OS11. Will it be another OSX?

[diametric]

We all know that the move from OS9 to OSX was fantasmical (HUGE).

Can we expect the same thing from OS11?

For example, new GUI, new apps, new architecture, etc.

.diametric

[iMeowbot]

At the last WWDC when the Intel switch was announced, Jobs claimed that Apple plans to get about 20 years from the OS X technology. That doesn't mean that nothing will change, but it does mean they don't plan on throwing everything away and starting from scratch again any time soon.

[diametric]

So it won't be changing to OS11 after 10.9?

I would expect a continous and revolutionary change with Apple, new interface, moving away from Aqua, I personally love how the GUI has changed from the old XP one to the very sexy looking Vista GUI. I would expect this from Apple.

At least a major GUI upgrade.

[iMeowbot]

There is nothing magical about .9, they could do a 10.10 and so on if they wanted, or jump after 10.5, whatever. Major version numbers are all arbitrary marketing fluff. Notice how most new software won't even run under early OS X releases.

[Chundles]

So it won't be changing to OS11 after 10.9?

I would expect a continous and revolutionary change with Apple, new interface, moving away from Aqua, I personally love how the GUI has changed from the old XP one to the very sexy looking Vista GUI. I would expect this from Apple.

At least a major GUI upgrade.

No, it's not a decimal point, 10.10 is not 11, the point simply represents a version number.

In general terms, anything below 1.0 is considered alpha or beta or whatever - basically it means they're still testing it. When something hits version 1.0 it is considered release quality.

After that, x.1 or x.0.1 releases are minor upgrades (compared with OS9 -> OSX, 10.2, 10.3 and 10.4 haven't really been all that different. But they aren't decimal numbers, you could have 10.4.13, 10.5.75 etc the numbers just signify where the program is at in its development.

[quagmire]

So it won't be changing to OS11 after 10.9?

I would expect a continous and revolutionary change with Apple, new interface, moving away from Aqua, I personally love how the GUI has changed from the old XP one to the very sexy looking Vista GUI. I would expect this from Apple.

At least a major GUI upgrade.

And you know MS stole Vista's GUI from OS X right? :rolleyes:

[Lollypop]

Well Apple used for OS 1 to 9 acrhitecture for ages, yet had multiple versions numbers out of it, I wouldnt be surprised if at some point we see a OS 11, it might use the foundation of X but have some sort of completely new and revolutionary component. Personally I think apple wont do anything to extreme for a while, they dont want to risk backlash from all the fundamental changes they have been making lately.

[DevilsRejection]

And you know MS stole Vista's GUI from OS X right? :rolleyes:

and Apple stole the GUI from Xerox right :rolleyes:

everything is built upon the shoulders of giants, get over yourself

[mark!]

I thought in the beginning Apple stole from Xerox...NOOOOW they didn't steal from anyone. Steve Jobs & his NeXT was like YO! & made OS X.

:confused:

[DevilsRejection]

who the hell cares who stole what, millions of people are enjoying os x and millions will enjoy vista and millions enjoy linux

why can't we all just leave it bloody be

[dejo]

and Apple stole the GUI from Xerox right :rolleyes:

who the hell cares who stole what...

:confused: :rolleyes:

why can't we all just leave it bloody be

Because it is not good to spread disinformation. Here's a good essay you may want to read: On Xerox, Apple and Progress (http://www.folklore.org/StoryView.py?project=Macintosh&story=On_Xerox,_Apple_and_Progress.txt&topic=Software%20Design&sortOrder=Sort%20by%20Date)

[diametric]

IMO, Vista's GUI rocks OSX's.

[Wolf River]

IMO, Vista's GUI rocks OSX's.

Sorry, not used to that expression, does that mean you think the Vista GUI is better than OS X?

Must say I'm not looking forward to the prospect of looking at OS X for 20 years (2021 :eek: ) as nice as it is, I hope they just mean they will keep the foundations but change the GUI look (a lot) in that time :o

[emotion]

IMO, Vista's GUI rocks OSX's.


Rocks = imitates?

:)

[diametric]

I mean the black and the general sleekness of it, I love OSX (how it works) but I'd love to look at something better and nicer than Aqua in the future.

[mduser63]

I mean the black and the general sleekness of it, I love OSX (how it works) but I'd love to look at something better and nicer than Aqua in the future.

To me Aero looks like a rip-off of Jaguar and earlier versions of OS X. Far too much unnecessary transparency. The whole thing looks cheap. In case you're wondering, I don't think OS X looked particularly good until Panther either.

[trainguy77]

OS 11 I think will be some GUI make over. Maybe even a re-design of finder(if it does not come in 10.5) However, the core of it will not change they will stay with cocoa for awhile.

[Cross]

I just skinned OS X as the aqua look is nice but some change now and then is ok to lol.

And that spinning beach ball is just not me lol.

[Xander562]

when they change, will it be OSXI or OS Eleven or OS 11?

[mjstew33]

No one knows.

Hell, could be called System 11 for all we know.

[icetraxx]

Personally I think we will see minor updates (which are quite major) to MacOS X until apple makes a large interface or architectural change, whenever that might be.

IMO, Vista's GUI rocks OSX's.

I'm sorry but I have to disagree. I've been using Vista Beta 2 and the aero itself is good looking but the interface is still cluttered. I think the interface functionality is worse then XP :eek: . The explorer and control panel windows have buttons everywhere and everything has been moved around from XP. The network setup in Vista is terrible, I couldn't even connect to a closed network because the network setup didn't make any sense. Also everything and I mean everything in vista that you can click has a mouseover, this drives me nuts as its so distracting. I dont want everything I hover my mouse over to light up like a christmas tree! :p As thats been said I think aero is good looking despite the fact that its not antialiased like Quartz (when you switch between windows the jaggedness is terrible while Quartz on MacOS antialiases the windows). I also hate the fact that everything is just slightly slower then XP such as how long it takes to draw a window (even on a 7800GT). Overall I find Vista to be an improvement on XP but I can't help but feel that its not a huge update to the operating system. Vista still feels like XP with a skin, and updated explorer, and aero interface effects.

[JosiahPB]

I hope I live to Mac OS XII...and I would die a happy man.

[Me1000]

come on guys, everyone here knows MS stole the GUI from Apple.
Hell the practically stole the software!

I installed vista beta 2 on a junk PC of mine 1GHz 512 MB Ram ...

it was as slow as hell. and it took me hours trying to find hoe to enter the ip settings. i had my first mac for 5 min and i was already on the internet.

Vista is cluttered everything on it is os x with a winders twist!

[Macmadant]

and Apple stole the GUI from Xerox right :rolleyes:

everything is built upon the shoulders of giants, get over yourself

No, Apple saw Xerox's OS in action, then went away and come up with somthing different, new ideas and stuff like drag and drop,
Bill gates took macintosh prototypes and messed around with the code and come up with somthing based on MS DOS.

[ham_man]

come on guys, everyone here knows MS stole the GUI from Apple.
Hell the practically stole the software!

I installed vista beta 2 on a junk PC of mine 1GHz 512 MB Ram ...

it was as slow as hell. and it took me hours trying to find hoe to enter the ip settings. i had my first mac for 5 min and i was already on the internet.

Vista is cluttered everything on it is os x with a winders twist!
MICRO$OFT SUX0RZ!!!

C'mon man...Vista on a 1 GHz 512 MB RAM machine? XP would drag on that machine...what did you expect from Vista...?

...and its common knowledge that the original GUI was developed at XEROX...

[Glen Quagmire]

come on guys, everyone here knows MS stole the GUI from Apple.
Hell the practically stole the software!

I installed vista beta 2 on a junk PC of mine 1GHz 512 MB Ram ...

it was as slow as hell. and it took me hours trying to find hoe to enter the ip settings. i had my first mac for 5 min and i was already on the internet.

Vista is cluttered everything on it is os x with a winders twist!

So, let's get this straight: you're complaining about an OS that's in beta and which won't be out for a good while yet and comparing it to a very mature OS in the form of OS X? And you express surprise that it's slow on a PC with 512MB of RAM and a slow CPU?

[Me1000]

^ That computer runs XP fine. in fact it came with XP preinstalled.
the only time it got slow was when you do a lot of multitasking and you start to fill up the HD.

vista was usable but still butt slow. also the graphic requirements for using areo are outrageous!

another reason why OS X dominates. im running a 350 MHz b&w if i tried to run winders on a 350 MHx machine, it would be as slow as my great grandma trying to run up stairs!!! ( no offense to anyone by that)

EDIT: I know some things will be fixed but all vista is, is xp with a diffrent interface.

also vista is suppose to be out very soon! in less than 6 months if im not mistaken, but please correct me if im wrong!

[Mac Rules]

I'm sorry but I have to disagree. I've been using Vista Beta 2 and the aero itself is good looking but the interface is still cluttered. I think the interface functionality is worse then XP :eek: . The explorer and control panel windows have buttons everywhere and everything has been moved around from XP. The network setup in Vista is terrible, I couldn't even connect to a closed network because the network setup didn't make any sense. Also everything and I mean everything in vista that you can click has a mouseover, this drives me nuts as its so distracting. I dont want everything I hover my mouse over to light up like a christmas tree! :p As thats been said I think aero is good looking despite the fact that its not antialiased like Quartz (when you switch between windows the jaggedness is terrible while Quartz on MacOS antialiases the windows). I also hate the fact that everything is just slightly slower then XP such as how long it takes to draw a window (even on a 7800GT). Overall I find Vista to be an improvement on XP but I can't help but feel that its not a huge update to the operating system. Vista still feels like XP with a skin, and updated explorer, and aero interface effects.

Funny you should say that, my Win XP has been skinned to Vista, had the new WMP11 downmloaded and IE7, do you think any of my mates realise? Not a chance. Besides a few changes to the start menu etc, its not that different at all.... Which is why Mac OSX is an absolute scream! So much smoother, nicer, cleaner! I can't wait for the new MBP!

Cheers

[Chip NoVaMac]

I hope I live to Mac OS XII...and I would die a happy man.

You were one up on me, I was thinking more along the lines of OSX II (could mean OSX Two). IMO we are 5 to 8 years away from OSX II.

[Killyp]

How come Microsoft seems to get it's development techniques all wrong?

This is how microsoft did it:


Windows 1.1 > Windows 3.1

Generally just a GUI change, still based on DOS. New graphics and sound engine...

Windows 3.1 > Windows 95

Generally just a GUI change, some new apps. Everything people were used to changed.

Windows 95 > 98

Generally just new things like auto device detecting (didn't that work well? :p ) and, WOW, they can integrate HTML into explorer! How useful! Everyone needs that!

Windows 98 > ME

Bill Gates kids changed the bits they thought needed changing.

Windows ME > 2000

GUI still the same as 6 years ago. Oh no, all the buttons have moved around, no-one knows where anything is for another 6 months.

Windows 2000 > XP

New ugly GUI! Windows 2000 with a bit of NT. Great. Windows no longer based on DOS (15 years after Windows first came along).

Why can't Microsoft get people used to something in an OS, and just upgrade the bits that need upgrading? Apple got it right in the first place with System 1, and every OS up to OS 9 changed the things that needed changing (colour introduced, better app support, better integration etc...) until OS X, when they changed it to a different but recognisable and understandable GUI with completely different innards.

So all together Apple have really had 3 main OSes, System 1, System 7 and OS X. They all had similar features, the finder worked off the same principles (okay, maybe system 1 was a bit wierd), and the basic idea behind the OS remained the same, one toolbar at the top which changes for the app you're in.

Windows seems to have changed so much on the top over the years, that most people who use XP wouldn't be able to use 3.1, or even 95.

If you got someone who was used to OS X, I bet they would also be able to use a System 1 based computer with no real difficulties...

[crees!]

come on guys, everyone here knows MS stole the GUI from Apple.
Hell the practically stole the software!
Ah, you mean like the QuickTime code in WiMP that still had QT comments in it :D

[Patch^]

Ah, you mean like the QuickTime code in WiMP that still had QT comments in it :D

:eek: really? Do you have an article that I can read up on?

[crees!]

:eek: really? Do you have an article that I can read up on? I read about this a long time ago. Here's something I googled up: http://www.roughlydrafted.com/insideitunes2.html

[funkychunkz]

who the hell cares who stole what, millions of people are enjoying os x and millions will enjoy vista and millions enjoy linux



Well I think the computer companies might care, seeing as there is a massive difference between 25 million users and say 450 millions users.

[Timepass]

^ That computer runs XP fine. in fact it came with XP preinstalled.
the only time it got slow was when you do a lot of multitasking and you start to fill up the HD.

vista was usable but still butt slow. also the graphic requirements for using areo are outrageous!

another reason why OS X dominates. im running a 350 MHz b&w if i tried to run winders on a 350 MHx machine, it would be as slow as my great grandma trying to run up stairs!!! ( no offense to anyone by that)

EDIT: I know some things will be fixed but all vista is, is xp with a diffrent interface.

also vista is suppose to be out very soon! in less than 6 months if im not mistaken, but please correct me if im wrong!

Umm have you read the system requirement for Vista yet. I dont think you CPU even meets them.

The recomend specs are a 3ghz intel CPU (or is equilent. AMD 3000+ is where the Recomend specs start).
1gig of ram
128mg video memory.


Most of the stuff in the recomend spec are good for a mid range computer built 2 years ago. (heck even a mid low)

Based off your computer specs I going to guess you system is oh about 4-5years old. Running PC 133 ram.

Really you complaining about vista being slow on a computer that bareily meets system requirements (if meeting them at all) on a OS that is still a BETA. And comparing it to a mature OS that is over a year old and has been thoguh several revision not exactly fair.

[Me1000]

i feel like im being attacked here!
I wasnt complaining it ran slow on my computer. i was saying it ran slow in general! I cant tell you when it was built but its around what time you said.

the point of what i was saying is... vista is XP that looks cooler, with extra features that are found on tiger!

MS needs to do what mac did and build the OS from the ground up! that would probably work out some bugs and make it run faster!

and yes i have read the requirements for vista. and they are outrageous!

here are some links for you guys
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2674791799339834706&q=vista
and
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7919991136779006253&q=vista+os+x


Umm have you read the system requirement for Vista yet. I dont think you CPU even meets them.

The recomend specs are a 3ghz intel CPU (or is equilent. AMD 3000+ is where the Recomend specs start).
1gig of ram
128mg video memory.


Most of the stuff in the recomend spec are good for a mid range computer built 2 years ago. (heck even a mid low)

Based off your computer specs I going to guess you system is oh about 4-5years old. Running PC 133 ram.

Really you complaining about vista being slow on a computer that bareily meets system requirements (if meeting them at all) on a OS that is still a BETA. And comparing it to a mature OS that is over a year old and has been thoguh several revision not exactly fair.:D