6 ms·

I hope we see a modern, case-sensitive filesystem, for once, without resource or data forks of any kind. Second, I hope we see better graphics, new OpenGL is a

by kunai 13y ago

I hope we see a modern, case-sensitive filesystem, for once, without resource or data forks of any kind. Second, I hope we see better graphics, new OpenGL is a must. Third, maybe a fresher UI similar to iTunes 11, would be nice. Aqua is dated. That's all I hope for. Just wait for it, the announcement is tomorrow. It's only 21 hours away... just wait.

dman 13y ago
+1 for newer opengl. 3.2 is from 2009 :(
- coldtea 13y ago
  So? Any particular thing you're missing in the desktop from OpenGL 4.x? Do people really play that many games on their Macs? And do they think 3.2 vs 4.x would make that much a difference? And it's not like 2009 is that back. If you want to see real pain, see us web people not being able to use 5+ year old CSS technologies without tricks because of lack of support, and having to use an almost unchanged for 15+ years JS language.
  - dman 13y ago
    ARB_sampler_objects, ARB_draw_indirect, ARB_tesselation_shader, compute shaders, opengl es compatibility, debug callbacks to name a few. Please do not justify brokenness by citing other brokenness.
packetslave 13y ago
The problem with modern, case-sensitive filesystems is that old software (and frameworks) don't like them. IIRC, case-sensitive HFS+ still isn't the default because Adobe software breaks if installed on it. Apple's not willing to say "sorry, you millions of Photoshop users, we're going to be technologically pure"
- nknighthb 13y ago
  The other problem is that nobody but change-resistant Unix geeks (of which I am one) want case-sensitive filesystems. To the average person, "John's grocery list" being different from "john's grocery list" would be nothing more than a silly limitation of the dumb computer.
kalininalex 13y ago
"case-sensitive filesystem" What is the business use case for a user to treat documents "Annual Report.docx" and "Annual report.docx" as absolutely different and unrelated?
coldtea 13y ago
>I hope we see a modern, case-sensitive filesystem, for once, without resource or data forks of any kind. How is a "case-sensitive" filesystem more ...modern? Case-sensitivity has fewer edge cases (I'll give you that, especially concerning Unicode), but it's really just us bending over to the way the computer sees files instead of the way people think about them. The files "accounts.xls" and "Accounts.xls" are not conceptually different. >without resource or data forks of any kind. Again, this is giving away tons of potential and actual benefits, features and uses, only to make it simpler for the developer of the filesystem and to enable better compatibility to cross-filesystems transfers. I'd rather see a standard way of handling resource/data-forks that is also implemented by Windows and Linux at least.
- kunai 13y ago
  When I switched to OS X from Linux, case sensitivity was a thing I missed dearly. I know that it's a fringe feature, and that even I don't use it much, but it irks me that it isn't there, especially when both ext4 and NTFS have it. It's more important considering Time Machine backups and actual UNIX moving and copying of files, and this is also where resource/data forks are also a huge burden. Unless OS X implements a different cp and mv than the standard FreeBSD ones, just implementing a filesystem without forking could be a solution. Also, case sensitivity is affected the same way. For the normal user, it's fine to keep a case-preserving filesystem. But, Apple needs to make sure developers write their apps with case-sensitivity in mind (I'm looking at YOU, Adobe).
  - nknighthb 13y ago
    NTFS "has" it, but it's only there to meet POSIX requirements. It's merely case-preserving in non-POSIX contexts, which ultimately means almost nobody uses it.
  - glhaynes 13y ago
    Unless OS X implements a different cp and mv than the standard FreeBSD ones, … It does (though it didn't before 10.4). There's still lots of code out there that doesn't respect them, no doubt, but to my knowledge you can use the built-ins without worrying about losing your resource forks.
Tloewald 13y ago
No data forks of an kind? The data fork of a file is ... the file. Mac OS X only supports resource forks as a legacy and I believe only through Carbon which is gone. Case sensitive file system? This is an advantage how? More modern how?
nextstep 13y ago
You can format your HD to be case-sensitive using DiskUtil. It's just set to case-insensitive be default.
seanmcdirmid 13y ago
File systems are an anachronism from when stored everything in filing cabinets (the original meaning of "file system"). Search and tagging have shown us a better way forward, we should just relegate file systems to behind the scenes work as they are on phones.
- kunai 13y ago
  While the naming is vestigial, the concept is not. Hierarchies are still the best way to navigate and organize data and objects, and search is only one component of that. It works on phones because phones have limited use cases. A computer needs to be general purpose.
  - seanmcdirmid 13y ago
    I don't think so, we just still stuck in the past. It is definitely quite reasonable to get rid of the file system as a user concern, how many people bother organizing their files into folders anyways? They would be better served by tagging and other enhanced meta-data to make search more effective.

by kunai 13y ago

dman 13y ago

+1 for newer opengl. 3.2 is from 2009 :(

coldtea 13y ago
So? Any particular thing you're missing in the desktop from OpenGL 4.x? Do people really play that many games on their Macs? And do they think 3.2 vs 4.x would make that much a difference? And it's not like 2009 is that back. If you want to see real pain, see us web people not being able to use 5+ year old CSS technologies without tricks because of lack of support, and having to use an almost unchanged for 15+ years JS language.
- dman 13y ago
  ARB_sampler_objects, ARB_draw_indirect, ARB_tesselation_shader, compute shaders, opengl es compatibility, debug callbacks to name a few. Please do not justify brokenness by citing other brokenness.

packetslave 13y ago

The problem with modern, case-sensitive filesystems is that old software (and frameworks) don't like them. IIRC, case-sensitive HFS+ still isn't the default because Adobe software breaks if installed on it. Apple's not willing to say "sorry, you millions of Photoshop users, we're going to be technologically pure"

nknighthb 13y ago
The other problem is that nobody but change-resistant Unix geeks (of which I am one) want case-sensitive filesystems. To the average person, "John's grocery list" being different from "john's grocery list" would be nothing more than a silly limitation of the dumb computer.

kalininalex 13y ago

"case-sensitive filesystem" What is the business use case for a user to treat documents "Annual Report.docx" and "Annual report.docx" as absolutely different and unrelated?

coldtea 13y ago

>I hope we see a modern, case-sensitive filesystem, for once, without resource or data forks of any kind. How is a "case-sensitive" filesystem more ...modern? Case-sensitivity has fewer edge cases (I'll give you that, especially concerning Unicode), but it's really just us bending over to the way the computer sees files instead of the way people think about them. The files "accounts.xls" and "Accounts.xls" are not conceptually different. >without resource or data forks of any kind. Again, this is giving away tons of potential and actual benefits, features and uses, only to make it simpler for the developer of the filesystem and to enable better compatibility to cross-filesystems transfers. I'd rather see a standard way of handling resource/data-forks that is also implemented by Windows and Linux at least.

kunai 13y ago
When I switched to OS X from Linux, case sensitivity was a thing I missed dearly. I know that it's a fringe feature, and that even I don't use it much, but it irks me that it isn't there, especially when both ext4 and NTFS have it. It's more important considering Time Machine backups and actual UNIX moving and copying of files, and this is also where resource/data forks are also a huge burden. Unless OS X implements a different cp and mv than the standard FreeBSD ones, just implementing a filesystem without forking could be a solution. Also, case sensitivity is affected the same way. For the normal user, it's fine to keep a case-preserving filesystem. But, Apple needs to make sure developers write their apps with case-sensitivity in mind (I'm looking at YOU, Adobe).
- nknighthb 13y ago
  NTFS "has" it, but it's only there to meet POSIX requirements. It's merely case-preserving in non-POSIX contexts, which ultimately means almost nobody uses it.
- glhaynes 13y ago
  Unless OS X implements a different cp and mv than the standard FreeBSD ones, … It does (though it didn't before 10.4). There's still lots of code out there that doesn't respect them, no doubt, but to my knowledge you can use the built-ins without worrying about losing your resource forks.

Tloewald 13y ago

No data forks of an kind? The data fork of a file is ... the file. Mac OS X only supports resource forks as a legacy and I believe only through Carbon which is gone. Case sensitive file system? This is an advantage how? More modern how?

nextstep 13y ago

You can format your HD to be case-sensitive using DiskUtil. It's just set to case-insensitive be default.

seanmcdirmid 13y ago

File systems are an anachronism from when stored everything in filing cabinets (the original meaning of "file system"). Search and tagging have shown us a better way forward, we should just relegate file systems to behind the scenes work as they are on phones.

kunai 13y ago
While the naming is vestigial, the concept is not. Hierarchies are still the best way to navigate and organize data and objects, and search is only one component of that. It works on phones because phones have limited use cases. A computer needs to be general purpose.
- seanmcdirmid 13y ago
  I don't think so, we just still stuck in the past. It is definitely quite reasonable to get rid of the file system as a user concern, how many people bother organizing their files into folders anyways? They would be better served by tagging and other enhanced meta-data to make search more effective.