Most wanted features in Operating System

I want to know if U all think our OS are not good enough.
Here is my missing feature, tell me yours.

I have 1GB of ram. Whenever I wana copy a 900MB file, windows just doesnt copy the entire file at a go first in memory and then to the destination, if this is done so then a lot of seek time delays will be removed. if I wana copy 1800MB of file then just first copy part data in whatever free physical ram is avaliable and simultaneously start writing to the destination just before the next part data is to be copied. Get the picture, ...

Linux r U listining ?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Most file manipulation within a computer system has been designed to undergo a CRC errorcheck, this means not just reading the source to RAM but writing it to the drive and then checking to make sure what is stored on the drive is a copy of the original and doesn't have malformed code.

If this was left to the end of a large file and an error was found, it would mean potentially the copy file would have to be completely erased and the process started again.

This is why the internals of the computer work similar to the internet by internally packeting the data to maintain integratey.

It is possible however to override this method of file manipulate since it is programmatic, however writing a program using VB to work on the OS is still going to bind it by the OS's ruleset so obviously it's only possible if you program it to run outside of the OS (namely boot itself up).

In fact I think that some Share-network software attempts to speed up transfers through how it deals with CRC, although you really should question that to Porfiry.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

No boot times and free access to warez?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I already have it. I restart my pc very rarely (Linux) and warez is free as it is.

 

The thing about no boot times will supposedly be possible soon. I have read that Infenion develops chips that use magnetic charges to save information. This enables a chip to immediately save data, and keep it even when the power is off. As a result, it might soon be possible to have a PC that has no boot times.

But I would like a Windows version (sorry, but I like to play games so I need Windows) that can be customized better and to a greater extend.

 

Well, if I had the money my primary workstation would remain Linux, but for games I'd make my own pc/windows based konsole

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

p.s. I'm playing Warcraft 3, Painkiller and Deus Ex on Linux atm (through Cedega)
I think in a few years time most games will have their Linux versions available.

 

Less MAINTENANCE

How about a GUI that responds no matter what happens to your system. NO PROGRAM should be able to stop my GUI from working.
Secure out of the box.
Data shredder built into recyle bin. NO PROGRAM should be able to recover my data without DOD equipment.
Internet Browser that cannot be hijacked. NO PROGRAM should be able to hijack my browser.
An auto - defragmentation program. This should happen without my intervention unless I am using a notebook or something.

 

Less form, faster content. Fancy graphics eat up resources & take forever to boot.
(Same for web. Internet is for fast information. If I want to look at something pretty, I'll look at my wife.)

 

I want a few, but here's the one in priority: problem free! Which may mean built-in perfect anti-virus, spyware remover etc etc is in, and that OS is crash free.
Easy input/output from PC or net is also a bonus....

 

Check out Fluxbox desktop environment on Linux. Eats up less than a megabyte of ram and looks quite pretty.

 

I see a FluxWIFE in the making!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Multi UI focus so that two or more people can use the same computer at the same time. All you should have to do is plug in another mouse and or keyboard and away you go.

VIrus free i think this is asking to much, this would seriously hinder the system. Viruses are the price we pay for having 3D party software.

More eye candy, with full use of available hardware 3D cards, with as many options as posible.

THe problem with adding features to an OS is that you are removing market share from 3rd party developers, look at the trouble MS had when they added IE to the bundle.

 

Blindman- not a bad idea. You'd need (or at least it'd be really recommended) two monitors as well, but that'd be awsome.

Sadly, I don't see it happening in either the Windows or the Apple side of things for one simple reason- the money lost because people could have two people working on one machine, instead of having to buy two machines.
Maybe Linux of one of the BSD's will implimnet something like this...

 

Isn't that what mainframes and servers do?

 

Well Mainframes and "Terminals" were the method that used to be used. For instance large corporate companies would have a mainframe that would "serve" to the terminals the overall programs and data, the "Terminals" would just display the information on the screen and not save anything (Since they didn't have data storage).

I believe it is possible to get XP systems to work like this, however you would need to build a terminal system (A system with Thats all RAM and has drivers that could load a Remote terminal connection to a windows system) However it doesn't do the direct One machine = two terminals.

What people tend to neglect is how processes run on a computer, they are usually run one at a time, sometimes it can be possible for the processes to be broken and then switched between, but a single processor I don't believe has "dual processed" until the usage of Hyperthreading. (although I could be wrong about what I think Hyperthreading is)

This means if you had two users using one machine, Their actions could cause a confliction of interest when it comes to assigning processing threads, since their would be less occurances of "Idle time" (Which is when processes are allowed to run)

As mentioned I don't think any Corporates currently have any plans for this, unless any third party OS builders decide to take it on, but I would suggest the Architecture would at least need a dual processor and plenty of RAM with a design where the RAM and Processor can be split between two different sessions or run as a whole.

(Then you would have the problems of the Harddrives only being able to write so much or read so much at a time, another potential of conflict, which would potentially mean seperate harddrives for each user. Before you know it, you've almost built a second machine but squished it in the same box)

 

Im not talking about terminal software but the same UI with two or more mice able to occupy the same point each having there own focus. It would be assumed that the users are aware that they are using the same UI.

Multi threaded OS should easly handle any concurrency problems. There is no reason that you cant have multiple focus points in your UI. Most users run at about 99% idle, the only apps that would have problems are high performance games.

This should be standard, I should be able to buy one pc, 3 monitors, keyboards and mice so that the family can use the computer. SO what if their all on low priority.

 

Okay I admittedly do look at the Gaming end of the market, or perhaps even the Software/Games Production side where the intergration of multiple machines would be useful for project management.

However there are alsorts of area's that I didn't mention to what you suggest, for instance you could have the drives rigged together in a raid array and partitioned (One partition for the OS to load from and a partition for each interface to connect to).

Each user would then pull from that array the Operating system's "Kernel" but then have files that alter the Kernel within their own partition (this means any filechanges caused by programs would be added to their partition and not alter the original OS in the main partition).

Only Service packs would update the overall OS in it's main partition.

This would attempt to stop alterations of core files from altering how the system works for the different users, namely if one has a file altered and can't boot up another that hasn't had the file saved to their partition can attempt to recover for them (With admin or Superuser privs)

My mear analyse of the overall systems Architecture having to be changed is that if you introduce two users attempting to use a systems resources, then those resources are going to have to be better controlled than some of the current operating systems allow. (Otherwise bufferoverflows would be all too regular an occurance), and the problem of "Conflict Polling" of processor usage.

The other point is that the system itself should be able to generate connections with the other users/partitions that would rival a network connection, so file transfers are instaneous and of course Games speeds when "networked" beat even T1 or T2 connections. (The question here would be if a generation of Pseudo-IP/TCP protocol would have to be generated within a driver on the system, or if the system itself doesn't support the current OS and games and becomes it's own New OS on a new architecture.)

The reason I'm giving this alot of thought Blindman is your innitial suggestion saves alot of Money, Resources and Energy. For instance such a Setup would use less electricity than four machines saving money and energy, It uses less resources for the creation of extra boxes (and therefore money again) and it would cost less than four machines to produce (therefore again saving money).

However it would need to be Developed, perhaps drawing up a plan and talking to someone like IBM, HP or even DELL might be a good idea for the Architecture, although if you want to build a desktop that is altered enough to rival the current trend in consoles then you could be looking at an entirely new market.

 

I would not want it to be multi user aware. The os should boot and login as normal with a single user account.

I see it as this.

Each mouse and keyboard have an ID. Each ID is set to a keyboard mouse pair and each ID has a priority value. Each focus point holds the focus owners ID and this is used to determine which input to except. With two mode. Shared and exclusive.

Shared, the users can both have focus on the same object, eg Word Doucument, the highest priority ID has visual priority, but both have input abillty.

Exclusive, both users have a focus point but they can not share a single application, any attempt to click on the other persons focus app will fail untill the user of that app moves focus away from the app.

As someone suggested earlier a dual monitor system would best suit this, you could also limit the input from a device to only one screen.

 

Why do we need an OS anyway? Any program should be able to boot and be loaded on "any" hardware system.

 

I agree with locknroll.
Also, I'd like to somehow have the opportunities and stability of linux with the user-friendlyness of windows, kinda windows with a linux kernel. How hard would it be to create something like a hybrid?

That's actually already made, Executive Software Diskeeper defragments your harddrive regularly in the background, before it gets so fragmented that it takes forever to defrag it. Runs as a service in win2k/xp, and it's also a LOT faster than the built-in defragmenter.