Hello!

The current version of SwOS (2.16 for RB260GS/RB260GSP) is very lacking in the following features:

1. Ability to change the login from the standard "admin"
2. Ability to set a password of 32 characters or more
3. Ability to change the MAC address of the switch
4. Access settings via HTTPS, not just HTTP
5. Access to settings only from a specific MAC address

Is it possible to implement this functionality in future versions of SwOS?

1. Ability to change the login from the standard "admin"

Would be nice, but IMHO not overly needed.

2. Ability to set a password of 32 characters or more

Do you really need over a 32 character password? There does need to be a limit from a coding standpoint. At least it's not limiting to something like 12 characters...

3. Ability to change the MAC address of the switch

Why?

4. Access settings via HTTPS, not just HTTP

This has been requested for years. By far the most important on your list.

5. Access to settings only from a specific MAC address

Never looked to see if you can do that via the ACL.

Is it possible to implement this functionality in future versions of SwOS?

Unfortunately, I do not expect to see any of these. It's obvious that Mikrotik treats SwitchOS as the bastard step-child as compared to RouterOS.
Note that I am a big proponent of SwitchOS and use it on currently seven switches on my home network.

1. Would be nice, but IMHO not overly needed.

I think that the ability to change default accounts like "admin", "user", etc. must be everywhere without fail.

2. Do you really need over a 32 character password? There does need to be a limit from a coding standpoint. At least it's not limiting to something like 12 characters...

I love long passwords, there is no such thing as too much security, RouterOS has this option.

3. Why?

Masking the network infrastructure, firstly, is an additional security measure, and secondly, for additional advanced control and accounting of network devices.

4. This has been requested for years. By far the most important on your list.

Even with a self-signed certificate automatically generated by the switch itself, without the participation of an administrator.

5. Never looked to see if you can do that via the ACL.

Via ACL it’s probably possible, but ACL is a slightly different and more complex mechanism, and it will most likely load the processor more. It would be easier to add a simple field in the System tab similar to the IP address from which access to the switch is allowed.

Unfortunately, I do not expect to see any of these. It's obvious that Mikrotik treats SwitchOS as the bastard step-child as compared to RouterOS.
Note that I am a big proponent of SwitchOS and use it on currently seven switches on my home network.

The above functionality that I would like to see in SwOS is not something supernatural, just additional security and ease of use. It would also attract even more people's attention to these devices and their use.

i think Switches based on SwOS are cheaper because they have a simpler control plane (very little cpu and memory), this come with serious restrictions for software functionality

all features you are requesting are on the control plane

I think if you better must go for a CRS switch which can offer much better management features because works using RouterOS, is worth the price increase

has been one chimera for small network builders to find a cheap manageable switch, but the relation between cost and features is very thight, i dont think feasible to pack more features at this low cost, specially on few ports devices like rb260.

Dont forget we are talking about sub 60 USD device including power supply

I think if you better must go for a CRS switch which can offer much better management features because works using RouterOS, is worth the price increase

Switching is SOOOO much easier to deal with in SwitchOS...

specially on few ports devices like rb260.

Dont forget we are talking about sub 60 USD device including power supply

And a RB750 router and the RB260 switch are EXACTLY the same price. Both admitedly bottom of the line products (other than the switch will do GigE and has one SFP whereas the RB750 is 10/100 mb/s).

I think if you better must go for a CRS switch which can offer much better management features because works using RouterOS, is worth the price increase

Switching is SOOOO much easier to deal with in SwitchOS...

Better and easier can be quite much anti-correlated. And easier can be subjective ... e.g. I've never practically used SwOS, so I guess ROS would be easier for me

Better and easier can be quite much anti-correlated. And easier can be subjective ... e.g. I've never practically used SwOS, so I guess ROS would be easier for me

And I fully admit that I'm just the opposite. I have never done switching in RouterOS. Each port on every router is a separate LAN or VLAN that is directly connected to a switch. Although I did not use it, the old Master / Slave ports made sense to me, but when RouterOS switched to the "new" bridging method a few years ago, it simply makes no sense to me. A while back I had an immediate need to implement a RouterOS device as a VLAN switch, and requested help here on the forum. Several people provided information that worked, but even with that information, it still makes no sense to me and I could not replicate it on my own. I've read the help multiple times, and it might as well be written in Latvian.