Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!cmcl2!adm!smoke!gwyn
From: gwyn@smoke.BRL.MIL (Doug Gwyn)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple
Subject: Re: resource forks
Message-ID: <10312@smoke.BRL.MIL>
Date: 23 May 89 20:26:15 GMT
References: <8905211958.AA07187@crash.cts.com>
Reply-To: gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn)
Organization: Ballistic Research Lab (BRL), APG, MD.
Lines: 22

In article <8905211958.AA07187@crash.cts.com> pnet01!pro-nsfmat!pro-europa!samt@nosc.mil writes:
>Doug Gwin writes:
> | It certainly is!  I've heard all the arguments for forked files before,
> | and I still don't like them.  I think it's the biggest OS design botch
> | since files types.
> Gee Doug, don't you really mean since ProDOS came out and wasn't DOS 4.0.

No, I mean since file types.

ProDOS was overall a considerable improvement over Apple DOS 3.3.

> I can't wait to hear you wail and nash your teeth over HFS.FST when (if ever)
>it comes out. 

Why would I do that?  I have some Mac disks I'd like to copy files from.

>Progress seems to be hard on some.

Especially when they refuse to learn from others' experience.
The UNIX experiment demonstrated conclusively the advantages to
simple, regular, wart-free structure.  Meanwhile, OS designers
keep adding warts.