Submit Hint Search The Forums LinksStatsPollsHeadlinesRSS
14,000 hints and counting!


Click here to return to the 'If you are going to reference Apple KB Articles...' hint
The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.
If you are going to reference Apple KB Articles...
Authored by: Dr. Galakowitz on Jun 17, '05 06:18:23PM

Check the DATE, PLEASE!

CatOne and high res, both of you have stated that Apple does not support Case Sensitive HFS booting on the client. In a word: WRONG! A year ago, yes, that was true.

High res, you have provide a link to a document to substantiate your claim.

May I refer you to the date on that KB article you referenced. Hmmm. Feb 6 2004. A year ago, it was only available and supported on the Server platform, so you could install it via the command line, but apple did not support it running on the client.

By referencing the kb article, are you trying to tell everyone here that KB article applies to Tiger, when Tiger didnt ship for another year? You have also stated there is NO way to reformat the disk in CS HFS+. There is, and it's called Disk Utility. It is available when formatting a disk, not erasing a volume.

Just because you think something is ugly or stupid, does not mean it is. For folks migrating from UNIX systems, HFSX is critical. Imagine having to tweak 15 years of code, just to move to a new box. For some developers, we could not migrate them to the Mac until this FS was available as a SUPPORTED option in the client OS. Why is 15 years of code base important to preserve? If it's being used on a system that might be in operation that long without the ability for upgrade, such as a satellite, there is a critical need for that code to work as the technology under it changes.

To set the record straight, poorly written apps are not the reason. Almost all of the UNIX world has been given the luxury of case sensitivity in their filesystems since the early days of system V. So because they took advantage of this feature, they are bad coders? Give me a break.

So since you both obviously don't understand why this is important and granted you may not have a need to support some mission critical system, here's the point: If Apple touts that Mac OS X is UNIX, then it has to look and breathe and act like UNIX. HFS+ does not. HFSX does. Developers such as Adobe have seed copies of the OS, long before it ships. Is there a failure in Apple Developer Relations for not highlighting this new feature? You betcha. Is there a failure in Adobe's expectations that not much has changed on the filesystem front? Ditto. So Apple is at fault for not shouting core filesystem changes from the rooftops and Adobe for not "fully exploring the beta." However, the end user is not at fault for wanting the mac to behave like a unix box if Apple touts it as a UNIX workstation replacement.

So when commenting on a hint, please remember that not everyone out there is using the computer in the way you are accustomed to, and that there are no stupid hints. If there is a way to tweak the system configuration ( and this includes using HFSX), there is probably a good reason to do so.



[ Reply to This | # ]