Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
What happens after Mac OS X 10.9
- Thread starter Dulcimer
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Hmm, some interesting discussions occurring here, but I'm still confused...
Does the X represent 10 or not? I know that it *could* represent Unix etc. but was there a Mac OS 1, 2, 3, ..., 8, 9 and then X? If so, then they can't really keep the X in the name IF they don't do a 10.10 version.
Does the X represent 10 or not? I know that it *could* represent Unix etc. but was there a Mac OS 1, 2, 3, ..., 8, 9 and then X? If so, then they can't really keep the X in the name IF they don't do a 10.10 version.
"OS Xi" would be a logical naming step, as the XI roman numerals would allude to a 11th version, and the lowercase i would relate to the further merging of iOS and Mac OS.
It was called System/System Software. And there was 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7. The Mac OS nomenclature first appeared in 7.6. Then it started to be called Mac OS 8, 9 and now X (obviously 10). That's why I just can't say that X does not stand for 10. Again, there might be other explanations (such as Unix) but it does stand for 10, at least.
I never thought I would agree with something like this. It's a shame they're leaving computers behind aka what they are truly good at.
But people still need to create & update apps for the App Store
And some kind of version of Xcode would be impractical on iPad. The type of modal interface that iOS apps have would make getting that sort of work much longer than necessary! Apple still cares about the Mac and productivity - they continue to offer their pro apps like Final Cut, Motion and Logic. Getting rid of all of that hard work wouldn't make any sense. Unless there is somehow a way to make iOS more optimal for pro work, the Mac will still remain relevant for Apple.
They make good computers, but they make a lot more profit off phones and other mobile stuff that people buy every year or two or three. And final cut, ilife, and iwork are really not for pro type of work. Adobe still makes pro apps for the mac though.
But people still need to create & update apps for the App Store
Apple still cares about the Mac and productivity - they continue to offer their pro apps like Final Cut, Motion and Logic. Getting rid of all of that hard work wouldn't make any sense. Unless there is somehow a way to make iOS more optimal for pro work, the Mac will still remain relevant for Apple.
It doesn't. The system versions all refer to different versions. Apple changed things with OSX though since they are very different things - but OSX is just branding - X is just X. Apple uses version numbers after OSX
Nonsense. They make lots of money selling Mac's and there is no evidence whatsoever that they are abandoning OSX - there is no reason to especially given that as of right now is that you have to have a Mac to Develop for the iOS devices.
ETA
Exactly. Version numbers are not decimals. Apple can label their OS whatever they want to. There is no reason they are going to version it 10.10 or whatever (my guess is that they won't market version numbers anyhow).
But they are hardly innovating on the computer front. They seem like they're abandoning their desktops, the mac pro is so obsolete now, the mac mini is bigger than ever, and they don't even advertise against windows and the pc anymore. All they do is refresh the processor and ports once in awhile and call it a day. OS X is so old, all they do is add a few new features every year, but keep all the legacy code and graphics from 2001. They even fail to figure out how to resize and maximize programs in a useful manner.
Almost three fourths of their money comes from iOS devices according to
http://arstechnica.com/apple/2011/10/despite-record-mac-sales-70-of-apples-revenue-comes-from-ios/
and this
http://www.macworld.com/article/1166533/apple_nearly_doubles_its_profits_in_ipad_driven_quarter.html
I see them gradually getting rid of the mini and imac, they already got rid of their 17 inch notebook and basically all their notebooks look the same as 5 years ago.
Almost three fourths of their money comes from iOS devices according to
http://arstechnica.com/apple/2011/10/despite-record-mac-sales-70-of-apples-revenue-comes-from-ios/
and this
http://www.macworld.com/article/1166533/apple_nearly_doubles_its_profits_in_ipad_driven_quarter.html
I see them gradually getting rid of the mini and imac, they already got rid of their 17 inch notebook and basically all their notebooks look the same as 5 years ago.
Well... Who cares?! As far as I'm concerned they can name it Jesus Christ Superstar or whatever they like, all I care about is what changes there'll be, the rest is just branding and marketing.
Anyway I think they'll keep using the OS X brand until they'll be ready for a major overhaul at which point they'll likely name it OS XI or even something completely new, whether this will happen after OS X 10.9 or OS X 10.8372942 only Apple knows. It would probably make sense for them to do that after OS X 10.9 because of people's expectations and because they need something "new" to keep selling (OS X has been around for almost 12 years). Time will tell.
Anyway I think they'll keep using the OS X brand until they'll be ready for a major overhaul at which point they'll likely name it OS XI or even something completely new, whether this will happen after OS X 10.9 or OS X 10.8372942 only Apple knows. It would probably make sense for them to do that after OS X 10.9 because of people's expectations and because they need something "new" to keep selling (OS X has been around for almost 12 years). Time will tell.
I think just because they make more profit on a general category of product, it shouldn't mean their alternative needs to be phased out. There must be a reason why they're still updating the iPod line.
Also if they phased out the Mac, what about all of the existing developers selling on the Mac App Store?
I didn't mention iLife or iWork, but FCP in its current version I would consider a pro app. I believe many of the pro features that originally existed got re-added.
Once upon a time OS X was a version number, but it has long since been turned into a brand. Like "Windows".
So long as the kernel design and UI philosophy remain rooted in the same heritage as 10.0, the OS X name will stay.
That said, if Apple does an overhaul to core of the OS, the name will probably be retired.
So long as the kernel design and UI philosophy remain rooted in the same heritage as 10.0, the OS X name will stay.
That said, if Apple does an overhaul to core of the OS, the name will probably be retired.
When? The first time that an OS with OS X in its name was offered to the public, it had the name MacOS X Server 1.0, codenamed "Rhapasody." This was version 1.0 of MacOS X Server. After Rhapsody, came MacOS X Public Beta, codenamed "Kodiak." Kodiak did not feature a version number. Its shipping package, however, was the first to prominently feature the "X."
The first retail release of MacOS X was MacOS X 10.0, version 10.0 of MacOS X. There was no server version of MacOS X 10.0. Soon to follow was MacOS X 10.1 and MacOS X Server 10.1. We are now at OS X 10.8 and OS X Server 10.8.
If ever the "X" in OS X were a version number, then clearly I missed it. Which version did I miss?
I hope when we hit 10.10 or os11.. we will see the influence of Ive!
I'm hoping for that to happen on 10.9.
I hope not! I loathe Windows from the standpoint of how it works under-the-hood (global registries, too much legacy code, requires installation due to shared libraries, etc) and because it's not a Unix/Linux environment. I don't think I could go back to using a non Unix/Linux based OS, and OS X is light years ahead of Linux from an ease of use standpoint.
What happens after Mac OS X 10.9 . . .?
Apple implodes in upon itself leaving behind the Black Hole of Cupertino
Apple implodes in upon itself leaving behind the Black Hole of Cupertino
Look through YouTube for OSX launch videos and demos.
Jobs even introduced it as OS Ten! Not OSX.
X=10 and you'd be a fool to believe otherwise!
The last answer is some time ago, but I will answer anyway.
This is my guess:
The "X" in OS X isn't just a version anymore. Surely it originally stood for 10, but not exclusively, because otherwise "OS X 10.8" would be redundant - wouldn't it? It then should be called OS X.8 or something.
So I'm sure for Apple "OS X" is a brand like "iOS". They will not drop the X.
But I also doubt they will call a version "OS X 10.10" or "OS X 10.11". They will more likely pick up the nomenclature of iOS and - after "OS X 10.9", continue with "OS X 11", "OS X 12" and so on. That would indeed make more sense than always keeping the "10." during major updates, like they did in the past.
This is my guess:
The "X" in OS X isn't just a version anymore. Surely it originally stood for 10, but not exclusively, because otherwise "OS X 10.8" would be redundant - wouldn't it?
It then should be called OS X.8 or something.So I'm sure for Apple "OS X" is a brand like "iOS". They will not drop the X.
But I also doubt they will call a version "OS X 10.10" or "OS X 10.11". They will more likely pick up the nomenclature of iOS and - after "OS X 10.9", continue with "OS X 11", "OS X 12" and so on. That would indeed make more sense than always keeping the "10." during major updates, like they did in the past.
its a "name" they can call it what ever they want.
maybe it wont be name OSX. it could be called "doors". i don't know.
the question OP is asking is NOT about the naming part of the UI. is how the UI will be like in the future.
but i hope the UI will be leaner uses less resources, user friendly, increase productivity. it even if this version UI is called " your mom's house" i would still buy it. lol
maybe it wont be name OSX. it could be called "doors". i don't know.
the question OP is asking is NOT about the naming part of the UI. is how the UI will be like in the future.
but i hope the UI will be leaner uses less resources, user friendly, increase productivity. it even if this version UI is called " your mom's house" i would still buy it. lol