Relative Paths

[Richard Gaskin]

Monte Goulding wrote:
> My question would be why is it necessary to ask your users to directly
> manipulate files and folders in and around your applications. It's a simple
> task to include an interface to abstract the user away from direct file and
> folder manipulation. I'd hazard a guess that many windows users don't even
> know where their applications are stored let alone want to mess with them.

And yet Photoshop is a best-selling application on Windows as it is on Mac.

We don't have the product managers from all the other vendors who do 
this here to explain their choices, but perhaps someone at RunRev will 
answer your question with regard to Rev.

>>Note that Revolution's components are also outside the bundle as they
>>are with mine.
> 
> Well if rev had all the IDE components in the app bundle it would make
> standalone building tricky for a start. But that's not a design issue that
> many of us need to deal with.

But others of us do, and we're no different than RunRev, Microsoft, 
Adobe, Macromedia, and several dozen other app vendors in terms of how 
we structure our deliverables.

I think it's nice that we have the option of going both ways, hiding 
things in bundles for OS X if we choose or structuring things more 
explicitely, the way Mac Classic and all other operating systems work. 
Since its possible to structure things both ways there's no need to 
dictate one or the other, and each has its merits for different kinds of 
apps.

My question was not whether everyone should deliver every app the same 
way RunRev, Adobe, and I do.  My question was whether the freedom we 
currently have to use either method could be made easier as well.

-- 
  Richard Gaskin
  Fourth World Media Corporation
  ___________________________________________________________
  Ambassador at FourthWorld.com       http://www.FourthWorld.com