Well i just got the new G5 mac(the one that is just a screen, no box). Then I had a cool idea for a TC: EVE. I had already made two ship models from the game just for fun, so I downloaded Nova, re registered it, got all the utilities I thought I would need, and then...downloaded Res Edit, only to find that it only runs on classic!!!! How can I make my TC with no res edit??
btw this comp can't go into classic mode.
Do you mean you can't boot into OS 9, or that you can't launch the Classic emulator? ResEdit works just fine for me in the built-in Classic emulator...all you need is OS 9.2.2 installed.
EVE is an interesting game, as far as I heard, but I don't have any experiences with it.
If you want to take a look, go to www.eve-online.com
However, it is Windows only.
This is not the first time someone asks for a ResEdit X.
The sad truth is, however, that this will never come to happen. The reason is simple, ResEdit is a resource editor. MacOS X, however, doesn't use resources. They died with MacOS 9. Thus, a resource editor for MacOS X would be complete nonsense. That's why there's never going to be one.
Best is you use EVONE and Mission Computer. Be careful about EVONE, though, as it has problems running under MacOS 10.3. It keeps crashing and such a crash corrupts the entire program.
And BTW, working with ResEdit under Classic isn't so terrible. In some cases, NovaTools still has a better interface than EVONE or Mission Computer.
Arion, on Jan 22 2005, 07:36 PM, said:
The sad truth is, however, that this will never come to happen. The reason is simple, ResEdit is a resource editor. MacOS X, however, doesn't use resources. They died with MacOS 9. Thus, a resource editor for MacOS X would be complete nonsense. That's why there's never going to be one.
Rubbish. At least that's what Apple would like you to think, just like OSX is not supposed to use creator or type codes other an extensions, but it does. Carbon applications DEPEND on resources (take Nova for example) just to function; in fact, resources are used to distinguish CFM, Mach-O and cocoa applications. Then there's the PowerPlant framework which is used to produce Carbon apps using Constructor, a resource editor.
And you know the snazzy Finder under OSX? It's actually a carbon program and uses quite a few resources.
Any company that could release a cheap ResEdit replacement would be guaranteed a market, but so far, the only OSX alternative is Resourcer which is ludicrously expensive. Who said monopolies were a good thing?
What about ResFool? OS X native, template support.
Carbon programs aren't really a good argument because they only exist to be compatible with OS 9. OS X programs do use resources, but they're stored in the data fork rather than the resource fork. ResFool can edit these types of resources too.
tycho61uk, on Jan 22 2005, 07:41 PM, said:
Rubbish. At least that's what Apple would like you to think, just like OSX is not supposed to use creator or type codes other an extensions, but it does. Carbon applications DEPEND on resources (take Nova for example) just to function; in fact, resources are used to distinguish CFM, Mach-O and cocoa applications. Then there's the PowerPlant framework which is used to produce Carbon apps using Constructor, a resource editor.
And you know the snazzy Finder under OSX? It's actually a carbon program and uses quite a few resources.
Any company that could release a cheap ResEdit replacement would be guaranteed a market, but so far, the only OSX alternative is Resourcer which is ludicrously expensive. Who said monopolies were a good thing?
View Post
Thank you. This crap about ResourceForks being useless is bugging me.
If people would stop develeoping so much stuff on OSX, I'd be much happier. Not everyone can afford to upgrade their computers every few months, and some of my friends still use machines that can't run X.
Macs were built for durability, so thinking everyone will buy a new computer every other year and get completely new software as soon as it comes out is just completely stupid. I'm counting on my new iBook G4 to last until the middle stages of the G6s. One of my friends still uses a 10 year old Performa. Rik (rmx256) once told me his desktop computer was something like 9-10 years old with a few small hardware upgrades.
Well, have fun modifying the Sherlock then.
Seriously, resources are dead. If not, then they're dying. The only reason why they're still in use is that there are still programs that don't work on MacOS X.
Apple of course couldn't completely deny any non-X programs.
Guy, I never encountered any resources in MacOS X applications. In fact, they generally are packages.
Anaxagoras, I never said they're useless.
Guy, on Jan 23 2005, 01:28 AM, said:
Carbon programs aren't really a good argument because they only exist to be compatible with OS 9. OS X programs do use resources, but they're stored in the data fork rather than the resource fork.
View Post
Again, not quite true. CFM-Carbon apps were introduced for this purpose. But Mach-O Carbon apps run only on OSX. There's a good reason for this. If you've every tried doing any OSX programming with graphics, you will know that the core foundation and appkit calls a slow. Very slow. This is because Quartz, OSX's graphics subsystem, is a workstation-class API which can do wonderful things, but lacks the sheer speed of QuickDraw. So if you're making a game, and don't want to work via OpenGL, using Carbon and the old QuickDraw system is the only practical option.
Every commercial mac game I've seen has been built using Carbon.
Data and Resource forks are simply different categories of the same thing, so switching resources from one to the other hardly achieve anything.
I suspect Apple planned to ditch traditional resources because of the 16mb limit, and because anyone with a copy of ResEdit could hack the system software. Windows also uses resources, although they are stored differently and their are few resource editors available.
I always liked the resource philosopy- modular sections of, well, resources that the system could invoke and do away with on an as-needed basis, as opposed to loading huge tracts of code into memory. It was what seperated Mac and PC for me.
I guess these modern new-fangled computers with thier gigs of ram don't need such practicality.
Lindley, on Jan 22 2005, 02:10 AM, said:
However, ResEdit was the easiest way to import graphics....I'm sure it's possible in MC, but I haven't found it easy.
View Post
Have you taken a look at the Resource Copier, in the Utilities menu?
rmx256, on Jan 23 2005, 02:46 PM, said:
I guess these modern new-fangled computers with thier gigs of ram don't need such practicality.
View Post
Well, it's true. These days, RAM is relatively cheap, so in Algorithms classes, they teach you---always go with the memory-intensive but fast algorithm, over the memory-light but slower one.
Arion, on Jan 23 2005, 10:56 AM, said:
Guy, I never encountered any resources in MacOS X applications. In fact, they generally are packages.
View Post
Check the iTunes package. In the resources folder is a file called iTunes.rsrc. This is full of resources in the data fork.
rmx256, on Jan 23 2005, 02:46 PM, said:
I always liked the resource philosopy- modular sections of, well, resources that the system could invoke and do away with on an as-needed basis, as opposed to loading huge tracts of code into memory. It was what seperated Mac and PC for me.
View Post
Yeah, I guess packages sort of accomplish a similar thing. I like being able to open something up and have a look at all the stuff inside. That's what I like about resources and I can do that with packages too.
