My top X unlikely requests for Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard

Major new features in the upcoming Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard like Time Machine are great, but I've been thinking about all the other a ects of the Mac OS X experience that could use some it and polish from A le's engineers. They've done a fantastic job building a damn impre ive OS over the years, but that doe 't mean there i 't room for improvements both big and small (besides: they have to keep their OS product cycle on a good pace). Following is a list of 10 unlikely requests I have for the next version of Mac OS X that might not be worthy of a Stevenote, but they could bring smiles and sighs of satisfied relief to many a user:

• Removing a licatio - and all their baggage: Deleting (or "uni talling") an a on Mac OS X is easy: you just move it to the trash. But what about all the extra data a create when you use them (databases, media libraries, etc.)? Sure there are 3rd party a like A Za er that truly remove the a and all those extras, but I think Leopard needs an integrated, obvious and thorough proce for removing a and their extra baggage (perha A Za er could go the way of CoverFlow?). I can't count the number of times I've been asked how to do it by users both old and new. This method could include a dialog when dragging an a to the trash which asks the user if they want to nuke the 'extra' files like A lication Su ort directories and preferences. I know many a don't leave much behind, but it all can pile up, and there are at least a few a that really know how to go le up the mega and gigabytes. To help everyone get on the same page though, a dedicated System Preferences pane would work best.
  
• Don't make me eject an idle drive: This one is always a tricky conversation, and I should disclose up front that I am certainly no developer. All I know is that it seems just a little strange in the year 2006 (or 2007, once Leopard is released) that I still have to eject a flash drive I haven't touched in two hours. Mac OS X is now both smart and pretty - I don't think it should be that hard to implement some kind of smart ejection system that can eject the drive when not in use, but fire it back up when needed. Further, if we set my lazy nerd ambitio aside for a moment, I'm sure this would save the lives of countle finance reports and term papers for all those users who don't understand what 'ejecting' a drive mea or why they have to do it.