Resource or 8.3?

[MultiFinder]

Mac OS X seems to be a little confused as to what it should use to open files. It seems to be able to use both the antiquated 8.3 naming scheme to tell it what app to use, and it also is able to use the resource fork when there's no file name extension. Which does OS X really use, or does it use both?

For example, my Documents folder is a hodgepodge of files, some using the 8.3 naming scheme, others using the classic naming scheme. And they all still open. I love it, but it is rather confusing. Which does OS X prefer?

 

[iMac600]

I think OS X uses the 3 character file extension, it just hides it by default. You can usually see it by using "Get Info".

 

[MultiFinder]

I think that OS X can use the resource fork. Isn't that how it can launch Classic applications while Classic isn't running?

Besides, I see no sign of the .doc here:

http://img102.imageshack.us/img102/5029/picture2aw1.png

Some things about OS X still confuse me... :-/

 

[The Macster]

I thought when you make a file on OS X it doesn't include the extension by default, but there's sometimes an option to include it, presumably for Windows compatibility for the same reason as downloaded files always have extension - if a Windows user downloads the file, it will only be recognised by Windows if it has an extension. Maybe Macs use the resource fork, but can also use the extensions as a fallback, for instance if someone sends you a file from Windows that of course has an extension but no resource fork? If you rename the file to remove the extension, it still recognises the type I think.

 

[bluekatt]

hmm not quite i just removed the .doc from a ms word document instead of opening ms word text editor opend te file

 

[~tl]

You can show/hide the file extension in a file's Get Info window...

 

[equill]

You can show/hide the file extension in a file's Get Info window...

'Hide' is indeed the expression, which implies that it remains attached. Try to change the extension in OS X, or append one when it seems that there is not one present, and you will quickly get a stern upbraid from Finder, and a prediction of dire consequences if you do not mend your ways forthwith.

One has to suspect that OS X Finder does add extensions by default. Your choice is only whether you choose to show them or not. If you have the will and the stamina, this may provide light, or obscurity, according to your taste.

de

 

[~tl]

'Hide' is indeed the expression, which implies that it remains attached. Try to change the extension in OS X, or append one when it seems that there is not one present, and you will quickly get a stern upbraid from Finder, and a prediction of dire consequences if you do not mend your ways forthwith.
One has to suspect that OS X Finder does add extensions by default. Your choice is only whether you choose to show them or not ...

Also, since if you change the extension of a file to something else, it'll open with that application. For example, if you change a text file's extension to .mp3, it'll open with QT/iTunes.

However, there are still resource forks under OS X. There are hidden ._filename files when you store OS X files on a Windows formatted disk files which are the resource forks. Not quite sure what's stored in them though.

 

[MultiFinder]

If you have the will and the stamina, this may provide light, or obscurity, according to your taste.
de

Ooooo! Thanks for the link!

 

[Charlieman]

Daring Fireball had a pretty good rant about creator types versus filename extensions a few years ago.

 

[gobabushka]

the finder does add the file extension, because if you go to change the extension, it pops up a window asking u if u really want to do this