Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

macOS Big Sur Listed as 'Version 11.0' in System Preferences

Read through some of the updates to MDM and can confirm it’s a thing:

0B20DFAC-824D-490C-8691-3C3A67CB4675.jpeg
 
Jyby said:
OSX is gone by the way it’s macOS now.. But they shouldn’t have gone to 11. .
there is a technical reason not to go to 11.0 because the version number after the dot is used by some software... If you go back to 0 you will break some programs that do comparison. Like if MacOS>=10.15 use this API feature
Click to expand...
Really? If a developer can't tell that 11.0 is greater than 10.15, then I question their development ability. No one should be comparing only the minor release version without also comparing the major release version first.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RandomDSdevel, Lazy and mmomega
Can someone give me advice? I still on High Sierra on iMac (2017, 4K), skipped Mojave and Catalina, but want to update to Big Sur. My problem is my boot drive is external SSD Samsung T5 (default one was HDD 1Tb) and I use Mac OS Extended file system. I heard that all new OS versions demand APFS, but it seems this file system has some problems with external USB drives. Is the situation still the same? And will I have any issues? I really don't want to return to HDD)
 
Darmok N Jalad said:
I’m not sure if it’s the lack of 32bit support in the chip
Click to expand...
It‘s definitely because the A series chips don’t support any 32-bit commands since the A11 (first processor that didn’t support ARM 32 bit commands). So, with Apple’s intent to eventually run macOS on an A-series derived processor, 32-bit instructions had to go. And, it happened in the same order on iOS. First, the OS stopped supporting 32-bit commands and, shortly after, the first 64-bit only processor appeared.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RandomDSdevel
Jyby said:
OSX is gone by the way it’s macOS now.. But they shouldn’t have gone to 11. .
there is a technical reason not to go to 11.0 because the version number after the dot is used by some software... If you go back to 0 you will break some programs that do comparison. Like if MacOS>=10.15 use this API feature
Click to expand...
Uh, you’ve got that backwards. They never should have gone with 10.X for 15 versions instead of just continuing doing the normal thing all software everywhere has always done, which is increase the major/first number for major releases.

A better time to switch though would’ve been two releases ago, to have the macOS and iOS version major version numbers matching.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BluefinTuna
So, the basic conclusion is that Apple is heavily relying on developers to transition their apps to Apple Silicon-based macOS apps.

With how poorly Catalyst was received by the development community, will the same happen when Apple releases their 1st ARM-based Macs later this year and very few Apple-Silicon-based apps are released?
 
when apple goes to arm im not buying anymore mac computers. i'm sorry but arm will not have the necessary power for actual use look what happened to the windows arm surface it died a quick death. i think the better idea would have been apple to use amd cpu's as they now run cooler than intel and actually have a lot of power. with mac os 11 i leave the testing for later ive not even gone to catelina as ive seen its issues
 
Wow. And so ends an era. Funny, during the keynote I was wondering if it would be 11.0 since it seems like such a huge design change and will be running on at least one product with Apple Silicon this autumn. Things are going to get pretty nuts in the coming years with all of these technologies coming together. Might be a little rough for a while but I think all of this is for the best.
 
So much focus on these 'your computer will tell you what to do for you!" or useless (message effects) features, I feel like I'm no longer the demographic.
 
padams35 said:
How in the world did the 2013 iMac not make the cut? It is faster than the 2013 Macbook Air, has a better display, was introduced later, discontinued later, shares the same iGPU/GPU as supported Macbook Pros... ?
Click to expand...

I currently have a Late 2015 21.5” iMac with every upgrade that was offered. So this news makes me very nervous. Honestly, why do supported iMacs start from 2014 when weaker computers can run Big Sur from 2013 on?
 
  • Like
Reactions: TimothyR734
macduke said:
Wow. And so ends an era. Funny, during the keynote I was wondering if it would be 11.0 since it seems like such a huge design change and will be running on at least one product with Apple Silicon this autumn. Things are going to get pretty nuts in the coming years with all of these technologies coming together. Might be a little rough for a while but I think all of this is for the best.
Click to expand...

Yeah, just wait until 2025 when you will be able to buy a crazy high core count ARM-based MacBook Pro that plays 4K Youtube videos without any fans turning on or watching Twitch streams without stuttering...

It's going to be an insane decade...get ready folks!
 
So I have iMac late 2015 5K with 128 SSD c drive and D drive fusion drive split. Os is SSD data is d drive regular. After download OS I had 43 GB fee which wasn’t enough! Had to move 23GB outlook folder to D drive, install OS, delete macOS install file and move my data back! Now I have 53 GB SSD free and d drive 1.3 TB of my data!

i was short 12 GB for OS install with split drive!!! Just an FYI

but install went smooth for my new wall paper lol 😂
 
  • Like
Reactions: TimothyR734
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