Software Uninstallation :::
was wondering, on mac os x, software is installed neatly into their own folders, and when you want to uninstall them, you just toss them into the trash......
two questions:
was it also like this on previous mac os's?
if i install a os 9 application on mac os x [running it in classic], do i delete the program the same way [into the trash] without worrying about the program itself leaving "left overs" on my system?
thanks!
two questions:
was it also like this on previous mac os's?
if i install a os 9 application on mac os x [running it in classic], do i delete the program the same way [into the trash] without worrying about the program itself leaving "left overs" on my system?
thanks!
Comments
Truth be told, you still have to do some of that in OS X, but the files are typically so small that unless you're just a neat freak, it won't make a difference. For example, applications in OS X create a preference file for each user, so you would have to go into your library folder and toss out the leftover preference file to erase all remnants of the app. Some apps also create license info, various kinds of application support, even their own folders in the user's library folder.
So like in System 6, ideally you can just toss the application icon and be done with it, but in reality there is still miscellaneous stuff left around, just not stuff that's as important/dangerous as extensions.
in mac os x, when the applications throw itself into various libraries & what not, are they easy to pick out & delete? [somewhat familiar with it, via linux]
thanks!
Watch this video clip (only 1 MB).
<a href="http://brad.project-think.com/movies/FinderSnap003.mov"; target="_blank">http://brad.project-think.com/movies/FinderSnap003.mov</a>;
The only apps that install other files are usually the big ones like Adobe Photoshop or Microsoft Office or LightWave or Cinema 4D... you know, the *big* apps. However, even with these, most of the related files are contained in just two places: the folder for the app itself and the Library folder. Adobe Photoshop, for example, puts the app together with a plugins folder and a presets folders, but it also puts some things like fonts and the spellcheck system in a folder called "Adobe" in your /Library/Application Support folder.
For the majority of the apps you encounter, though, uninstalling is as simple as that video clip. There won't be any ".DLL"-like libraries tossed anywhere and there's nothing like a registry to keep track of it all.
Welcome to Macintosh!
[ 05-30-2002: Message edited by: starfleetX ]</p>
And you don't have to worry about tossing anything in your library folder and breaking your system. Worst case: you can lose settings and sometimes customized stuff, but you won't kill your computer. For example, the app Create tossed a folder in my home library called, you guessed it, "Create." It has any custom items like blends or effects I saved in the app's resources widow. That's the worst case, and easily avoidable since everything is pretty logically marked, usually in their own folders or sub-folders.
Finally, some application installers (if the app even has one) also uninstall too. So if you deleted the installer, download it again and you might be able to choose "custom install" and "uninstall" as an option.
[ 05-30-2002: Message edited by: BuonRotto ]</p>
for applications where it's not as easy as in the video above, how would you uninstall it? is the icon embedded in the application's folder?
When you install an application, do you run the application's installer or do you simply just move it's folder over to the folder you want to put it in, on your system?
Is there a program that can keep track of where an application spits it's application-related files to?
<strong>for applications where it's not as easy as in the video above, how would you uninstall it? is the icon embedded in the application's folder?</strong><hr></blockquote>It's as easy as this.
<a href="http://brad.project-think.com/movies/uninstalling-2.mov"; target="_blank">http://brad.project-think.com/movies/uninstalling-2.mov</a>;
[quote]<strong>do you run the application's installer or do you simply just move it's folder over to the folder you want to put it in, on your system?</strong><hr></blockquote>Usually it's a drag-and-drop process, but there are a handful of apps that (poor choice, in my opinion) require you to use an installer. Usually its the apps with installers that may put files in other locations.
are all executable files on the mac have an .exe extension?
thanks starfleet! much help!
<strong>
are all executable files on the mac have an .exe extension?</strong><hr></blockquote>
No, most don't have extensions at all. Neither do many files, and some would argue that this is the way it should be. Some programs have a .app extension, but you'll probably never see it. Applications are distinguished by their icons, which tend to be more descriptive and obvious than on Windows. And since apps are normally self-contained, you won't really have to worry about distinguishing between apps, readmes, data files, etc.
[edit: better picture]
[ 05-31-2002: Message edited by: BuonRotto ]</p>
example:
if i have an icon [let's say a picture of a sun], can I use that icon as the icon for ALL jpg files?
where do i make that the preference?
[ 05-31-2002: Message edited by: Fluffy ]</p>
Someone else will have to fill you in on them since I don't know what they are.
Thanks for all the info. ;-)
Get ready for a trip down memory lane...
For generic files that OS X just can't identify, it uses the plain doc icon.
That's the easy part. Now it gets tricky.
There are two ways you can identify a file: by the extension or by the type and creator codes. The type and creator codes are bits of data stored invisibly in files saved on a Mac (with an HFS or HFS+ formatted drive). The type code is a four-character code (similar to the DOS filename extensions) that identifies what kind of file it is (QuickTime movie is MooV, JPEG is JPEG, plain text is TEXT). The creator code is a unique four-character code that identifies what program created that file (Photoshop is 8BIM, GraphicConverter is GKON, Audion is Audn). These codes are supposed to be registered with Apple so that multiple apps won't use the same code.
What does all that mean? Well, I'll get to that in a minute...
The method you are familiar with is to choose the icon by the extension. Let's say I have a JPEG image. I have several apps that can open it though, including OmniWeb, GraphicConverter, Photoshop, Internet Explorer, Preview, QuickTime Player, and a dozen others. Well, like Windows, Mac OS will have a "preferred" app for opening these kinds of files (assuming there is no type/creator code) that you can set yourself. I have set GraphicConverter as the default app to handle jpg images, so this file inherits GC's icon.
Here you can also see where you can change the default handling. To get this window, simply select a file and choose "Show Info" from the File menu.
That's like what you're probably accustomed to with Windows.
For as long as I can remember, though, Mac OS has had a different approach to handling files. Macs have never had to deal with file extensions until recent years and the need to exchange Windows-based files from the Internet. How did it work? Well, each file was assigned a type and creator code as I mentioned before. The system dynamically kept track of what codes belonged to what apps (nothing dirty like the Windows registry). If I created a picture in Photoshop and saved it in the jpeg format, it would use Photoshop's jpeg icon. If I created it in GraphicConverter, it would use its icon. This was a boon for many users because it meant that you could have different files of the same type but they would open with their respective parent applications when double-clicked.
Of course, just because the default handler for the second file was Photoshop doesn't mean GK can't open it -- it's just that Photoshop is, well, the default for specifically that file.
This is the secondary method that Mac OS X uses to identify files and choose their icons. If a file was created by a Mac application, it will probably have the type and creator codes so it doesn't need an extension to determine how it will be handled.
However, in recent months, Apple seems to be abandoning the type/creator method. Cocoa apps, IIRC, do not have a default way of setting these codes. Thus, new apps have to rely on the clunky file extensions.
It's all quite a mess right now.
There has been an ongoing debate for quite some time. There are some people that want Apple to stick by the type/creator codes but there are others who want to give in to depending on DOS filename extensions. There are others still who insist Apple should build a new filesystem that uses MIME codes to identify files.
*whew* I hope that makes some sense...
[ 05-31-2002: Message edited by: starfleetX ]</p>
for mac os x , does it still use hfs [hfs+]?
what filing system did mac os 9 use?
on a machine with os 9 and os x on it, how does the two filing systems work?
about the file types....
is the "show info" preference where i can make ALL file types have the same icon, despite having different creator/type codes?
<strong>is the "show info" preference where i can make ALL file types have the same icon, despite having different creator/type codes?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Well... that's not really how the OS works. If there is a creator code, then the OS uses it. For generic types like jpgs or tiffs most files don't have a creator code, but many programs will add it. There is no way that I know of to guarantee that every file of a single type will have the same icon. This is just how the MacOS works... it is considered a benefit to know which program "owns" a particular file, regardless of type, and to assign different files of the same type to separate applications and to know which will open when the file is double-clicked.
If this bothers you then you can batch-change the default application for large groups of files, again using the "Get Info" command:
Once again, this system is currently in a state of flux, and nobody outside of Apple really knows how it will turn out.
for graphic files, i'd want all of my files to look the same & open the same.......
::::
even if i put os9 [classic] on a separate partition, can I use UFS still?
is UFS the most advised for os x? [over hfs+]