Mac OS X 10.5 ideas

[Qion]

I'd love to cube over to Windows. Well, let me rephrase that. I'd love for people to be able to cube over to Windows. That way, you'd really, really get the difference between the OS's right there in your immediate attention. OS X looks marvelously superior next to the current XP system, and I'm guessing Leopard will look/feel better than Vista also. You'd also have all your iApps on the Mac side of things, and maybe your Office apps on the Windows side of things. Mac is fun, Windows is work.

It would stick.

 

[sheepguy42]

So many people keep talking about an Address Book/Mail/iCal/whatever hybrid. I don't get it; the Mozilla people finally figured out that having one giant bloated app isn't necessarily a good idea, hence we have FireFox, ThunderBird, and things like them (Nvu, and I don't recall the calendar app's name...). I love the way Apple segregates functions into their appropriate apps. I also love the level of integration between them. I really want to see a more user-friendly implementation of Services. Seriously, you can select an email address and open Mail with a new message to that address, you can access Address Book info in Mail and iCal and iChat, you can do all sorts of wonderful things already. But if all you want to do is read your email, you don't have to wait for the software to deal with a ton of data you have no interest in at the moment. For me, that's the beauty of the MacOS: I can do EXACTLY what I want, and not have the computer try to second-guess me. I hate Outlook/Entourage because of these exact situations: sometimes I only want to do stuff with my calendar, or just Mail, or even just Address Book. I think, if anything, the built-in apps need to be able to have more 2-way integration with each other.

I really liked the idea about Safari being more like Dashboard or fust integrated into the Finder; it would streamline the interface even more, and further distinguish it from 3rd party browsers. I would also love to not have to enable the debugging mode in Dashboard just to be able to keep my widgets on the desktop all the time. What's the use of a VLC remote if you need to bring up the whole Dashboard environment to see it? I know about Amnesty Widget Browser, and the rotating/resizing/transparency features are neat, but if all I'm using is the "keep them on the desktop" part, I shouldn't have to use 3rd party software for it any more than I should for the "double arrows at both ends of the scrollbars" bit.

One more thing: I love ideas for future Apple Products, but if you have an idea for an iApp, could you either find or make a thread for that topic? I'm reading a thread titled "Mac OS X 10.5 ideas," and yet I keep seeing ideas for iTunes (or GarageBand). Maybe I'm just sleepy, but it's confusing me. Not trying to push buttons here, just like to keep thoughts organized.

 

[Mikuro]

Sheepguy, I agree with you about bloatware. Personally, I see no reason to merge Mail and iCal. They're two completely different programs. At this point I don't even use Mail, so why should I need to load it to access my calendar? Everything's lean and organized the way it is.

But you lost me with your "integrated Safari" wish. Seems to me like that would be the ultimate bloat. Apple should not pull a Microsoft and try to make their non-essential applications unavoidable. What if I don't like Safari? Why should it be built into my Finder? And considering how often Safari unexpectedly quits, I'm very, very glad it's an isolated program. That's perhaps one of the biggest reasons why bloat/integration is a bad thing: if one of the integrated tasks goes wrong, it screws with all the others!

I also rarely, if ever, want to organize my files while browsing the web. They're two different tasks that deserve their own environments.

 

[fryke]

I've read somewhere that Phil Schiller said BootCamp won't go the virtualization way. That it's about dual booting after all. And I think Apple - sadly - will keep it that way. That'd mean _no_ cube effect switching between OSs. (The Cube effect alone would mean that OS X is still loaded and not suspended.) They _could_ however actually suspend the OSs instead of powering them down completely. This way, you'd get back where you were, although with a little more time than it takes for a Cube effect.

BootCamp only a baby... Well: It's simply a partitioning tool with an added script that changes your startup volume! And my _guess_ is they will refine the partitioning features. And maybe add updated drivers for the hardware running in Windows. But that's about it. Sadly.

Then again: There's Parallels Desktop, and CodeWeavers' solution is said to be final this month as well. So if a user doesn't like Apple's solution, there _are_ others to be found. People dream of running 3D Windows games while still in OS X: This won't happen until not only the CPUs, but also the GPUs have virtualisation features. As long as you have to "pass through" the graphics from main machine to virtual machine, you won't get many fps in recent games.

 

[Satcomer]

With everyone concentrating on Parallels it seems like everyone in the Macintosh world has forgotten Microsoft BU's VPC. I bet they soon will be coming out with a VPC for Intel running like Parallels but with every driver loaded and optimized to use some, if not most, 3D games.

 

[cyprus mac man]

what about DVD Player being able to play all region DVDs and not having to switch. or have Apple let you switch an unlimited number of times. i dont like having to go to 3rd party software (even if it is free) like VLC to do what Apple is to lazy to do. just stop the junk and let me play my international DVDs!!

 

[Mikuro]

I'd really like to see Apple open up their APIs a bit more. For example, the windowing system. As it is, it's very hard (if not impossible) for third parties to write software that does the things Apple does with the Dock (like Exposé and window minimizing and whatnot). Also, I can't understand why Apple tries so hard to keep third parties from making standard menu extras. All it does is reduce consistency! I wish Apple would make all this functionality freely accessible to developers.

I'd also like to see Apple split the Dock into three or four different processes. Right now, the Dock handles far more than it ought to: volume control, the Dashboard, Exposé, etc. This makes it very hard for developers to replace or override any of these things, because the Dock is so closed up and virtually impossible to disable. I'd like to be able to completely turn off the Dock (that is, the bar with the icons) if I want to, but since the Dock process controls all those other things I can't do without, I couldn't afford to turn it off even if it were technically possible. And since it uses private APIs to do most of the things it does, I can't find (or make) third-party substitutes, either. Boooo!

what about DVD Player being able to play all region DVDs and not having to switch. or have Apple let you switch an unlimited number of times. i dont like having to go to 3rd party software (even if it is free) like VLC to do what Apple is to lazy to do. just stop the junk and let me play my international DVDs!!

I don't think it's that Apple's lazy, but rather that their hands are tied legally. There are all sorts of stupid regulations on DVD playback — that's why the region system exists in the first place. This has never been a technical issue; companies go out of their way to impose these limitations because they're required to. I'm not sure exactly how VLC gets away with it, but I imagine it has something to do with the fact that they don't make or distribute DVD playback hardware, and thus are not subject to all these rules are regulations.

I'm not an expert on this, though, so it's possible my understanding is outdated or just plain wrong.

 

[whitesaint]

I'd really like to see Apple open up their APIs a bit more. For example, the windowing system. As it is, it's very hard (if not impossible) for third parties to write software that does the things Apple does with the Dock (like Exposé and window minimizing and whatnot). Also, I can't understand why Apple tries so hard to keep third parties from making standard menu extras. All it does is reduce consistency! I wish Apple would make all this functionality freely accessible to developers.

The API's have been open for quite some time, CoreImage basically does the dashboard effect. CoreImage/CoreVideo have been open to developers for a while now, while CoreAudio has been open to developers since 10.1. I've been able to get windows to do pretty cool things and believe me, Apple doesn't cripple the developer in any way. And the Status Items in the menu bar are super easy to make.

 

[Rogue_Tr00per]

I would like to change the OS on install to "easy mode" for new users to the OS (ex windows), or Office mode for normal users. Then there would be a "Power" mode for the Mac nuts, with the utills and admin apps to hand. Also allowing admin to change the easy mode to Office mode, with minimum config..

 

[fryke]

I think three stages would be too much. "Office" is not really a good moniker, anyway, because the "middle" in a Macintosh user would less be the office user but rather the desktop publisher. ... But I, too, would like to see clearer differences between a "simple" and an "advanced" user. Could be interface differences etc. Permissions-differences are already there, of course. The admin can limit the users quite easily.

 

[Rogue_Tr00per]

Granted, what I was getting at is the idea of models, say you wanted a simple no BS layout, then a standard like OSX is now, then an advance setup with every tool needed but to hand..Just a first power on.

 

[sheepguy42]

Sheepguy, I agree with you about bloatware...At this point I don't even use Mail, so why should I need to load it to access my calendar?

Cool, somebody agrees with me about something And your example is exactly the type of situation I'm talking about.

But you lost me with your "integrated Safari" wish. Seems to me like that would be the ultimate bloat. Apple should not pull a Microsoft and try to make their non-essential applications unavoidable. What if I don't like Safari? Why should it be built into my Finder? And considering how often Safari unexpectedly quits, I'm very, very glad it's an isolated program.
…
I also rarely, if ever, want to organize my files while browsing the web. They're two different tasks that deserve their own environments.

I see your point about the finder integration. However, I want to clarify something: what I was asking for (in an incorrectly worded way) wasn't so much an integration of Safari so much as more use of WebCore. I would agree that the Finder's uses and Safari's uses are wildly different; on the other hand, I could see revamped FTP and general file server access by utilizing WebCore abilities in the Finder. In other words, I don't really want Safari to be integrated into the Finder—I want something that already is part of the OS to be used more extensively. Several third party browsers already use WebCore as part of their functionality; surely WebCore is useful outside of browsing the WWW.

 

[magilum]

It'd be great if Apple would fix the network bug I've been seeing since I started using Tiger (on various machines). I've attached a file, from an article I'd meant to write about it, demonstrating the strange behavior.

I'd also like to have more control over the Dock. The automatic hide/show is awkward and annoying. I'd rather be able to hide it until invoked by a specific command or by clicking on something.

 

[symphonix]

I would love if they add "Fast OS Switch" similiar to "Fast User Switch" So we can switch to different OS without shut down and make choice which OS. That what i am suspecting that Apple is working on it.

I disagree. It would not benefit Apple to actually encourage users to switch back to Windows. I'm sure Boot Camp will grow, and be made faster and easier to use. But Apple should be working on making all those Windows switchers *want to stay* in Mac OS X.

what would be awsome would have iTunes music be able to transfer to Garage Band and then Garage Band can edit them. its like Garage Band's "Export to iTunes", so it would say in iTunes "Export to Garage Band".

I regularly drag songs into GarageBand from iTunes. Its a simple drag and drop operation, provided there is no DRM on the songs. Since I have ripped all of my songs directly from CDs, its no problem.

I really liked the idea about Safari being more like Dashboard or fust integrated into the Finder; it would streamline the interface even more

Apple will be avoiding this. Historically it has proven to be unwise to integrate browsers into the operating system. It cost Microsoft dearly in legal battles right through the 90s simply because they integrated the browser too much - it was anti-competitive behaviour to make it more difficult for the user to use a different browser. I know times have changed, but I think all the players in the industry are now careful not to make that same mistake again.

I also rarely, if ever, want to organize my files while browsing the web. They're two different tasks that deserve their own environments.

Yes!

I would like to change the OS on install to "easy mode" for new users to the OS (ex windows), or Office mode for normal users. Then there would be a "Power" mode for the Mac nuts, with the utills and admin apps to hand. Also allowing admin to change the easy mode to Office mode, with minimum config..

Anyone else remember OS/2 Warp? That was a hard lesson to learn, but we learnt it. Believe me, Apple are better off trying to get one interface spot-on perfect, without trying to make the user work in different "modes".

 

[magilum]

It'd also be cool to be able to jump to the corresponding directory in the Finder from an open or save dialog.

How about a 'cut' feature added to the file copy and paste available in the Finder?

What good are search results when you can't sort them properly? How about complete sorting capabilities in the Finder search results windows?

 

[fryke]

I would agree that the Finder's uses and Safari's uses are wildly different; on the other hand, I could see revamped FTP and general file server access by utilizing WebCore abilities in the Finder. In other words, I don't really want Safari to be integrated into the Finder—I want something that already is part of the OS to be used more extensively.

But WebCore doesn't really do FTP at all. I'd say we need FTP handled like WebDAV in the Finder - but there's no need to do that through WebCore. I think Microsoft has shown extensively that it can be a *very* bad idea to integrate the webbrowser with the file browser. If anything, WebCore should be as isolated from the rest of the system as practical.
But I agree that the Finder's FTP support must become, well, full FTP support. While I like Fetch as my FTP client, I'd probably ditch it the moment the Finder _writes_ to (S)FTP servers as well.

 

[chevy]

I prefer CyberDuck for FTP.

my 10.5 cents ?
-Windows compatibility (still requiring a full Windows license),
-multidesktop using the mini-ball of the MightyMouse,
-Mail/iCal/iChat/Address better integration (all with direct web access through .mac - similar to Google approach, but not a built into single application)

just my 10.5 cents.

 

[winterdude]

Some sort of device manager, where you could see the drivers installed on your computer.

 

[fryke]

You mean like a "System Profiler.app" you'd find in /Applications/Utilities/ ...

 

[chevy]

.... maybe with the addition of an upgrade/downgrade/enable/disable capability ....