Combuster wrote:
The desired end result as described would look something like the following:
Code:
Dir "c:\program files\"
app1 -> filesystem_1\program files\app1
app2 -> filesystem_1\program files\app2
game1 -> filesystem_2\program files\game1
game2 -> filesystem_3\program files\game2
Are you saying here that e.g. "/app1" would map to "filesystem_1/program files/app1"? Or what? Sorry but it's a bit cryptic to me.
Combuster wrote:
On an *nix system it's completely possible to demonstrate this with symlinks, and you can actually move around stuff without anything noticing by copying a folder to a different filesystem and pointing the symlinks to the new location.
True, symbolic links are another way to deal with the issue, although I think using them would be a bit more complicated than what I have in mind. To me it's still a question of 1) what common use cases exist for home desktop computer users and 2) what would be too confusing for the average home desktop computer user.
Combuster wrote:
The real problems start to occur when you try to move something that's in use, or when a power failure happens. The system you'd probably make would need to take care of such scenario's at a more fundamental level, and you'll have to break with current implementations somewhere to make this work safely and transparently.
To be honest, those issues are way off my radar. But as I mentioned in my OP, I'm not worried in the slightest about breaking with current implementations. I'm not trying to make a Windows clone, a Unix clone, or any other kind of clone.
Combuster wrote:
Typical windows installs gather so much junk that many people are better off reinstalling it.
I'm not sure what you mean by this, sorry.
Combuster wrote:
Beyond that, it takes some good design of both user interface and implementation for this to be ever workable for end users. Most programmers can't deal with my mom as an end user.
Agreed, but I think that's another issue entirely. What I'm thinking right now is that the Unix model (i.e. unified file system) is at least marginally more flexible, the CP/M model (i.e. each file system presented separately) may be more transparent - and thus easier to use - for home desktop computer users, in spite of the lesser flexibility.
Quote:
There'll probably be a need, as even I have had that problem on occasion. The question is if your time is better spent on making the world a better place elsewhere.
Whether my time is better spent on making the world a better place elsewhere is entirely up to me.