ambassador at fourthworld.com
Thu Mar 9 14:07:35 EST 2006
Robert Brenstein wrote:
>> Robert Brenstein wrote:
>>> For those wondering about those ._ files, here is the explanation
>>> from the "guilty" party, Apple itself:
>>> For most files, these ._ are actually empty and in case of Rev stacks
>>> safely ditched.
>> So in all cases where the file has no resource fork (many Classic
>> file, most OS X files, and just about all Rev stacks, MP3s, MPEGs, and
>> more) it's merely a waste of time and space.
>> That Apple provides no option for the user to be able to decide
>> whether this happens is an unfortunate design decision.
>> That Apple does this for files that have no resource fork is a bug.
>> That is, it would be a bug but another poster here already pointed out
>> that no software vendor in the world 'cept RunRev ever ships anything
>> with known bugs. ;)
> Well, no, it is not exactly a bug in the way you present it. I
> simplified above (distorted the truth if you wish) saying that files are
> empty: they contain at least a single line with Finder info, like file
> type and creator, which is good enough reason to create that file even
> for files with no resource fork.
But many OS X apps (even some from Apple?) don't set the Finder info,
relying on OS X's preference to determine type from the file type
extension in the name.
But okay, it's not a bug per se. My main point there was having fun
with the notion that no vendor except Rev has ever shipped any software
with known bugs. ;) Of course there are enough examples that we needn't
stretch to find more.
I still feel it would be useful to allow users to be in control of these
additional files. It makes it cumbersome to use any non-Apple Flash
drive, work with multi-platform networks, etc. Not allowing that
control just makes Apple look bad, lending credence to the old lightbulb
Managing Editor, revJournal
Rev tips, tutorials and more: http://www.revJournal.com
More information about the Use-livecode