OS XI?

in the past it was when i believe the core was changed (7.5 (i think) went to 8.0, 8.6.6 went to 9.0, and 9.2 went to X)

But Apple has made a lot on the theme of being X so i believe they will go up to 10.9 unless something happens that they change the core a lot.

 

OS X is a marketable brand, so they'll probably go to OS 10.6/7/8.

Past:
7.6.x
8.6.x
9.2.2

 

Nope, they ported 7.5 to the PPC and released it as 7.6

 

OS 10 was a complete rewrite, not 1 line of code was kept, whole new GUI, whole new core, whole new everything!

 

thanks i couldn't remember what the last 7 was.

and greenguy4 the change from those OSes were DRASTIC to say the least

 

Got 7.6 installed on a PPC 7200/75 upstairs

 

heh nice, i had 7.5 then went to 8 on a new computer, have that downstairs

 

I am working on the glorious finale, 9.2.2, right at the moment...

 

Actually, huge amounts of code from System 1.0 through OS 9.2.2 were kept. All of QuickDraw, for example. And most of the code from Carbon apps, including the Finder.

As for the X thing, Apple will keep that as long as they can, even when they get to version 11 (and no, it won't be called OS XI); the WWDC 2003 build of Panther, for example, was labeled "OS X version 11". It was later that they decided on 10.3 (or it could have been before, just after the CDs went to press). In doing so, Apple made a marketing gambit; they dumped the ability to say it's a new major version of the OS (though they do their best to convince people that is a new major version (which it is)) in order to avoid confusing consumers with something like OS X version 11 or OS X version 12 (getting rid of the X was out of the question, marketing-wise). Personally, I would have gone the other way, but then I don't run Apple's marketing dept.

 

Well, definitely between 9 and 10. But 8.6-9 wasn't very drastic at all*, except for the addition of Sherlock 2 and AppleScript over TCP/IP**. 8.1-8.5, 8.5-8.6, and 9.0.4-9.1 were much, much, more so.

*Given this, why did they change it, one might ask? Marketing. They thought Sherlock 2 and AppleScript/TCP/IP were big enough on their own for a new brand name. Their coders thought, until marketing stepped in, that they were developing 8.7; in fact, if you try to use the OS 9.0 version of DVD Player on an 8.6 system, the error message is "This application requires Mac OS 8.7 or later to run."

**plus a few things that were either gimicks, or didn't really work right until 9.1, like Multiple Users and the voiceprint password system.

 

Huh? It was during the reign of System 7.1 that Apple transitioned to the PPC. System 7.5 was the first new version of the OS after the transition. System 7.5 incorporated a lot of Copland (System 8) technology in the OS. IIRC, MacOS 7.6 was the OS designed for the clones. MacOS 8.1 was the last that ran on any version of the 680x0 processor. MacOS 8.5 and later were all PPC-exclusive.

 

/me forgot

 

The Voiceprint Password System was something that was in OS 9. It was a startup password where instead of typing your password you said "My voice is my password" and it compared your voiceprint to one on file. Although if it didn't get it after 2 tries it prompted you to enter your password manualy. Kind of a neat idea, I used it for about a week, then it got anoying. I don't believe it exists in OS X.

 

Since 10.9 is still several years away, it may not be something that Apple is really thinking about now. "XI" would not have nearly the marketing and aesthetic appeal of the current campaign. Maybe they'll change it to "XX" instead. Or maybe they'll go with OS names instead, just "Tiger" and no number. In various ways they could slow down their small updates and really extend the 10.x.x series for a long time if they didn't have a plan.

It might depend on which side of the bed Steve gets up on the day of the meeting.

 

There will definitely be a 10.5, beyond that its hard to be certain. A 10.6 is likely, but they get less likely after that. Apple is moving to release updates every 2-2.5 years, as opposed to 12-18 months like they've been doing. So that means a 10.7 would come out after 2010...by then computing could look totally different, so its hard to say that they won't be releasing OS XI instead of OS X 10.7.

The upgrade from 7 to 8 was pretty major. OS8 was a compromise release because Apple had promised a modern OS for a long time and failed to deliver. OS8 had a much different GUI and lots of new features under the hood. OS8 to 9 was much less important. Honestly I can't even remember what OS9 had.. OS X was huge, of course, probably as significant an upgrade as OS7 was.

 

My guess is they'll use up their two remaining registered trademarks: Cougar and Lynx, then move on to a full 64-bit OS 11.

 

They've trademarked those?

And i thought the next would be ocelot, or something like that....

But mainly i agree, although theyve cornered themselves slightly...XI doesnt really work...maybe they'll completely switch to using the codenames as market names, just like they've recently done with Tiger and Panther...

 

Of course, they don't need to stop at 10.9 – there's no reason they can't go onto 10.10, 10.11 and so on.

 

Please dear LORD, not the freakin' numerical argument again.