What Windows Features Do You Want In OS X?

Posted:
in macOS edited January 2014
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!
«13456789

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 168
    buonrottobuonrotto Posts: 6,368member
    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>
  • Reply 2 of 168
    I second multi-user sessions



    Beyond that, nothing I can think of at the moment.
  • Reply 2 of 168
    ast3r3xast3r3x Posts: 5,012member
    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
  • Reply 4 of 168
    1) speed



    2) application stability



    3) speed



    4) applications that work



    5) did I mention speed?
  • Reply 5 of 168
    ast3r3xast3r3x Posts: 5,012member
    [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
  • Reply 6 of 168
    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>
  • Reply 7 of 168
    buonrottobuonrotto Posts: 6,368member
    [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.
  • Reply 8 of 168
    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>
  • Reply 9 of 168
    torifiletorifile Posts: 4,024member
    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.
  • Reply 10 of 168
    [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! ^_^
  • Reply 11 of 168
    stunnedstunned Posts: 1,096member
    Networking.



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



    other than that, Apple rules!!
  • Reply 12 of 168
    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.
  • Reply 13 of 168
    chuckerchucker Posts: 5,089member
    [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.
  • Reply 14 of 168
    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>
  • Reply 15 of 168
    [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.
  • Reply 16 of 168
    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.
  • Reply 17 of 168
    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
  • Reply 18 of 168
    buonrottobuonrotto Posts: 6,368member
    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>
  • Reply 19 of 168
    [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.
  • Reply 20 of 168
    hobbeshobbes Posts: 1,252member
    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.
Sign In or Register to comment.