it in the Apple Menu Items folder. > In short, DAs still work just fine. But with MultiFinder always on, > full-fledged applications as easily accessible as DAs, and virtual memory > available on most machines (so the small size of the average DA isn't as much > of an advantage), there's not as much incentive to use them. Something I wonder about: Can one create submenus in this new improved Apple menu? I would like to have submenus for, say, CDEVs, DAs, Applications, and Folders, rather than having a single list of probably more than 100 items. Maynard Handley maynard@helios.tn.cornell.edu
rob@aeras.uucp (Rob Rogers) (03/16/91)
In article <1991Mar15.032828.18935@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> dorner@pequod.cso.uiuc.edu (Steve Dorner) writes: >In article <18440@milton.u.washington.edu> phaedrus@milton.u.washington.edu (Mark Phaedrus) writes: >>... virtual memory available on most machines > >What planet are *you* from :-)? On my planet, the majority of macs have >68000's, for whom system 7.0 virtual memory is useless, and for whom >System 7 will EXACERBATE, not solve, their memory woes. [........] Stuff deleted - - - My feelings exactly. I have 2 Mac II's, but I also have 2 SE's. My company is 2 to 1 for the SEs. Does this mean I'll have 2 different systems on my Macs? My SE's have 4 megs, but my system takes up 1.2M alone. Now there's a minimum of 2 meg needed for 7.0. Sounds like at least 2.5 M is going to be taken up as soon as I boot (goodbye Illustrator). :-( The Company's Macs are all 1 meggers. It sounds like a ploy to get people with 68000 Macs to upgrade (visions of MultiMedia). I also HATE the idea of double-clicking to open DAs and cdevs. I _never_ have more than 1 Finder window open at a time (even on my 21" monitor), and I'll be damned if I'm going to open 3 windows to get to a folder to open a DA that I use all the time. (I kind of like the idea of a small program that does it's job and gets out of my way). What do I do? Install it in OnCue or the so-called Application menu (if that's possible in 7.0)? Sounds a hell of a lot like a DA to me. So why bother? I don't like this one bit. I know I'm going to _have_ to upgrade later (no way sooner) and I _hate_ that. We now return your regularly scheduled flame to a mere pilot light. -- Rob Rogers Art Director, ARIX Computer Corporation {mips|sun|wyse|jade}!aeras!rob <> rob@aeras.UUCP <> 73377.1017@compuserve.com <> GEnie=R.ROGERS10 <> AOL=MacGun
phaedrus@milton.u.washington.edu (Mark Phaedrus) (03/16/91)
In article <1991Mar15.233913.3418@vax5.cit.cornell.edu> umh@vax5.cit.cornell.edu writes: >In article <18440@milton.u.washington.edu>, I (Phaedrus) write: >> The Apple menu works on a completely new principle. Anything you put in >>the "Apple Menu Items" subfolder in the System Folder immediately shows up in >>the Apple menu. Applications, DAs, folders, whatever. >Something I wonder about: Can one create submenus in this new improved Apple >menu? I would like to have submenus for, say, CDEVs, DAs, Applications, and >Folders, rather than having a single list of probably more than 100 items. It doesn't appear so. You can certainly put folders in the Apple Menu Items folder (as I mentioned, that's how the Control Panels choice works), but that just creates one Apple menu entry with the folder name--you have to choose it, then double-click on the thing you want from the open folder. I'd love to see folders in the Apple Menu Items folder become hierarchical menus in the Apple menu, but that's probably too late to sneak into 7.0. (Maybe 7.0.2, Apple? :] ) -- Internet: phaedrus@u.washington.edu (University of Washington, Seattle) The views expressed here are not those of this station or its management. "If you can keep your head while those about you are losing theirs, consider an exciting career as a guillotine operator!"
phaedrus@milton.u.washington.edu (Mark Phaedrus) (03/16/91)
In article <1991Mar16.034517.3195@aeras.uucp> rob@aeras.UUCP (Rob Rogers) writes: >My feelings exactly. I have 2 Mac II's, but I also have 2 SE's. >My company is 2 to 1 for the SEs. Does this mean I'll have 2 >different systems on my Macs? My SE's have 4 megs, but my system >takes up 1.2M alone. Now there's a minimum of 2 meg needed for >7.0. Sounds like at least 2.5 M is going to be taken up as soon as >I boot (goodbye Illustrator). :-( The Company's Macs are all 1 >meggers. It sounds like a ploy to get people with 68000 Macs to >upgrade (visions of MultiMedia). It's obviously not a ploy for upgrades, since Classics don't have PMMUs either... Seriously, though, the memory requirements aren't really much greater than System 6's. Under System 6, the System (plus ten or so INITs) and video memory took about 1100K on my machine, and I had the Finder set for another 250K so I could drag decent-sized sets of files around. Under System 7, the whole mess (System, Finder, those INITs that don't duplicate System 7 features) takes 1800K. I think that most people will be willing to pay 450K more memory to get the System 7 features. (And this is still the System 7 beta; I'm told that System 7 proper will be even smaller, once the debugging code is removed.) >I also HATE the idea of double-clicking to open DAs and cdevs. I >_never_ have more than 1 Finder window open at a time (even on my >21" monitor), and I'll be damned if I'm going to open 3 windows >to get to a folder to open a DA that I use all the time. I don't see the problem here at all. In case you didn't see this earlier, you can add *anything* to the Apple menu. If you put a DA icon in the Apple Menu Items folder, that DA works exactly like it did under System 6; you choose it from the Apple menu and it runs. As for cdevs, you have two choices. You can use the default system (choose Control Panels from the Apple menu, then double-click on the cdev you want); this takes exactly one more click than the old way, and involves two windows instead of one (the Control Panels folder window and the cdev's window). Or you can put an alias of a cdev you use a lot in the Apple Menu Items folder, and run that cdev straight off the Apple menu without clicking on anything! I'd call that an improvement... -- Internet: phaedrus@u.washington.edu (University of Washington, Seattle) The views expressed here are not those of this station or its management. "If you can keep your head while those about you are losing theirs, consider an exciting career as a guillotine operator!"
wilkins@jarthur.Claremont.EDU (Mark Wilkins) (03/17/91)
In article <1991Mar15.233913.3418@vax5.cit.cornell.edu> umh@vax5.cit.cornell.edu writes: >Something I wonder about: Can one create submenus in this new improved Apple >menu? I would like to have submenus for, say, CDEVs, DAs, Applications, and >Folders, rather than having a single list of probably more than 100 items. This issue was battled over on AppleLink for a while. Turns out that the Human Interface people did a great deal of user interface testing, and it appeared to them that this kind of thing confused all but the most capable power users. So, it's not going in, even though some people inside and out of Apple have asked for it. I suspect they're making the right decision because it keeps the idea much less complicated and much closer to the existing Apple menu. -- Mark Wilkins -- ******* "Freedom is a road seldom traveled by the multitude!" ********** *-----------------------------------------------------------------------------* * Mark R. Wilkins wilkins@jarthur.claremont.edu {uunet}!jarthur!wilkins * ****** MARK.WILKINS on AppleLink ****** MWilkins on America Online ******
dbert@geech.ai.mit.edu (Douglas Siebert) (03/17/91)
In article <11254@jarthur.Claremont.EDU> wilkins@jarthur.Claremont.EDU (Mark Wilkins) writes: >In article <1991Mar15.233913.3418@vax5.cit.cornell.edu> umh@vax5.cit.cornell.edu writes: >>Something I wonder about: Can one create submenus in this new improved Apple >>menu? I would like to have submenus for, say, CDEVs, DAs, Applications, and >>Folders, rather than having a single list of probably more than 100 items. > > > This issue was battled over on AppleLink for a while. Turns out that the >Human Interface people did a great deal of user interface testing, and it >appeared to them that this kind of thing confused all but the most capable >power users. > > So, it's not going in, even though some people inside and out of Apple >have asked for it. I suspect they're making the right decision because it >keeps the idea much less complicated and much closer to the existing Apple >menu. > Luckily for us all, I'm sure some developer somewhere is hard at work on an INIT to do that right at this moment! :) BTW, this is unrelated, but in the interests of saving net.bandwidth I'll ask it here: What exactly do the CPS Tag-Fix and SFS Scroll INIT do? And what systems are they needed (used) on? I've got a couple disks from places that among the stuff on there were those two INITs, but I don't know what they do! I saw them mentioned a couple times recently so I thought I'd ask. Please respond by e-mail as I'm probably the only one who doesn't know what they are. -- ________________________________________________________________________ Doug Siebert dbert@albert.ai.mit.edu MBA Student (2nd year) The University of Iowa
jyen@Apple.COM (John Yen) (03/17/91)
I'm typing this on a ci, but I also have an SE on my desk for testing and administrivia. With standard 7.0 system software and a 128 disk cache, the system partition in RAM is still under 1.5 M. Using DAs in 7.0 is by default the same as in 6.0.x: select from the Apple menu. They can _also_ be double-clicked, but they _don't_ have to be. The point is almost _anything_ - network aliases, DAs, apps, cdevs, documents - can be placed in the Apple menu. Please try 7.0 before posting comments, ok? John Yen jyen@apple.com
francis@arthur.zaphod.uchicago.edu (Francis Stracke) (03/17/91)
In article <11254@jarthur.Claremont.EDU> wilkins@jarthur.Claremont.EDU (Mark Wilkins) writes: In article <1991Mar15.233913.3418@vax5.cit.cornell.edu> umh@vax5.cit.cornell.edu writes: >Something I wonder about: Can one create submenus in this new improved Apple >menu? I would like to have submenus for, say, CDEVs, DAs, Applications, and >Folders, rather than having a single list of probably more than 100 items. [says HI's sample users thought it was confusing] So, it's not going in, even though some people inside and out of Apple have asked for it. I suspect they're making the right decision because it keeps the idea much less complicated and much closer to the existing Apple menu. Sounds very reasonable. Recall that, currently, a submenu to a DA is that DA's menu--your suggestion would break that. Of course, since that's an add-on (DAmenuz), Apple might ignore it. Anybody know who wrote DAmenuz? (I'm sure it's in the info in the cdev, but I haven't used it in a while--haven't got my own Mac, so I can't run whatever cdev I want. :-) I'm wondering if he's planning to make it work under Sys7--if so, maybe we could have submenus being app's menubars! :-) -- /============================================================================\ | Francis Stracke | My opinions are my own. I don't steal them.| | Department of Mathematics |=============================================| | University of Chicago | Until you stalk and overrun, | | francis@zaphod.uchicago.edu | you can't devour anyone. -- Hobbes | \============================================================================/
mlbarrow@athena.mit.edu (Michael L Barrow) (03/18/91)
System 7 isn't as big as was described earlier. I am on a 5M SE/30 that has 6 INITs, 128K cache and my System partition is 1847K. It's not really all that bad. Besides, memory _is_ kinda cheap these days. -- Michael B. -- ======================================================================= | Michael L Barrow | "If any of the above offended you, it was | | <mlbarrow@mit.edu> | my idea to do it -- not MIT's" | |---------------------------------------------------------------------| | Consultant | MIT Computing Support Services (CSS) | | Member | Student Information Processing Board (SIPB) | | Student | Computer Engineering Major, '93 | =======================================================================
long@mcntsh.enet.dec.com (Rich Long) (03/19/91)
In article <1991Mar15.233913.3418@vax5.cit.cornell.edu> umh@vax5.cit.cornell.edu writes: >Folders, rather than having a single list of probably more than 100 items. [in the Apple Menu] Actually, I heard the Apple menu was limited to 50 items, which I think is insufficient. I'd rather see no limit. Richard C. Long * long@mcntsh.enet.dec.com * ...!decwrl!mcntsh.enet.dec.com!long * long%mcntsh.dec@decwrl.enet.dec.com
bp12+@andrew.cmu.edu (Brian J. Papa) (03/19/91)
On 18-Mar-91 in Re: Version 7.0 questions user Rich Long@mcntsh.enet.de writes: > Actually, I heard the Apple menu was limited to 50 items, which I think is > insufficient. I'd rather see no limit. Why would you want to scroll through 50 items to find some application that start with a z. Try making folders of similar aliases, or aliases of the actual application folder which is buried deep within your hard drive. Although I see your point, I don't think that anyu more than 25 will actually be practical (I have 20 right now (3 folders)) -Brian -Brian
moise@husc9.harvard.edu (Wesner Moise) (03/19/91)
Actually, I remember reading in MacWeek that the limit of applications (including DAs) installed in the Apple Menu is about 10,000.
rubinoff@linc.cis.upenn.edu (Robert Rubinoff) (03/20/91)
In article <MOISE.91Mar19103523@husc9.harvard.edu> moise@husc9.harvard.edu (Wesner Moise) writes: >Actually, I remember reading in MacWeek that the limit of applications >(including DAs) installed in the Apple Menu is about 10,000. That's not enough! I know it probably seems like enough *now*, but remember that 128K (or certainly 512K) seemed like enough memory when the Mac first came out. Sooner or later, this limit is going to be a problem, as the demands of more sophisticated software push the limits of the Apple Menu size! :-) Robert
gillies@m.cs.uiuc.edu (Don Gillies) (03/20/91)
Has someone tried to run mathematica under system 7.0 ? Does it fit in the memory of an SE/Classic along with the new system software? I still think it was an error (or a cruelty to new users) to release a new machine (the classic) which is limited to only 4 Mb of RAM. Mathematica interface + kernel is nearly unlivable under MF 6.03 with 5Mb on a Mac II (it runs out of memory and dies after doing three 3-D figure plots). It seems that in the near future there will be many useful applications that might choke on the limited memory of the macintosh classic. They probably could have made minor changes to the classic to allow 8Mb of RAM. Don Gillies | University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign gillies@cs.uiuc.edu | Digital Computer Lab, 1304 W. Springfield, Urbana IL ---------------------+------------------------------------------------------ "UGH! WAR! ... What is it GOOD FOR? ABSOLUTELY NOTHING!" - the song "WAR" by Edwin Starr, circa 1971 --
ewright@convex.com (Edward V. Wright) (03/21/91)
In article <1991Mar16.034517.3195@aeras.uucp> rob@aeras.UUCP (Rob Rogers) writes: >My feelings exactly. I have 2 Mac II's, but I also have 2 SE's. >My company is 2 to 1 for the SEs. Does this mean I'll have 2 >different systems on my Macs? My SE's have 4 megs, but my system >takes up 1.2M alone. Now there's a minimum of 2 meg needed for >7.0. Sounds like at least 2.5 M is going to be taken up as soon as >I boot (goodbye Illustrator). Huh? How do you get "2.5 M is going to be taken up?" System 7 replaces your existing system. The memory requirement does not come on top of what you already use. And the stated 2 meg requirement is *not* the amount of memory required for the operating system alone -- it is the amount required for the operating system and a useable-size application partition. >I also HATE the idea of double-clicking to open DAs and cdevs. So don't do it. System 7 allows you to install *any* application, desk accessory, CDEV, document, etc. in the Apple menu.
breidenb@Informatik.TU-Muenchen.DE (Oliver Breidenbach) (03/21/91)
In article <39398@netnews.upenn.edu> rubinoff@linc.cis.upenn.edu (Robert Rubinoff) writes: >That's not enough! I know it probably seems like enough *now*, but remember >that 128K (or certainly 512K) seemed like enough memory when the Mac first >came out. Sooner or later, this limit is going to be a problem, as the demands >of more sophisticated software push the limits of the Apple Menu size! System 27.0 solves this problem. :-) It comes on a 10000 GB 0.5 inch removable disk cartridge. BTW this version also increases the number of attachable peripherials to 1 Million since some companies running large Networks (>10 Billion machines) complaint about the nasty 65535 limit. Oliver
klingspo@mozart.cs.colostate.edu (Steve Klingsporn) (03/22/91)
You can put ANY file into the Apple Menu Items folder. If you don't use more than one concurrent Finder window, you're dumb. :) System 7 does NOT suck. Steve
ckix@vax5.cit.cornell.edu (George Paci) (04/08/91)
In article <1991Mar16.034517.3195@aeras.uucp>, rob@aeras.uucp (Rob Rogers) writes: > > I also HATE the idea of double-clicking to open DAs and cdevs. I > _never_ have more than 1 Finder window open at a time (even on my > 21" monitor), and I'll be damned if I'm going to open 3 windows > to get to a folder to open a DA that I use all the time. (I kind > of like the idea of a small program that does it's job and gets > out of my way). What do I do? Install it in OnCue or the so-called > Application menu (if that's possible in 7.0)? Sounds a > hell of a lot like a DA to me. So why bother? > It sounds like you've never gotten a chance to actually play around with System 7. I know you've in all likelihood heard this a million times before, but there's really no reason for DAs in S7. You can take any application (however large) and drop it (or an alias of it) into the apple menu. Then to execute it, you just pull down the apple menu and select it--just like a DA, except this works with _any_ program (and anything else you can double-click: cdevs, printers (beats the hell out of the Chooser!), fileservers, etc.). This feature pretty much supersedes OnCue, as well as freeing programmers from the overhead involved with creating a DA--they just write a little application instead. Personally, I really like being able to double-click just about any icon in the Finder. I never realized how complicated things used to be until I got a chance to try the way they will be.... As for your memory woes, they may not be quite as bad as you feared: S7 (sound kind of like a modal logic, doesn't it?) eats up less than 1M of RAM; the reason you need 2M is so you can run more than one app under it. Somehow I doubt you'll run out of memory very often with 4 Megs (of course, you know more about your situation than I do). --George Paci (ckix@cornella.cit.cornell.edu) I'm at work, so I need a disclaimer: All opinions in this post are mine and do not necessarily reflect the views of Cornell Information Technologies (which, incidentally, will probably switch to System 7 as soon as reports of devils ice-skating can be reliably confirmed....).
ack@wings.dartmouth.edu (Andy J. Williams) (04/09/91)
ckix@vax5.cit.cornell.edu (George Paci) writes: >Then to execute it, you just pull down the >apple menu and select it--just like a DA, except this works with _any_ >program (and anything else you can double-click: cdevs, printers (beats >the hell out of the Chooser!), fileservers, etc.). Huh? I've been using System 7 for a few months now and have yet to be able to double click on printers... how is this done? -A -- Andy J. Williams sNail: RFD 1 #268 echo "Hello." Consultant Guy Lebanon NH, 03766 setenv NAME 'Inigo Montoya' Kiewit Computation eMail: ack@wings.dartmouth.edu user>kill -9 my ppid Dartmouth College pHone: 603-646-3417 Prepare to vi.
jhp@wpi.WPI.EDU (John Petrangleo) (04/09/91)
In article <1991Apr8.153415.3908@vax5.cit.cornell.edu> ckix@vax5.cit.cornell.edu (George Paci) writes: > I know you've in all likelihood heard this a million >times before, but there's really no reason for DAs in S7. You can >take any application (however large) and drop it (or an alias of it) >into the apple menu. Then to execute it, you just pull down the >apple menu and select it--just like a DA, except this works with _any_ >program (and anything else you can double-click: cdevs, printers (beats >the hell out of the Chooser!), fileservers, etc.). I don't know. Have you eve checked out the memory required by DA's compared to applications. DA's only take up 16K, compared to apps which take 100's or 1000's of K. Granted DA's aren't as powerful, but sometimes I only have 100K or less available, so its nice to cram an only slightly powerful DA into memory instead of quitting something to load some full blown program. I know app. programmers could write smaller programs, but the smallest I've ever seen requires around 64K. Maybe I've missed some crucial point about DA's stealing memory from somewhere else to pull off this minimal memory magic. If some one could shed some light on this, I'd like to know how DA's can be so small yet still do so much sometimes. ---------------------- jhp@wpi.wpi.edu ----------------------
kent@sunfs3.Camex.COM (Kent Borg) (04/10/91)
In article <1991Apr9.003731.10182@wpi.WPI.EDU> jhp@wpi.WPI.EDU (John Petrangleo) writes: >I don't know. Have you eve checked out the memory required by DA's compared >to applications. DA's only take up 16K, compared to apps which take 100's >or 1000's of K. Granted DA's aren't as powerful, but sometimes I only have >100K or less available, so its nice to cram an only slightly powerful DA >into memory instead of quitting something to load some full blown program. >I know app. programmers could write smaller programs, but the smallest >I've ever seen requires around 64K. > >Maybe I've missed some crucial point about DA's stealing memory from somewhere >else to pull off this minimal memory magic. If some one could shed some light >on this, I'd like to know how DA's can be so small yet still do so much >sometimes. One reason DAs can do a lot in a little space is that they are often better written. OK, maybe there is some lower limit to memory usage by an application because it gets full globals and jump tables and stacks, and stuff like that, but there is no reason why programmers cannot write small applications that do small things. Which brings me around to one of my controversial views. I am glad the Classic is such a slow machine. The fact that Apple is selling them by the plane-load keeps developers from assuming that everybody has IIfx's. Unchecked, programs will expand to eat all of the available resources and the Classic helps put a stop to that. The downside is that the poor folks who own Classics (or even worse a Plus, as I have) will have to live with applications which have expanded to the limits of their computers. I think that all programmers in Apple should be forced (yes, *forced*) to use Classics on a regular basis--as should all non-Apple developers. The Classic is a powerful machine, a computer many of us would have died for 10-years ago. Needing an fx to run a word processor or draw program is stupid, just plain stupid. Fight Computer Gluttony!! -- Kent Borg internet: kent@camex.com AOL: kent borg H:(617) 776-6899 W:(617) 426-3577 "We foolishly did not realize that he was stupid." - April Glasbie 3-20-91
jc7j+@andrew.cmu.edu (Jae W. Chang) (04/11/91)
What I like best is not to put aliases into the apple menu but instead put them into a separate folder and format the window for view by name. I'll either always keep the separate folder open or since I have WindowShade running I can just collapse the window so that it takes only a fraction of the space on the desktop. Jae
chas@netcom.COM (Chuck Fisher) (04/13/91)
In article <1930@camex.COM> kent@sunfs3.Camex.COM (Kent Borg) writes: >Fight Computer Gluttony!! I agree. Us old-timers remember when memory was at a premium and we made every byte count. Nowadays it seems that developers get sloppy and this is especially true where virtual memory is assumed. I've worked on Sun workstations that seemed to take an interminable amount of time to start up some applications in spite of the MIP/SPECmark ratings in the teens. All that I/O has to be squeezed through SCSI and Sun's I/O is not proportionally fast with its processors. I hope that with System 7 we won't have bloated Mac applications like I have seen some workstation applications. Chuck -- Chuck Fisher Work: (800) 359-7997 chas@netcom.com <--- Note change Home: (415) 964-2819 {apple,claris,amdahl,tandem}!netcom!chas