I have never said this before but that would almost be enough to drive me over to the dark side.
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.
Apple Already Working on Mac OS X 10.7 Development?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I have never said this before but that would almost be enough to drive me over to the dark side.
Ignorance or ignoring?
Dictionary in OS X defines 'ignore' as to "refuse to take notice of or acknowledge; disregard intentionally". Which is pretty much the opposite of what you have done. Hopefully, you won't get confused in the future.
Obviously, whether Snow Leopard is a whole new operating system or something closer to a service pack, is a moot. The almost half a million hit on Google for the combination of the two words definitely suggests that I am not the only one raising the issue. Even the pricing verifies that the latter theory is closer to the truth. If you are on Leopard, Snow Leopard is pretty much the same in terms of usability and appearance. For not a lot of benefits, you pay a small fee. If you are upgrading from Tiger, then you have to pay full OS price. Which you ultimately get. Just as you would have done if you upgraded to Leopard.
Dictionary in OS X defines 'ignore' as to "refuse to take notice of or acknowledge; disregard intentionally". Which is pretty much the opposite of what you have done. Hopefully, you won't get confused in the future.
Obviously, whether Snow Leopard is a whole new operating system or something closer to a service pack, is a moot. The almost half a million hit on Google for the combination of the two words definitely suggests that I am not the only one raising the issue. Even the pricing verifies that the latter theory is closer to the truth. If you are on Leopard, Snow Leopard is pretty much the same in terms of usability and appearance. For not a lot of benefits, you pay a small fee. If you are upgrading from Tiger, then you have to pay full OS price. Which you ultimately get. Just as you would have done if you upgraded to Leopard.
:O SHOCKING NEWS!!!! They're doing what they and every other company has always done... shipped their product and begun on the next one. Actually in many cases they're working on the next one before they're even done with the current one. -rolls eyes- how is this news.
The "shocking news" posts
It seems like there is about one every page... someone posting that this news is not at all surprising.
Yes; nor is that comment surprising, since a dozen people already said it earlier in the thread.
By the time a thread tops 300 posts, wouldn't people guess that maybe a super-obvious post such as that would have already been mentioned?
They don't even have to read all the previous posts. It's just a no-brainer that an obvious first reaction is going to have been covered already when a thread has been around for days.
OK, OK... </rant>
It seems like there is about one every page... someone posting that this news is not at all surprising.
Yes; nor is that comment surprising, since a dozen people already said it earlier in the thread.
By the time a thread tops 300 posts, wouldn't people guess that maybe a super-obvious post such as that would have already been mentioned?
They don't even have to read all the previous posts. It's just a no-brainer that an obvious first reaction is going to have been covered already when a thread has been around for days.
OK, OK... </rant>
Here's a name suggestion:
OS X 'My cat just yakked on the carpet which I just had steam cleaned a couple days ago'
How about:
OS X I Just Crapped in Your Shoe
Amen. Long overdue. HFS+ is a hack on top of a hack, and it blows. It's just as antiquated and obsolete as NTFS. Why apple shut down their ZFS project is just beyond me. ZFS is the most badass filesystem out there at the moment, and it's been released as open-source. Apple is retarded if they don't use it for 10.7.
There are windows 7 disk's made that have both 64 bit an 32 bit on them as well as vista. Its competely possible. Every vista disk had 6 different version it. Its called modular software.
Based on the two team theory, Apple must have started development of 10.7 on August 5, 2009 (the day 10.5.8 was released). Development for 10.5 ended that day, so the 10.5 team must have started 10.7 that day.
Well they based OSX on Mach and Mach is just above Minix in terms of power.
I mean OpenStep was already ported to different platforms so there was no need for Mach.
I didn't know linux was such a niggly spot for some Mac users. This is a fun button to push.
Why doesn't Apple takefull use of EFI and have the driver sin the Firmware?
I think I read here that the two teams working in parallel were merged after the release of Tiger, although perhaps someone else can confirm this as my google-fu isn't firing on all cylinders tonight.
Cartoon cat names!
Just being silly.....
How about "OSX Garfield"?
"OSX Hobbes"? With some kind of USB-powered Calvin accessory?
"OSX Tom"? Complete with the new "Apple Jerry Mouse"
"OSX Sylvester"? Maybe HK can bring out Tweety speakers to go with that?
"OSX Josie"? With optional "Pussycat" Apps maybe similar to iLife? The box set could then be renamed to "Josie and the Pussycats".
Gonna go see if there's any Josie episodes on YouTube,
Keri
Oh! Duh! cant forget "OSX Snagglepuss"!
Just being silly.....
How about "OSX Garfield"?
"OSX Hobbes"? With some kind of USB-powered Calvin accessory?
"OSX Tom"? Complete with the new "Apple Jerry Mouse"
"OSX Sylvester"? Maybe HK can bring out Tweety speakers to go with that?
"OSX Josie"? With optional "Pussycat" Apps maybe similar to iLife? The box set could then be renamed to "Josie and the Pussycats".
Gonna go see if there's any Josie episodes on YouTube,
Keri
Oh! Duh! cant forget "OSX Snagglepuss"!
Just being silly.....
How about "OSX Garfield"?
"OSX Hobbes"? With some kind of USB-powered Calvin accessory?
"OSX Tom"? Complete with the new "Apple Jerry Mouse"
"OSX Sylvester"? Maybe HK can bring out Tweety speakers to go with that?
"OSX Josie"? With optional "Pussycat" Apps maybe similar to iLife? The box set could then be renamed to "Josie and the Pussycats".
Gonna go see if there's any Josie episodes on YouTube,
Keri
Oh! Duh! cant forget "OSX Snagglepuss"!
You forgot TopCat! TBone... I can't think of any more.
You weren't pushing any buttons. The reason I was prepared to bet my life savings that Apple won't go after Linux is that XNU is stable, works well and is improving with every release. As the saying goes: if it ain't brokeWell they based OSX on Mach and Mach is just above Minix in terms of power.
I mean OpenStep was already ported to different platforms so there was no need for Mach.
I didn't know linux was such a niggly spot for some Mac users. This is a fun button to push.
I actually think the Mac is a bigger niggly spot for Linux users than the reverse. Mac OS X made the UNIX for the desktop dream a reality and did it first. And worst of all, it doesn't fulfil and ideological dream.
Out of interest, how often has HFS+ caused you major problems on your Mac?
We're talking about file systems here, one of the most important things that can not be rushed when it comes to new features. It takes decades to even create a new file system from scratch.
Apple is not going to use ZFS due to the licensing issues unless Oracle completely open sources ZFS (by buying out the companies that apparently owns some of the patents that ZFS is infringing on) but that's not going to happen due to some patent issues and a number of lawsuits. Apple isn't going to drag themselves into that. They'll rather just develop their own file system or pick another file system that's without any patents.
Also ZFS isn't without limitations, it is still far too immature to be used as a default file system for home users, it may be stable for servers' environment, it may not be for users.
Both NTFS and HFS+ continues to evolute over time, in fact HFS+ is only 11 years old. Apple continues to introduce new features to the HFS+ file system in every release, I believe SL gained some compression features for binary files, I can't recall at the moment and Apple will continue to use HFS+ for the next few years until they complete their new file system that's probably going to be in the OS XI with a new kernel. I don't foresee any file system changes until 2015.
Didn't say that. You're putting words in my mouth.
Apple has a kernel which works well now, why would they want to change it (and go through the upheaval for very little gain). There is a clear case the filesystem needs looking at and one day we will see a HFS+ replacement. But the XNU kernel is fine for now.
Which is why Apple are developing and improving their Kernel with every release.
Maybe that's valid. But it's hardly equivalent to corruption or a fault that renders files ususable.
Hard disks are getting bigger and bigger and the latest release slimmed down the OS by doing on demand installation for things like Rosetta and printer drivers, along with adding filesystem compression.
Be careful copying those disks - they have funky file layouts. There's a single-instance-store so that if the same file appears in different directories, all the directory entries point to the same disk blocks. Similar in effect to links, but they aren't links in the typical sense.
I have it on good authority that 10.7 will be known as "Mac OS X Longcat".
That's not going to happen unless they port Cocoa to Windows. (I know there's been some speculation that that will happen, but I haven't heard anything about it in a while.) Failing that, they're not going to split it into two codebases that have to be maintained separately.
I think Apple has invested too much time, money, and effort into the "Mac OS X" branding to just give it up when the version number passes 10.9. My prediction: Over time, they will deemphasize the version numbers, continuing a pattern that's already begun. Starting with 10.2, they generally marketed it as "Mac OS X v10.# Cat Name", i.e. "Mac OS X v10.2 Jaguar" continuing through "Mac OS X v10.5 Leopard". They still occasionally use that pattern to refer to 10.6, but much more frequently, they refer to it as "Mac OS X Snow Leopard", deemphasizing the version number. I predict that this will continue: the version numbers will continue to exist, but they will not be the primary designations under which the different versions are marketed, so it will not sound odd when they come out with a 10.10 -- because Apple won't call it that in its marketing.
They'll probably only "go to 11" if they fundamentally change the foundation of the operating system, similar to the difference between Mac OS 9 and Mac OS X, and I don't see that happening in the foreseeable future.
It's hard to say based on build number alone. 10.010.6 were 4K78, 5G64, 6C115, 7B85, 8A428, 9A581, and 10A432 respectively, so you can see they vary a lot.
Unreasonably optimistic speculation: They closed down the open source project and are continuing to work on it internally, because they're adding some proprietary extensions that they don't want to open-source.
Probably not happening, I know.
That's not going to happen unless they port Cocoa to Windows. (I know there's been some speculation that that will happen, but I haven't heard anything about it in a while.) Failing that, they're not going to split it into two codebases that have to be maintained separately.
I think Apple has invested too much time, money, and effort into the "Mac OS X" branding to just give it up when the version number passes 10.9. My prediction: Over time, they will deemphasize the version numbers, continuing a pattern that's already begun. Starting with 10.2, they generally marketed it as "Mac OS X v10.# Cat Name", i.e. "Mac OS X v10.2 Jaguar" continuing through "Mac OS X v10.5 Leopard". They still occasionally use that pattern to refer to 10.6, but much more frequently, they refer to it as "Mac OS X Snow Leopard", deemphasizing the version number. I predict that this will continue: the version numbers will continue to exist, but they will not be the primary designations under which the different versions are marketed, so it will not sound odd when they come out with a 10.10 -- because Apple won't call it that in its marketing.
They'll probably only "go to 11" if they fundamentally change the foundation of the operating system, similar to the difference between Mac OS 9 and Mac OS X, and I don't see that happening in the foreseeable future.
It's hard to say based on build number alone. 10.010.6 were 4K78, 5G64, 6C115, 7B85, 8A428, 9A581, and 10A432 respectively, so you can see they vary a lot.
Unreasonably optimistic speculation: They closed down the open source project and are continuing to work on it internally, because they're adding some proprietary extensions that they don't want to open-source.
Probably not happening, I know.
Given the present trend in major release intervals we should expect 10.10 around 2017. Anything could happen by then.
I agree, and it would probably be a radically new OS concept that is very different than the traditional single-system disk-based OS. In any case it would be major new development that would take several years, not something that will be rushed out the door at the next release cycle.