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.
First OS X 10.10 Banner Goes Up at Moscone Featuring Yosemite
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Is they brought back themes from 0s 9 days I would mind. But having to use that all the time. No thanks
With all the crap about version numbers 10 this 11 that .10 this X that... I feel it necessary to remind folks that the real current version number is, of course, 13D65.
Not so pretty, doesn't look so good in a thin ass white font, but...hey.
Not so pretty, doesn't look so good in a thin ass white font, but...hey.
I created it as a fan image exactly two months ago.
http://djtech42.deviantart.com/art/WWDC-2014-443740606
So Yosemite it is. I had a feeling It may be called that because I heard on June 30th (I think) Yosemite celebrates It's 150th anniversary.
I for one am calling for it. We don't need to abandon UNIX or throw away the entire kernel, but we need a new filesystem, we need to recognize the changes in technology (particularly with the internet) in the last 15 years, and we need to acknowledge the rise of mobile devices and people having more than one computer/device as a matter of course. What assumptions did Apple make 15 years ago that simply no longer apply? What sorts of UI elements didn't exist way back then that we'd really like today? What sorts of UI elements existed back then that we'd really wish were better? What sorts of security concerns are there that didn't exist back in 1999?
OS X has come a long way since the beginning, and they've tacked on a lot of functionality and technologies over subsequent releases. It's arguably not the same OS. But there is bloat that can be gotten rid of, there are things that we're missing and can't easily get because of the way things already are. Starting fresh with new assumptions and the experience of 15 years of OS X could really end up with a much nicer, more modern operating system to take us through the next 15 years.
I guess really the question is, why not now? OS 11 is going to have to happen eventually. Do you want to wait and plod along with timid OS X releases, or get the initial difficulties over with sooner on a bold new OS? It's either OS 11 by name, or OS X 10.whatever, but there needs to be some major overhauls of the foundation of OS X, and various UI elements. Putting off these problems doesn't make them go away. Even Microsoft, as poorly as they might have executed, at least tried to shake things up with Windows 8. They've got a new CEO now who is probably more willing to take bigger risks. Does Apple want to get left behind?
I'm very much hoping we see some serious work being done by Apple this Monday. I would very much like to hear the announcement that Apple's working on OS 11 already in secret. With the sort of institutional problems of OS X being addressed, and some kind of timeline for it to come out.
Yes, some developers and users alike will moan and complain and make threats about leaving the platform, just as they did when OS X replaced OS 9. Is anyone here going to argue that we weren't better off, as painful as the transition may have been at the time? I want an OS foundation that can take us to 2030. If there's nobody at Apple willing to make that happen, then I really do fear for the company's future.
This isn't an "Apple is doomed" post, because I really do think Apple is working on just such a foundation, deep in the bowels of Apple HQ. Think about it. Mac OS was born in 1984. Mac OS X was born 15 years later in 1999. Here it is, 15 years later in 2014. I've long believed that the big executive reorganization was, in part, due to significant changes coming in Apple's software line-up. Services got new emphasis. UI got new emphasis. So what's Apple working on? I would really like to know. Even if it's just a hint, anything, that shows Apple is focused on the future, not the past.
You idiots.
That's exactly why it SHOULD be OS 11.
Everyone thinks it's gonna be 11 because everyone thinks after 10.9 comes 11.0, and apparently you don't get how marketing works.
I don't know if they will go for 10.10 or 11, but it will make more sense for people if it is 11, because they associate the number with math.
Hopefully more then just costmetic
I don't by that OS X is the world's most advanced OS. I have some serious problems with OS X and hope that Apple works a little harder on this new version then just flattening boxes. I still see some pretty rinky dink problems with OS X like multiple disk IO processes stalling until a "master" task is finished, the update/patch process is ridiculously slow, my OS X server crashes at least once a week while a Windows 8 box I use for media streaming has an uptime measured in months.
Also something I found annoying recently about the worlds most advanced OS is that I swapped out my cable modem/router and upgraded my service, and OS X would NOT connect to the internet until I rebooted, while a Windows 8 laptop and desktop both were connected to the internet immediately without shutting down. OS X kept trying to renew the IP using the old base address of the old router until I restarted, while the Windows boxes renewed right away with the new base address of the new router. Seems like there are lots of times when you have to reboot OS X to get things to work properly while Microsoft seemed to have properly figured out this plug and play thing a long time ago.
I just hope that Apple is not simply putting lipstick on the pig, which they seem to have done the last two versions. I really don't need a new flatter calendar or calculator in an OS, I still want a company to put some effort improving the guts of an OS, even in the post-PC era.
I don't by that OS X is the world's most advanced OS. I have some serious problems with OS X and hope that Apple works a little harder on this new version then just flattening boxes. I still see some pretty rinky dink problems with OS X like multiple disk IO processes stalling until a "master" task is finished, the update/patch process is ridiculously slow, my OS X server crashes at least once a week while a Windows 8 box I use for media streaming has an uptime measured in months.
Also something I found annoying recently about the worlds most advanced OS is that I swapped out my cable modem/router and upgraded my service, and OS X would NOT connect to the internet until I rebooted, while a Windows 8 laptop and desktop both were connected to the internet immediately without shutting down. OS X kept trying to renew the IP using the old base address of the old router until I restarted, while the Windows boxes renewed right away with the new base address of the new router. Seems like there are lots of times when you have to reboot OS X to get things to work properly while Microsoft seemed to have properly figured out this plug and play thing a long time ago.
I just hope that Apple is not simply putting lipstick on the pig, which they seem to have done the last two versions. I really don't need a new flatter calendar or calculator in an OS, I still want a company to put some effort improving the guts of an OS, even in the post-PC era.
We are talking about Apple, though. They tend to do things in secret. They could very well have had a team working on something new for years already. I find it hard to believe nobody at Apple realized that they were running out of single digits for OS X, even with the accelerated pace of releasing a new OS X every year.
I'm not saying "OS 11" (whether it's called that or not) is coming out this year, but big changes need to happen to stay with the times. The first version of OS X came out in 1999. Mac OS was 15 years before that. It's 2014 now. If they don't take another leap like they did OS 9 to OS X, they get left behind by the world changing.
I really do think Apple still has the temerity to leave OS X behind. Maybe it won't be this year. Maybe it won't even be next year. But I really do think it'll be soon. Hopefully Apple will let developers know they're at least working on it. At the very least, I am hoping Apple starts transitioning OS X to OS 11 technologies, like a new filesystem, or some new UI elements. Things that will make the transition easier when it comes.
Your equality would be true if version numbers were the same as decimals. The '.' is not a decimal, but rather a separator between major and minor version numbers. It reminds me of the '.' in an IP address.
But I agree that it does look weird because our brains think of normal numbers.
Last edited:
Have you sat through the update process for Windows 8 to 8.1? I have. It sucked. This was on my gaming PC with a Samsung EVO Pro SSD and 100Mbs Internet. It took almost 1 hour. It wasn't my Internet connection. It wasn't because I had a HD instead of a SSD. No, it took over 1 hour because Microsoft decided a simple update that on Mac would take 1 restart, they would have to restart like 3-4 times. No Mac OS X update has ever taken that long. When I was updating my new Mac Pro, it took about 10 minutes to install 10+ app updates and 1 Mac OS X 10.9.x update and about 5 new apps (FCP, Xcode, Pixelmator and others).
Multiple IO processes on Windows NTFS filesystem is beyond crap. On my same gaming PC with one of the fastest SSDs on the market right now, I was transferring 10GBs of files from a NAS server. I was also deleting about 2-3GB in the Recycle Bin. Windows 8.1 took over 1 hour to copy before it crashed on me. On my Mac? I can copy and delete and do whatever I want. It has never ever crashed when doing simple copy/delete operations. Windows on the other hand... is pretty much expected to crash. I copied the same 10GBs of files while deleting a movie archive I had (50GB+) and it took a few minutes to delete and about 30 mins to copy.
As for your Internet issue, have you tried deleting that network and re-adding it? I went through the same situation you did and none of my Macs have ever experienced that problem. And I didn't have to do what I just suggested you did either. The reason it kept trying to renew the IP (which isn't even technically correct of a term/phrase) is because you didn't switch the network configuration properly. For your sake and others who are more technically inclined on here, delete the network in System Preferences and re-add the new one. I have done numerous IT jobs for friends/family and I have never ever experienced what you did with any Mac OS version. Nor have I experienced that on Windows either.
Because it was the late 90s, and X's looked cool.
I agree though that there will probably never be an OS XI. It'll be OS 11, if anything. Look how balanced and clean those two 1s look next to each other.
What the hell? Version numbers have never followed mathematically. The point is simply a separator. Why are we seeing a flurry of complaints about the number 10.10? Why didn't you complain when there was, say, 10.9.1? What about 10.4.10?
People just can't stop complaining!
They deprecate certain APIs with each release. Some (old) software does end up not working anymore, or not working entirely right. Mavericks stopped running some software for me, for example. They dropped Rosetta support in Lion. Leopard was the last OS X to have a Classic environment.
Still, there are some things OS X could do without but still clings to. It's a 15 year old operating system. It's been heavily patched to be sure, with many parts rewritten over time. But the filesystem in particular is in desperate need of replacing. The whole GUI could use an overhaul. A lot of the assumptions about the technology OS X would run on when they made OS X are no longer true. Same goes for the assumptions they made about how people would use computers/devices in general. There's all manner of internet services now that simply were unimaginable in 1999. I have loved OS X for a long time, so I hate to say it, but OS X is feeling more and more like OS 9 every day.
----------
There's always some non-hidden banners at Moscone. There are likely some other banners that are hidden outside the keynote theater.
HFS+ is elderly. Let's get a new filesystem and put this one in a nursing home where we can forget about it.
CONtrails.
----------
You should really take a trip to Kings Canyon.
He is anything but nice, he stepped on peoples' toes, and he had a skeed sense of aesthetics.
It's not going to happen. Neither the iOS X merge, or the ARM-in-Macs thing. iOS is designed for touch screens, OS X is designed for keyboard and mouse. The inputs are different so the interfaces are different. Apple has said this repeatedly. ARM is not going to replace x86 in computers in the near future, and possibly never will. Apple does not want to compete directly with Intel in the computer space. Apple does not want to be on a different architecture as the rest of the PC market (again).
The people who keep talking about these ideas do not know what they are talking about. You can relax.
I'm actually kind of hoping they drop the charade that the X in OS X stands for "ten" and just call the thing OS X 11. I don't know of anyone who calls it "oh es ten" and I've even heard some Apple executives call it "oh es ex" by mistake. Macintosh Operating System Ten hasn't been the official marketing name for it in a very long time. People say "I'm running oh es ex ten point nine." So just call it OS X 11. Its version number can be OS X 11.0 or something. Then, in the future, if Apple wants to jump from OS X 11.3 to OS X 12, because they've changed all of the things, they can do so and nobody will care.
