Become a MacRumors Supporter for $25/year with no ads, private forums, and more!

Mac OS X 10.2.5 Monday/Tuesday?

King Cobra

macrumors 603
Mar 2, 2002
5,403
0
As of this posting, the title is:

Mac OS X 10.2.6 Monday/Tuesday?

Yet the thread is about 10.2.5.

I doubt there will be a 10.2.6, though. There have been plenty of "seeds" for 10.2.5, so a lot of preperation went into 10.2.5. I suspect the rest will go towards 10.3.
 
Comment

Giaguara

macrumors 6502a
Nov 22, 2002
902
0
AFAIK 10.2.5 has not been out yet for normal users.

10.2.6 will exist, if before that the battery killer and some other issues will not be resolved.
 
Comment

bousozoku

Moderator emeritus
Jun 25, 2002
14,328
409
Lard
Originally posted by Giaguara
AFAIK 10.2.5 has not been out yet for normal users.

10.2.6 will exist, if before that the battery killer and some other issues will not be resolved.

10.2.6 will exist That's rather bold for something that isn't known to exist and may not be possible. Are you creating it?
 
Comment

shadowfax

macrumors 603
Sep 6, 2002
5,849
0
Houston, TX
Originally posted by Hemingray
Yeah, even with the conditional "if" it's still possible that they hold off fixing it until 10.3...
if we aren't going to see panther till september, i think chances are OK for a 10.2.6.
 
Comment

t^3

macrumors regular
Oct 17, 2001
179
0
OS updates have been showing up about every two months, so this would put 10.2.6 in June, and if issues crop up, 10.2.7 could possibly be in late July or early August. Of course, since 10.0 went to 10.0.4 and 10.1 went to 10.1.5, perhaps 10.2 will stop at 10.2.6? But I doubt that by the time 10.6 comes around, there would be a 10.6.10.
 
Comment

howard

macrumors 68020
Nov 18, 2002
2,017
2
i'm gonna be pretty pissed if this next update doesn't fix my battery. this kind of thing should happen!!...an update that actually makes your machine peform worse
 
Comment

Freg3000

macrumors 68000
Sep 22, 2002
1,914
0
New York
Is this battery problem on all Apple laptops, or specifically one type, like the iBooks? I am scared about my new 12" Powerbook, and am secretly hoping it ships with 10.2.3 instead. :rolleyes:

Hopefull 10.2.5 resolves all battery issues so there will be no more problems.
 
Comment

Kwyjibo

macrumors 68040
Nov 5, 2002
3,809
0
Originally posted by Freg3000
Is this battery problem on all Apple laptops, or specifically one type, like the iBooks? I am scared about my new 12" Powerbook, and am secretly hoping it ships with 10.2.3 instead. :rolleyes:

Hopefull 10.2.5 resolves all battery issues so there will be no more problems.

I think your OK. I thought most apple products shipped iwht 10.2.1 and gave u the option to upgrade.
 
Comment

Kwyjibo

macrumors 68040
Nov 5, 2002
3,809
0
I jsut repaired all my permissions and I'm ready for the update. Maybe we will have a SUPERTUESDAY. Who knows but heres hoping.
 
Comment

Nermal

Moderator
Staff member
Dec 7, 2002
19,024
1,485
New Zealand
Originally posted by Hemingray
Yeah, even with the conditional "if" it's still possible that they hold off fixing it until 10.3...

Just changing the subject a bit, do we have any proof that Panther is actually going to be 10.3? Apple's site just says it's the next version of OS X, and I'm reminded of OS 7 and 8, which skipped straight up to 7.5 and 8.5 without having a .3 or .4 in either case (or a .2 for that matter IIRC).
 
Comment

bwawn

macrumors member
Jul 24, 2002
78
0
Originally posted by Nermal
Just changing the subject a bit, do we have any proof that Panther is actually going to be 10.3? Apple's site just says it's the next version of OS X, and I'm reminded of OS 7 and 8, which skipped straight up to 7.5 and 8.5 without having a .3 or .4 in either case (or a .2 for that matter IIRC).

Jaguar was 10.2. Apple wants to stick with the "X" naming scheme (since X = 10). It's only logical that Panther will be 10.3.

But there is a chance otherwise.
 
Comment

DaveGee

macrumors 6502a
Jul 25, 2001
677
2
Originally posted by bwawn
Jaguar was 10.2. Apple wants to stick with the "X" naming scheme (since X = 10). It's only logical that Panther will be 10.3.

But there is a chance otherwise.

I agree 1000%

Apple has a really good OS and the name brand "X" isn't gonna be given up so quickly. Apple never really had this kinda problem before (not really a problem but you know what I mean).

10.3 = 2003
10.4 = 2004
10.5 = 2005
10.6 = 2006
10.7 = 2007
10.8 = 2008
10.9 = 2009 = The year of debate: 'now what do we call it'

Apple is gonna wanna hold on to X for as long as it can. In fact, I wouldn't be shocked to start hearing about 'X v11.0' in another 6 or so years. :D

Dave
 
Comment

shadowfax

macrumors 603
Sep 6, 2002
5,849
0
Houston, TX
Originally posted by DaveGee
I agree 1000%

Apple has a really good OS and the name brand "X" isn't gonna be given up so quickly. Apple never really had this kinda problem before (not really a problem but you know what I mean).

10.3 = 2003
10.4 = 2004
10.5 = 2005
10.6 = 2006
10.7 = 2007
10.8 = 2008
10.9 = 2009 = The year of debate: 'now what do we call it'

Apple is gonna wanna hold on to X for as long as it can. In fact, I wouldn't be shocked to start hearing about 'X v11.0' in another 6 or so years. :D

Dave

what's wrong with OS XI? it's less confusing than X, if not as cool-looking.
 
Comment

Sol

macrumors 68000
Jan 14, 2003
1,564
6
Australia
The 1970 Mac

I hope OS X.2.5 fixes that damned date bug introduced in the last version. Nearly every time I boot up the date is the 1st of January, 1970!!

Anyway, apart from that I am very happy with OS X.2 on my dual 800 MHz QuickSilver. I do not have a laptop but those people complaining about their batteries should double check what their Energy Saver settings are, as well as minimize usage of the optical drive and turn down their screen brightness. Oh, and they should also use an AC adaptor when in-doors.
 
Comment

Zeke

macrumors 6502a
Oct 5, 2002
507
1
Greenville, SC
You're computer boots to Jan 1, 1970. That's funny. That means instead of saving the date they initialize to the epoch time (initializing the time variable to 0). Oh well, sorry for the lame post. I've been researching computer time the day for my little programming endeavor. For anyone who doesn't know, time is stored in this signed double which is the number of seconds since the aforementioned date. Interesting...
 
Comment

AppleMatt

macrumors 68000
Mar 17, 2003
1,780
20
UK
Re: The 1970 Mac

Originally posted by Sol
I hope OS X.2.5 fixes that damned date bug introduced in the last version. Nearly every time I boot up the date is the 1st of January, 1970!!

Have no fear! The first seed of 10.2.5 fixed the date bugs, so no more playing around with network time I'm afraid...:(

AppleMatt
 
Comment

TreeTruckie

macrumors newbie
Apr 8, 2003
5
0
Chicago
What about iChat and Mail?

Ah, but will the suggestions I've been sending repeatedly to Apple be incorperated? iChat should send my Away message when someone sends me an IM. And attachments in Mail are always a problem for me when I send files to my friends on AOL. If these two things could be fixed, I can start to mend the poor opinion my friends have of Macs (given that I've had to explain these two faults to my PC friends with the "I guess it's because I'm on a Mac" response).
 
Comment

Giaguara

macrumors 6502a
Nov 22, 2002
902
0
i said 10.2.6 to exist if the battery issue won't be solved before. (it does affect even some powerbooks).

any of the releases so far hasn't have any note it to have been resolved.

it makes no sense to leave that issue open and to "force" the users that otherwise like X.2 (and e.g. have a G3) to migrate to panther. so just invent the battery fix and release that before. if it so far isn't in any release note, it hasnt' been solved.

or in alternative, give me just a new battery and i'll stuck on 10.2.5. ~ 40 minutes of battery life sucks.

unless panther will be faster even on a G3 probably on my 'book i'll stay with jag.
 
Comment

mec

macrumors newbie
Jul 18, 2002
3
0
Version Numbers

10.8 = 2008
10.9 = 2009...

I'm seems like the next steps would be:

10.10 = 2010
10.11 = 2011 etc.

I doubt in ten years anyone will confuse 10.1.0
and 10.10.0
 
Comment

Giaguara

macrumors 6502a
Nov 22, 2002
902
0
nope. what happened after 9.1 or 9.2? 9.3?? or X?

so why 10. would have e.g. 10.9 ?
 
Comment

cubist

macrumors 68020
Jul 4, 2002
2,075
0
Muncie, Indiana
Originally posted by coumerelli
But do we really want to confuse our OS with the SuperBowl? ;)

Coming to a city near you!!! SuperMac XXXIV (v 34.1.4)

And then later on Mac OS L (v.50.0.0)
And Mac OS C (v.100.0.0)

In Mac OS XI we go from brushed metal to frosted glass. By Mac OS XIV we should be going to oiled teakwood.
 
Comment

t^3

macrumors regular
Oct 17, 2001
179
0
If I remember correctly, Steve Jobs did say that OS X will last Apple for the next 15 or so years when it was introduced, so I have reason to believe that when the next generation OS comes along, it'll be renamed.
 
Comment
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.