10.5 "Leopard"

124

Comments

  • Reply 61 of 83
    Is Apple using Samba? And if not, why not? And if so, why does it lag?



    Full FTP support is built in... on the command line. Apple only need to create a GUI to feed the app arguments.



    I used Cadaver (command line Webdav app) on my old 292mhz Powerbook under linux/ppc, and it was instantaneous for accessing my iDisk. Again, Apple can use all the code they want from this project and simply feed it's results into the Finder window associated with iDisks and Webdav stuff.



    Apple should save itself a lot of work by using existing, proven projects and integrating their functionality with the finder. SMB, FTP, WebDav, copying files, etc.
  • Reply 62 of 83
    bigbluebigblue Posts: 341member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Mike Eggleston

    1. Location Bar. I love the column format, and it works well. However, once you start going deep into some nested directories, it would be simpler to just be able to type it out, and for the Mac to follow allong with you. Pull from Linux, they did a good job of the Location Bar (Window's version of it sucks ass, but that's just my opinion).





    In addition, each column-width should (have the option to) snap to the size of the longest filename. All to often I see the dreaded dots (...) who hide a good part of the filename. And to often there's unnecessary white space behind the names, eating valuable screenspace.
  • Reply 63 of 83
    rokrok Posts: 3,519member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by BigBlue

    In addition, each column-width should (have the option to) snap to the size of the longest filename. All to often I see the dreaded dots (...) who hide a good part of the filename. And to often there's unnecessary white space behind the names, eating valuable screenspace.



    double-click on the resize widget at the bottom of a column divider, and it'll snap. thought it might be nice to have it as a global setting somewhere in the system prefs that you could toggle.
  • Reply 64 of 83
    I'd also like to see support for *edit:* pf/ALTQ which basically speeds up all networking by prioritizing certain packets, allowing you to saturate your bandwidth. OpenBSD and FreeBSD have this. OS X does not.



    I'd also like to see Apple set TCP/kernel defaults for broadband users, instead of dialup users, as this will, again, greatly improve OS X networking.



    Oh, and everything he says:



    http://www.tuaw.com/2005/06/09/os-x-10-6-wish-list/
  • Reply 65 of 83
    Quote:

    Originally posted by kaiwai

    Agreed; when I go into the local retailer, I'm the only one, it seems, who uses 'Mac OS X 10.4' - whilst the customer service people will say "Mac OS X Panther" or what have you.



    Personally, they'll keep keep calling it for it is really use; Mac OS X, release 4 (in the case of 10.4.2) - thats how I explain it to people; Version Ten; release 4, patch level 2.




    Surely you mean: Version Ten, release Five, patch level Two! (in the case of 10.4.2)
  • Reply 66 of 83
    feraliferali Posts: 175member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Nautical

    Surely you mean: Version Ten, release Five, patch level Two! (in the case of 10.4.2)



    no, 10.0 would be release 0. and there is no such thing, so 10.4 would be Release 4.
  • Reply 67 of 83
    icfireballicfireball Posts: 2,594member
    I think iChat will get a overhall...i mean...its terrible compared to adium right now. Also, I think they will have some really great photo sharing feature.



    Also, you need to think in terms of windows. Mac OS X Tiger is ahead in many respects to windows XP, but also behind in others. Apple needs to not only catch up in the respects they are behind in but also add "new", "revolutionary" features that would secure its position as better. One example that apple could work on is open window mannagement. Window's use of the taskbar at the bottom of the screen is an excelent way to manage windows. I think that Apple needs to address this issue on macs, because right now, expose is great for open window clutter, but the dock is only moderatly good with minimized window clutter. I'm was thinking that maybe Apple would adress this somehow...and I thought maybe a name like "mosaic" would be appropriate. Maybe a revamped finder?



    If you have ever seen Growl...that comes with Adium...you will notice that it is an excelent way to give alerts. Maybe Leopard will include such a program standard. Maybe not.



    I think it's time for some significant iCal update.



    Open GL2



    Eye Candy of course...
  • Reply 68 of 83
    bigbluebigblue Posts: 341member
    A dramatically updated FontBook: ofcourse faster, but also with an 'Adobe Type Reunion' feature. Fonts are then grouped in every application by family. No more endless scrolling for people (mostly designers) with hundreds of active fonts.

    Fontbook could also have an auto-activation feature. When a file is opened that needs an inactive font, FontBook will automatically activate it (as in Font Reserve, altough they need to install plugins for that).
  • Reply 69 of 83
    kaiwaikaiwai Posts: 246member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by icfireball

    I think iChat will get a overhall...i mean...its terrible compared to adium right now. Also, I think they will have some really great photo sharing feature.



    Also, you need to think in terms of windows. Mac OS X Tiger is ahead in many respects to windows XP, but also behind in others. Apple needs to not only catch up in the respects they are behind in but also add "new", "revolutionary" features that would secure its position as better. One example that apple could work on is open window mannagement. Window's use of the taskbar at the bottom of the screen is an excelent way to manage windows. I think that Apple needs to address this issue on macs, because right now, expose is great for open window clutter, but the dock is only moderatly good with minimized window clutter. I'm was thinking that maybe Apple would adress this somehow...and I thought maybe a name like "mosaic" would be appropriate. Maybe a revamped finder?



    If you have ever seen Growl...that comes with Adium...you will notice that it is an excelent way to give alerts. Maybe Leopard will include such a program standard. Maybe not.



    I think it's time for some significant iCal update.



    Open GL2



    Eye Candy of course...




    GL2 is merely a consoldation of all the proprietary extensions that each video card created; even if Apple were to bring it out, until graphic cards are GL2 compliant, I don't see any GL2 games or programmes coming anytime soon.



    As for GUI clutter; I'm an old school CDE user, so anything Apple provides will be better than what I have experienced in the past.



    What I would like to see are more protocols supported by iChat; MSN and Yahoo specifically; it would solve alot of problems and finally MSN users would have a decent, "OS Embedded" replacement for the crap-o-la MSN messsenger from Microsoft.
  • Reply 70 of 83
    a_greera_greer Posts: 4,594member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Mike Eggleston

    Ok, after reading several posts about the Finder, I want to throw in a couple of different things that I would like to see in there.



    1. Location Bar. I love the column format, and it works well. However, once you start going deep into some nested directories, it would be simpler to just be able to type it out, and for the Mac to follow allong with you. Pull from Linux, they did a good job of the Location Bar (Window's version of it sucks ass, but that's just my opinion).



    2




    I Would love that too, but I doubt it, Apple is all about pushing Spotlight, and that seems to fly in the face of the /x/y/z heirarchy being visable at all.



    God I hope I am wrong
  • Reply 71 of 83
    a_greera_greer Posts: 4,594member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Mike Eggleston





    5. Spotlight. This sucker is fast. It probably is using the locate command in Unix as the backend. However, have it search network drives, please. This should be something that the user needs to setup first though, for privacy reasons. (Do you want you brother Bob to do a search for his friend Ron, and accidently come across your Pron folder?? )





    Nope, built from the ground up, does its own indexing and uses SQLlite as the backend
  • Reply 72 of 83
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Ferali

    no, 10.0 would be release 0. and there is no such thing, so 10.4 would be Release 4.



    Since 10.0 is release ONE; that means 10.4 is release FIVE. Thanks for playing though!
  • Reply 73 of 83
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Mr Beardsley

    1. Resolution Independence

    2. Object management and garbage collection for Cocoa

    3. WebObjects moving back to Objective-C

    A. WebObjects using the Cocoa foundation frameworks

    B. WebObjects getting some of cool new stuff from Cocoa

    like bindings

    C. Further development of CoreData to replace the EO

    frameworks. Webobjects apps would have the ability to

    either use a SQLite datafile, or a full fledged

    database

    4. 3D kit, a high level Cocoa framework for working in 3D

    with OpenGL 2.0 at the core

    5. A new Cocoa based finder

    6. More of the "Pro" apps using Coca and Objective-C

    7. Spotlight able to work over the network on server shares

    8. Kernel improvements now that the KPIs are published

    9. Further work with UTIs allowing the system to add and

    strip filename extensions on receiving and sending files.

    10. More advanced searching and metadata handling in spotlight






    In short: OS X we discussed during the merger back in 1997, but with current technologies. I wholeheartedly agree!
  • Reply 74 of 83
    Although I acknowledge that FTFF is a huge issue and that it has it's own problems all by itself, Reiser4 would be a huge upgrade over HFS+. And by huge I mean noticeable performance increases quite possibly across the board. I think a new file system is a vitally important part of keeping their lead over Windows, and in this case catching up to Linux. Spotlight with the sheer awesomeness of BeOS... Drool.



    I do admit that adopting Reiser4 would be a bitch. Maybe res independence in Leopard, Reiser4 in 10.6? Apple could of course develop their own new one, but I find this rather unlikely. File system code being some of the best on the planet means lots and lots of man hours.



    Aside from that, we need a new Finder - Carbon or Cocoa it doesn't matter but it does need a huge major rewrite, and Cocoa does provide you with more 'free' stuff.





    Resolution independence is also a must, given the low DPI's Apple prefers for quite justifiable reasons - native size of course. Going to high density DPI's like the rest of the world would be nice, but the new PB's are probably pushing it to the limit of what Apple is willing to accept until resolution independence. Vectoring everything like IIRC Vista is doing would be the best way of course.



    Additionally they need to shift away from changing the resolution of the screen (i.e. do you want 1024x768 or 640x480 or...) and to virtual size (for lack of a better word) making clear that the actual resolution of the screen will not change due to LCD limitations - fuzzy at non-native, but the perceived size of everything will change as if you were changing the actual resolution. This can be totally in the background, but they should bury the option to actually change the resolution somewhere in advanced to prevent novice users wanting bigger or smaller everything from changing the real resolution.



    I consider this important because novice users often don't know about the LCD's native resolution and shift resolutions as if they were using a CRT in order to adjust the size. This is bad behavior, and with resolution independence can be prevented.





    Also I think they need to unify the UI under two banners. Say Unified (as seen in Aperture version), Pro (as seen in Pro apps) plus of course widgets - but widgets could use some UI standards such as the textured black back that Apple and some others use.



    Let Adobe and any other company selling expensive "pro" programs (pick a money kickoff point around when Apple starts using Pro in their own applications) to use the Pro theme. This keeps Pro exclusive, but does allow other 'pro' programs to use it so the UI matches.



    Standardize on Unified for everything else, but allow variations such as Mail and iTunes 6 (because 5's corners must never be mentioned) so that everything doesn't look exactly the same.



    To appease theme happy people tell them to use Shapeshifter - Apple has been known as the place where UI design is considered and the rules are followed, although if it looks good do it should be followed to a certain extent as well. The balancing act is a hard one, and I think Apple has shifted to far over to 'if it looks good do it' school. But yeah, if you want themes use a separate app, Apple should collapse everything down to the two themes IMNSHO.





    This is all good as well The coding improvements are needed, albeit a full overhaul (C# or whatever) can probably wait a few years.



    Quote:

    Originally posted by Mr Beardsley

    1. Resolution Independence

    2. Object management and garbage collection for Cocoa

    3. WebObjects moving back to Objective-C

    A. WebObjects using the Cocoa foundation frameworks

    B. WebObjects getting some of cool new stuff from Cocoa

    like bindings

    C. Further development of CoreData to replace the EO

    frameworks. Webobjects apps would have the ability to

    either use a SQLite datafile, or a full fledged

    database

    4. 3D kit, a high level Cocoa framework for working in 3D

    with OpenGL 2.0 at the core

    5. A new Cocoa based finder

    6. More of the "Pro" apps using Coca and Objective-C

    7. Spotlight able to work over the network on server shares

    8. Kernel improvements now that the KPIs are published

    9. Further work with UTIs allowing the system to add and

    strip filename extensions on receiving and sending files.

    10. More advanced searching and metadata handling in spotlight



  • Reply 75 of 83
    kaiwaikaiwai Posts: 246member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Electric Monk

    Although I acknowledge that FTFF is a huge issue and that it has it's own problems all by itself, Reiser4 would be a huge upgrade over HFS+. And by huge I mean noticeable performance increases quite possibly across the board. I think a new file system is a vitally important part of keeping their lead over Windows, and in this case catching up to Linux. Spotlight with the sheer awesomeness of BeOS... Drool.



    I do admit that adopting Reiser4 would be a bitch. Maybe res independence in Leopard, Reiser4 in 10.6? Apple could of course develop their own new one, but I find this rather unlikely. File system code being some of the best on the planet means lots and lots of man hours.








    The easier way would simply to use ZFS which will be made available, in source form, on the OpenSolaris.org site; as long as there aren't licence incompaibilities between the CDDL and ASPL, it should be a matter of copying it over and porting it over to MacOS X.



    It is the perfect filesystem for MacOS X; not only supports efficiently huge files that media gurus use, but insanely large storage capacities ( its a 128Bit filesystem) and add ontop of that its 99.9999999% reliability factor, in regards to its ability to stop corruption before it occurs; I would say that ZFS is the better option for Apple.





    Quote:

    This is all good as well The coding improvements are needed, albeit a full overhaul (C# or whatever) can probably wait a few years.



    Well, Apple don't need C# because they already have a better alternative to .NET and that is Cocoa; what Apple DO need to do is spend more time evangelising their technologies and make programmers realise that Apple is more than just a bunch of skivvy wearing arty-farty's - there is actually some engineering coolness factor below the sexy exterior.
  • Reply 76 of 83
    I want SELinux-style type enforcement MAC controls. HFS+ already has the extended attributes required. Not to mention much of SELinux root's is in Mach.
  • Reply 77 of 83
    Here's what I want Apple to do:



    Start integrating Spotlight abilities more into your own apps. iTunes, iPhoto, Aperature (I am not sure about this one) all seem to use their own Spotlight-like databases to index your data and provide ways of working with it.



    I mean, shouldn't Spotlight be the one being used to store data on your files and make it easy to work with. Right now, it seems like Apple is barely even using Spotlight to its full potential.



    I am not against applications having their own databases. There is sometimes some data that would just be redundant for Spotlight to store in its own central database.



    But iTunes, iPhoto, Aperature (not sure about this one) all seem to each have their own Spotlight-like systems in place to index the metadata about your files. Then of course, the main Spotlight system then reindexes this data (sometimes not all of it) so you can work with these files outside of these applications.



    Rather than build their own unique one for every application, why doesn't Apple start using the Spotlight database. Right now, it seems like they don't even trust their Spotlight system to handle their applications.



    I don't see why iTunes/iPhoto couldn't store all of its metadata about your music/photos in Spotlight. Why have data redundancy by having metadata about one file in two places at one.



    Plus the added benefit is that any changes you make in one application are available in another that accesses the same files.



    But all of this does come at a price. Your libraries wouldn't be so portable. But you could solve this with a simple "export library data" menu option.
  • Reply 78 of 83
    Quote:

    Here's what I want Apple to do:



    Start integrating Spotlight abilities more into your own apps. iTunes, iPhoto, Aperature (I am not sure about this one) all seem to use their own Spotlight-like databases to index your data and provide ways of working with it.



    I mean, shouldn't Spotlight be the one being used to store data on your files and make it easy to work with. Right now, it seems like Apple is barely even using Spotlight to its full potential.



    I am not against applications having their own databases. There is sometimes some data that would just be redundant for Spotlight to store in its own central database.



    But iTunes, iPhoto, Aperature (not sure about this one) all seem to each have their own Spotlight-like systems in place to index the metadata about your files. Then of course, the main Spotlight system then reindexes this data (sometimes not all of it) so you can work with these files outside of these applications.



    Rather than build their own unique one for every application, why doesn't Apple start using the Spotlight database. Right now, it seems like they don't even trust their Spotlight system to handle their applications.



    I don't see why iTunes/iPhoto couldn't store all of its metadata about your music/photos in Spotlight. Why have data redundancy by having metadata about one file in two places at one.



    Plus the added benefit is that any changes you make in one application are available in another that accesses the same files.



    But all of this does come at a price. Your libraries wouldn't be so portable. But you could solve this with a simple "export library data" menu option.



    I'm guessing we'll see that in iLife '06. It's not in '05 because '05 was released before Tiger shipped. However, there's probably a 50/50 chance that iTunes will continue to use its own index due to its cross platform code base.
  • Reply 79 of 83
    progmacprogmac Posts: 1,850member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Nautical

    Since 10.0 is release ONE; that means 10.4 is release FIVE. Thanks for playing though!



    I don't think 10.0 should even count. It sucked almost as bad as Public Beta. I guess that wasn't your point though.
  • Reply 80 of 83
    My suggestions for OS X 10.5 --

    Most of my concerns are with the core underpinnings. I would like to see OS X truly be the most advanced OS. Sometimes,OS X seems like a compromise -- too much technology thrown on top of different tech that sits in too many layers. Mach micro kernel with BSD layer with carbon, cocoa, and hfs+ file system. There is more. Some things are poorly threaded and optimized, some held on to for some compatibility, etc. look at the speed problems with apache!



    I would love to see them start with a solid optimized unix. look at solaris 10. Fast, well threaded, cool useful core features, seemless kernel interaction (from what i am told), - get darwin to that level (linux has had better luck with macro-kernals - [kinda off-topic]), with a great advanced modern filesystem (no compromises), build in your api's and tune the hell out of it.



    Is something like this even remotely feasible?
Sign In or Register to comment.