Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

stevenaaus

macrumors member
Original poster
Oct 23, 2013
61
41
I've been thinking about the OS X rebranding, and imho it fairly stinks. I know it's only a few letters, but it's just disrepectful to the operating system, and indicative of the financial decisions driving Apple now.

Everyone knows that Apple makes so much more money from it's phone business, so naturally the technological focus is on iOS. But such a silly rebrand, along with a pile of nasty bugs/regressions solely associated with backend rewrites, you'd think they couldn't afford an extra engineer or two for the world's best home computer operating system. It's hard not to see it as a real freudian slap-in-the-face, cart-before-the-horse sort of thing.

And the company's legal battle with Android is ugly too. OS X has benefited so much from the "free" technologies of the Unix era. Not just the FreeBSD core, but the hardware and mach-derived kernel too. Suing Andoid for billions of dollars because they reproduce slide-to-unlock ? Please. Have some shame; or at least knowledge about your origins.

While they focus on suing Google, and cutting corners in maintaining their dual operating systems, Google are the only ones making useful new technologies. Perhaps it's just because i am a Unix CS graduate that it annoys me so much... but i can't bring myself to upgrade from El Capitan.
 

Darmok N Jalad

macrumors 603
Sep 26, 2017
5,419
48,205
Tanagra (not really)
Well, technically, Apple's desktop OS used to be called Mac OS. "Mac OS X" was the 10th edition, and it was a significant rewrite and design overhaul (and "X" showed up in a lot of marketing back then for many companies). Early OS X was pretty rough because of a lack of compatibility with Mac OS 9, so people dual booted the old and new until OS X gained its footing and developers could port their programs over. Not entirely sure why Apple moved away from "X," but consider that we are running on the 14th major revision of "Mac OS 10." Maybe it was to avoid confusion, or maybe it's because 10.13 barely shares anything with 10.0. Go read a review of 10.0.

https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2001/04/macos-x/

Mac OS X shows tremendous promise, which is a nice way of saying that the 10.0 release is not quite ready for prime time. This is most certainly an early adopter's OS release. Interface responsiveness and effective stability are the two biggest fundamental problems, but missing features and compatibility issues rank just as high if you actually intend to use OS X as a full Mac OS 9 replacement: the 10.0 release cannot view DVD movies; printer drivers are still scarce; CD burning is not yet supported, even by Apple's own iTunes CD authoring application; and a lot of hardware (like my G3/400's serial port adapter to which my printer is attached) seem destined to be orphaned forever.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.