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
Please explain what is "antiquated and obsolete" about NTFS.
If it's just because it's a 64-bit filesystem, that's pretty much expected. Volumes can only be 256 TiB, and files are stuck at a max of 16 TiB per file. (Actual NTFS structure limits are 16 EiB per volume and file, but current implementations are limited to 256 TiB/16 TiB). And it sucks that file paths can only be 32KiB-1 characters long.
Other things like online volume expansion (and contraction), advanced ACLs, sparse/compressed/encrypted files, Volume Shadow Services, resource forks (alternate data streams), single instance store, reparse points, transactional NTFS, SSD support (TRIM and allocation alignment), and advanced journaling are fairly modern. (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NTFS#Features)
Is a desktop OS filesystem "obsolete" because it doesn't support disks bigger than 256 TiB ??
(Note: People often lump "filesystem" and "volume manager" together in these feature lists, so I've followed that line and not distinguished filesystem features from volume manager features.)
Gut Mach/Xnu and replace with the FreeBSD Kernel.
Mac OS X should move to the freebsd kernel. This will bring a host of new goodies Jails, ZFS, PF, and a new network stack to name a few.
All Apple would need to do is finish the launchd port for FreeBSD, integrate OpenCL, Grand Central Dispatch and bring over Cocoa/Aqua.
This would give Apple a bigger developer community vs Darwin's and eliminate the ugliness of the Mach/XNU frankenstein kernel. Advancement would move at a rapid pace and more bugs would be squashed.
My 2 cents.
Mac OS X should move to the freebsd kernel. This will bring a host of new goodies Jails, ZFS, PF, and a new network stack to name a few.
All Apple would need to do is finish the launchd port for FreeBSD, integrate OpenCL, Grand Central Dispatch and bring over Cocoa/Aqua.
This would give Apple a bigger developer community vs Darwin's and eliminate the ugliness of the Mach/XNU frankenstein kernel. Advancement would move at a rapid pace and more bugs would be squashed.
My 2 cents.
That's just plain ... odd. "Good enough for a server" is usually the gold standard for stability.
Why? Performance. Mach has terrible performance in several important areas, and because the problem is architectural they can't be fixed.
Since when did marketing hype have anything to do with reality?Only if you are the king of the cats though. Otherwise you just look pretentious.
Name Taxonomy - The Science of OS X Cats
Just FYI, there are only four big cats. Or depending on your definition, maybe seven.
10.0 Cheetahs are considered Big Cats by some, but not by the stricter 4-species definition.
10.1 Puma is basically just another name for Cougars; another of the expanded, 7-species Big Cats.
Once Apple moved up to 10.2 Jaguar, they were more firmly in the big-4 of big cats.
Well, strangely a 10.3 Panther is not a kind of cat at all, but rather a folk name for a variety of different cats... usually Big Cats. (The 4 Big Cats are all of the Family Panthera.)
10.4 Tiger and 10.5 Leopard are two more big cats.
10.6 Snow Leopard is well, taxonomically challenging. They sound like they're just a kind of Leopard, but they are if anything more closely related to Tigers. But for a long time, Snow Leopards were considered part of genus Panthera, so can get away with qualifying as Big Cats. In any event, Apple can get away with it due to the confusion with the Leopard. And they qualify as Big Cats in the broader 7-species definition.
So in any event, that leaves 10.7 with two options. In the broader definition of Big Cat, they still have Cougar. If they stick with the Big Four, then that only leaves Lion.
Cougars are the same as Pumas, which was already used, but Apple is not constrained by little niceties like that, since they used Panther as well.
So my guess would be:
10.7 Cougar
10.8 Lion
10.9 - Nah... this one goes to 11.
There you have it. Absolute scientific proof. I am sure Apple is this technical in their name choices, so feel free to bet thousands of dollars on this important information.
Just FYI, there are only four big cats. Or depending on your definition, maybe seven.
10.0 Cheetahs are considered Big Cats by some, but not by the stricter 4-species definition.
10.1 Puma is basically just another name for Cougars; another of the expanded, 7-species Big Cats.
Once Apple moved up to 10.2 Jaguar, they were more firmly in the big-4 of big cats.
Well, strangely a 10.3 Panther is not a kind of cat at all, but rather a folk name for a variety of different cats... usually Big Cats. (The 4 Big Cats are all of the Family Panthera.)
10.4 Tiger and 10.5 Leopard are two more big cats.
10.6 Snow Leopard is well, taxonomically challenging. They sound like they're just a kind of Leopard, but they are if anything more closely related to Tigers. But for a long time, Snow Leopards were considered part of genus Panthera, so can get away with qualifying as Big Cats. In any event, Apple can get away with it due to the confusion with the Leopard. And they qualify as Big Cats in the broader 7-species definition.
So in any event, that leaves 10.7 with two options. In the broader definition of Big Cat, they still have Cougar. If they stick with the Big Four, then that only leaves Lion.
Cougars are the same as Pumas, which was already used, but Apple is not constrained by little niceties like that, since they used Panther as well.
So my guess would be:
10.7 Cougar
10.8 Lion
10.9 - Nah... this one goes to 11.
There you have it. Absolute scientific proof. I am sure Apple is this technical in their name choices, so feel free to bet thousands of dollars on this important information.
There you have it. Absolute scientific proof. I am sure Apple is this technical in their name choices, so feel free to bet thousands of dollars on this important information.
One thing I would bet on is that Apple won't go to an entirely new OS base simply because they've exhausted all big cat names.
One thing I would bet on is that Apple won't go to an entirely new OS base simply because they've exhausted all big cat names.
I suppose they could transcend big cats into something even bigger. Like...
Mac OS X 10.9 ThunderCat
Actually currently the majority of 3D graphics work for movies is done on Windows. The times of SGI and IRIX are over for quite some time now.
Don't confuse apples and oranges. I didn't say anything about SGI and IRIX. Last time I talked to pixar they were using linux on their own boxes. That may have changed. When I worked at AMD we sold Dreamworks animation a bunch of CPUs for their renderfarm, which, from what I was told, was also running some form of *NIX.
I was under the impression that people here didn't like NTFS because windows happens to use it.
Apple just released Snow Leopard, which contains a number of significant performance enhancements in areas like multicore scheduling and GPU processing. Did they do that just to abandon OS X and go to a new OS code base? No, they did it to support upcoming platforms with higher performance multicore and GPU architectures. In other words, OS X is now at the point where it's going to move Apple systems forward for a number of years to come. How many years is uncertain, but Apple is not going to abandon OS X in the next release.
That's understandable but file systems are not the same thing for both home users and servers. Users don't do the same thing that servers are excellent at. It's two completely different computation workload and there are many benefits and trades for different type of file systems. Newer server file systems tend to be optimized for multi-users, huge files resources with high focus on integrity (checksumming and snapshots) and backups and so on that can have an impact on responsiveness and so on.
in response to the title:
why wouldnt they be working on 10.7?
If they weren't I would be concerned for Apple as a company and tehir direction
why wouldnt they be working on 10.7?
If they weren't I would be concerned for Apple as a company and tehir direction
You know, I was originally going to argue against that possibility, but history seems to support it. A Mac OS 7.7 was developed and seeded to developers, but it was released as Mac OS 8. Same with Mac OS 8.7, which became Mac OS 9.
Still, I'd bet against it. Back then, the brand was "Mac OS", and what followed was just a version number. Now, "Mac OS X" is the brand, and it's a damn strong one; they'd need a really really good reason to drop it, and I don't think "we've never had a .7 before" cuts it.
I call it the Mac OS and consider X to be a series, not a version number. I don't think any other OS company has a brand, series, and version number or I just don't remember one. Most Mac people I know when referring to specific versions actually use the names like Leopard and Snow Leopard instead of the OS ten five or six.
As for the future, we don't know what Apple will do for a brand new OS just like we can't be sure that Apple will call it XI instead of some other name. I can assure you that Apple has an internal research teams that's working on the next generation OS that nobody here has any idea of what it can do, just like MS has for its Singularity and other research OS teams. Remember the project of working on Intel port of OS X for 5 years in private, that was done in parallel in order to ensure Apple has something in case PPC just dies or whatever. Apple will do whatever it can to assure its survival, it's not going to just let OS X be the only thing for its Mac business.
I just know we'll look back here in a decade and just laugh.
I think this might be the time for Apple to move away from the Big Cat codenames, if they plan to make any major visual changes. It'd be a good time, since they're running short anyways. To the user who made a nice list of big cats a few posts ago, I think it's rather clear why Apple would choose not to use Cougar for their OS codename and while they might use Lion, I just can't quite see it (though admittedly, I didn't believe the reports about the Snow Leopard name either). If they don't abandon it for 10.7, then certainly I expect by 10.8 we'll see a different series of codenames.
jW
and while they might use Lion, I just can't quite see it (though admittedly, I didn't believe the reports about the Snow Leopard name either). If they don't abandon it for 10.7, then certainly I expect by 10.8 we'll see a different series of codenames.jW
Can't Wait!!
Apple just made the iPad go public, so hopefully they can start working on 10.7!!!
Apple just made the iPad go public, so hopefully they can start working on 10.7!!!
Apple just made the iPad go public, so hopefully they can start working on 10.7!!!
Holy thread revival, Batman. Firstly, I'm sure Apple is already working on 10.7, and has been ever since 10.6 was released. Secondly, I hope we see new Macs before 10.7!
Apple just made the iPad go public, so hopefully they can start working on 10.7!!!
Hopefully, they can work on something. Come on, anything here guys. New MBP, Mac Pro, anything! I guess Apple as a company is like the iPhone and iPad: No multitasking allowed.