Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!think.com!samsung!crackers!m2c!wpi.WPI.EDU!jhp
From: jhp@wpi.WPI.EDU (John Petrangleo)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.system
Subject: Re: Version 7.0 questions
Message-ID: <1991Apr9.003731.10182@wpi.WPI.EDU>
Date: 9 Apr 91 00:37:31 GMT
References: <18440@milton.u.washington.edu> <1991Mar15.03 <1991Apr8.153415.3908@vax5.cit.cornell.edu>
Distribution: na,comp
Organization: Worcester Polytechnic Institute
Lines: 25

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
----------------------