Results 1 to 8 of 8
  1. #1

    unknown1's Avatar
    Member Since
    Feb 29, 2008
    Location
    Idaho, USA, Out in the Country Northwest of Boise
    Posts
    19
    Specs:
    Pismo 400MHz bought for $46
    Doesn't OS 9 Support Long Filenames?
    I thought I read somewhere that the later versions of OS 9 (9.1-9.22) were adapted to 'support long filenames for better compatability with OS X', I can't find it now.

    I have never been able to get OS 9+ to use anything but standard 32 character filenames. Is there something I am missing?

    A particularly annoying problem is transfering files from PC -> Mac or Mac -> PC. I mainly do this with MP3s over our home network. The file names longer than 32 characters are truncated with strange characters and the file extensions are never in tact. Is there a solution for this?

    I use Dave, TransMac, PC MacLAN (all old versions for OS 9 and no longer supported) and Web Sharing but nothing seems to handle this correctly.
    Sent with an Ancient 2000 Mac PowerBook Pismo
    Russell - Unknown1 - Idaho USA
    http://www.narrowgaugenews.net

  2. #2

    harryb2448's Avatar
    Member Since
    Nov 28, 2007
    Location
    Nambucca Heads Australia
    Posts
    21,709
    Specs:
    Imac 27" Retina 3.3GHz, 512GB Flash, 16GB memory, OS X.11.4.
    Thirty one characters in OS 9. Have a look at this link:-

    http://ez.no/ezpublish/documentation...9_and_mac_os_x

  3. #3

    Lifeisabeach's Avatar
    Member Since
    Sep 30, 2007
    Location
    The Republic of Neptune
    Posts
    7,725
    Quote Originally Posted by unknown1 View Post
    I thought I read somewhere that the later versions of OS 9 (9.1-9.22) were adapted to 'support long filenames for better compatability with OS X', I can't find it now.
    Here's what seems to be the definitive answer and explanation:

    "the HFS+ file system and mac os 9 support file names of upto 255 unicode characters, previous versions only supported 31 character names. but most applications do not yet support the longer names, the finder doesnt even support them. So, at this time you cant really use names longer than 31 characters, even though the underlying file system supports them."

    So basically yes, the OS supports "long" file names, but its own file manager (the Finder) doesn't, nor do "most" apps. You could try finding alternate ones that do... surely there must be something.

  4. #4

    unknown1's Avatar
    Member Since
    Feb 29, 2008
    Location
    Idaho, USA, Out in the Country Northwest of Boise
    Posts
    19
    Specs:
    Pismo 400MHz bought for $46
    There we go...
    Jobs and company were busy spending sooo much time on this OS X STUFF that they never FINISHED a good OS that only uses 50 Megs of memory!

    I wonder if there is anyone with enough skill (and cares )that they can build an extension to make the long file names work?

    While they're at it maybe rebuild OS 9 with protected memory and full preemptive multitasking! Should only take a minor extension or two...

    I guess I could just spend $39 on eBay and get the full OS X 10.3.9 install, but what would be the fun in that?

    Thanks for the info guys.
    Sent with an Ancient 2000 Mac PowerBook Pismo
    Russell - Unknown1 - Idaho USA
    http://www.narrowgaugenews.net

  5. #5


    Member Since
    Mar 11, 2004
    Posts
    1,964
    I wish someone would update 9's JavaScript and Flash. 9 is (or at least feels) twice as fast as X on my G4. Mozilla 3.1 certainly is twice as fast as Firefox.

  6. #6

    Lifeisabeach's Avatar
    Member Since
    Sep 30, 2007
    Location
    The Republic of Neptune
    Posts
    7,725
    Quote Originally Posted by Brown Study View Post
    I wish someone would update 9's JavaScript and Flash. 9 is (or at least feels) twice as fast as X on my G4. Mozilla 3.1 certainly is twice as fast as Firefox.
    And Safari 3.1 is nothing less than the fastest browser on the planet.

  7. #7

    harryb2448's Avatar
    Member Since
    Nov 28, 2007
    Location
    Nambucca Heads Australia
    Posts
    21,709
    Specs:
    Imac 27" Retina 3.3GHz, 512GB Flash, 16GB memory, OS X.11.4.
    Talking
    Quote Originally Posted by unknown1 View Post
    Jobs and company were busy spending sooo much time on this OS X STUFF that they never FINISHED a good OS that only uses 50 Megs of memory!

    Course they did. Ran OS 7.0.1 on an LC with 10MB RAM and 160MB HDD. Was a great improvement having that hard disc as previously used two x 1.4MB floppy disc drives!

  8. #8


    Member Since
    Mar 11, 2004
    Posts
    1,964
    I had a floppy containing OS 6 and Norton Disk Doctor that I'd use to boot and fix my LC running System 7.

    Why, regarding electronics, does everything except software, shrink? OSes and apps seem to follow a reverse Moore's Law.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Why doesn't my battery last long?
    By davyvfr in forum OS X - Operating System
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 09-03-2012, 02:23 PM
  2. USB 3 - How long will Apple take to support it?
    By Kevriano in forum Schweb's Lounge
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 10-02-2010, 07:54 PM
  3. How long will Apple support Tiger?
    By clint1986 in forum OS X - Operating System
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 03-21-2008, 10:31 PM
  4. Long Filenames
    By gselliott in forum OS X - Operating System
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 09-06-2006, 01:44 PM
  5. Replies: 5
    Last Post: 01-16-2005, 11:58 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •