"Peter Hayes" <not_in_use@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:20061011235019585+0100@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> In <3727628.tarrfNDZjz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>> __/ [ Oliver Wong ] on Wednesday 11 October 2006 21:54 \__
>>
>>>
>>> "Peter Hayes" <not_in_use@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>>> news:20061011213232316+0100@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>> In <ukovv3-5ju.ln1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> JEDIDIAH wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> OTOH, if an OSX app is entirely self contained then how can any
>>>>> sort of code reuse occur?
>>>>
>>>> Won't most apps have specific code that isn't likely to be of use
>>>> elsewhere except in narrowly defined cases.
>>>
>>> Yes, but most of the functionality in an app comes from re-use.
>>> Otherwises, every program would have to re-implement its own keyboard
>>> interrupt handling, USB support, mouse configuration, video timing,
>>> support for screen readers (for the visually impaired), support for
>>> all sorts of soundcards, supports for different types of storage
>>> medias (IDE harddrives, SATA harddrives, USB keys, network drives,
>>> RAM drives, etc.)
>>> Then there'd be stuff like drawing buttons, animating them getting
>>> pressed downwards, adding code to grey-out disabled buttoms. Drawing
>>> drop down menus, making sure the drop down menus appear above the
>>> window frame, instead of beneath it, highlighting the currently
>>> selected menu item, etc.
>>> Instead, code for this is supplied once, and re-used by multiple
>>> applications.
>
> Yes, code supplied by the OS.
Well, not always. For example, someone might come up with a GUI widget
library like GTK or qT in order to facilitate cross-platform applications.
This would be a third party library not bundled with the OS, but which might
be used by several applications. I had assumed OSX did "something smart"
with respect to these shared libraries, rather than having multiple copies
of them around.
E.g. I thought maybe the icons that represent the application were
actually an archive of some sort which contained the application *AND* the
libraries, and the OS could detect duplicate libraries and have them share
the same location on disk or something like that.
>>>> Makes for extremely easy uninstall - just drag the app to the trash.
>>>
>>> This is indeed one very attractive aspect of Apple's design.
>>
>>
>> Like trashing the USB pen in order to unmount it (for safe removal)? I
>> think not... *grin*
I like that you can delete programs easily in Apple (as opposed to
Windows, where you have to do an "uninstall" process which Microsoft is
trying to standardize, but which some third party apps do in arbitrary
ways). I'm neutral about the unmounting a USB pen thing. The first thing I'd
try is right clicking on it (assuming I'm using an Apple with a right mouse
button), and Peter's reply seems to confirm that works.
>
> Just right click the icon and select eject, or eject it from the Finder.
>
> But yes, dragging to the trash is a bizarre Apple-ism, like window
> resizing from the bottom right corner only.
That may have been true in earlier versions of Windows (3.1?), but I
just tried resizing from the top left in XP, and it seems to work.
- Oliver
|
|
