Sidebar Sidebar
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?

jb510 said:
I hope we go to 10.11 because you always want to go one more then the other blokes...

Nigel Tufnel: The numbers all go to eleven. Look, right across the board, eleven, eleven, eleven and...
Marty DiBergi: Oh, I see. And most amps go up to ten?
Nigel Tufnel: Exactly.
Marty DiBergi: Does that mean it's louder? Is it any louder?
Nigel Tufnel: Well, it's one louder, isn't it? It's not ten. You see, most blokes, you know, will be playing at ten. You're on ten here, all the way up, all the way up, all the way up, you're on ten on your guitar. Where can you go from there? Where?
Marty DiBergi: I don't know.
Nigel Tufnel: Nowhere. Exactly. What we do is, if we need that extra push over the cliff, you know what we do?
Marty DiBergi: Put it up to eleven.
Click to expand...

"most amps" :D how about this one:
Digidesign Eleven

and yes, I also do want to see OSX eleven (and twelve, and so on...)

forget the "ten" already, it is "OS X". To repeat myself, "ex", not "ten". Roman numeral "X" indeed does mean "10", but in Apple's case the "X" means "successor to classic Macintosh OS that ended with 9". Successor being very much alive in its 6th incarnation (not counting dot-zero "Cheetah" which was very much extension to public beta "Kodiak" and the two were not yet end-user ready).

OSX v1 = 10.1 = "Puma"
OSX v2 = 10.2 = "Jaguar"
OSX v3 = 10.3 = "Panther"
OSX v4 = 10.4 = "Tiger"
OSX v5 = 10.5 = "Leopard"
OSX v6 = 10.6 = "Snow Leopard"

I wonder if they're going to call the next version "OSX 7" to slap MS in the face :D oh, well -- perhaps not.
 
dreadkid08 said:
When Microsoft takes 2 steps forward Apple needs to take 4.
Click to expand...
This has been the usual progression since 1999, although MS took a pretty long nap between 2001-07, the Zune notwithstanding.

jav6454 said:
The half assed previews are all over iLife, iWork, iTunes and QuickTime.
Click to expand...

I rather like the evolving UI - I'd be willing to go as far as to say that it has matured to the level of 3/4 assed.
 
I really hope that this goes the route Tiger/Leopard took, even more so if anything.

OS X needs to regain it's superiority over Windows.
 
I'm hoping Apple finally gives networking the treatment in 10.7. It's the last real weak-spot on the Mac.

Other than that, I really have no complaints about Snow Leopard. It's solid, everything works, everything is quick and intuitive. And yes, I know some of you are already formulating arguments over those statements and we could split hairs over some of this, but overall, I just don't see anything really wrong with the Mac right now.

Except networking.

And wow, when Apple gets something wrong, they really get it wrong.

I work in a mixed Windows and Mac environment, and Windows, for all its flaws, still kicks the Mac's ass up and down the street when it comes to networking. Apple's made improvements with the last few versions of OS X, but it's just not there yet.

The most glaring problem is keeping a Mac connected to network shares. I love scripting automated tasks at my workplace on a Mac as opposed to Windows because I can work wonders on a Unix command line that just won't happen on a Windows box. Plus I've got SSH and all its tools at my fingertips. I've got perl. I've got PHP and Apache right out of the box. It's beautiful.

But it all collapses because there's just no predictability with network shares. And if I can't stay connected to the source of data I need to work with, all those wonderful tools are worthless.

Mac users are fond of mocking the drive mapping mechanism on Windows as an anachronism, but here's the thing: that approach is a life saver. If a mapped drive on Windows disconnects, that mapping stays there, persistent, and reconnects automatically if a program or user accesses it. It's transparent to the user and, ironically, very Mac-like.

But on the Mac? If your network share disconnects... well, sorry. It's just gone. Or worse, OS X leaves a folder with the share name in /Volumes (a leftover from the Unix drive mounting process) which greatly complicates reconnecting even if you write it into your scripts with the mount command.

I've tried a million things to stay connected on a Mac. Applescripts sometimes fail for various reasons. Shell scripts fail for various reasons. Even aliasing a share, a trick that some users claim is a cure-all, fails (for whatever reason, OS X occasionally forgets what these share aliases are.)

Apple has a feature called automount hidden in the bowels of the OS that I've discovered is almost the fix to this problem. I've used it now for several months and network shares stay connected for days on end. But, there's no UI for it so you have to really geek out to get this to work... and even then, while it's a massive improvement over other techniques, it's still far from perfect and still no competition for the Windows approach.

I just hope someone at Apple recognizes that for the massive Achilles' heel it is and fixes it in 10.7. There has to be a better way than what OS X does now.
 
JFreak said:
...forget the "ten" already, it is "OS X". To repeat myself, "ex", not "ten". Roman numeral "X" indeed does mean "10", but in Apple's case the "X" means "successor to classic Macintosh OS that ended with 9". Successor being very much alive in its 6th incarnation (not counting dot-zero "Cheetah" which was very much extension to public beta "Kodiak" and the two were not yet end-user ready).
Click to expand...
There also happens to be that ever so, slightly symbolic, referential reverence to NeXt, as well.

r.j.s said:
Mac OS X 10.7 - Codename "10.7, because it's better than just 7." :p
Click to expand...
By a factor of 10!
 
r.j.s said:
Mac OS X 10.7 - Codename "10.7, because it's better than just 7." :p
Click to expand...

Hey don't knock it. The protoplasm out there really think Windows "7" is a lot different than "Vista" when in fact it's still Vista.

"7" just sounded better. So if "7" sounded better wouldn't 10.7 sound better than "7" ? :D

Remember before OSX there was OS "9"
 
Peace said:
Hey don't knock it. The protoplasm out there really think Windows "7" is a lot different than "Vista" when in fact it's still Vista.

"7" just sounded better. So if "7" sounded better wouldn't 10.7 sound better than "7" ? :D

Remember before OSX there was OS "9"
Click to expand...

I'm not knocking it, just trying to help come up with the slogan.
 
JFreak said:
OSX v1 = 10.1 = "Puma"
OSX v2 = 10.2 = "Jaguar"
OSX v3 = 10.3 = "Panther"
OSX v4 = 10.4 = "Tiger"
OSX v5 = 10.5 = "Leopard"
OSX v6 = 10.6 = "Snow Leopard"

I wonder if they're going to call the next version "OSX 7" to slap MS in the face :D oh, well -- perhaps not.
Click to expand...

Don't forget about OS X 10.0 "Cheetah" :)
 
In other shock news, Porsche working on new 911, Microsoft working on Win 8, USAF working on new fighter jets.

How is this even news? OF COURSE they're working on 10.7 - they'll have been on it for months and months.
 
jav6454 said:
Safari for me has been a crash fest nightmare. In Leopard, complete stabilization (even Safari 4 Beta was much more stable).

I have benefited from the lean OS and overall refinements, but my Safari experience has been ruined since day one (hell even Flash plug-ins crash or freeze Safari).
Click to expand...

It's amazing to me the range of experiences users have with new operating systems.

I installed SL the week it came out and have had a surprisingly pleasant experience so far. The only bug I've experienced was the one fixed in the last update where the login screen comes up at random. And that only happened a couple times and it's minor (it doesn't even log you out, just brings up the login screen as if you'd logged out.)

On the other hand, Leopard 10.5.0 - 10.5.2 was a nightmare experience for me and others seemed to have no problems. I had a handful of kernel panics, broken Active Directory plug-in, weird networking glitches, etc. Haven't encountered anything like that with SL.
 
gibbz said:
Don't forget about OS X 10.0 "Cheetah" :)
Click to expand...
Except Cheetah was a dog rather than a cat! :p

And inkswamp, I hear you. While I wouldn't say that networking was the only thing that still needs to be addressed, I agree that it's the major one. And not just on shared environments. Hopefully my imminent upgrade to SL Server will sort some things out, but experience tells me not to be too hopeful.
 
Toe said:
I am pretty sure Apple always has two OS development teams. One works on the current one, the other works on the next one. They stick with their OS from development through final release.

For example, while the 10.5 team was making new builds of Leopard, the 10.6 team was working on development of Snow Leopard. When 10.5 wrapped up, that team started work on 10.7. Meanwhile the 10.6 team keeps working on refinements to 10.6 until its last release, at which point they start on 10.8.
Click to expand...

Not quite so. Right now, everyone is working on 10.7 except people will spend some time on fixing problems in 10.6 that need fixing and will go into 10.6.3. Quite a while before 10.7 is finished, people will start working on lists of features and planning for 10.8. Then as 10.7 nears completion, some people will have finished their bit earlier than others; they can then either help out in other areas or start work on 10.8 already. Everyone who is late finishing their part of 10.7 will get as much help as needed to not delay 10.7. Once its out and everyone has recovered from the shipping party _everyone_ will be working on 10.8.

But nobody will start on actual coding a year early. It would be an absolute nightmare having to merge all the work done in the last year of the previous OS with the new work done by another team. It would be very inefficient and you would never get any stability. The only time when you can work ahead is when you write some completely separate application.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back