Type/Creator Codes
Type/Creator Codes
- Subject: Type/Creator Codes
- From: Jamie Curmi <email@hidden>
- Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 19:56:43 +1000
Hi All,
Since I started the original thread, I thought I should just say
something. Hopefully Apple have got the message from the responses
here, and, I'm hoping, the feedback you've all given them through the
MacOSX web page.
First, I didn't mean to make a flame war out of this. I was asking a
serious question - thanks for all the great responses.
However, on the topic of extensions, I would like to just say a few
things.
First, whether you like using extensions or not, mixing file name and
file type is very bad from a usability perspective - regardless of the
fact that Windows does it that way, as did NeXT (I believe). You should
never be able to change a file's type by editing its name - this is
basic good usability. It is part of the reason why Windows started
hiding the extensions.
Having seen Windows users in the past change the extension of a GIF file
from .gif to .jpg and believe that they had now created a JPEG - this
should be evidence enough. Try this on OSX and you'll see the icon
actually change from a GIF to a JPEG - even though this is not a JPEG.
This is one of the biggest problem with using such a system.
Or having a text editor save a file with an extension you didn't request
(like TextEdit) - another example of poor usability. Then when the user
removes the extension so that the file name is like they originally
wanted, and finding the file is no longer launches TextEdit?
Clearly just hiding all the extensions is not a solution, as some files
do require extensions to be shown - for example source code (.c, .cc,
.h, .java). But to blindly have all extensions showing, editable, AND
essential for association in the interface is just poor all round.
Clearly most Mac users are not happy with this, and I'd think anyone
with a usability background is in total shock that this wasn't resolved
earlier (didn't Apple once have the best usability people in the
business?).
There are much better ways to do this - and OSX is capable, regardless
of the file system being used. But file extensions like they are
currently are probably the worst way to do this.
I am hopeful that Apple are working on something, and it will be
revealed very very soon. If not though, I think there may be a revolt.
I get very concerned when Windows is looking more usable than the Mac,
as should you all.
One final thing I'd like to say. I am a Unix programmer - 10 years
now. I basically came over to the Mac recently - mainly because of
OSX. However, I'm sick of people characterising Unix users as wanting
extensions on files, or Unix somehow requiring extensions to work. Unix
has NEVER required extensions on file names. They have sometimes been
used in the past because there was no way to determine the type of a
file easily by just looking at it - no icon for one thing in the early
days. They're convenient from a terminal. But I have scripts on
Solaris at work without extensions - for example sh, perl, csh scripts
etc. Executable don't end in .exe. Text files are often without
extension such as README, INSTALL etc. Adobe FrameMaker on Solaris is
quite happy to save files as "My Letter". Don't think for one minute
that just because this is Unix underneath you need to throw out all the
usability ideals of the Mac.
Jamie