.Neo Posted August 17, 2009 Share Posted August 17, 2009 Maybe apple is trying to get away from the OSX name? I mean this is 10.6... they'll need something new for OS 11 Mac OS X2 :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the evn show Posted August 17, 2009 Share Posted August 17, 2009 I'm interested in what they'll do after 10.9Will they be using XI? Looks a bit retarded :p Version number's don't work like that. There's no reason there couldn't be "Mac OS X version 10.28.97" if they wanted to. Like I stated earlier, "Mac OS X" has strong brand recognition, just like "Windows" or "iPod." Thus, it doesn't matter what the packaging looks like, because people will know what "Mac OS X" is. Yes it does. "We've got great brand recognition: lets ignore that when we try to sell our new product" is extremely rare. One notable example of Apple trying to build the Mac OS X umbrella label includes the way they're counting "Mac OS X market share" by including iPhones/iPod Touches in their count. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Denis W. Veteran Posted August 17, 2009 Veteran Share Posted August 17, 2009 Mac OS X2 :laugh: That's taking a page from Corel's book. :p (reference: Corel PSP X2) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hell-In-A-Handbasket Posted August 18, 2009 Share Posted August 18, 2009 they had 10.4.12 ( think it was 12 ) so they are not against going past the 10 barrier, might be OSX 11.0.0 Well it will be 10.10 (nothing says you can't have >.9 point release), unless they run out of big cat names :p Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.Neo Posted August 18, 2009 Share Posted August 18, 2009 v10.4.11 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snakehn Posted August 18, 2009 Share Posted August 18, 2009 (edited) So... anybody knows if it has hit "GM" or "RTM" Status? or could this be an indication of it? http://www.crunchgear.com/2009/08/17/this-...he-gold-master/ Edited August 18, 2009 by Snakehn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pdmcmahon Posted August 18, 2009 Share Posted August 18, 2009 I am itching bad for this joker to drop, I hate waiting... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Decryptor Veteran Posted August 18, 2009 Veteran Share Posted August 18, 2009 Hmm, well they did this for Tiger, but it didn't match the real thing: This could be the same kind of deal. Although, I really do hope the box and disc do look like that! :D Yeah, but look at the Leopard disk. They've done it with Leopard, they certainly could do it again with Snow Leopard. I'm interested in what they'll do after 10.9Will they be using XI? Looks a bit retarded :p Mac OS X 11.0 "OS X" is good branding they wouldn't want to give up, and it wouldn't really be considered to be a roman numeral considering they've called it "Mac OS 10 version 10" for the last 6 releases. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.Neo Posted August 18, 2009 Share Posted August 18, 2009 "Mac OS X v11.0" doesn't make any sense. The "X" in "Mac OS X" isn't a letter, it's a Roman number. So you would go from "Mac OS ten (dot six) Snow Leopard" to "Mac OS ten eleven (dot something) codename here". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astra.Xtreme Posted August 18, 2009 Share Posted August 18, 2009 "Mac OS X v11.0" doesn't make any sense. The "X" in "Mac OS X" isn't a letter, it's a Roman number.So you would go from "Mac OS ten (dot six) Snow Leopard" to "Mac OS ten eleven (dot something) codename here". Exactly. I don't think some people realize that OS X = OS 10 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
offroadaaron Posted August 18, 2009 Share Posted August 18, 2009 Exactly. I don't think some people realize that OS X = OS 10 Mac OS X+1 <----- You heard it first from me :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L0u1s Posted August 18, 2009 Share Posted August 18, 2009 lol, if they name it Mac OS X 11 they really are retarded. Like stated above, it doesn't make any sense... I think 10.10 would be the more logic solution. That way they'll keep the "X". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PL_ Veteran Posted August 18, 2009 Veteran Share Posted August 18, 2009 "Mac OS X v11.0" doesn't make any sense. The "X" in "Mac OS X" isn't a letter, it's a Roman number.So you would go from "Mac OS ten (dot six) Snow Leopard" to "Mac OS ten eleven (dot something) codename here". It's not written OS X.6, it's written OS X 10.6. This is Apple, and if Apple decide the X doesn't stand for anything they'll pretend the X never stood for anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
offroadaaron Posted August 18, 2009 Share Posted August 18, 2009 Well there was Mac OS 7,8,9 weren't they just named like that!!?? I'm sure the other ones before that as well but you get what I mean. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.Neo Posted August 18, 2009 Share Posted August 18, 2009 It's not written OS X.6, it's written OS X 10.6. This is Apple, and if Apple decide the X doesn't stand for anything they'll pretend the X never stood for anything. It's pronounced as "Mac OS ten dot six", not "Mac OS ex ten dot six". You'll never hear Steve Jobs saying the latter. The fact that they choose to repeat the "v10" bit of the version number doesn't change the fact the "X" still stands for "10". They could throw that overboard, but I strongly doubt it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malisk Posted August 18, 2009 Share Posted August 18, 2009 Well it will be 10.10 (nothing says you can't have >.9 point release), unless they run out of big cat names :p LOL, yeah, they're actually pretty close in doing that. Those still left after this would be: Lion, Cougar, Lynx. And that's it. Unless they want to use Clouded Leopard oddities, but I sure hope they change their naming scheme before that. :D Lion is the "king" of big cats, so maybe it will be last. ;) Apple has already trademarked Cougar and Lynx. "Mac OS X v11.0" doesn't make any sense. The "X" in "Mac OS X" isn't a letter, it's a Roman number.So you would go from "Mac OS ten (dot six) Snow Leopard" to "Mac OS ten eleven (dot something) codename here". Don't underestimate the weird minds of marketing people. Odder things have happened than them suddenly starting to treat a roman numeral as instead part of a brand name, if it was deemed powerful enough. Intel remained with the Pentium brand for a long time, despite it originally being meant as merely the fifth (penta) CPU generation, after their 80486. For the next generation, they simply went for Pentium II instead of going for e.g. Hexium, because of the power of the Pentium brand. It made zero logical sense, but complete business sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.Neo Posted August 18, 2009 Share Posted August 18, 2009 Only time will tell right? ;) Don't think we'll see Apple departing from the Mac OS X v10.x scheme anytime soon though. Pretty convinced we'll at the very least least see a Mac OS X v10.7 and v10.8. That's is unless something really really big happens, like Apple actually dumping the current Aqua scroll bars. :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Decryptor Veteran Posted August 18, 2009 Veteran Share Posted August 18, 2009 "Mac OS X" is marketing, it's not an Roman numeral (Since then it's "Ten Ten Point Five") It would just be Mac OS 10 if it was meant to be interpreted as a number (The X makes it seem like a larger change, the jump from OS8 to OS9 wasn't that great, while the change from OS9 to OS X was, but just increasing the version number doesn't signify that) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.Neo Posted August 18, 2009 Share Posted August 18, 2009 (edited) "Mac OS X" is marketing, it's not an Roman numeral (Since then it's "Ten Ten Point Five") At this point that's simply not true. The "X" stands for the number "10" and is pronounced as such, not as being "Ex". You can take it up with Steve Jobs himself next time he pronounces the name in public. Edit In fact you can hear it for yourself at 0:57 right now: Jobs says "Mac OS Ten Leopard" while at the same time a huge disc pops up in the background with "Mac OS X Leopard" written down. Honestly, what more proof do you want? Edited August 18, 2009 by .Neo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snakehn Posted August 18, 2009 Share Posted August 18, 2009 At this point that's simply not true. The "X" stands for the number "10" and is pronounced as such, not as being "Ex". You can take it up with Steve Jobs himself next time he pronounces the name in public.Edit In fact you can hear it for yourself at 0:57 right now: Jobs says "Mac OS Ten Leopard" while at the same time a huge disc pops up in the background with "Mac OS X Leopard" written down. Honestly, what more proof do you want? LOL that was a great one ;) nice clip Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.Neo Posted August 18, 2009 Share Posted August 18, 2009 Yeah, that was a good one. :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+John. Subscriber¹ Posted August 18, 2009 Subscriber¹ Share Posted August 18, 2009 At this point that's simply not true. The "X" stands for the number "10" and is pronounced as such, not as being "Ex". You can take it up with Steve Jobs himself next time he pronounces the name in public.Edit In fact you can hear it for yourself at 0:57 right now: Jobs says "Mac OS Ten Leopard" while at the same time a huge disc pops up in the background with "Mac OS X Leopard" written down. Honestly, what more proof do you want? Great clip :p I did like that keynote. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PyX Posted August 18, 2009 Share Posted August 18, 2009 I honestly like saying "Mac OS Ex", but it's pretty obvious that the X stands for a 10 because it was Mac OS 9 before... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cldmani Posted August 18, 2009 Share Posted August 18, 2009 Well, speaking of the OS itself, not much changed from a visual point of view from the few minutes i spend messing around with it. What i did notice is, while browsing for WiFi spots, it also shows the signal strength while browsing for wifi spots. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BoDEAN Posted August 18, 2009 Share Posted August 18, 2009 Leopard seems to run well. Installed via "upgrade" without a hiccup. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts