Adding CocoaTouch to Cocoa for some hybrid Mac solution isn't adding iOS to Mac OS X, it's adding an element from iOS. Same goes for QTX foundation coming from iOS to Mac OS X. Sharing of relevant and useful code didn't Mac OS X become iOS. For you to say that it will be the same OS you are 1) saying that an installation will work on the Apple TV, iPhone, iPad and any Mac, and 2) Apple will rename them so they follow what MS is doing with Windows, except go even further and make Windows Phone become Windows RT. Neither of these will happen.
If Mac OS X runs on ARM that does not mean it's not iOS. Darwin OS already runs on ARM so there only hurdles are to get the appropriate drivers and make sure the UI is fluid and smooth enough to be reasonable for an ARM-based product. There would still be driver issues for 3rd-party devices which I think is a strong indication they wouldn't go this route.
They'd likely be keeping that name for a decade. Does OS XI work for marketing? Does it make sense to give up the solid market name of OS X just because a number most customers aren't aware of and only a handful take issue with don't like the idea of 10.11.x as internal numbering schema?
I'd think there would have to be some radical changes Apple is sure about to jump from OS X to something else. At least MS kept the Windows part even when they had to get rid of the tainted Vista name. Apple doesn't even have Mac in front of OS X anymore which implies that OS X is the part they think is most valuable for the OS name.
Right alienate and piss off half the planet just so they can be "patriotic" to the Americans. That really sounds like a smart move that Apple would make. /s
Right alienate and piss off half the planet just so they can be "patriotic" to the Americans. That really sounds like a smart move that Apple would make. /s :rolleyes:
Now that you mention it this is probably is an important consideration. As well giving extra focus to what will work well in China, and perhaps India after that, as those markets become more important.
You think you're being clever, but when they say they've ran out of numbers after 10.9 so they're moving onto 11, everyone will understand what they mean and that will be that. Next slide. ...
No one with a brain will "understand what they mean." There's nothing wrong with 10.10 or 10.11 or 10.58. There is no actual good reason to move to 11.0 after 10.10.
My contention is that most people think of it as "OS X." It's one of the most valuable brands on the planet. Why would they ditch that over some obsessive number nonsense?
Now that you me turn it this probably is an impotent ant consideration, as well giving extra focus to what will work well in China, and perhaps India after that.
I was maybe a bit strident there, but I have American friends and yet (if I'm honest), my "gut" reaction to the Bald Eagle imagery and flag waving etc. is usually "f*ck that noise".
From the outside, American patriotism is just as distasteful as any other, perhaps more so. Americans are one of the few peoples that still do all that flag-waving junk. It's passé and tacky at best. You don't see rippling flag imagery and misty eyed eagles on Apple's website for instance. I can't think they've ever even had an American flag up once in all their history.
Most people I know purposely avoid websites and companies in America that use that sort of imagery.
I was maybe a bit strident there, but I have American friends and yet (if I'm honest), my "gut" reaction to the Bald Eagle imagery and flag waving etc. is usually "f*ck that noise".
From the outside, American patriotism is just as distasteful as any other, perhaps more so. Americans are one of the few peoples that still do all that flag-waving junk. It's passé and tacky at best. You don't see rippling flag imagery and misty eyed eagles on Apple's website for instance. I can't think they've ever even had an American flag up once in all their history.
Most people I know purposely avoid websites and companies in America that use that sort of imagery.
OT: In my extensive travels outside the US I've found very little hatred for the US and what animosity I did find was on an individual level, not a nationwide sentiment. I've never been to a country that was directly warring with the US so I assume it would be a different story in those states but by and large people are fascinated by the US and are well aware of American politics, entertainment, and culture.
OT: In my extensive travels outside the US I've found very little hatred for the US and what animosity I did find was on an individual level, not a nationwide sentiment. I've never been to a country that was directly warring with the US so I assume it would be a different story in those states but by and large people are fascinated by the US and are well aware of American politics, entertainment, and culture.
I've traveled to around 30 countries on 5 continents and this is highly variable. In some parts of the world Americans are hated - and I was advised to do nothing at all to show my nationality because it would put me in danger. In other parts of the world, Americans are revered. Those statements are true both on individual and national perspectives. Even among countries that we are not at war with, there are several that I would not want to be recognized as American.
So the question becomes: does using US symbology provide more positive response than negative or vice versa? In order to answer that, you have to look at the nations which are on each side, the depth of their feelings, and whether they're countries that are likely to buy Apple products, anyway.
In the end, there's little value to using such a nationalistic symbol in a case like this. Typically, the positive would be modest (and most of the people who would be positive about it already know that Apple's an American company so you wouldn't gain much. The negative attitudes are much stronger - so there would likely be a net loss.
Now that you mention it this is probably is an important consideration. As well giving extra focus to what will work well in China, and perhaps India after that, as those markets become more important.
edit: typos!
I liked it before you fixed the typos. Get that impotent ant some viagra.
I've traveled to around 30 countries on 5 continents and this is highly variable. In some parts of the world Americans are hated - and I was advised to do nothing at all to show my nationality because it would put me in danger. In other parts of the world, Americans are revered. Those statements are true both on individual and national perspectives. Even among countries that we are not at war with, there are several that I would not want to be recognized as American.
So the question becomes: does using US symbology provide more positive response than negative or vice versa? In order to answer that, you have to look at the nations which are on each side, the depth of their feelings, and whether they're countries that are likely to buy Apple products, anyway.
In the end, there's little value to using such a nationalistic symbol in a case like this. Typically, the positive would be modest (and most of the people who would be positive about it already know that Apple's an American company so you wouldn't gain much. The negative attitudes are much stronger - so there would likely be a net loss.
I liked it before you fixed the typos. Get that impotent ant some viagra.
Don't you love autocorrect?
10.11) I agree with the lack of value and potential harm of going with a national symbol like the bald eagle but I can't say I've ever been in a country where I felt the country was as a whole anti-American. I've been to 40 something countries, give or take a few depending on if you count the various sovereign states and principalities and whatnot. Does the Vatican count as one? Do N. Ireland, Scotland, Wales and GB count as 4, do I only get to count it as UK, or do I get 5, one for each of those plus the UK on top of it? I counted Vatican as one, and I counted the territories in the UK as 4 but didn't count the UK as it was redundant to the land it covered.
10.12) The most anti-American comments I've ever heard were in Madrid, Spain by an Irish man who was telling me at a bar how the Americans deserved 9/11.
10.13) Just like on this forum I've found that your country of origin has no barring on if you are intelligent or rational individual, My feeling is that people around the world have the same basic dreams and desires as everyone else.
10.14) Usually when I make a typo the context is still understandable but that last comment had me re-reading my owns to figure out what I was trying to say.
How about a new filesystem in 10.9 not one that leaves .DS_Store droppings and requires me to pay for a defrag app?
1) I believe it was version 10.5 that Apple stopped using .DS_Store files on remote systems. If you're in Mac OS X you don't see them as they are invisible.
2) I'm not sure why you'd need a defrag app on a UNIX system. If you have any evidence to show that Mac OS X does a horrific job defragging itself then please post it.
1) I believe it was version 10.5 that Apple stopped using .DS_Store files on remote systems. If you're in Mac OS X you don't see them as they are invisible.
2) I'm not sure why you'd need a defrag app on a UNIX system. If you have any evidence to show that Mac OS X does a horrific job defragging itself then please post it.
1) If I want to view hidden files like .vimrc I need to view those .DS_Store files as well.
2) Perhaps they fixed something in the last couple of years but I definitely had an issue requiring me to defrag my file system with a paid defragger. I can't remember exactly what I was trying to do, but OS X definitely told me I needed to defrag.
HFS+ is an aging file system that was written in a hurry. Linux users have lots of file system options so why are stuck with HFS+?
1) If I want to view hidden files like .vimrc I need to view those .DS_Store files as well.
2) Perhaps they fixed something in the last couple of years but I definitely had an issue requiring me to defrag my file system with a paid defragger. I can't remember exactly what I was trying to do, but OS X definitely told me I needed to defrag.
HFS+ is an aging file system that was written in a hurry. Linux users have lots of file system options so why are stuck with HFS+?
1) Sure, HFS+ is aging but that doesn't mean it's bad.
2) I'l defer to this article on how Mac OS X defrags itself.
"Apple supplies a handy application for working with hard drives called Disk Utility. If you open up Disk Utility, you’ll notice that it doesn’t include a tool for defragmenting your hard drive. The reason for this perceived oversight is that a Mac running any version of OS X later than 10.2 does not need to be defragmented. OS X has its own built-in safeguards that prevent files from becoming fragmented in the first place.
OS X’s HFS+ file system tries not to use recently freed file space on a disk. Instead, it looks for larger free areas already present on the drive, thereby avoiding fragmenting files just to fit them into available space.
OS X dynamically gathers groups of small files and combines them into larger areas on your disk automatically. The process of writing the files to a new larger location defragments all of the files in the group.
OS X implements Hot File Adaptive Clustering, which monitors frequently-accessed files that do not get changed (read only), and then moves these often-accessed files to a special hot zone on the hard drive. In the process of moving these files, OS X defragments them, and then stores them in the area of the hard drive that has the fastest access.
When you open a file, OS X checks to see if it is highly fragmented (more than 8 fragments). If it is, OS X will automatically defragment the file.
The result of all these safeguards is that OSX rarely, if ever, needs to have its disk space defragmented. The only real exception to this is when your hard drive has less than 10 percent free space. At that point, OS X is unable to perform its automatic defragmentation routines, and you should consider either removing files or expanding your disk storage size."
3) I would love for the .DS_Store files to go away completely in favour for a more modern way of storing data about folder states (and one that worked consistently, especially for maintaining window sizes and positions in Finder) but if you don't like seeing .DS_Store files when you look for .vimrc files then I'd say the problem is with you needing to see files that are designed to be hidden. That's what the preceding period is telling the system.
That's absurd. I never said that you need to know all that it would entail. I just said there's no reason to get excited when you know NOTHING about what it will entail.
I could just as easily argue that your life must be very shallow if you get excited and look forward to something that you know nothing about.
Disagreed, Jrag. You can look forward to a major OS update because you know that it will bring new features and improvements to your PC. You don't know what they are - but you know that's what a major OS update entails.
Disagreed, Jrag. You can look forward to a major OS update because you know that it will bring new features and improvements to your PC. You don't know what they are - but you know that's what a major OS update entails.
How do you know that? Not all 'upgrades' are beneficial. Some are actually a step backwards. I used iCloud/MobileMe as an example (although it's not an OS upgrade, of course). Plenty of Windows users found that Vista was a huge step backwards from XP, though.
Even in the Mac world, a number of OS 'upgrades' have been significant problems for some users. For example, if you are using PPC Macs, one of the 'upgrades' wouldn't even run on your computer - so it was of no benefit at all. And others have found unusual situations that made upgrades problematic.
Granted, these problems are far less of an issue in the Mac world than in the Windows world, but not all upgrades have been positive for everyone. What if OF X 10.9 requires 8 GB of RAM - and your system only supports 4?
How do you know that? Not all 'upgrades' are beneficial. Some are actually a step backwards. I used iCloud/MobileMe as an example (although it's not an OS upgrade, of course). Plenty of Windows users found that Vista was a huge step backwards from XP, though.
Even in the Mac world, a number of OS 'upgrades' have been significant problems for some users. For example, if you are using PPC Macs, one of the 'upgrades' wouldn't even run on your computer - so it was of no benefit at all. And others have found unusual situations that made upgrades problematic.
Granted, these problems are far less of an issue in the Mac world than in the Windows world, but not all upgrades have been positive for everyone. What if OF X 10.9 requires 8 GB of RAM - and your system only supports 4?
I found the changes from MM to iCloud to be most beneficial. I would have liked a Dropbox-like service to replace iDisk but iCloud overall is a great step forward. But that's all beside the point, as it's about expectations of will likely happen, not precognitive knowledge of an event. I look forward to getting my new iMac but I don't know if the damn thing will be broken when it arrives. I look forward to my next vacation but I don't know if I'll get in an accident that will kill me. I look forward to Apple's next major product release but I don't know if it'll be something I'll end up buying. In all case I am looking forward to them because historically they have proven to be an enjoyable experience. If they haven't been for you then you have the right to not look forward to them but others do.
Time to go now as I am looking forward to a nice steak dinner… which may end up giving me food poisoning or E.coli but that doesn't mean I'm not looking forward to it.
This is the way I see the OS name being made up, taking the current version of 10.8.2 for example.
10 = the 10th version, .8 = the 8th release of the 10th version, .2 = the 2nd revision / update of the 8th release.
Mountain Lion being a more user friendly / easier to remember name for 10.8.2, & OS X (spoken as OS Ten) the general over all OS name, like Windows or Linux.
If I am correct in this, there is no reason at all that they cannot use 10.10, 10.11 etc, if they choose to of course. Cannot see why some say it would be wrong or confusing myself.
1) Sure, HFS+ is aging but that doesn't mean it's bad.
2) I'l defer to this article on how Mac OS X defrags itself.
"Apple supplies a handy application for working with hard drives called Disk Utility. If you open up Disk Utility, you’ll notice that it doesn’t include a tool for defragmenting your hard drive. The reason for this perceived oversight is that a Mac running any version of OS X later than 10.2 does not need to be defragmented. OS X has its own built-in safeguards that prevent files from becoming fragmented in the first place.
OS X’s HFS+ file system tries not to use recently freed file space on a disk. Instead, it looks for larger free areas already present on the drive, thereby avoiding fragmenting files just to fit them into available space.
OS X dynamically gathers groups of small files and combines them into larger areas on your disk automatically. The process of writing the files to a new larger location defragments all of the files in the group.
OS X implements Hot File Adaptive Clustering, which monitors frequently-accessed files that do not get changed (read only), and then moves these often-accessed files to a special hot zone on the hard drive. In the process of moving these files, OS X defragments them, and then stores them in the area of the hard drive that has the fastest access.
When you open a file, OS X checks to see if it is highly fragmented (more than 8 fragments). If it is, OS X will automatically defragment the file.
The result of all these safeguards is that OSX rarely, if ever, needs to have its disk space defragmented. The only real exception to this is when your hard drive has less than 10 percent free space. At that point, OS X is unable to perform its automatic defragmentation routines, and you should consider either removing files or expanding your disk storage size."
3) I would love for the .DS_Store files to go away completely in favour for a more modern way of storing data about folder states (and one that worked consistently, especially for maintaining window sizes and positions in Finder) but if you don't like seeing .DS_Store files when you look for .vimrc files then I'd say the problem is with you needing to see files that are designed to be hidden. That's what the preceding period is telling the system.
Comments
Not games, the only reason why I have a Windows partition at all.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
Adding CocoaTouch to Cocoa for some hybrid Mac solution isn't adding iOS to Mac OS X, it's adding an element from iOS. Same goes for QTX foundation coming from iOS to Mac OS X. Sharing of relevant and useful code didn't Mac OS X become iOS. For you to say that it will be the same OS you are 1) saying that an installation will work on the Apple TV, iPhone, iPad and any Mac, and 2) Apple will rename them so they follow what MS is doing with Windows, except go even further and make Windows Phone become Windows RT. Neither of these will happen.
If Mac OS X runs on ARM that does not mean it's not iOS. Darwin OS already runs on ARM so there only hurdles are to get the appropriate drivers and make sure the UI is fluid and smooth enough to be reasonable for an ARM-based product. There would still be driver issues for 3rd-party devices which I think is a strong indication they wouldn't go this route.
Well if you say it, then it must be true!
They'd likely be keeping that name for a decade. Does OS XI work for marketing? Does it make sense to give up the solid market name of OS X just because a number most customers aren't aware of and only a handful take issue with don't like the idea of 10.11.x as internal numbering schema?
I'd think there would have to be some radical changes Apple is sure about to jump from OS X to something else. At least MS kept the Windows part even when they had to get rid of the tainted Vista name. Apple doesn't even have Mac in front of OS X anymore which implies that OS X is the part they think is most valuable for the OS name.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Povilas
OS X Bald Eagle
Right alienate and piss off half the planet just so they can be "patriotic" to the Americans. That really sounds like a smart move that Apple would make. /s
Now that you mention it this is probably is an important consideration. As well giving extra focus to what will work well in China, and perhaps India after that, as those markets become more important.
edit: typos!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ireland
You think you're being clever, but when they say they've ran out of numbers after 10.9 so they're moving onto 11, everyone will understand what they mean and that will be that. Next slide. ...
No one with a brain will "understand what they mean." There's nothing wrong with 10.10 or 10.11 or 10.58. There is no actual good reason to move to 11.0 after 10.10.
My contention is that most people think of it as "OS X." It's one of the most valuable brands on the planet. Why would they ditch that over some obsessive number nonsense?
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
Now that you me turn it this probably is an impotent ant consideration…
Soli, you feeling okay, man? Finally had an aneurism?
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
Now that you me turn it this probably is an impotent ant consideration, as well giving extra focus to what will work well in China, and perhaps India after that.
I was maybe a bit strident there, but I have American friends and yet (if I'm honest), my "gut" reaction to the Bald Eagle imagery and flag waving etc. is usually "f*ck that noise".
From the outside, American patriotism is just as distasteful as any other, perhaps more so. Americans are one of the few peoples that still do all that flag-waving junk. It's passé and tacky at best. You don't see rippling flag imagery and misty eyed eagles on Apple's website for instance. I can't think they've ever even had an American flag up once in all their history.
Most people I know purposely avoid websites and companies in America that use that sort of imagery.
OT: In my extensive travels outside the US I've found very little hatred for the US and what animosity I did find was on an individual level, not a nationwide sentiment. I've never been to a country that was directly warring with the US so I assume it would be a different story in those states but by and large people are fascinated by the US and are well aware of American politics, entertainment, and culture.
I've traveled to around 30 countries on 5 continents and this is highly variable. In some parts of the world Americans are hated - and I was advised to do nothing at all to show my nationality because it would put me in danger. In other parts of the world, Americans are revered. Those statements are true both on individual and national perspectives. Even among countries that we are not at war with, there are several that I would not want to be recognized as American.
So the question becomes: does using US symbology provide more positive response than negative or vice versa? In order to answer that, you have to look at the nations which are on each side, the depth of their feelings, and whether they're countries that are likely to buy Apple products, anyway.
In the end, there's little value to using such a nationalistic symbol in a case like this. Typically, the positive would be modest (and most of the people who would be positive about it already know that Apple's an American company so you wouldn't gain much. The negative attitudes are much stronger - so there would likely be a net loss.
I liked it before you fixed the typos. Get that impotent ant some viagra.
Don't you love autocorrect?
10.11) I agree with the lack of value and potential harm of going with a national symbol like the bald eagle but I can't say I've ever been in a country where I felt the country was as a whole anti-American. I've been to 40 something countries, give or take a few depending on if you count the various sovereign states and principalities and whatnot. Does the Vatican count as one? Do N. Ireland, Scotland, Wales and GB count as 4, do I only get to count it as UK, or do I get 5, one for each of those plus the UK on top of it? I counted Vatican as one, and I counted the territories in the UK as 4 but didn't count the UK as it was redundant to the land it covered.
10.12) The most anti-American comments I've ever heard were in Madrid, Spain by an Irish man who was telling me at a bar how the Americans deserved 9/11.
10.13) Just like on this forum I've found that your country of origin has no barring on if you are intelligent or rational individual, My feeling is that people around the world have the same basic dreams and desires as everyone else.
10.14) Usually when I make a typo the context is still understandable but that last comment had me re-reading my owns to figure out what I was trying to say.
1) I believe it was version 10.5 that Apple stopped using .DS_Store files on remote systems. If you're in Mac OS X you don't see them as they are invisible.
2) I'm not sure why you'd need a defrag app on a UNIX system. If you have any evidence to show that Mac OS X does a horrific job defragging itself then please post it.
1) If I want to view hidden files like .vimrc I need to view those .DS_Store files as well.
2) Perhaps they fixed something in the last couple of years but I definitely had an issue requiring me to defrag my file system with a paid defragger. I can't remember exactly what I was trying to do, but OS X definitely told me I needed to defrag.
HFS+ is an aging file system that was written in a hurry. Linux users have lots of file system options so why are stuck with HFS+?
1) Sure, HFS+ is aging but that doesn't mean it's bad.
2) I'l defer to this article on how Mac OS X defrags itself.
The result of all these safeguards is that OSX rarely, if ever, needs to have its disk space defragmented. The only real exception to this is when your hard drive has less than 10 percent free space. At that point, OS X is unable to perform its automatic defragmentation routines, and you should consider either removing files or expanding your disk storage size."
3) I would love for the .DS_Store files to go away completely in favour for a more modern way of storing data about folder states (and one that worked consistently, especially for maintaining window sizes and positions in Finder) but if you don't like seeing .DS_Store files when you look for .vimrc files then I'd say the problem is with you needing to see files that are designed to be hidden. That's what the preceding period is telling the system.
Disagreed, Jrag. You can look forward to a major OS update because you know that it will bring new features and improvements to your PC. You don't know what they are - but you know that's what a major OS update entails.
How do you know that? Not all 'upgrades' are beneficial. Some are actually a step backwards. I used iCloud/MobileMe as an example (although it's not an OS upgrade, of course). Plenty of Windows users found that Vista was a huge step backwards from XP, though.
Even in the Mac world, a number of OS 'upgrades' have been significant problems for some users. For example, if you are using PPC Macs, one of the 'upgrades' wouldn't even run on your computer - so it was of no benefit at all. And others have found unusual situations that made upgrades problematic.
Granted, these problems are far less of an issue in the Mac world than in the Windows world, but not all upgrades have been positive for everyone. What if OF X 10.9 requires 8 GB of RAM - and your system only supports 4?
I found the changes from MM to iCloud to be most beneficial. I would have liked a Dropbox-like service to replace iDisk but iCloud overall is a great step forward. But that's all beside the point, as it's about expectations of will likely happen, not precognitive knowledge of an event. I look forward to getting my new iMac but I don't know if the damn thing will be broken when it arrives. I look forward to my next vacation but I don't know if I'll get in an accident that will kill me. I look forward to Apple's next major product release but I don't know if it'll be something I'll end up buying. In all case I am looking forward to them because historically they have proven to be an enjoyable experience. If they haven't been for you then you have the right to not look forward to them but others do.
Time to go now as I am looking forward to a nice steak dinner… which may end up giving me food poisoning or E.coli but that doesn't mean I'm not looking forward to it.
This is the way I see the OS name being made up, taking the current version of 10.8.2 for example.
10 = the 10th version, .8 = the 8th release of the 10th version, .2 = the 2nd revision / update of the 8th release.
Mountain Lion being a more user friendly / easier to remember name for 10.8.2, & OS X (spoken as OS Ten) the general over all OS name, like Windows or Linux.
If I am correct in this, there is no reason at all that they cannot use 10.10, 10.11 etc, if they choose to of course. Cannot see why some say it would be wrong or confusing myself.