- From: <S.N.Brodie@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
- Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 10:09:04 +0100 (BST)
- To: walter@natural-innovations.com (Walter Ian Kaye)
- Cc: www-html@w3.org
Walter Ian Kaye wrote: > > >Wait a minute, I think you will find that Acorn RISCOS has a perfectly > >good system of file types. And they have a similar profile in my country > >to that which Apple has in yours. > > Didn't Acorn decide to migrate to PowerPC's running MacOS? No. Acorn restructured last year to get the technology development seperated from any education business by forming a jointly owned venture with Apple called Xemplar (www.xemplar.co.uk). Acorn RISC Technologies (www.art.acorn.co.uk) is now providing all kinds of design and implementation services based on RISC provessors (primarily ARM) > The difference is that Apple *registers* creator type (parent application) > and file type codes. This prevents Word/FrameMaker and similar conflicts. > Of course, another difference is that the 4-byte codes are *binary*, > resulting in 4 billion possible codes. I've even reserved a few for my own > MacOS programs! ;-) The lack of filetypes has been a concern for some time in the Acorn world where we have only 4096 types. Again these are registered in a single place, but according to the people running the registry, there is no shortage ... So is it necessary to have all these different filetypes? Does it lead to file-type bloat with lots of different types for what are essentially the same format files? [Not related to or speaking for Acorn Computer Group in any way, except as a user of a StrongARM-powered Risc PC which seems to outperform our P166's running NT4 with no trouble] -- Stewart Brodie, Electronics & Computer Science, Southampton University. http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~snb94r/ http://delenn.ecs.soton.ac.uk/
Received on Friday, 18 October 1996 05:09:46 UTC