FreeLists / openbeos / [openbeos] Re: OT Re: drive letter vs. mounten

["Axel Dörfler" <axeld@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

"theUser BL" <theuserbl@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I only say, that a not mounted drive (like under MS-Windows/DOS), 
> have some 
> advantages.

Windows 2000 and up mounts its volumes like every other OS out there.
It has just the automatic approach that it tries to mount a volume when 
you access its drive letter - those letters are just links in the 
system. For floppies, it obviously continuously checks if the disc has 
been removed or replaced and unmounts/remounts the volume as needed.
Both can be easily added to a BeOS like system without too much impact 
(and in fact, something similar is already planned).

But neither drive letters nor amiga-like device names will be 
introduced to it. If you want to have those, you can create them 
manually (like you even have to do on the Amiga - you specify the 
device names yourself (harddisk config or via the DosDrivers 
mountlist).

Say you have 3 CD-ROM like devices in your computer (one plain CD-ROM, 
one CD-Burner, one DVD-ROM), and you put one CD in.
Is it any user-friendly that you have to choose between three always 
accessible disk icons all by yourself? Isn't it much nicer that a new 
icon with the real name of the CD pops up without irritating you with 
two useless icons? 
If you really prefer the former, you should consider just staying in 
Windows and be happy with its inferior design (in this particular case) 
:)

Adios...
   Axel.