Apple Seeds OS X Mavericks 10.9.3 Build 13D28 to Developers

[MacRumors]

Apple today seeded build 13D28 of OS X 10.9.3 to developers, a little over one week after releasing the third OS X 10.9.3 beta, build 13D21 and three weeks after the first 10.9.3 beta. The beta is available through the Software Update mechanism in the Mac App Store as well as through the Mac Dev Center.

Apple is currently asking developers to focus on Graphics Drivers and Audio. As was discovered with the first beta, 10.9.3 adds new support for 4K displays, offering "Retina" resolutions that improve readability along with support for 60Hz output from the Retina MacBook Pro.

Article Link: Apple Seeds OS X Mavericks 10.9.3 Build 13D28 to Developers

 

[ZacNicholson]

459 MB on 2011 mbp

 

[WilliamG]

Still waiting for working GMail....

Be nice to check my iPhone's GMail account, and then when I go to my iMac have my mail actually be read there, too. You know, like IMAP should work? Used to work just fine in Mountain Lion, so not sure what Apple changed to have it not work in Mavericks, despite whatever non-standard IMAP implementation Google uses.

Please, Apple. Think of the children.

 

[sniffies]

I look forward to 10.10 DP and iOS-ification of the system.

 

[MARKBOARD]

I look forward to 10.10 betas.

hahaha me too but Apple had changed its way to release OS betas since Mountain Lion, i guess so

 

[MartinAppleGuy]

Does OSX have the drivers for the 700 series Nvidia cards (like the GT 750m, 780m...)? Not sure if this was long ago, or if these GPU's are running on the 600 series drivers. Anyone know?

 

[bekiil]

I look forward to 10.10 DP and iOS-ification of the system.

I am wondering when they will start working on OS 11, and what they will name it.

 

[Sound214]

I've noticed that since upgrading to 10.9.3, Blizzard games (Starcraft 2 and Diablo III) run poorly with my Retina Macbook Pro. Anyone else experiencing inferior gaming performance?

 

[Nunyabinez]

I am wondering when they will start working on OS 11, and what they will name it.

OS X is a brand. It's like saying "when will they change the name of the iPhone?"

OS X was a play on words (it's pronounced Oh Ess Ten) because Apple was on version 9.x of the Mac operating system.

When Steve Jobs returned from NeXt (notice the capital X) he brought the Unix-based operating system that they had been developing.

OS X wasn't called OS 10 because it was a completely new kernel based on Unix. So the play on works was to call it Oh Ess Ten but write is as OS X to signify that it was the operating system following 9.x but was Unix based.

So, unless there is a brand new kernel that gets introduced, the name will never change from OS X. We are currently on OS X 10.9.2. You would pronounce this Oh Ess Ten, Ten point Nine point Two. The next major release will be either OS X 10.10, or it could be OS X 11.0 (unlikely). There will be no OS 11.

 

[BigPink]

Will they fix "Share to">"Airdrop" functionality?

It's been broken in all apps in Mavericks up to this point. I opened a case with  support and they confirmed existence of the bug.

 

[Orlandoech]

OS X is a brand. It's like saying "when will they change the name of the iPhone?"

OS X was a play on words (it's pronounced Oh Ess Ten) because Apple was on version 9.x of the Mac operating system.

When Steve Jobs returned from NeXt (notice the capital X) he brought the Unix-based operating system that they had been developing.

OS X wasn't called OS 10 because it was a completely new kernel based on Unix. So the play on works was to call it Oh Ess Ten but write is as OS X to signify that it was the operating system following 9.x but was Unix based.

So, unless there is a brand new kernel that gets introduced, the name will never change from OS X. We are currently on OS X 10.9.2. You would pronounce this Oh Ess Ten, Ten point Nine point Two. The next major release will be either OS X 10.10, or it could be OS X 11.0 (unlikely). There will be no OS 11.

Love your post. Thanks for the info. Being serious FYI.

 

[JetLaw]

I still think that the successor of OSX will be called xOS (starting with version 11.0), which brings the naming convention into conformity with iOS. Apple has already shown a willingness to re-brand an OS when they adopted the "iOS" moniker for the then-extant "iPhone OS".

 

[Freida]

I still think that the successor of OSX will be called xOS (starting with version 11.0), which brings the naming convention into conformity with iOS. Apple has already shown a willingness to re-brand an OS when they adopted the "iOS" moniker for the then-extant "iPhone OS".

read it out loud and you will realise why xOS won't happen

 

[maflynn]

They've really amped up the build frequency, I'm not sure if that's a good sign or a bad sign

 

[bbfc]

I am wondering when they will start working on OS 11, and what they will name it.

Not this again!

As said above, OS X is a brand name.

----------

I still think that the successor of OSX will be called xOS (starting with version 11.0), which brings the naming convention into conformity with iOS. Apple has already shown a willingness to re-brand an OS when they adopted the "iOS" moniker for the then-extant "iPhone OS".

Er, no.

 

[jameslmoser]

I could see it being named "OS Xi", which would be 11 in roman numerals, still keeping the X. =) or Xi OS.

 

[milo]

I am wondering when they will start working on OS 11

No question they're working on 10.10 already in house. External beta testers could see it at WWDC in June or any time before that.

 

[bbfc]

OS X is a brand. It's like saying "when will they change the name of the iPhone?"

OS X was a play on words (it's pronounced Oh Ess Ten) because Apple was on version 9.x of the Mac operating system.

When Steve Jobs returned from NeXt (notice the capital X) he brought the Unix-based operating system that they had been developing.

OS X wasn't called OS 10 because it was a completely new kernel based on Unix. So the play on works was to call it Oh Ess Ten but write is as OS X to signify that it was the operating system following 9.x but was Unix based.

So, unless there is a brand new kernel that gets introduced, the name will never change from OS X. We are currently on OS X 10.9.2. You would pronounce this Oh Ess Ten, Ten point Nine point Two. The next major release will be either OS X 10.10, or it could be OS X 11.0 (unlikely). There will be no OS 11.

Very interesting post.

Plus they don't even use the version number anymore really. It's all about the name.

----------

I could see it being named "OS Xi", which would be 11 in roman numerals, still keeping the X. =) or Xi OS.

Now it's just getting silly.

 

[Icaras]

Er, no.

Actually, I wish they would have kept it as Mac OS X.

 

[Mike MA]

Getting a bit boring at the moment, so bring it on

 

[sshhoott]

Would someone please post a list of the Graphics Driver versions in this release to settle my anxiety issue?

 

[3282868]

They've really amped up the build frequency, I'm not sure if that's a good sign or a bad sign

It's been a bad sign, for me and many others. Before 10.7, OS X 10.X development varied between 1 ½ to 2 ½ years with biweekly or weekly releases that required downloading a .dmg from the developer site, burning the image to a DVD, wiping the system and installing a "clean" OS. This allowed for improved debugging by eliminating any possible third party app "contamination" (10.7+ releases have proved difficult to properly isolate any system matters), and allowed Apple more time to "get it right" before release. Of course not all 10.X first releases were stellar, but they were far better than the current annual release cycle to match iOS. There is no need to rush out annual OS overhauls, especially as we're just on 10.9.3 beta. By the time iOS is released it may be .5 or .6.

Personally, while Craig Federighi is an excellent engineer, nothing beats the work Bertrand Serlet did while SVP of OS X engineering. I still believe 10.5/6 are the best OS X releases to date (and before the "Serlet was involved with 10.7, he was not, he was already on his way out the door to Parallels 2009-2010, 10.7 was all Federighi).

Actually, I wish they would have kept it as Mac OS X.

Ditto

 

[Watabou]

It looks like they took out the amount of memory used by the GPU. And they left out an extra space as you can see:

The system report app still shows the amount of memory used though, and it takes up 1.5GB of system memory, like with the previous build.

 

[SarcasticJoe]

Personally, while Craig Federighi is an excellent engineer, nothing beats the work Bertrand Serlet did while SVP of OS X engineering. I still believe 10.5/6 are the best OS X releases to date (and before the "Serlet was involved with 10.7, he was not, he was already on his way out the door to Parallels 2009-2010, 10.7 was all Federighi).

You can go on about that like you usually do until the cows come home, but the reality is that you don't design things like Operating Systems in the fashion that you ship a version and then have a meeting where you decide on what you're going to work on in the next version.

Instead you have long range plans that go for years ahead. When one version ships, the feature set for the next one is pretty much locked at that point. If you worked on one version up until launch or close to it, you've generally been part of planning the one after that as well as whatever comes after that. Just go read up some Apple history and you'll see that that's the way they plan OS development.

Also, I don't see why people like to moan about how great 10.5 was... It made OSX considerably heavier to run (bye bye everything but the really last of the G4 machines and G5's) and had a ton of bugs. I personally like to call it Apple's Vista considering that disaster was pretty recent at the time. Sure, 10.6 fixed a lot of things, but I still consider it a massive service pack as reflected by the now much lower price.

 

[Pentad]

Personally, while Craig Federighi is an excellent engineer, nothing beats the work Bertrand Serlet did while SVP of OS X engineering. I still believe 10.5/6 are the best OS X releases to date (and before the "Serlet was involved with 10.7, he was not, he was already on his way out the door to Parallels 2009-2010, 10.7 was all Federighi).

I too am a fan of Bertrand Serlet. I thought 10.6 was the amazing OS for the time of its release. I had a top of the MBP and added 8 GB (a lot for the time - I think we spent nearly a grand on the memory) and ran 10.6 doing some heavy development projects. 10.6 just screamed. It was just a well-tuned, solid, extremely efficient OS.

-P