or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac OS X › What Windows Features Do You Want In OS X?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

What Windows Features Do You Want In OS X?

post #1 of 169
Thread Starter 
Me?

1) Multi-user sessions (being able to log-out with active processes and apps while another user logs in on the same computer locally)

2) System Restore (Being able to grab a snap-shot in the past and revoke the system to that state)

3) NTFS-like filesystem? (Still learning...)

4) Better terminal/remote services

5) Wizards! (just kidding)

6) Faster boot times ala XP

7) Market share!
A friend will help you move, but a REAL FRIEND will help you move a body.
Reply
A friend will help you move, but a REAL FRIEND will help you move a body.
Reply
post #2 of 169
I'd like it if they could do something like OLE... but much improved.

I'd like it if they could do something like Remote Desktop... but much improved.



[ 01-15-2003: Message edited by: BuonRotto ]</p>
post #3 of 169
I second multi-user sessions

Beyond that, nothing I can think of at the moment.
post #4 of 169
if i'd said it once i've said it a million times, OS ...X has no .dll's how are we supposed to stop programs from working or scour the internet for them when they get corrupted or deleted?! <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />

...illegal operations, need more of those too

...weird bugs that happen for no reason would help too

...active desktop, i've always wanted one :eek:

honestly though, multi user session would be nice...MS did something good for once i'd say
0 People Found This Reply Helpful
Reply
0 People Found This Reply Helpful
Reply
post #5 of 169
1) speed

2) application stability

3) speed

4) applications that work

5) did I mention speed?
post #6 of 169
[quote]Originally posted by neurokid:
<strong>1) speed

2) application stability

3) speed

4) applications that work

5) did I mention speed?</strong><hr></blockquote>

OS X isn't stable enough for you?!

...and what computer are you using, 10.2.3 is almost as fast as 9 on a 733MHz G4, so i would imagine on a newmachine it is blazing
0 People Found This Reply Helpful
Reply
0 People Found This Reply Helpful
Reply
post #7 of 169
sure, the OS is stable. but the apps are not.

and as for speed...I just don't get why everyone on this site thinks this OS is so blazing fast. I have 2 laptops: an 800 MHz TiBook running OSX and a 2GHz Dell running XP. The TiBook has 1 GB RAM, the Dell 512 MB. Both laptops have the same graphics card. Both have a 40GB 5400 rpm HD. And I can tell you, the Dell outperforms the TiBook in almost every respect -- both in speed and stability. It's not just a little better -- it's really insanely better. And this is coming from a Mac guy who has bashed PCs and Windows since before I can remember.

don't get me wrong. I love OS X, and I think it has a lot of potential. and it's definitely come a long way since 10.0. It's just no reason to "switch"...yet.

[quote]Originally posted by ast3r3x:
<strong>

OS X isn't stable enough for you?!

...and what computer are you using, 10.2.3 is almost as fast as 9 on a 733MHz G4, so i would imagine on a newmachine it is blazing</strong><hr></blockquote>
post #8 of 169
[quote]Originally posted by neurokid:
<strong>sure, the OS is stable. but the apps are not.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Your apps aren't stable. My (mostly Cocoa) apps are effectively uncrashable.

And the system is speedy here. I think people confuse the Finder with the system.
post #9 of 169
and I think that the people who think this OS is fast and stable aren't really using applications

[quote]Originally posted by BuonRotto:
<strong>

Your apps aren't stable. My (mostly Cocoa) apps are effectively uncrashable.

And the system is speedy here. I think people confuse the Finder with the system.</strong><hr></blockquote>
post #10 of 169
XP is not fast. I've had to use it the past couple days and it makes my Ti667 seem downright snappy. I'm not sure what the proc is on the dell that I've got to use, but it's definitely some piv.
post #11 of 169
[quote]Originally posted by BuonRotto:
<strong>

Your apps aren't stable. My (mostly Cocoa) apps are effectively uncrashable.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Try your hand @ illlustrator and photoshop.... but that's adobe's problem, not apple's.

I'd like an MS SQL enterprise manager and MS Access app (and stable adobe apps).. Other than that 10.2 is DA BOMB! ^_^
"I've learned there's more to life than being really, really, really, really, really, really, ridiculously good-looking. :-x" - Zoolander
~:My scraps:~
Reply
"I've learned there's more to life than being really, really, really, really, really, really, ridiculously good-looking. :-x" - Zoolander
~:My scraps:~
Reply
post #12 of 169
Networking.

Window's network neighbourhood is much more user-friendly than Apple's connect to server option...

other than that, Apple rules!!
iSurf, iSaw and iType
Reply
iSurf, iSaw and iType
Reply
post #13 of 169
The system can hardly be blamed if companies are making buggy software. And now that they won't trash the system, I'm happy!

I've had a few app crashes in the last 12 day uptime, but nothing has touched the system, including photoshop.
post #14 of 169
[quote]Originally posted by dstranathan:
<strong>Me?

1) Multi-user sessions (being able to log-out with active processes and apps while another user logs in on the same computer locally)

2) System Restore (Being able to grab a snap-shot in the past and revoke the system to that state)

3) NTFS-like filesystem? (Still learning...)

4) Better terminal/remote services

5) Wizards! (just kidding)

6) Faster boot times ala XP

7) Market share!</strong><hr></blockquote>

1) Definitly want this!

2) Why? If you want to do a Backup, backup /Library and ~/Library to each a DiskCopy .dmg file. If you really want to backup all apps too, you can also do that. System Restore is a lame excuse for no stable driver architecture.

3) Why? Yes, OS X could need a file system abstraction layer like Linux has it, but NTFS really isn't that good of a file system. Or do you mean *access* to NTFS file systems on external devices etc., like it's supposedly already available for FAT32? Then I'm all for it.

4) I don't know how well Apple Remote Desktop works, but there's always VNC, too...

5) Haha.

6) You've been brainwashed.

7) Haha.
post #15 of 169
Yeah, but at the end of the day, it's the software and how much work you can get done that matters.

[quote]Originally posted by Code Master:
<strong>The system can hardly be blamed if companies are making buggy software. And now that they won't trash the system, I'm happy!

I've had a few app crashes in the last 12 day uptime, but nothing has touched the system, including photoshop.</strong><hr></blockquote>
post #16 of 169
[quote]Originally posted by neurokid:
<strong>and I think that the people who think this OS is fast and stable aren't really using applications

</strong><hr></blockquote>

I do. Things are VERY stable for me. Much better than my experiences on Windoze. Chimera crashes once in a while. It's beta software. That's about it.
post #17 of 169
I've mentioned this about OS 9 and I hoped that OS X might have something like this...

In an Open or Save window...control or right click...



This would make my life in OS X a lot easier...maybe not ALL those options but I hate this one issue in OS 9 & OS X.
I AM THE Royal Pain in the Ass.
Reply
I AM THE Royal Pain in the Ass.
Reply
post #18 of 169
GOD NO that menu is absolute hell look at it ARGHHH. i want for no windows feature, i love osx how it is its wonderful
post #19 of 169
Actually, while I'm not a fan of Finder-like file management in Open/Save dialogs, I do like the ability to save over documents by clicking their name in the save dialog. I know it's destructive and dangerous, so maybe there's a better way.

Also, adding a "Find" function to open/save dialogs is a good idea too. I know that Find item in that context menu only finds stuff in a separate window, but it would be very nice functionality to be able to find a folder or file within the dialog. It obviously helps when looking for a certain file to open, and it is a nice option when saving files too, instead of jumping all over the HD in pursuit of some place you put stuff six months ago.

[ 01-16-2003: Message edited by: BuonRotto ]</p>
post #20 of 169
[quote]Originally posted by sushiism:
<strong>GOD NO that menu is absolute hell look at it ARGHHH. i want for no windows feature, i love osx how it is its wonderful</strong><hr></blockquote>

You just don't get it...

I like the fact that I can open, rename, delete, copy, cut, send, and view the properties of folders and files in Windows. I don't like this idea that the very same folders and files are unatainable at all in OS X! They are my files and I should do with them what I will...not have a "pane of glass" preventing me from them.

And of course the menu in OS X would look the same as the one would see if one control/right clicked on anything on the desktop.

Get over your Windows adversions...some of the features Windows has are good.
I AM THE Royal Pain in the Ass.
Reply
I AM THE Royal Pain in the Ass.
Reply
post #21 of 169
Specifically: the only thing I miss about using Windows full-time (from a six month stint using NT a few years ago) was the ability to "grab" a name from an Open/Save dialog and use it in the Save name field. That was invaluable timesaver, esp. when working on a web site with hundreds of similarly but slightly different named files.

(And yup, I've sent this in to OS X Feedback. No doubt it's #8,856 on their to-do list, if at all.)

More generally: more of the functionality of Windows Open/Save dialogs, though with less the clutteredness and complexity.

The clever speedy user switching from XP would be a very nice addition, too, of course. But not that's not in OS X out of choice.
post #22 of 169
[quote] But not that's not in OS X out of choice.<hr></blockquote>No, I believe it has something to do with when the UIServer loads. Its not the same process as Nextstep.
four more beers, four more beers
Reply
four more beers, four more beers
Reply
post #23 of 169
Ah, good point re: getting properties or info about files/folders in the open/save dialog. Add that to my post above.

My previous comment got me thinking a bit about having some way to find stuff based on how long ago you used it. It might be nice to have some function to find something you worked on six months ago along with whatver else you worked on in that time frame, sort of Very Old Items as opposed to Recent Items. Add to that some ability for the Finder to know what was burned when (this might be cumbersome), and it could tell you that it was backed up on Jan 1, 2001 with x, y, and z to a CD-R named "Old Stuff."

Of course, I'm getting away from Windows functionality too at this point so I'll save it for the 10.3 thread.
post #24 of 169
[quote]Originally posted by BuonRotto:
<strong>Actually, while I'm not a fan of Finder-like file management in Open/Save dialogs, I do like the ability to save over documents by clicking their name in the save dialog. I know it's destructive and dangerous, so maybe there's a better way.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Glory be. It's nice to see I'm not a lone voice crying in the woods about this.

What do you think about a drag and drop? (e.g. Dragging a file name from the dialog into the save field.) It would make it much less dangerous, and I think useful and satisfying.

[quote]<strong>Also, adding a "Find" function to open/save dialogs is a good idea too. I know that Find item in that context menu only finds stuff in a separate window, but it would be very nice functionality to be able to find a folder or file within the dialog. It obviously helps when looking for a certain file to open, and it is a nice option when saving files too, instead of jumping all over the HD in pursuit of some place you put stuff six months ago.</strong><hr></blockquote>

I'll be crestfallen if Apple doesn't add this to 10.3.

I'm even hoping for a revamp of the Open/Save dialog (modeless window only), with a customizable toolbar, including a search field and easy to see (and click) icons instead of that faintly annoying pulldown menu. Save as a sheet, otoh, probably needs to stay simple. I don't know. Perhaps this is inconsistent.

[ 01-16-2003: Message edited by: Hobbes ]</p>
post #25 of 169
[quote]Originally posted by BuonRotto:
<strong>My previous comment got me thinking a bit about having some way to find stuff based on how long ago you used it. It might be nice to have some function to find something you worked on six months ago along with whatver else you worked on in that time frame, sort of Very Old Items as opposed to Recent Items. Add to that some ability for the Finder to know what was burned when (this might be cumbersome), and it could tell you that it was backed up on Jan 1, 2001 with x, y, and z to a CD-R named "Old Stuff."</strong><hr></blockquote>

Love this idea. There's definitely degrees of "recent", and Open/Save would be much improved by addressing that. Just like Safari so smartly understands the degrees of usage in bookmarking (most used / used often / used occasionally, but nice to have an archive) and implements its UI accordingly.
post #26 of 169
I miss product activation. I would just feel better about myself
semper ubi sub ubi
Reply
semper ubi sub ubi
Reply
post #27 of 169
The blue screen of death. That is the thing that I miss the most from my old PC days. Please Steve, can you add the BSOD?

bob <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" />

[ 01-16-2003: Message edited by: bspears ]</p>
post #28 of 169
[quote]Originally posted by Hobbes:
<strong>I'm even hoping for a revamp of the Open/Save dialog (modeless window only), with a customizable toolbar, including a search field and easy to see (and click) icons instead of that faintly annoying pulldown menu.</strong><hr></blockquote>

I don't have any problems with the pull-down menu per se, but open/save dialogs are more or less just a hook into the Finder. Sort of like how iPhoto can dial up iTunes songs in a data browser. So if the Open dialog acted more like a Finder window, I think that could be considered consistent. And, yes, they should be modeless.
post #29 of 169
[quote]Originally posted by ast3r3x:
<strong>

OS X isn't stable enough for you?!

...and what computer are you using, 10.2.3 is almost as fast as 9 on a 733MHz G4, so i would imagine on a newmachine it is blazing</strong><hr></blockquote>

how come so many people seem ecstatic that their brand new shiny macs with their next gen OS manages to run almost as fast as 9? are we now so easily satisfied? no wonder apple seem in no hurry to sort out the PMac mess
Greatly Insane
Reply
Greatly Insane
Reply
post #30 of 169
Are you talking about the features that are really bugs, but when asked, Microsoft said... "No, those are features"?

I don't want those.

[ 01-16-2003: Message edited by: drumbug1 ]</p>
hmmm.... I need something clever here....
Reply
hmmm.... I need something clever here....
Reply
post #31 of 169
Although this thread is about Windows features I thought I throw in a couple of X11/Unix features.

1) How about allowing Unix type users to get rid of the "system" menu at the top of the screen, or at a minimum allow the application's menu to be attached to the main window of the application. I have 21" monitor and I have to surf the mouse back and forth between windows and the system menu and it is a pain in the wrist.

The Mac style menu was great when the Mac had a 9" screen and did cooperative multitasking. This is no longer the case, deep six the Apple style menu or give us Unix guys with large screen real-estate the option to get rid of it.

2) Window activation via mouse over. This feature of the X11 window managers is a great usability feature. I would be able to refer to a large window and type in a window that is barely exposed. Those folks that work with text need this.

All I'm saying PLEASE give me the option to make these things happen. (Just mouse over window activation should be a no brainer, since the current interface recognizes the mouse when you move over the close button on a window that is on the bottom of the stack!)

Those of us from the Unix world have to limp along with the rigid interface and it is wearing thin.

Otherwise the rest is fine, although I'd like to get comprehensive Apple documentation on Netinfo and other Unix integration components. The existing docs are good for a general feel for some of the things, but I'd be hard pressed if I had to start up the rshd daemon by manipulating the entries in Netinfo (yes I have every Netinfo document I could find on the web) or try to integrate the Mac into a production Unix network.
iCode
Reply
iCode
Reply
post #32 of 169
[quote]Originally posted by iCode:
<strong>Although this thread is about Windows features I thought I throw in a couple of X11/Unix features.

1) How about allowing Unix type users to get rid of the "system" menu at the top of the screen, or at a minimum allow the application's menu to be attached to the main window of the application. I have 21" monitor and I have to surf the mouse back and forth between windows and the system menu and it is a pain in the wrist.

The Mac style menu was great when the Mac had a 9" screen and did cooperative multitasking. This is no longer the case, deep six the Apple style menu or give us Unix guys with large screen real-estate the option to get rid of it.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Never gonna happen. Fitts' Law, and all that. Besides, you call yourself a Unix head, and you're not using the keyboard?

[quote]<strong>2) Window activation via mouse over. This feature of the X11 window managers is a great usability feature. I would be able to refer to a large window and type in a window that is barely exposed. Those folks that work with text need this.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Pressing Cmd before clicking the mouse button sends the click through to the window without bringing it forward. Works for most everything *except* typing in text. I used to be a die-hard advocate of this feature, now I don't miss it. Took a while to learn the new ropes though. Less immediately obvious but more definitely intuitive features start to intrude on your workflow as time goes on. (The proxy icon at the top of a document or Finder window is *PRICELESS*.)

[quote]<strong>All I'm saying PLEASE give me the option to make these things happen. (Just mouse over window activation should be a no brainer, since the current interface recognizes the mouse when you move over the close button on a window that is on the bottom of the stack!)

Those of us from the Unix world have to limp along with the rigid interface and it is wearing thin. </strong><hr></blockquote>

I hear ya, but to be honest us X11'ers can adapt pretty quickly. (C'mon, we *have* to, when every app has its own idea of the Right Way(tm). ) You soon come to VASTLY appreciate the fact that a little rigidity in the UI gives back something much more valuable: general consistency. I used to tweak my twm system until I was blue in the face, and have a ball doing it... but it never gave me the level of consistent usability that Aqua does. *shrug*

[quote]<strong>Otherwise the rest is fine, </strong><hr></blockquote>

Wait, wait, WAIT!!!

No calling for a three-button mouse?!?!?

What kind of Unix geek ARE you???



[quote]<strong>although I'd like to get comprehensive Apple documentation on Netinfo and other Unix integration components. The existing docs are good for a general feel for some of the things, but I'd be hard pressed if I had to start up the rshd daemon by manipulating the entries in Netinfo (yes I have every Netinfo document I could find on the web) or try to integrate the Mac into a production Unix network.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Hear, hear! It's so much better now than it was even a year ago though, that it isn't funny. (You should have been around in the Rhapsody beta testing days... whoo boy.)
My brain is hung like a HORSE!
Reply
My brain is hung like a HORSE!
Reply
post #33 of 169
1.) Speed

2.) Faster boot

3.) Speed

4.) Multi-sessions would be great too..

5.) Speed

6.) Faster boot

7.) Cheaper hardware...

8.) Oh, and did I also forget to mention speed?

9.) A 'connect too...' dialog that normal people can actually use..
"There's no bigot like a religious bigot and there's no religion more fanatical than that espoused by Macintosh zealots." ~Martin Veitch, IT Week [31-01-2003]
Reply
"There's no bigot like a religious bigot and there's no religion more fanatical than that espoused by Macintosh zealots." ~Martin Veitch, IT Week [31-01-2003]
Reply
post #34 of 169
The ability to manipulate files through a dialog is nice, but like many things on Windows it seems to have been grudgingly half-implemented, and then tacked on to over the years.

What OS X should do is what Mac OS was originally designed to do. File dialogs were created because Mac OS was singletasking originally, so Finder couldn't run concurrently with an app. Now, of course, Finder can. So I for one would like to see open/save dialogs ditched altogether, and Finder promoted to the full-on file management tool that it is. Then you wouldn't have to peer into large directories through a tiny little window unless you wanted to for some reason.

The concurrent-user ability of XP is the only thing I can think of that I'd prefer from Windows. And, as with other things, I think Apple can do it better. Unfortunately, they'll have to do some real work on the window server to enable that.
"...within intervention's distance of the embassy." - CvB

Original music:
The Mayflies - Black earth Americana. Now on iTMS!
Becca Sutlive - Iowa Fried Rock 'n Roll - now on iTMS!
Reply
"...within intervention's distance of the embassy." - CvB

Original music:
The Mayflies - Black earth Americana. Now on iTMS!
Becca Sutlive - Iowa Fried Rock 'n Roll - now on iTMS!
Reply
post #35 of 169
I can understand ditching the open dialog, but how would you be able to ditch the save dialog? It's one thing if your work is saved as you go, but if you change your mind, you're kind of screwed, aren't you?
post #36 of 169
Copland actually toyed with this idea... you'd start a document, and it was auto-saved to what was essentially a FileMe folder. You'd then move the file at some point using the Finder.

Personally, I like the action of save site selection being tied more closely to when I am creating the document. I'm more likely to know what I intend, what I'm thinking, etc. If I'm unsure, I toss it in Documents until I can figure out where I want it.
My brain is hung like a HORSE!
Reply
My brain is hung like a HORSE!
Reply
post #37 of 169
[quote]Originally posted by Kickaha:
<strong>
Wait, wait, WAIT!!!

No calling for a three-button mouse?!?!?

What kind of Unix geek ARE you???

</strong><hr></blockquote>

I have a three button mouse!

I understand the consistency issue, but I think it should be consistent with the rest of the world, that's all.
iCode
Reply
iCode
Reply
post #38 of 169
My Wish List - by priority....

- 1) Resize window from ANYWHERE! Apple practically invented the GUI, and I have to resize my windows from one TINY corner!! No friggin way, I can NOT believe this has not been mentioned, and we don't have it ALREADY! Please chime-in and add your support, so SOMEONE DOES SOMETHING ABOUT THIS!!!!! (yes that pissed off!)

- 2) Active Desktop (but better) - I want my desktop image to be my "homepage" or my "email client" or my "default finder window", or "ALL OF THEM" at the same time with a powerful interface to customize it and resize (of course) the components within it! I truley believe it is time to utilize this space with functionality, not just an image, what a waste! Imagine having all the Apple apps integrated into the actual desktop image iCal, iChat, Safari, iSync, Mail, AddressBook, iTunes! - That would be - Innovation!

- 3) Safari / iApp Integration - I know it is a beta, but would be great for Safari to be able to read iApp documents and the file types exported from iApps. Windows does this well, PowerPoint, Excel, Word, etc can all be read by IE. For example - Imagine if Safari could control iTunes? You could control all aspects of of iTunes from within the interface of Safari, ONE APP open. I would imagine this would similar to the bookmark button, takes over the entire Safari interface to display iTunes, or iTunes equavilent. Can you Imagine more of this type of Integration, I can Safari opens up a lot of integration possabilities - Think AOL, Think MSN, next gen web experience

- 4) Internet Access (see point 3) - I know people are questioning Apple for their diversification, too many businesses. However, follow the logic. To answer the question, "What Windows features would you like in OSX?", needs to be expanded to "What Microsoft features would you like to see in Apple?" I would Apple to expand to at least one more business - Internet Access. They are almost their, actually. They need to buy Earthlink at their deflated stock price and get on it. Imagine what Apple could do if they owned the entire Internet/Computer/Creation Process....? My god the possibilities are endless, and could if done effectibely and in innovative ways... actually EXPAND AND GAIN MARKETSHARE! Thoughts?

- 5) And yes, better network usability
That's about it for now I guess - Please feel free to give your opinion - the good, the bad, and the ugly

tom
<a href="http://www.santoriello.com" target="_blank">www.santoriello.com</a>
Reply
<a href="http://www.santoriello.com" target="_blank">www.santoriello.com</a>
Reply
post #39 of 169
[quote]Originally posted by iCode:
<strong>

I have a three button mouse!

I understand the consistency issue, but I think it should be consistent with the rest of the world, that's all.</strong><hr></blockquote>

If that were the issue, we'd all be running Windows, now wouldn't we? :/

The menu at the top really does make much more sense to most people, and it *is* demonstrably easier to target with the cursor. Duplicating the same menu bar on N windows of an app is just wasting N x menuHeight pixels on the screen. :/ IMHO, of course. In any case, it's a dead horse we're beating. This is one UI element that just plain won't be changing.
My brain is hung like a HORSE!
Reply
My brain is hung like a HORSE!
Reply
post #40 of 169
[quote]Originally posted by Dali:
<strong>My Wish List - by priority....

- 1) Resize window from ANYWHERE! Apple practically invented the GUI, and I have to resize my windows from one TINY corner!! No friggin way, I can NOT believe this has not been mentioned, and we don't have it ALREADY!</strong><hr></blockquote>
Havent thought about that one before.. Nice thinking!

I think the save/open dialogs needs more work.. They practually suck right now...

And speed..

And that fricking 'connect too...' dialog.. &gt; Its useless, and bugridden like HELL!
"There's no bigot like a religious bigot and there's no religion more fanatical than that espoused by Macintosh zealots." ~Martin Veitch, IT Week [31-01-2003]
Reply
"There's no bigot like a religious bigot and there's no religion more fanatical than that espoused by Macintosh zealots." ~Martin Veitch, IT Week [31-01-2003]
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Mac OS X
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac OS X › What Windows Features Do You Want In OS X?