I wasn't paying much attention to what I was typing, I guess, and I seriously mis-spoke! I have no idea how HFS slipped into the comments! Geez! Apologies all around! Remove "HFS/HFS+" from the comments, and they read okay. Big ooops!
keith whaley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Quoting Keith Whaley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > Seems that's pretty much over. The Apple Macintosh HFS/HFS+ operating > > system is a dead end street. Obsolete. Now, some form of UNIX is all. > > One more step toward a rather universal operating system that will work > > on myriad machines, no matter who developed it. > > > > > > HFS/HFS+ is a file system, not an operating system, and is not obsolete. HFS+ > continues to be the default file system for Macs, and appears to work just > fine. Apple has even recently extended it to include support for journaling. > > Apple's "form of unix" actually still contains the same type of frameworks for > developing applications. In fact, now things are much easier, as more of the > basic components are built-in for you. Developers who use apple's > instructions still make programs that work well, have few surprises, and are > faniliar to any mac user. Developers can continue to use their old code, with > a few updates (this is called "Carbon", and is designed for updating old apps > for the new OS) or can re-write from scratch using the easier and faster Cocoa > (designed for brand-new app development. The Unix base of Mac OS X (called > Darwin) will run on myriad machines, an Intel version does exist. The > application development frameworks and GUI are specific to apple machines with > PowerPC processors. > > -Matt (who used to study operating system design)
