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

Should Apple ditch the codenames from macOS?

Should Apple ditch the codenames from macOS?

  • Yes

    Votes: 15 24.2%

  • No

    Votes: 42 67.7%

  • Unsure

    Votes: 5 8.1%
  • Total voters
    62
I don't want them to but think they will do it this year with macOS 27 aligned to the year. It is not done for any other OS release from Apple so I think they'll completely sanitize it.
 
Ben J. said:
No. I think the names helps when discussing stuff on forums like this. Helps with clarity.
Click to expand...
I like the names, but think 100% the opposite. Less than a decade on and how many people can remember if Mojave or High Sierra is the older OS? When someone says El Capitan, where is that in relative time? It's somewhere between Mavericks and Big Sur, but closer to which end? Does it support a feature you know was released with Sierra? Which came first?

The codenames are for marketing, everythign else should use the version number. Which makes even more sense now that the version is tied to the year.
 
"It's 2035. The latest OS is OS 35. You're still running OS 29 on your 2026 MBP; but you can upgrade to OS 34."

"It's 2035. The latest OS is Snow Badger. You're still running Ocelot on your 2026 MBP; but you can upgrade to Wolverine."

One of these conveys more information, particularly to people who aren't tech nerds.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mdcmdcmdc and brilliantthings
If anything, I wish Apple would just bring the name to all of the operating systems and unify around an entire theme each year.
Matching or contrasting macOS and iOS wallpapers, an accompanying tvOS screensaver and so on.
I think the names are fun, keeps around a little bit of the whimsy from the early days of the Internet and operating systems.
 
I voted yes, ditch the names, but I'm a numbers person. The names are arbitrary and provide no information about what version came before or after what, unless you (a) remember or (b) look it up. I'm glad Apple is at least going to year-based numbering.
 
MacGizmo said:
They release the OS in September (or very early in October), leaving only 3 months of the year where the date is wrong. Doing it the way you're saying would make it wrong for 9 months of the year.

The only way to avoid the problem would be to release the OS' every January 1st. Or they could pull a Microsoft and keep the release year in the name for several years so the marketing team can take an extended multi-year sabbatical. 😆
Click to expand...

True about Microsoft. On the other hand, instead of rushing out a new OS every year, they would let an OS percolate for a few years, then offer a newer OS. In the interim, Microsoft did patches, etc. Not that the damn OS ran any better, but they did try. 🙂

With Apple pushing a new OS every year, they are publishing updates, but at the same time, there is this internal push and diversion of resources to get a new OS ready in 9 months. Microsoft had a better way; OS was not necessarily better, but the user base had an easier go of it.
 
cjsuk said:
Yes. This is a persistent problem across the industry.

Look at Linux. No one can tell what version Ubuntu Manky Mutt is. Is it older or newer than Feral Ferret or Stoned Snake.

Numbers are by nature ordered.
Click to expand...
I think the difference is I haven't heard anyone saying in the wild "I'm using jammy jellyfish." They'll say the year code, which I think is the better way of talking about Ubuntu. An even year + April is an LTS release (22.04, 24.04, 26.04) and everything else is a point release and not LTS.

macOS already has both a marketing name and a number. Compared older versions like Mountain Lion (10.8) to Sequoia (15) I find that anything fun about macOS has been stripped out. Like why doesn't the Time Machine menu bar icon animate when it is backing up? I think it would suck if Apple removed one of the only fun/personable things about the macOS release cycle. Plus it is a harmless legacy OS X thing. Maybe when they run out of California locations they'll retire it, who knows.
 
Regardless of names or number systems, the following usually occurs:

"Are you using macOS Sequoia or Tahoe?"
"I use a Mac, yes."
"Which version?"
"I said I use a Mac."
 
Maybe when they start to run out of desirable names they will rethink releasing a new MacOS every year, so we don't get beta software like Tahoe
 
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