Re: Mac d/l for Apple2 GS forked files need help

[supertimer@aol.com (Supertimer)]

buchner@freenet.msp.mn.us (Greg Buchner) wrote:

>supertimer@aol.com (Supertimer) wrote:
>
>>Greg, kindly put that namecalling voice aside.  Just because someone
>>(me in this case) takes the time to answer someone's question does
>>not mean I am trying to put on airs or what...
>
>Well sorry, that's how you came across to me....

I suppose we've all been a little agitated lately...you by Nathan Mates'
anti-Macintosh posts and me by the upteenth time someone thought
GS programs WITHIN an archive needed forks removed (I honestly
think that everytime someone mentions that forks need to be
removed from a archive file for 8-BIT shrinkit should also have some
documentation telling people that FORKS WITHIN an archive DON'T
need to be removed but need GS SHRINKIT)...

>>I've run the four files through 8-bit unbinscii and it worked, so what's
>>the big deal?  The original archive of GS Shrinkit itself IS NOT an
>>extended file...8-bit unbinscii handles it FINE...what's the big deal? He
>>never said he did not have 8-bit unbinscii...if he didn't, I would have
>>pointed him in the right direction.  Come to think of it, he never said
>>he didn't have Protype either!
>
>OK, how do you get those text files over to a GS without a resource fork
>being attached?  When I just copy them over, they have a resource fork
>and the P8 version of binscii won't touch it.

Greg, forget Nathan Mates' editorialism for a minute and go back to
read what Tim wrote...he said he could not get past 8-bit Shrinkit's
"can't extract forked file" message.  Logically, if he got to that
message, he MUST have been able to get the files over to the GS
with the forks already stripped.  How does he get the forks stripped?
Could be either AppleTalk or Protype, but the point is, THAT'S NOT
HIS PROBLEM!  Unless Tim posts otherwise, I don't see what's
wrong with my suggestion...he'd just get the binsciied files the
same way he got the original .shk files and the forks should be
off those text files...once he gets GS Shrinkit, he can deal with
forks WITHIN as well as ON the archive...

>I for one like ProTYPE...it's easier to run.  I have never had a problem
>when using ProTYPE and it's far more convenient.  I know everything has
>the correct filetype.  I like having the correct filetype and so do most
>programs.

I have nothing against ProTYPE except the idea that it is a
complete necessity once you have GS Shrinkit and the NDA
unbinsciier.  For someone who does not or can't set helper
apps (like if the computer was not yours), ProTYPE represents
an extra step that's not needed by GS Shrinkit.  Again, I have
nothing against ProTYPE...I am just saying it is not an either
or...if you have GS Shrinkit, you don't need it (but can use it
if you like to set the correct type, auto debinscii, etc.)...

>Thinking about it, I'd also have to say that part of my response was from
>reading Nathan's post.
>
>Nathan, if you don't like the Macintosh, fine, don't like, but don't put
>it down...it just makes you look like the twelve year old that everybody
>seems to claim you are.  I for one, happen to be a Mac user that enjoys
>both the Mac and my Apple II's...and would rather bang my head against
>a brick wall that use Win95/NT and could absolutely care less about any
>sort of a unix variant.

I agree.  I suggest before you transfer your "respond to Nathan"
anger to me, read my followup to him...I said about the exact
same thing in different words to him.  ;-)

Actually, Nathan rants about Win 95 users too...he thinks everyone
should use Linux.  He does rant against Macintosh more than
anything else, though...