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.
Rumors of Coming 'macOS' Rebrand for OS X Refuse to Die
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The camelBack name ‘macOS’ looks immature and forced. I had hoped that watchOS was just a phase, but now it seems to be spreading to an established name like OS X. The X in OS X is a reminder of its UNIX and NeXTSTEP heritage and it would be unfortunate to see it go. Mac OS is alright, but not ‘macOS’.
An interesting rumor, but the source doesn't seem to be indicative that OS X is going to be renamed. If multiple NIB files are needed, then a suffix is added (_iPhone, _iPad), so why not _macOS?
I don't feel that this rumor carries much weight, but with Apple, one never can tell. Would rebranding OS X to macOS make sense? Sure, it would fall in line with the naming scheme of their other three operating systems.
Or perhaps they'll really go back to the past and rename the next version of the OS to System 11.
I don't feel that this rumor carries much weight, but with Apple, one never can tell. Would rebranding OS X to macOS make sense? Sure, it would fall in line with the naming scheme of their other three operating systems.
Or perhaps they'll really go back to the past and rename the next version of the OS to System 11.
Because when you've used "normal" numbers to name all your other operating systems, then suddenly switch to Roman numeral for your tenth one, it'll throw people off. Also, the single "X" doesn't have any context to let people know that it's a Roman numeral and not a letter. I think if we were on a different number, such as eleven (XI) or eight (VIII), it would be much more obvious that it is in fact a Roman numeral.
Just like all those fools who call it the "Ex-box". Evrywun knos it’s "Ten-Box".
right, because I forgot the xbox was preceded by the nine-box. my b
To me it still means the UNIX-based Mac OS (and not because of the X that occurs in both).
And nobody minds the way you are dressing, whatever makes you happy.
I guess you also abhor the use of greek letters.
I've always wondered the same. When iOS reaches the tenth version, would it be called iOS X? or iOS 10? If it is iOS X would it converge somehow with OS X? Would be weird if they had both OS X and iOS X (or iOS 10) as pronouncing both would be the same.
Now bring back the Happy Mac! Am I too old that I remember this back when I had Mac System 6.0 on my Macintosh LC III?
It would be interesting to see what would happen if Apple rewrites all of their OSes from scratch, using all of the latest approaches, to build a modern OS that is responsive across all different device display sizes and processors—much like the modern web just works and scales across different environments. Get rid of the cruft, make everything integrate together from day one with continuity and the cloud. That would be really interesting to see. A clean reset.
They've done it before with OS X from NEXT. They've done something similar before with Final Cut X and a few other apps. You remove everything, start over, and start putting features back in. They could introduce it alongside interim updates for the current software so that users can slowly transition over a couple years. Upgrade when you're ready and the apps or features you use are available.
IDK, I just get really excited about entering in to a new age of operating systems that aren't built upon such archaic systems and have our full 2016 knowledge during the laying of their foundations. Why does it seem like there aren't new operating systems any more? Like truly new ones? iOS and OS X rely on Unix and Android relies on Linux which relies on Unix. I don't keep up with the intricacies of Windows anymore but I thought they were at least trying to rewrite parts of their core since it was pretty ancient for many versions. I mean is Unix really the ultimate form of building an operating system that runs on silicon? I guess there are only so many ways of writing code that interacts with traditional computer hardware. I just wonder why there are still so many bugs and crashes? Shouldn't error checking for that sort of thing be built deep into the system to prevent bad code from being executed, as well as tell the developer exactly what went wrong? Could we leverage AI to build a system that fixes itself when it finds errors? I'm thinking like really futuristic, outlandish operating systems. Self-healing operating systems that anticipate what you're going to do next so that processes are already loaded, and are smart enough to guide you when needed and customize themselves automatically for the user based on observing them. I just can't wait!
They've done it before with OS X from NEXT. They've done something similar before with Final Cut X and a few other apps. You remove everything, start over, and start putting features back in. They could introduce it alongside interim updates for the current software so that users can slowly transition over a couple years. Upgrade when you're ready and the apps or features you use are available.
IDK, I just get really excited about entering in to a new age of operating systems that aren't built upon such archaic systems and have our full 2016 knowledge during the laying of their foundations. Why does it seem like there aren't new operating systems any more? Like truly new ones? iOS and OS X rely on Unix and Android relies on Linux which relies on Unix. I don't keep up with the intricacies of Windows anymore but I thought they were at least trying to rewrite parts of their core since it was pretty ancient for many versions. I mean is Unix really the ultimate form of building an operating system that runs on silicon? I guess there are only so many ways of writing code that interacts with traditional computer hardware. I just wonder why there are still so many bugs and crashes? Shouldn't error checking for that sort of thing be built deep into the system to prevent bad code from being executed, as well as tell the developer exactly what went wrong? Could we leverage AI to build a system that fixes itself when it finds errors? I'm thinking like really futuristic, outlandish operating systems. Self-healing operating systems that anticipate what you're going to do next so that processes are already loaded, and are smart enough to guide you when needed and customize themselves automatically for the user based on observing them. I just can't wait!
I know what it means, just like you
. But to most people, the "X" is mostly irrelevant or meaningless today.Technically it should be the iOS that should change for them to be consistent. Apple's thing is to not reuse terms common it seems. Ex. IPP has a pencil not stylus. IT being BT enabled and does stuff is actually not new...I had a BT capable stylus a few years ago. Its limitation was not many apps worked with it.
iOS too has meanings and usage that predates apple's use of it. I can at work go to a coworker go how are the iOS updates going? And he will say not too bad, 1 or 2 cisco devices wanted to be a pain but not too bad otherwise.
I cringe when people put iOS 10 instead of iOS X. Apple normally uses X to represent 10 as seen in software releases. I'm wondering if Apple will stop here and then use the same naming convention as OS X. It would sound weird if they still continued with number releases. "Look, I'm running iOS 69!"
MacOS sounds got to me better than OS 10.11.4; Btw they could also skip the naming (cat names and places with stange names) of OSX / MacOS as the systems have also no name. The current names are silly anyhow.
This is not a sarcastic question – where did they use X apart from Mac OS X?
If (and that is an if) Apple got serious about being consistent, then they would either call this macOS or start giving cute name (a la El Capitan) all the other OS flavors. I wish they were more consistent at all levels including the product naming, but in general I find the dart board approach used by the marketing department is less than consistent.
