3 ms·
what a shitty comment. did you try to use some Adobe product on case sensitive version of HFS+? let me guess, no you didn't. because if you would, you would fin
by gondo 12y ago
what a shitty comment.
did you try to use some Adobe product on case sensitive version of HFS+?
let me guess, no you didn't. because if you would, you would find out that some programs simply doesnt work on case sensitive HFS+, most likely because people like you, who simply "know" whats better for end user
- durin42 12y agoIt's almost certainly a bug in a build script somewhere, and they're dynamically linking against something via the wrong name. I once linked against Quicktime.framework, and it worked on everything but my case-sensitive Mac. QuickTime.framework worked everywhere. So your Adobe example is flawed. They should be testing on case-sensitive volumes, but the vast majority of normal users don't want a file named README and readme in the same directory, and enforcing that invariant seems reasonable to me.
- tambourine_man 12y agoIt is a bad article. The author uses a quote from 2002 to criticize the Finder, in order to support his claim that today's Apple software is bad in general, and therefore HFS+ sucks. Which it does indeed, pretty badly. You would be hard pressed to find a worse FS still in use, excluding FAT, which will just never die. Except the article doesn't contribute to the discussion and the quotes from Linus are unfortunately not newsworthy. Instead of a deep critique, perhaps pointing what it should learn from Btrfs and ZFS, he acuses Apple of not shipping a consumer case sensitive FS and criticizes its string and slash encoding, which although bad, are successfully abstracted even from most developers. It then ends stating that Apple, like the weather, pays no attention to criticism. As empty an analysis as can be.