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.
OS X 10.10 to Feature 'Flatter' Look, but Not as Stark as iOS 7
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
"Ugh...this OS is terrible! I want my money back! ..... oh, all OS updates are free as of Maverick release?"
Its Mavericks
I really don't understand how a version number can create such heated debated. Apple markets their operating systems by name anyway, so how they arrange their numbers and decimals is just common sense.
Tell me about it.
And Cue from iOS 7? or Windows Phone/Windows 8 flat modern UI, which everyone hates.
Relax.... there's plenty of time for Mavericks to get to a "full stable" 10.9.5 (or so), so that all the new 10.10 users (end of 2014) can bitch about going back to Mavericks.
History repeats itself.
I can't believe we're over 180 posts in, and nobody has commented about the code name for OS 10.10 being Syrah, at least according to the article. We went from cats, to a surfing spot in California, and now to a wine? I'm fine with that, but is it an indication that Apple is done with "theme" names for now? Of course, there are plenty of wine names they can use, and they would provide MR posters with fodder for humor for years to come. ("OS 10.11 Cabernet: It was a very good year." "OS 10.10 Syrah sucks. They should have called it Thunderbird!" "Apple swore they'd serve no OS before its time. Well, OS 10.12 Merlot should have stayed in the cask for a few more months, because it's buggy as hell." And so on.)
I don't care how it looks. What will it DO?
Seriously you'd thing people just look at the desktop all day. I look at the words I type and the images I shot and so on. If you make the ap go full screen you don't see much else that you didn't make yourself.
(1) Can we have MUCH better searching. I'd like to have spotlight use Google-like techniques to find stuff on my Mac.
(2) any large collection such as iTunes or Aperture libraries need to allow for MULTIPLE USERS. (I'm sure the engineer at Apple know how security is done inside a typical SQL DBMS, do that in your libraries, please.)
(3) Why not a smarter file system? I want to add "storage' and just get more storage and not have to worry and what is on which drive. Just like I can add more RAM and not have to manage it.
There are LOADS of things to do. Making changes to the color of the icons shows a total lack of creativity, it does exactly nothing for the end user.
Seriously you'd thing people just look at the desktop all day. I look at the words I type and the images I shot and so on. If you make the ap go full screen you don't see much else that you didn't make yourself.
(1) Can we have MUCH better searching. I'd like to have spotlight use Google-like techniques to find stuff on my Mac.
(2) any large collection such as iTunes or Aperture libraries need to allow for MULTIPLE USERS. (I'm sure the engineer at Apple know how security is done inside a typical SQL DBMS, do that in your libraries, please.)
(3) Why not a smarter file system? I want to add "storage' and just get more storage and not have to worry and what is on which drive. Just like I can add more RAM and not have to manage it.
There are LOADS of things to do. Making changes to the color of the icons shows a total lack of creativity, it does exactly nothing for the end user.
"10.10" is a valid and perfectly acceptable string. As is the current "10.9.1" string:
Code:
Last login: Mon Jan 27 14:06:25 on console
loki:~ scaredpoet$ sw_vers
ProductName: Mac OS X
ProductVersion: 10.9.1
BuildVersion: 13B42
loki:~ scaredpoet$
Things always come full circle and OS X is doing so. The very first OS X was hideous looking - I owned it. Then with each subsequent release Apple improved not just the look but the functionality. Now, they're returning full circle with a hideous looking OS.
What was it one of the tech magazines said about OS 7; something about it looking childish. I quite couldn't put my finger on how to describe it until I read that review, which sums up the look perfectly.
Actually, I'd quite like that. This rendering isn't nearly as garish and loud as most people in the anti-flat camp are mocking up.
Then again, as I've said before, I'm more interested in functionality, not whether my icons have flat colors, smooth gradients or faux textures.
Actually it would be 10.10.0 followed by 10.10.1 etc...
Apple doesn't care about the version number, actually nobody does (or should). People need to know they are using the latest OS X version. Non technical people don't look at version numbers. These are only for geeks, like us.
Look at Chrome for example. Who cares about its version number?
The first number in a typical software version is the major version number. The second (and any subsequent ones) are minor version numbers.
If you are sitting at version 10.9 of something and you are about to release a MAJOR change, you might go to version 11.0. However, this generally means a significant new release, like the difference between Microsoft Office 2008 and 2011, or Pixelmator version 2.x to version 3.x, or Windows 7 versus Windows 8. They are actually completely different software products from the same family. You don't just jump up the major version because you "ran out of numbers" in the minor version.
If it is a minor improvement on the existing product, then you would go from 10.9 to 10.10 -- which is exactly what Apple has done. And if it is just a patch or a bug fix then you go to 10.9.1 -- again, exactly what Apple does.
Last edited: