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

Mavericks' Successor: Mac 11

nutmac said:
I would frankly prefer "X" to be pronounced as "ex" and not "ten", and I would frankly prefer OS X to move away from 10.x versioning altogether. For instance, I would like the next OS X to be called OS X 9 Mavericks.
Click to expand...

OS X 9 Mavericks make no sense and doesn't exactly roll off the tongue!
 
Could it be that Apple is calling it OSX 9 just to seem a step ahead of MSFT?

Since Windows is still version 8, and OSX is now well, at 9, At least to the modern mac users.
 
Last edited:
Apple does away with the numbering, 10.7 or 10.10 doesn't matter. It's the name that matters. That's why they talk about Mavericks, not necessarily OS X Mavericks.

Different from iOS though, maybe because iOS is much less mature.
 
RoelJuun said:
Apple does away with the numbering, 10.7 or 10.10 doesn't matter. It's the name that matters. That's why they talk about Mavericks, not necessarily OS X Mavericks.

Different from iOS though, maybe because iOS is much less mature.
Click to expand...

Good point.. Rather than using version numbers, just use names 🙂 But a strong naming convention would be needed.

I must admit, Tim Cook chose a pretty rucking start to a naming convention lol This is what happens when you replace an 'Inventor' i.e. Steve Jobs (RIP) with a money man (Tim Cook)
 
I think Apple should just use names, however, version numbers are extremely helpful. I have people that get confused on the order of OS X's cat names...

Oblivious: "Was it Tiger then Lion, right? ...Oh wait, there was Leopard in there too, right?"

Me: "Ummm, no... it was Tiger, Leopard, Snow Leopard, Lion, Mountain Lion, and now Maverics."

Oblivious: "So what version is Tiger?"

Me: "10.4."

Obvlious: "What version is Mountain Lion, then?"

Me: "10.8"

Oblivous: "When did Leopard come out? What version is that?"

Me: "Ahhhhhhh!"
 
We won't see an OS 11 unless they do a major overhaul and rewrite the entire OS, which is not likely to happen for ten or twenty years.
 
chibiterasu said:
I think apple like os x ever since lion about this mac shows os x and not mac os x which is in snow leopard and earlier. It makes marketing sense to have iOS on mobile and OS X on computers.
Click to expand...

On this computer, "About This Mac" still shows "Mac OS X" in 10.8.4. Obviously no standardization has occurred:
 

Attachments

  • Screen Shot 2013-08-17 at 3.19.37 PM.jpg
    Screen Shot 2013-08-17 at 3.19.37 PM.jpg
    28.8 KB · Views: 128
I think the version number will be 10.10. But what will the name be? If apple continue naming os's after places, which place is next?

Maybe

OS X 10.10 California?

OS X 10.10 Cupertino?

OS X 10.10 Santa Clara?

OS X 10.10 Infinite Loop?
 
I think OS X is less about being version ten of apple's operating system and more about the letter. As others stated its really at this point a branding mechanism.

I don't think we'll ever see OS XI (or how ever they'll want to market it). The only wild card in that stream of thought is if they ever merge the iOS/OSX code base. Kind of what MS did with win8, though seeing how people with desktops are struggling with win8 (being a tablet OS) I doubt we'll see a true merging. More like we'll see Apple continue to draw iOS elements into OSX where it makes sense.
 
tywebb13 said:
I think the version number will be 10.10. But what will the name be? If apple continue naming os's after places, which place is next?
Click to expand...
Maybe they'll reuse the Yosemite codename.
 

Attachments

  • 185px-Apple_Yosemite.JPG
    185px-Apple_Yosemite.JPG
    4.8 KB · Views: 853
In terms of how it's properly pronounced it's always been OS Ten from the start. Nobody from Apple has ever stood on the stage at a keynote that I've ever viewed and called it OS EX. I can't understand why anyone that's been in tune with Apple's products would purposely call it OS EX? And from my experience I hear this more from people that live in the UK than anywhere else and frankly it's sickening and irritating.
It has always been the Macintosh Operating System with a version number using a roman numeral 10 (X). How could it be anything else? It was System 7, OS 8, OS 9.....why would it be OS (EX)? 😛
 
HenryDJP said:
In terms of how it's properly pronounced it's always been OS Ten from the start. Nobody from Apple has ever stood on the stage at a keynote that I've ever viewed and called it OS EX. I can't understand why anyone that's been in tune with Apple's products would purposely call it OS EX? And from my experience I hear this more from people that live in the UK than anywhere else and frankly it's sickening and irritating.
It has always been the Macintosh Operating System with a version number using a roman numeral 10 (X). How could it be anything else? It was System 7, OS 8, OS 9.....why would it be OS (EX)? 😛
Click to expand...

The same goes for Logic Pro X and Final Cut Pro X, I keep hearing both of them referred to as (EX). I can sort of understand that it's a bit confusing with Final Cut Pro jumping straight from 7 to X, but Logic Pro even had a version 9 before the current X. So if it's a numeral in OS X, and it is used by the very same company in a Logic Pro release that came after version 9, why on earth would it suddenly be the letter x!
 
It's OS X (Ten) and it'll probably always be that. Much like iOS will always be iOS. The version number doesn't matter, or need to stop at 10.9. It can be OS X 10.10 or OS X 10.11, etc. It's not as complicated as people make it out to be. 😱
 
laurihoefs said:
The same goes for Logic Pro X and Final Cut Pro X, I keep hearing both of them referred to as (EX). I can sort of understand that it's a bit confusing with Final Cut Pro jumping straight from 7 to X, but Logic Pro even had a version 9 before the current X. So if it's a numeral in OS X, and it is used by the very same company in a Logic Pro release that came after version 9, why on earth would it suddenly be the letter x!
Click to expand...

Well here's the thing, regardless of why Apple went from 7 to X (10) in Final Cut, the fact remains that Apple refers to the "X" in Logic, Mac OS and Final Cut as TEN. They've never called it "EX". No one has ever heard them refer these products as (EX) so consumers need to call it was it is, not what they feel it to be. Makes no sense to do otherwise.
 
nutmac said:
Well, which is better?

Oh Es Ex 9 Mavericks

Oh Es Ten 10 Point 10 Mavericks
Click to expand...
Neither. They're both bad.

Viable choices: "OS X, version 10.9", "10.9", "OS X Mavericks", or even "OS 10.9".

No one would say "Windows 2000 5.0" or "Adobe Photoshop CS4 11.0" either, for the same reason. OS X is the product, 10.9 is the version number.
 
DFZD said:
Could it be that Apple is calling it OSX 9 just to seem a step ahead of MSFT?
Click to expand...

Only if you believe Apple hatched this plan back in 1999, when the first version of OS X was being readied for release, and the current version of Windows was Windows 98.
 
HenryDJP said:
It has always been the Macintosh Operating System with a version number using a roman numeral 10 (X). How could it be anything else? It was System 7, OS 8, OS 9.....why would it be OS (EX)? 😛
Click to expand...

Because by some wild coincidence, OS X is the most used, consumer-oriented "Ex" operating system.
 
One thing to note is that Apple hasn't been putting the version number in any marketing in quite a while either. The average customer doesn't know what OS X 10.6, 10.7, 10.8, etc are but rather know them by their name - OS X Snow Leopard, Lion, Mountain Lion, etc.

Saying simply OS X Mavericks works just fine and there is no real need to change it.
 
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