If you could build a custom OS...

Nuvo

Ok, so after reading Moddy's topic about what you'd do if you culd design a custom graphics editor, I decided to do some Microsoft style borrowing and came up with this idea for a topic.

Anyway, if you had the power to design your own custom operating system, what would you have it be like?

Personally: Skip this if you like :]
Unix based (better stability and security).

Multiple desktops would be a must have as they are so useful (allowing you to put things on one desktop and work on another, meaning less clutter on screen).

Theme capable: I hated the look and feel of XP so much as it was like some childish and vulgar looking toy.
I like the Mac Aqua style, but it'd be nice to have support for other looks as well (OS X has software to allow this, XP can be hacked to allow 3rd party themes and other desktops like KDE and Gnome just have it ready to use).

Not too many silly effects: I don't mind designers trying to make a system look good, but when you could be using the power needed for them to make something like Photoshop get into gear, then it gets annoying.
OS X can handle the effects it has because the systems it runs on are designed for it and XGL runs on less than high end PC's relatively well, but I see Vista struggling here.

Decent applications: While it doesn't fall directly on the OS developers to make applications for it, an OS with support for Windows apps or which has good enough tools for making applications to draw in a lot of interest would be a good thing.
The only issue I had with moving to Linux was losing the ability to fire up Delphi and hack some Object Pascal when I tired of PHP work as there's no one stop way of getting that kind of stuff here.
It would be nice if everything was in one unified format like .exe as well as using Alien to install .RPM packages under Debian based systems (which use .DEB) can be a little less than great (because you end up using Alien to convert from one format to another and then it can still fail).

Nice desktop: Windows has an awful desktop environment when you've used others.
I mean, why have the menu, taskbar, clock, quick launch icons and tray icons been lumped together?
It's bad design to do that in my view as it encourages grouping, which means that every time two or more windows from one app are created, they create a menu in the taskbar which saves space, but makes navigating between windows pure hell.
Gnome does this very well by basically saying "hey, here's two bars... One for the menu, clock and other things and one for the taskbar. If you want more or less, you can do that too!" and it does so with minimal loss of desktop work space and since the panels can be hidden, you don't even notice that.
The OS X system is nice as docks are good, but I don't think the whole "app menu outside the app" thing is overly important or useful as all it's doing is moving the menu and KDE can do that as well.
Vector icons are a good thing too as they improve accessability and allow you to do neat things like resizing desktop icons based on their importance (I use SVG icons, meaning this is possible and they don't lose detail).

MGDesigns

LOL @ MS style borrowing

snicker

DeluxeNames

Good question, I'm no opertating system expert but I have always meant to switch from PC to Apple and so I have to say I would create an operating system just like Apple's Mac OS X.

whitefang

MAC OSX is a good OS simply because it is built on a Unix architecture. I think that my choice would be Ubuntu Linux (for a workstation) with some added features that would enable it to run Photoshop, MSTSC server and a few other windows apps that I use on a regular basis.

Nuvo

There's work being done to make Windows apps run under Linux distro's such as Ubuntu in the form of WiNE and a few other projects like Cedga.
WiNE can already run Photoshop 7.0, though Save For Web doesn't work on it and it might be like running Photoshop through Rosetta for OSX in that as it's not native, it'll not run as fast as native code (which is why there's GIMPShop).
As I'm not a Photoshop user (I tried it once, it made me bleed out of holes I didn't know I had), I have had no problem migrating as Xara Xtreme is pretty great for vector and pasic manipulation work, GIMP is good for rasters and Inkscape is nice for SVG work.
I don't actually remember how to use Windows that well as I've been using Ubuntu for almost a year now, and Linux on and off for a few years (stupid networking not being usable under other distro's... Thank god for Belkin's cheap WiFi cards from PCWorld).

When I get back from Spain (I didn't choose the destination and I'm only going because it's a family thing and I stayed at home the last time they went :[), I'm seriously thinking of saving for an iMac, especially once Leopard is out as such a system would have the power I need, would use less space than my big old tower (4 optical drive bays, 2 3.5in bays and 3 internal HDD bays I think), would run commercial software if needed (Fireworks, YAY!) and wouldn't lose the all important multiple desktop functionality as Leopard has Spaces (and i cannot stress how god like multiple desktops are when working with browsers, code editors and console apps all at once).
Also, this would let me use my current rig as some form of media server (not a great one as it's only a 2.5Ghz system with a 256MB graphics card and 256MB of DDR RAM, but even this is enough to run Ubuntu with all of Compiz' features turned on without the system dying, unlike Vista ).

CannonBallGuy

I wanted to show you a fantastic blog post about how too many people seem too obsessed with Ubuntu that I read a while back. It's not there anymore, so make do with this:
http://www.whydontyou.org.uk/blog/2006/01/21/ubuntu-is-not-the-only-distro/

I agree with it, I'm saving up (slowly....) for an intelmac. When I get one I'll be installing Gentoo on here.

Nuvo

I know Ubuntu isn't the only distro out there, and all it basically is is Debian with more updates and a few other shiny things installed (most of which can be obtained on their own), but out of all the distro's I've used, Ubuntu was the only one that I never had a problem with (until 6.06, which does have some issues which would annoy less technically minded people).

I've used Mandrake 8.2, Mandrake 9.1 Bamboo, SuSE 9, too many versions of Knoppix to count and I even tried running a LiveCD of Linspire for kicks, but it wouldn't even boot (HAH!).
In terms of desktops, I've used Gnome, KDE, Openbox, XFCE, IceWM and possibly others that I don't recall.

I don't mind using the console commands to use Ubuntu (something broke the update GUI and possibly Synaptic's advanced mode, so I use plain APT) and although I'm far from a Linux pro, I don't shy away from doing things the more technical way, so basically, it's like using Debian without the 2 year long waiting times for... well... anything.

Gentoo was one of my other choices when I was looking for a replacement for SuSE, but I simply do not want to spend a day installing little more than the core components just to get a minimal speed boost (which you only get by compiling natively as it's optimized for your system that way).
I know there's some base packages for Gentoo to get around this, but the whole point of Gentoo is it's speed and BSD style ports system (it's often called a ricer distro because it's all about making it work better for your system specifications).

It's doubtful that I'll stay with Ubuntu forever as I would like something with less hand holding as I progress, but Ubuntu is still a very good distro for people wanting to avoid buying new Windows OS's or OEM installed systems even if they don't know the difference between APT-GET INSTALL <package> and MKDIR <directory>.

Also, telling Ubuntu users that it's not the only Linux distro is like telling OS X users that OS X isn't the only OS other than Windows that's usable as a desktop OS...
They will come up with some rather lacking counter argument which only makes sense if you travel in their circles (though OS X users are more inclined to insult anything not made by Jobs and friends as Linux users are often just people who don't distinctly hate commercial OS's, but just choose not to use them).
Also, it angers me that Mac users call other OS's ugly as Linux can look however you want it to while OS X looks like, well, OS X and Windows (without hacks) looks like a childs toy.

CannonBallGuy

Finished with the generalisations, Nuvo?

Nuvo

So basically, CBG, you're saying you don't despise Windows, you haven't called Linux a 'poor man's OS X' and Mac users are nice and friendly towards people not using Apple computers?

That's pretty much the oposite of everything I've ever known from Mac users.

You've insulted other systems yourself and while I can't say I'm neutral as I'm not fond of Windows myself, I do try to find the good points in each system (Macs are Unix with commercial software, Linux is free, stable and secure and Windows has GUI's for everything, which is better if you're not great with computers).
Just today, I was in PCWorl ogling a 20" Intel based iMac, a Macbook and a Macbook Pro, even though the screens for the Macbooks look tiny as they are widescreen (when compared to other 15" systems they had in).

The article you linked to is, apparently, buy a Ubuntu user, so he's not actually complaining about the users, but about magazines using Ubuntu articles to sell more copis of their magazine.
The problem with that is that these articles might cover installing apps, but as it mentions, they cover Synaptic rather than the package manager it's a GUI for, APT.
Now, if they covered APT usage through a console, or package managment in general, this wouldn't be such an issue as APT is used across the board when it comes to Debian (and OS X if you use Fink) and RPM's are supported using Alien.
I agree that computer magazines that cover Linux should avoid centering on one specific distrobution's software as many distro's can use the same stuff, but don't come with the same GUI tools, but at the same time, it would be a little daunting to cover APT, PAC-MAN, RPM, TAR, Portage (you'll be getting to know this one) and every other package system in just one or two pages.

CannonBallGuy

I'm not saying anything other than you're making huge generalisations.
My father has never said anything bad about any OS online, afaik. So by saying that "Mac users call other OS's ugly" for example, you're making a false statement.

Nuvo

Ok, so it would have been better to say that some do it, but the fact remains that you shouldn't knock something unless it's done something to you.
Yes, you can say that Windows crashes and lacks tools for power users, but I don't exactly remember Linux doing anything incredibly wrong, and I just find it annoying when some people call a fully customizable desktop ugly when they are using a desktop environment with little customization and which not everyone is going to love.
I know that you can use widgets and such, but you'd end up buying software to change the look of things, which isn't even needed under Windows XP (if you swap out a DLL file).
I have widgets and flashy effects too, but I prefer to have a simple desktop which is even less distracting than OS X's desktop (because it looks like a blank screen with very little on it).
If I wanted to have a desktop that looked that flash, I'd use KDE with OS X style settings and a dock.

My only gripes with Apple are the price and the whole iPod thing, but the price is offset by what you get with it in terms of software (yes, you get software with Windows, but Lotus Smartsuite? Microsoft Works? I'm not over 50, so I don't want this, I want graphics tools and media players darn it!) and the iPod stability isn't a factor as I do not use one and never will... ever.
I would be well on my way to having a Mac now, but the shop where I tried to peddle my PSP and DS Lite told me what they would pay for them (?75 a piece without the 16 games and 3 movies), but when I got there, they had no money (fools!) :[