Apple Seeds Two New Mavericks Updates to Employees for Testing

[CubusX]

Hmmm....

So, instead of bundling two updates together to fix all the bugs, lets release one minor update to fix some of the bugs and wait another month or so to fix the rest of them??? Sounds quite dumb... The decision making process at Apple seriously needs an over hull...

 

[RobFog]

* overhaul

Yes, I'm sure you know much better, they should sign you up as CEO.

 

[seveej]

Documentation, entertainment and so on are areas, where e-Books are important.

You plan never ahead? Some tasks require detailed maps (Google Maps is better).

1) I'm not saying there cannot be users who do welcome Books to MacOS, but I am not one of them. On average days I spend 12-14 hours sitting behind a desk. No way do I want to increase that, and If I have a book/scientific article I need to read, I will not do so on the computer if I can avoid it.

2) Sure I use maps. The central point is that I don't benefit from the maps being an app. There's no reason why I'd need anything but a web page... Ergo, Maps in 10.9 does not offer me anything I don't get with google maps on 10.6.

I'm seem to be having trouble making people understand my way of thinking: an upgrade, whether from X.Y.Z to X.Y.Z+1 or from X.Y to X.Y+1 is two things:

Firstly: It has a cost. Now that 10.9. is free that cost is smaller, but far from non-existent. E.g., I'd still need to upgrade parallels (39$) and other softwares, plus it produces downtime.

Second: It carries a risk. Especially upgrading to a X.Y.0 -version is something I avoid at any cost- Some things may brake, get lost or corrupted, time may be lost, and (worst of all), you may lose some of your work. When I downgraded from an MBP running 10.7.5 to an MP running 10.6.8, I had the added problem of Aperture-version on the MBP having been one which is plannedly obsolete on 10.6.8. Luckily I only lost some days of work (because I still had a pre-upgrade aperture library in backup).

10.6.8 runs rock solid on four machines in this household, is snappy, has no frills, supports a wide range of hardwares, supports all critical softwares... Nothing Lion, ML or 10.9 offers seems to be enough of a reason to take the plunge. Problematically (and here it gets painful), this also leads to me being less than happy with the prospect of getting new Apple hardware...

RGDS,

 

[danielsutton]

cool... An apple seed..

Two of them ......

So, the next version will be 10.10 ? What happened to 10.0 ? Someone's starting early... Mavericks has only just came out, and Apple's already starting on the next ?

iBooks are already been "fixed". Apple snuck the update in with iTunes 11.1.3 to allow iBooks to open..

"The next iteration of OS X is said to alter the look of the operating system to bring it in line with iOS 7."

Does this sound good to anyone ?? I know Apples being throwing their weight aboud with Notifications, LaunchPad in Mountain Lion, and now Mavericks, not to mention social networking too, but do we need to further ?

It IS a desktop with a keyboard ...

Just as long as Apple doesn't decide to do touch, to make it operative as a tablet, i'm happy... Unless they take away the physical keyboard, and allow you to Bluetooth...... But you can do that already.

ummm ....

It takes YEARS to write an operating system, so yes, 10.10 has likely been in the works for some time BEFORE Mavericks was released. What I reall hope is that in 10.10, Apple will move away from HFS+ and will incorporate a next-generation filesystem into the OS. It was very sad when the ZFS project was cancelled due to new licensing terms. However, I did read that Apple hired filesystem following the project's cancellation, and that they have been working on an alternative. I hope we can see this alternative at WWDC 2014!

 

[Yebubbleman]

Apple is also continuing work on the next iteration of OS X, 10.10, which has been seeded internally. The next iteration of OS X is said to alter the look of the operating system to bring it in line with iOS 7.

The only positive thing about this is that there will once again be some visual continuity between OSes. That was the nice thing about the combination of OS X Mountain Lion and iOS 6 last OS season. Otherwise it's a look that looks less futuristic and more like we've gone back to an age where things weren't about looking cool.

Either way, look and feel is only superficial. As long as it's still OS X, Apple still has me as a customer. My views are the same when it comes to iOS 7 as well, despite the fact that I do have iOS 6 on half of my devices with no plans to upgrade them past that.

I hope software development is advancing due to the new collaboration. The increasing frequency of updates and bug fixes is excellent.

Things break with big new releases and that causes inconvenience and hassle on the part of developers and the users alike. I'd much rather system patches and under-the-hood improvements than feature-creep for this very reason.

Then we can definitely agree to disagree. I say bring it. Bring it all over Apple. I seriously want all the icons between the two match up and unify the image of the two OSes completely. Would also be very helpful to newcomers to Macs who are coming from iOS devices only as it would all be familiar ground.

The design parity would be the only benefit of such a design change. Otherwise it'd be a step back in aesthetics just as iOS 7 was from iOS 6 and earlier.

Whether you like or not, the trend is pretty much obvious now. Apple keeps bring iOS apps to OS X, keeping OS X app as simple as iOS app. I am not sure if Apple would do next version, but when the time come, iOS and OS X will merge together....

That's nonsense. The two platforms serve two very different functions. They'll grow in surface similarity and at the core they'll both still be OS X, but as far as function is concerned, they'll remain separate because there's no practical reason to merge them.

10.10 was called Puma. It came out in 2001. The next version after Mavericks would be Mac OSX 11, assuming they continue this naming convention.

Tell that to 10.4.10, which is 9 point releases newer of a build of OS X Tiger than 10.4.1 was. While they could go to 11, especially with iOS 7-inspired design changes, 10.10 remains no less viable of an option as it is not 10.1. Similarly, the existence of a future 10.10.x version of OS X would further prove my point.

Image

Actually, as someone who's not a fan of the look of iOS 7 nor the idea of that style for OS X, this picture doesn't make it look half bad; and, as is the case for iOS 7, I imagine it'll look semi-reasonable on a retina display where it looks fugly on a non-retina display.

There's no such thing as a "timeless design" when one is talking about computer hardware, software, or operating systems. Change is inevitable as is the resistance to it.

For some fun, go back to the discussions in 2002 when a vocal contingent was complaining about the switch from OS 9's Platinum user interface to OS X's Aqua user interface. Find some of the OS 9 GUI proponents from back then and see how many would still prefer to use that older GUI now. See how many of them still consider it to be a "timeless design."

Honestly, I'd totally rather an OS X interface with the look and feel of OS 9's platinum than I would an OS X interface resembling iOS 7. Actually maybe that's too harsh. Still though, how it looks today is gorgeous and they'd be fools for making it worse.

10.10!! Given that the last zero is mathematically ignored does this mean we are regressing to 10.1. I always thought '11' followed '10.9'. At least that's what I was taught at school.

I'm going to cite the progression of builds of Mac OS X 10.4 Tiger to respond to your point:

10.4.0
10.4.1
10.4.2
10.4.3
10.4.4
10.4.5
10.4.6
10.4.7
10.4.8
10.4.9
10.4.10
10.4.11

Yes, 10.10 is fair game.

With iOS becoming more desktop class with 64bit computing, I'm sure the transition to combine the 2 will get easier with each update. Eventually your ipad will basically run whatever full desktop version is in your Mac.

You might have been paying too much attention to the Apple rhetoric. The only reason why they call the A7 "desktop class" architecture is that it is the first 64-bit ARM chip and that 64-bit up until this point was typically reserved for desktop CPU architectures.

Otherwise, by your logic, there would've been no trouble at all running OS X apps on iOS 2.0. We can already run iOS apps on OS X by way of the iOS Simulator which basically takes the same code but runs it for x86 instead of ARM.

Does anyone use the app launcher? Virtually all my Mac app launches are via the Dock, or Spotlight (cmd-Spacebar).

It makes much more sense to use Launchpad when you have a trackpad present as it is super-fast with gestures. If you do not, then it is sort of pointless.

Good question... I'm still peeved that they replaced the Widgets button with the LaunchPad button. Good thing my 2011 MBP is still using the widgets command.

The F12 shortcut will still work. As will the F11 shortcut to push windows out of the way to clear the desktop.

Apple needs to solve the issue with WD hard drives - Apparently OSX 10.9 is wiping WD drives in their entirety. That is an insane bug for a first release of a new OS.
There will be no installing past 10.8.5 until this is resolved.
Sounds like Apple needed more Beta Testing before releasing this OS.
I have Windows 8 as well. Win 8 isn't that big a deal that a lot of people make it out to be.

Before you get too wrapped up in bashing Apple, the WD drives issue is with WD's software being incompatible with Mavericks and not with Mavericks killing the drives itself. WD needs to update its software. They have had months to iron out those kinds of kinks with developer releases; the onus is on them to fix this. Not Apple.

 

[funone0]

When?

And we will get these when ?

 

[undesign]

Could not agree more.
The resize from-every corner is the only Lion feature I miss...

Have been to Lion and ML, have come back.
Once Mavericks is at 10.9.2 I'll have a go (Clone disk->update->Try).

I'm looking forward to some of the OS optimizations, but honestly most of the new features Apple has offered in mavericks fall flat with me:
• iBooks? - Excuse me, I have iBooks on the iPad, why would I want to read books from a MBP/MP?
• Maps? - can't see the point on a computer. iPhone/iPad? yes. Mac Pro? No.
• New Calendar? - Switched back to a paper calendar 18 months ago. The main problem with electronic calendars just can not be fixed with an update.
• Safari? - Nice, but I'm making do with 5. Just as with a larger tv: the programming does not get better...
• iCloud keychain? - for an iCloud user it this is probably a good update, but I'm using neither keychain nor iCloud...
• Multiple displays? - wait. Didn't mac support multiple displays since way back in the 80's? Oh yeah. This means they "fixed" the "feature" they "introduced" when allowing full screen apps...
• Notifications? - no need.
• Finder Tabs? - Long overdue, but not really necessary for me. I installed a trial for Totalfinder once upon a time, and when the trial expired I didn't consider it worth the money.
• Finder tags? - Wait, this is an improvement? I think it's a disaster waiting to happen: http://arstechnica.com/apple/2013/10/os-x-10-9/8/#tags
• "Advanced technologies"? - Some of these are interesting, others less so, but definitely among the few real reasons to "upgrade".

Honestly, I'm a recovering UI designer/programmer and since I returned to the Mac in 2006, I've regularly sent suggestions to apple about potential improvements to the OS, especially to Finder. In all these years exactly one of them has been realized (flexible resize). In all the other cases, post snow leopard, OS X has moved farther and farther from my ideal...

RGDS,

Agreed as well!

Except for one point:

Tabs in the finder. TotalFinder works, but XtraFinder is just as good and FREE.

I've sent Apple suggestions before and they did implement it after... however, it was the inability to ungroup application windows when Mission Control was launched. If you had 5 windows in Photoshop and need to see all (as well as all other windows from other apps) it was impossible. Snow Leopard handles this perfectly. The Lion came out and took away this functionality. People on MacRumors were *pissed* and sent Apple a fury of emails. They finally got the message and implemented the option to UNGROUP in the systems preferences panel.

But thats not the only problem, for some reason, many (MANY!) people downplayed, mocked and dismissed the complaints of these people, essentially claiming that the complaint about the removal of ungrouped windows isnt warranted and we should be happy with what Apple gives us.

Am I the only one thats worried about whats become of the Apple culture since the iPod skyrocketed in popularity?

I like Apple products... but I don't like their 'walled garden' approach. Anyone else?

 

[Michael Goff]

I like Apple products... but I don't like their 'walled garden' approach. Anyone else?

I like them -for- their approach.

I don't like the major fans, but the walled garden approach didn't create that. Microsoft has major fans and they don't have a walled garden approach in the slightest (on their Desktop OS, that is)

 

[HVDynamo]

10.10 was called Puma. It came out in 2001. The next version after Mavericks would be Mac OSX 11, assuming they continue this naming convention.

But 10.1 and 10.10 are generally seen as two different things in the development world. I would put money on them staying with OS X and listing it as 10.10 with the next version being 10.11 and so on. OS X has kind of become apples OS name like Windows has been Microsoft's OS name.

 

[drew627]

If you "scream" for a 10.9.x release, I'd really like to see how you celebrate a major update.

Then I shall scream while jumping up and down...

 

[ls1dreams]

Fortunately, OSX is not as locked down as iOS. I am going to back up all my 10.9 icons and overlay any trashy pastel rubbish introduced in 10.10.

I do worry about the dock, though. If Apple 'simplifies' it like the solid bar in iOS7 then CandyBar will find another buyer.

Seriously, does anyone like iOS7? I hated it at first, but figured I'd eventually get used to it. I still hate it, using it non-stop 3 weeks later.

I should set up a poll. Super thin fonts make things less legible. Ugly line drawing icons that all look similar. GTFO iOS7.

 

[mrxak]

While I'm not going to argue that OS X 10.10 wouldn't be a valid version number, can we all at least agree it's a stupid one? It's literally Oh Es Ten Ten Ten.

OS X is old. Apple has done quite a lot of work over the years and OS X 10.9 is very different from Mac OS X 10.1. But a lot of the assumptions made by Mac OS X 10.1 simply don't apply anymore. Between the advances in computing power, multicore processing, cloud storage, SSDs, social networking, mobile devices, and so much more, isn't it just time for a new OS built from the ground up?

It's time for a new set of assumptions, and a modern OS that leaves behind ideas that are no longer relevant, and is built based on the concepts that the modern computing world has had to patch on haphazardly.

Start with a brand new file system that's built from scratch to do everything the user actually wants to do in the modern world and on modern hardware. Then offload as much computing as possible onto OpenCL and various Core APIs. Make multithreading even easier for developers to implement. Build a solid foundation that works exceptionally well with modern networking. Make it work better with multiple devices, mobile included. On top of all, make a clean, refined UI based on the design concepts introduced in 10.9 with high DPI graphics, but setting aside obsolete notions and creating new UI elements that make more sense.

It can look a lot like OS X. If you really think about it, OS X looked a lot like OS 9. It should still be based on Unix. It can also behave very much like we're used to. Under the hood, though, it should be a foundation to build on for the next 10 versions, looking ahead to where Apple thinks the world is going. It should be called OS 11, so nobody's confused. It should still be backwards compatible with as much software as it can be, similar to how Classic Mode was in early versions of Mac OS X, and of course Rosetta more recently. But it should be very Apple-like in its ambition and willingness to cut away the past.

Maybe what I've described is coming, and we're going to get one last OS X in the meantime. Apple should take two more years, regardless, and develop an OS for the future, and it should be OS 11. I very much believe that the executive reshuffling was in part explained by the impending end of OS X and the desire to start fresh with OS 11.

 

[Michael Goff]

While I'm not going to argue that OS X 10.10 wouldn't be a valid version number, can we all at least agree it's a stupid one? It's literally Oh Es Ten Ten Ten.

OS X is old. Apple has done quite a lot of work over the years and OS X 10.9 is very different from Mac OS X 10.1. But a lot of the assumptions made by Mac OS X 10.1 simply don't apply anymore. Between the advances in computing power, multicore processing, cloud storage, SSDs, social networking, mobile devices, and so much more, isn't it just time for a new OS built from the ground up?

It's time for a new set of assumptions, and a modern OS that leaves behind ideas that are no longer relevant, and is built based on the concepts that the modern computing world has had to patch on haphazardly.

Start with a brand new file system that's built from scratch to do everything the user actually wants to do in the modern world and on modern hardware. Then offload as much computing as possible onto OpenCL and various Core APIs. Make multithreading even easier for developers to implement. Build a solid foundation that works exceptionally well with modern networking. Make it work better with multiple devices, mobile included. On top of all, make a clean, refined UI based on the design concepts introduced in 10.9 with high DPI graphics, but setting aside obsolete notions and creating new UI elements that make more sense.

It can look a lot like OS X. If you really think about it, OS X looked a lot like OS 9. It should still be based on Unix. It can also behave very much like we're used to. Under the hood, though, it should be a foundation to build on for the next 10 versions, looking ahead to where Apple thinks the world is going. It should be called OS 11, so nobody's confused. It should still be backwards compatible with as much software as it can be, similar to how Classic Mode was in early versions of Mac OS X, and of course Rosetta more recently. But it should be very Apple-like in its ambition and willingness to cut away the past.

Maybe what I've described is coming, and we're going to get one last OS X in the meantime. Apple should take two more years, regardless, and develop an OS for the future, and it should be OS 11. I very much believe that the executive reshuffling was in part explained by the impending end of OS X and the desire to start fresh with OS 11.

They're keeping the OS X name for "another decade" as Craig Federighi said during his Mavericks presentation at WWDC.

 

[mrxak]

Seriously, does anyone like iOS7? I hated it at first, but figured I'd eventually get used to it. I still hate it, using it non-stop 3 weeks later.

I should set up a poll. Super thin fonts make things less legible. Ugly line drawing icons that all look similar. GTFO iOS7.

I like it a lot, with one exception about the font. I like the font. It's just slightly too tall. This has the tendency to make certain elements taller in general, thus making less efficient use of the space in places like Mail. iOS 6 Mail on a 3.5" screen shows the same amount of inbox as iOS 7 Mail on a 4" screen.

In terms of iOS 7 apps, I don't like Calculator. The "everything must be square" mentality kind of ruined the app.

But everything else about iOS 7, I either don't mind, or actively like. I'm still waiting on a few developers to take advantage of some of the new APIs, but otherwise things are golden.

 

[XtraSmiley]

1) I'm not saying there cannot be users who do welcome Books to MacOS, but I am not one of them. On average days I spend 12-14 hours sitting behind a desk. No way do I want to increase that, and If I have a book/scientific article I need to read, I will not do so on the computer if I can avoid it.

2) Sure I use maps. The central point is that I don't benefit from the maps being an app. There's no reason why I'd need anything but a web page... Ergo, Maps in 10.9 does not offer me anything I don't get with google maps on 10.6.

I'm seem to be having trouble making people understand my way of thinking: an upgrade, whether from X.Y.Z to X.Y.Z+1 or from X.Y to X.Y+1 is two things:

Firstly: It has a cost. Now that 10.9. is free that cost is smaller, but far from non-existent. E.g., I'd still need to upgrade parallels (39$) and other softwares, plus it produces downtime.

Second: It carries a risk. Especially upgrading to a X.Y.0 -version is something I avoid at any cost- Some things may brake, get lost or corrupted, time may be lost, and (worst of all), you may lose some of your work. When I downgraded from an MBP running 10.7.5 to an MP running 10.6.8, I had the added problem of Aperture-version on the MBP having been one which is plannedly obsolete on 10.6.8. Luckily I only lost some days of work (because I still had a pre-upgrade aperture library in backup).

10.6.8 runs rock solid on four machines in this household, is snappy, has no frills, supports a wide range of hardwares, supports all critical softwares... Nothing Lion, ML or 10.9 offers seems to be enough of a reason to take the plunge. Problematically (and here it gets painful), this also leads to me being less than happy with the prospect of getting new Apple hardware...

RGDS,

Well said, but I'm upgrading!

 

[Icaras]

Do what you will. Just leave the finder happy face, the dock, and the menubar alone.

I love how OS X looks.

The menubar is a part of iOS so I don't know why you would think they would change it in any way. The dock is also a part of iOS, but on OS X, has that slick 3D look to it, which I personally like a lot myself.

The Finder icon on the other hand....well, I personally disagree here. I'd like to see it change with a heavily iOS 7 look to it. I know it's such a classic icon, but it honestly looks a bit dated IMO.

Does anyone use the app launcher? Virtually all my Mac app launches are via the Dock, or Spotlight (cmd-Spacebar).

By App Launcher, are you guys referring to Launchpad? Cause if so, I wonder the same thing.

Yup, I do, extensively. My dock contains the most used basic apps, but I have a ton of other apps including a LOT of OS X games and I don't have any intention of flooding my dock with tiny sized icons from one side of my display to the other, particularly on my 27" display. I'm also not a fan of the magnification effect.

 

[Reason077]

Nothing Lion, ML or 10.9 offers seems to be enough of a reason to take the plunge. Problematically (and here it gets painful), this also leads to me being less than happy with the prospect of getting new Apple hardware...

Perhaps this will help you.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tzxggJRWRUE

 

[MacLC]

for me yes. garbage. Worse than ML.

Please explain what you didn't like. For me Lion and Mountain Lion had some incompatibilities with older software so I stayed with Snow Leopard. 2 years later my mac is at the bottom of the compatibility list but I jumped in anyway.
My main gripe is Apple's line of: "Tags ≠ Labels but we have to get rid of Labels in order to implement Tags". Other than that, and the fact that a 6 year old computer is struggling a little with Mavericks, new features work as advertised and although Safari 7 is a letdown from Safari 5, it is better than Safari 6.

 

[wikiverse]

Once you get past the Metro interface Windows 8 is a bit of an improvement on Windows 7, BUT you have to get past that tiled interface. While they needed to do something new and I applaud MS for doing their own thing, I still agree and think 'what were they thinking'.

As a mac user who hasn't had to use a PC in over a decade, Metro is awesome. I don't understand why mac users complain.

It's launch pad with widgets. Using it with a trackpad instead of a mouse is even better.

 

[Ddyracer]

Please explain what you didn't like. For me Lion and Mountain Lion had some incompatibilities with older software so I stayed with Snow Leopard. 2 years later my mac is at the bottom of the compatibility list but I jumped in anyway.
My main gripe is Apple's line of: "Tags ≠ Labels but we have to get rid of Labels in order to implement Tags". Other than that, and the fact that a 6 year old computer is struggling a little with Mavericks, new features work as advertised and although Safari 7 is a letdown from Safari 5, it is better than Safari 6.

I did, look through my posts.

 

[Reason077]

For some fun, go back to the discussions in 2002 when a vocal contingent was complaining about the switch from OS 9's Platinum user interface to OS X's Aqua user interface. Find some of the OS 9 GUI proponents from back then and see how many would still prefer to use that older GUI now. See how many of them still consider it to be a "timeless design."

The OS 9 GUI is a "timeless design" in the same sense as a 1967 Ford Mustang is a timeless design. Something that was very elegant and distinctive in it's day.

Today, of course, most of us would prefer to purchase a modern car because technology has moved on and even a relatively cheap, boring Toyota is going to be more efficient, perform better, and require less maintainance than that '67 Mustang.

But that doesn't mean we don't respect and admire the '67 Mustang, or feel nostalgic for some of the design elements and qualities that may have been lost or watered down in more modern cars.

 

[g-7]

Does anyone use the app launcher? Virtually all my Mac app launches are via the Dock, or Spotlight (cmd-Spacebar).

I use it quite often. If my hands are on the keyboard, I use Cmd-Space, but if my hand is on the mouse, I click the Launchpad icon. It's quite handy for opening the apps that are not placed in the Dock.

 

[hyhybt]

So, instead of bundling two updates together to fix all the bugs, lets release one minor update to fix some of the bugs and wait another month or so to fix the rest of them??? Sounds quite dumb... The decision making process at Apple seriously needs an over hull...

Not nearly as dumb as making the fixes that *could* be released very soon wait until the ones that will take longer are ready.

The only positive thing about this is that there will once again be some visual continuity between OSes. That was the nice thing about the combination of OS X Mountain Lion and iOS 6 last OS season. Otherwise it's a look that looks less futuristic and more like we've gone back to an age where things weren't about looking cool.

No style gets dated as quickly and firmly as "futuristic."

 

[grahamperrin]

Discussion of ZFS

… ZFS project …

OS X Mavericks (10.9) > Where is the ZFS?

 

[hyhybt]

OS X Mavericks (10.9) > Where is the ZFS?

Why do you want ZFS?