OS X 10.9 to be announced tomorrow?

[thejadedmonkey]

Eh? Apple basic gives OSX away to sell more macs. The revenue they generate from this is nothing. I actually believe it's not free just to give it some kind of value to the end user.

I never really thought about the rationale, but if you have a userbase that's consistantly on the newest OS, it makes it easier for Apple to keep their app-store developers always writing for the newest OS, and any laptop that's more than 3 years old that doesn't have OS support, doesn't get new apps, and is... outdated.

By this time next year, I'm sure the first core i5's will start being "dated" in the world of Apple.

 

[Kashchei]

It won't come out until 10.8.3 has been out at least one week.

If that.

Waiting for 10.8.3 is like Waiting for Godot

 

[wrldwzrd89]

Apple's most likely planning 10.8.3 to be a major "clean up outstanding bugs" release of 10.8, aka the final one before engineering effort fully transitions to getting 10.9 ready. That would explain the larger than normal number of betas.

 

[ssn637]

Don't think I've ever been so impatient for an OS X upgrade. I remember reading somewhere that Windows 8 will also be supported with 10.8.3's Boot Camp utility. And if OS X 10.9 follows shortly thereafter it will be interesting to see what the new operating system has to offer.

 

[alphaod]

They announced Mountain Lion on Thursday February 16 2012... maybe they'll announce 10.9 tomorrow? That's assuming they're continuing with the yearly OS cycle.

OS X used to be released on an alternative 18 month/12 month cycle.

 

[ThirteenXIII]

I am sick of these silly annual new versions of OSX. Last time, it messed up my VMWare file which wouldn't work on Mountain Lion. Out of all the 200+ or so features that Apple touted, less than a handful are relevant to me. The whole place has gone mad. Apple is sick with consumerism, wanting to bring out the latest toy every year. Stuff the stability of apps that have to be updated every year just to work with the latest OSX version. Some of us out here are trying to get some work done on OSX.

Ok, since stability is important to me, I do not upgrade oSX with everyone else. I wait till its more stable, e.g. 10.6.6 or 10.7.4. But it impacts me when I need to buy a new Mac, and it comes with a buggy early version of the latest and greatest OSX, and when I need to transfer my older software, e.g. my VMWare data file.

Money has gotten to Apple's brain, but the fact is, these Apple management people stare at the mirror and con themselves into believing they're still make great products. Why else is the cash pile growing, they justify themselves.

- Bring back a 2 year release cycle of OSX
- Each new OSX, get it up to around 10.x.9 to be totally rock stable
- Have wider beta testing so we consumers are not used as paid beta-testers.

If I didn't have to buy Macs every so often, I would not care. I just would not update until the OS was rock solid, and all of you can gnash your teeth as you help Apple discover bugs. But I do regularly buy new Macs, and I don't like them coming with buggy releases such as 10.7.0-3 and 10.8.0-2

I can agree on some points. I think Apple Retail is where Apple Corporate is taking its queue from, honestly. Where as in the beginning the influence was reversed.

They see numbers and immediately just go on that, Tim is very robotic it seems when it comes to product productions and manipulation.

However, in regards to customers being paying beta testers, in Apple's defense there is a HUGE customer beta-test program Apple has. Customers (non-developers) have access to OS X releases to test in their environment and platforms. Its a great program and highly involved. And they also have the Developer side of it as well.

So there is alot of testing and QA going into these public releases.

 

[bkends35]

Anyone else wish that they could use Snow Leopard on their rMBP's?

Some buddies of mine still use snow leopard and IMO its much better than mountain lion in many ways.

 

[Sky Blue]

Anyone else wish that they could use Snow Leopard on their rMBP's?

Not in the slightest.

 

[Tmelon]

Anyone else wish that they could use Snow Leopard on their rMBP's?

Some buddies of mine still use snow leopard and IMO its much better than mountain lion in many ways.

Snow Leopard was great back in '09, but I'd much prefer Mountain Lion.

 

[fivenotrump]

Anyone else wish that they could use Snow Leopard on their rMBP's?

Some buddies of mine still use snow leopard and IMO its much better than mountain lion in many ways.

It was good in its day, which has now passed.

 

[jasimon9]

Anyone else wish that they could use Snow Leopard on their rMBP's?

Some buddies of mine still use snow leopard and IMO its much better than mountain lion in many ways.

I loved Snow Leopard for its robustness, speed, and lack of bugs. It was the inspiration for my second tagline: I will trade you 250 new features for 1 "it just works!"

Actually, never upgraded my wife's MBP from Snow Leopard. But my main machine is ML. I have about a half dozen times came within an inch of downgrading back to SL.

 

[MJL]

Love Snow Leopard but am running Lion for SSD support. Similarly many will be running Mountain Lion for Fusion Drive but I'm running windows on the SSD so I could not care less about Mountain Lion. Unfortunately I'll need Mountain Lion to get the Bootcamp drivers for Windows 8.

 

[WhackyNinja]

If Im correct on this. Theres an Apple event coming up next month...however its not really known if its Apple TV or something else. I hope OS X "Lynx" will be announced OR if by knowing what has happened in the past (Mac OS X Leopard, and Snow Leopard) it will be announced at WWDC this year.

 

[Zab the Fab]

I want an Aqua HyperCard - does that make me weird? lol

This will be the last OS X, before OS 11. And how ironic that it ends with '9' as we look back to the classic environment before taking a small step for man and a big step for man kind, into OS 11

 

[WestonHarvey1]

This will be the last OS X, before OS 11. And how ironic that it ends with '9' as we look back to the classic environment before taking a small step for man and a big step for man kind, into OS 11

No, they will probably have OS 10.10, 10.11, 10.12, etc. It doesn't have to "roll over" to 11.

 

[Peace]

No, they will probably have OS 10.10, 10.11, 10.12, etc. It doesn't have to "roll over" to 11.

It doesn't have to but I bet it will.

 

[trustever]

I am sick of these silly annual new versions of OSX. Last time, it messed up my VMWare file which wouldn't work on Mountain Lion. Out of all the 200+ or so features that Apple touted, less than a handful are relevant to me. The whole place has gone mad. Apple is sick with consumerism, wanting to bring out the latest toy every year. Stuff the stability of apps that have to be updated every year just to work with the latest OSX version. Some of us out here are trying to get some work done on OSX.

Ok, since stability is important to me, I do not upgrade oSX with everyone else. I wait till its more stable, e.g. 10.6.6 or 10.7.4. But it impacts me when I need to buy a new Mac, and it comes with a buggy early version of the latest and greatest OSX, and when I need to transfer my older software, e.g. my VMWare data file.

Money has gotten to Apple's brain, but the fact is, these Apple management people stare at the mirror and con themselves into believing they're still make great products. Why else is the cash pile growing, they justify themselves.

- Bring back a 2 year release cycle of OSX
- Each new OSX, get it up to around 10.x.9 to be totally rock stable
- Have wider beta testing so we consumers are not used as paid beta-testers.

If I didn't have to buy Macs every so often, I would not care. I just would not update until the OS was rock solid, and all of you can gnash your teeth as you help Apple discover bugs. But I do regularly buy new Macs, and I don't like them coming with buggy releases such as 10.7.0-3 and 10.8.0-2

Fair Point.. !

 

[WestonHarvey1]

It doesn't have to but I bet it will.

The brand will change then. "OS 11" sounds ridiculous. It will be something else, like "Mac OS".

 

[Peace]

The brand will change then. "OS 11" sounds ridiculous. It will be something else, like "Mac OS".

It does. That's why it will be called OS XI.

Keep in mind Apple removed the "Mac" part of the naming a few months ago.

 

[Krazy Bill]

The brand will change then. "OS 11" sounds ridiculous. It will be something else, like "Mac OS".

Why does the number following 10 sound ridiculous? "Eleven" has been around since man discovered he could also use his toes for simple accounting.

 

[WestonHarvey1]

It does. That's why it will be called OS XI.

Keep in mind Apple removed the "Mac" part of the naming a few months ago.

They did, but it's conceivable it could come back, with the version number dropped.

Mac OS (for Macs)
iOS (for iPhone, iPod touch, iPad, and.. i... err... Apple TV)

 

[MattInOz]

I guess it's not tomorrow yet.

 

[TheBSDGuy]

Not to be a Smart A**, but I wonder which platforms will be rendered obsolete with the release of the new OS, when it comes. This is a feature I really didn't like with ML. It didn't affect me, but I'd hate to be one of those people that bought a Mac Pro for thousands of dollars just a few years ago and have it, to some extent, being relegated to the junkyard after a fairly short life. A machine like that, IMHO, ought to be good for 7 years.

 

[till213]

Which do you think delivers usable features to user sooner?

Which do you think would be more important as OS features (1):

• Facebook Integration vs ZFS (stable file system which detects "bit rot")
• iOS "Applification" (Notes, Reminder, ...) vs current OpenGL 4.2
• Crippled features (Launchpad, Spaces, Fullscreen) vs iSCSI (support for NAS protocol)
• etc.

Hint: the items on the left have been existing "major features" in the last two OS updates...

(1): OS stands for "Operating System" - yes, I know, "user experience", "integrated functionality", blah blah blah... but being able to attach (certain shares of) my NAS via iSCSI, or having confort in a reliable File System would enhance my own "experience" much much more than the annoying behaviour of certain "iCloud"-ified applications (I hate, hate, hate those "Duplicate" (no "Save as") and "Here are all your 20 documents you had open last time you closed the application - enjoy!" concepts!)

 

[lunaoso]

Which do you think would be more important as OS features (1):

• Facebook Integration vs ZFS (stable file system which detects "bit rot")
• iOS "Applification" (Notes, Reminder, ...) vs current OpenGL 4.2
• Crippled features (Launchpad, Spaces, Fullscreen) vs iSCSI (support for NAS protocol)
• etc.

Hint: the items on the left have been existing "major features" in the last two OS updates...

(1): OS stands for "Operating System" - yes, I know, "user experience", "integrated functionality", blah blah blah... but being able to attach (certain shares of) my NAS via iSCSI, or having confort in a reliable File System would enhance my own "experience" much much more than the annoying behaviour of certain "iCloud"-ified applications (I hate, hate, hate those "Duplicate" (no "Save as") and "Here are all your 20 documents you had open last time you closed the application - enjoy!" concepts!)

The average consumer would pick everything on the left. That's why they were added. I'm not saying that the options on the right shouldn't be added, but the left is what is selling the product.