PDA

View Full Version : Switch User in MacOs X


SubFredZero
Mar 19, 2002, 12:32 AM
Is there any way to let a program run while you log out and log in with an other user ?

Rower_CPU
Mar 19, 2002, 12:37 AM
Not that I'm aware of. This is why XP users like to say that OS X isn't a "true" multi-user OS, since you can't log out and leave all your programs running and taking up CPU cycles and memory...sheesh.:rolleyes:

SubFredZero
Mar 19, 2002, 12:42 AM
I'm not the only one using this mac and i run a server with a carbon program. So the other persons working on my computer must always work in my user and that's not very handy...

Rower_CPU
Mar 19, 2002, 12:48 AM
Can they log in from other machines? They can run apps and save files if they're connected through AppleTalk.
Just throwing it out there...

AmbitiousLemon
Mar 19, 2002, 01:50 AM
this is a much requested feature. the other thing i woudl like to see, is the ability to log out with a bunch of apps running and documents open and have all that stuff launch again when i log back in. these need to be options added sometime in the future.


on a side note but still in harmony with the "switching users in osx" theme i was wondering about something i heard about users in osx. i heard that if you run osx as a user who does not have administrative privs then the finder/gui will run "snappier" than if you are the admin. im the only user on my computer so ive set everything up in my admin account so i was wondering first if anyone knew if it is true that it runs better without admin privs and if so then if anyone knew of an easy way to transfer all my preferences to a new user (hint copying the entire library folder from one user to another DOES NOT work!).

AmbitiousLemon
Mar 19, 2002, 04:26 AM
many of you are probably familiar with my list of osx bugs and features. well i added the idea from this thread to my list of desired features and thought i would mention how i wrote it out here in case you guys thought i worded anything wrong or poorly:

option when logging out to:
1) leave all currently running apps running while logged-out/logged-in as another user (only an admin privledge and have the apps run hidden from the other user, ie in the background).
2) create a saved state so that when one logs back in all the apps, windows, and documents that were open would still be open when logging back in (like connectrix virtual pc)
3) quit all apps and not create a saved state (current default)


let me know what you think. :)

Beej
Mar 19, 2002, 06:09 AM
That saved state thing (like VPC) is really cool. Why hasn't anyone thought of that yet? That would rock!

I'd never use it... but it would be useful if I did... :)

eyelikeart
Mar 19, 2002, 09:40 AM
I wouldn't use it either...

it's not much of a big deal for me to have to restart applications...but then again I'm the only person who uses my TiBook...:p

blakespot
Mar 19, 2002, 10:03 AM
Originally posted by Rower_CPU
Not that I'm aware of. This is why XP users like to say that OS X isn't a "true" multi-user OS, since you can't log out and leave all your programs running and taking up CPU cycles and memory...sheesh.:rolleyes:

Unix-style "services" (Apache for instance) most certainly stay running regardless of whether or not anyone (or whoever) logs into the system once it's booted. You can configure certain apps in this way.


blakespot

Rower_CPU
Mar 19, 2002, 10:03 AM
Originally posted by eyelikeart
I wouldn't use it either...

it's not much of a big deal for me to have to restart applications...but then again I'm the only person who uses my TiBook...:p

The one thing that really bugs me is that if I'm tweaking OS X and I need to log out and log back in, I've got to relaunch Classic, painfully slow process that it is, just to go back to work in Dreamweaver, etc.

Good work with the list 'Lemon. How long is that thing now?

Rower_CPU
Mar 19, 2002, 10:09 AM
Originally posted by blakespot


Unix-style "services" (Apache for instance) most certainly stay running regardless of whether or not anyone (or whoever) logs into the system once it's booted. You can configure certain apps in this way.


blakespot

True, services stay running on our OS X Server when I'm logged out. I wasn't aware that it was possible to do with applications though. Wouldn't that app still be running in the second users space when they logged in (ie. available to quit out of, change, etc.)?

Gelfin
Mar 19, 2002, 12:23 PM
Originally posted by Rower_CPU
Not that I'm aware of. This is why XP users like to say that OS X isn't a "true" multi-user OS, since you can't log out and leave all your programs running and taking up CPU cycles and memory...sheesh.:rolleyes:

Really? They say that? Can you point me to an example? I'm not questioning your word. I want to go over there and laugh at them. One, are they talking about the "Fast User Switching" hack they've got in there? I haven't tried that because it seemed pretty pointless to me. But otherwise, how do you log out and keep apps running in XP? And why would you want to? What is it they want to keep running?

I'm not sure where this definition of "true" multi-user capability came from. I can plop down at the console of a UNIX server (arguably about as multi-user as you can get). When I log out, the stuff I was working on goes poof unless I take special steps to ensure that it doesn't. Those exact same special steps may be taken in OS X to keep processes running after I log out.

If a half-dozen users can simultaneously ssh into the iBook I now use as a cheap server, it would seem to be multiuser. If I can install XFree86 and hang remote window stations off that same iBook, it would seem to be multiuser. Do that with XP. No, seriously. I wanna see it. Sure, I suppose you could set up a Windows Terminal Server environment if your pockets are deep enough, but your typical XP user doesn't get to do that.

Seriously, I hope this isn't just a straw man argument, because I really want to go ask some idiot what he's been smoking to make a claim like that.

eyelikeart
Mar 19, 2002, 12:34 PM
Originally posted by Rower_CPU
The one thing that really bugs me is that if I'm tweaking OS X and I need to log out and log back in, I've got to relaunch Classic, painfully slow process that it is, just to go back to work in Dreamweaver, etc.

I didn't think about it from that point of view....I try to stay away from Classic as much as possible....

which is why I chose to partition with everything completely separate....even though having to restart in 9 from X can also be a bit teadious... :rolleyes:

AmbitiousLemon
Mar 19, 2002, 12:42 PM
perhaps a classic saved state should be another option.

until that happens i would totally suggest anyone who uses classic on a regular basis try optimizing their classic system folder. after elminating control panels, contexucal menus, extensions, etc that werent needed by the classic state i can get classic to load in about 40 seconds on my slow ass g3 333mhz powerbook. im sure you guys running computers that arent two years old can get classic to load really fast if you optimize things as i did.

Rower_CPU
Mar 19, 2002, 12:50 PM
Originally posted by Gelfin


Really? They say that? Can you point me to an example? I'm not questioning your word. I want to go over there and laugh at them. One, are they talking about the "Fast User Switching" hack they've got in there? I haven't tried that because it seemed pretty pointless to me. But otherwise, how do you log out and keep apps running in XP? And why would you want to? What is it they want to keep running?

I'm not sure where this definition of "true" multi-user capability came from. I can plop down at the console of a UNIX server (arguably about as multi-user as you can get). When I log out, the stuff I was working on goes poof unless I take special steps to ensure that it doesn't. Those exact same special steps may be taken in OS X to keep processes running after I log out.

If a half-dozen users can simultaneously ssh into the iBook I now use as a cheap server, it would seem to be multiuser. If I can install XFree86 and hang remote window stations off that same iBook, it would seem to be multiuser. Do that with XP. No, seriously. I wanna see it. Sure, I suppose you could set up a Windows Terminal Server environment if your pockets are deep enough, but your typical XP user doesn't get to do that.

Seriously, I hope this isn't just a straw man argument, because I really want to go ask some idiot what he's been smoking to make a claim like that.

The narrow-minded definition of "multi-user" that XP proponents use is this:
One user can log in, start an app like SETI, and then log out (while choosing to "switch user"). The next user can then log in and use their apps, and SETI will still be running in the background.

This type of "fast user switching" at the GUI level is what Windows users are talking about when they accuse OS X of not being multi-user.

Rower_CPU
Mar 19, 2002, 12:53 PM
Originally posted by AmbitiousLemon
perhaps a classic saved state should be another option.

until that happens i would totally suggest anyone who uses classic on a regular basis try optimizing their classic system folder. after elminating control panels, contexucal menus, extensions, etc that werent needed by the classic state i can get classic to load in about 40 seconds on my slow ass g3 333mhz powerbook. im sure you guys running computers that arent two years old can get classic to load really fast if you optimize things as i did.

How about three years old?
My G3 450 with 256 MB of RAM and 5400 RPM IDE drives at work is slooooow at loading Classic.
I'll go back and optimize it some more to see if I get better results.

evildead
Mar 19, 2002, 12:56 PM
Give the new Apple remote client a try.. given that you have another mac to use ... it may do what you are looking for.

I too would like to see processes still running in the backround when you log ot.. but I dont see it happing..

they dont even do that in Solaris

Taft
Mar 19, 2002, 01:06 PM
It is possible to run a program as root as a background process. Then, when you log out, it shouldn't effect that process. This only works for command line apps that don't require a GUI. Like this:

sudo theProgram &

This probably won't help you much...

Matthew

SubFredZero
Mar 19, 2002, 01:18 PM
Well Matthew, i've tryed this (sudo theProgram &) before but because this program is carbon it doesn't work... but thanks anyway :)