Apple releases fifth OS X 10.11 El Capitan beta to developers [u]

Posted:
in macOS edited July 2015
Apple on Monday issued the fifth OS X 10.11 El Capitan beta to developers for testing ahead of an expected release later this fall.




Today's El Capitan beta version, build 15A235d, comes less than one week after Apple seeded its last round of prerelease software for developer assessment, a round that included iOS 9 and watchOS 2 builds.

Today's beta 5 build carries over the same areas of focus from Apple's previous beta version as well as known issues with Photos, Apple ID and Language localization and formatting. Many problems can be traced back to iCloud syncing, likely due to incomplete or incompatible backend assets also in testing.

Developers can access the latest OS X 10.11 El Capitan build by updating through the Mac App Store or downloading from Apple's developer website.

Update: This article has been updated with information from OS X 10.11 El Capitan beta 5 release notes.
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 40
    Quote:

     next-generation Mac operating system


    A point release is not a "next-generation operating system". OS XI with a new, non Darwin kernel would merit that term.

     

    If you repaint a room in your house and change the light fixtures out, you don't call it your "next generation house".

     

    *goes back to waving cane on porch*

  • Reply 2 of 40
    sphericspheric Posts: 1,730member
    Never mind.
  • Reply 3 of 40
    solipsismysolipsismy Posts: 5,099member
    A point release is not a "next-generation operating system". OS XI with a new, non Darwin kernel would merit that term.

    If you repaint a room in your house and change the light fixtures out, you don't call it your "next generation house".

    *goes back to waving cane on porch*

    Seriously? You don't consider any changes since 10.0.0 its debut in NeXTSTEP to be next generation advancements simple because it's still a Darwin-based OS? SERIOUSLY?!


    PS: Darwin isn't the kernel.
  • Reply 4 of 40
    zabazaba Posts: 226member
    The under the hood changes and interface tweeks since Mavericks are fantastic, I love the way they are going with the desktop OS, it gets better and better and the Mac is a pleasure to work on, and always has been. Well done Apple!
  • Reply 5 of 40
    solipsismy wrote: »
    Seriously? You don't consider any changes since 10.0.0 its debut in NeXTSTEP to be next generation advancements simple because it's still a Darwin-based OS? SERIOUSLY?!
    I wouldn't, but I also wouldn't consider every single 10.x release to be "next-generation."

    10.1, for example, was mostly just fixing things that were broken in 10.0 (granted, there were a lot of those, but still). 10.6 and 10.8, likewise, were refinements of the versions they followed, and their names reflected that (Leopard / Snow Leopard, Lion / Mountain Lion). El Cap is the same story — it's a refinement of Yosemite, given away by the fact that the actual El Capitan is a rock formation in Yosemite National Park.
  • Reply 6 of 40
    solipsismysolipsismy Posts: 5,099member
    I wouldn't, but I also wouldn't consider every single 10.x release to be "next-generation."

    10.1, for example, was mostly just fixing things that were broken in 10.0 (granted, there were a lot of those, but still). 10.6 and 10.8, likewise, were refinements of the versions they followed, and their names reflected that (Leopard / Snow Leopard, Lion / Mountain Lion).

    But those refinements lead to what was the next generation of that OS. I would say that the 1967 Pontiac GTO is the pinnacle of the GTO line in terms of looks after the 1966 design, and that the 1968 design and onwards are horrible, but I wouldn't say that the 1968 Pontiac GTO is not the next generation of the GTO after 1967 simply because I didn't like the direction they went.
    El Cap is the same story — it's a refinement of Yosemite, given away by the fact that the actual El Capitan is a rock formation in Yosemite National Park.

    I wouldn't read too much into the names because technically a Panther is the same as a Leopard, and if we start looking at their genetic makeup then the nomenclature has no focused direction.
  • Reply 7 of 40
    solipsismy wrote: »
    But those refinements lead to what was the next generation of that OS. I would say that the 1967 Pontiac GTO is the pinnacle of the GTO line in terms of looks after the 1966 design, and that the 1968 design and onwards are horrible, but I wouldn't say that the 1968 Pontiac GTO is not the next generation of the GTO after 1967 simply because I didn't like the direction they went.
    It has nothing to do with liking or not liking changes. It has to do with how major the changes are.

    The maintenance updates to Yosemite, 10.10.1, 10.10.2, 10.10.3, and 10.10.4, were also refinements. Does that make them all "next-generation" as well?
    I wouldn't read too much into the names because technically a Panther is the same as a Leopard, and if we start looking at their genetic makeup then the nomenclature has no focused direction.
    I would read into the names, because Apple's clearly been using them lately to denote the "tick-tock" strategy of updates that they've been following lately (with the exception of Mavericks). If you look at the intent of the naming strategy, rather than going into pedantic details like the genetic makeup of the cats :rolleyes:, it's pretty clear.

  • Reply 8 of 40
    solipsismysolipsismy Posts: 5,099member
    It has nothing to do with liking or not liking changes. It has to do with how major the changes are.

    The maintenance updates to Yosemite, 10.10.1, 10.10.2, 10.10.3, and 10.10.4, were also refinements. Does that make them all "next-generation" as well?

    So you don't deem the offspring of a successful coupling to be the next generation until you arbitrarily and subjectively determine how much of a major impact those changes are compared to their parents before saying they can be said to be the next generation?

    I would read into the names, because Apple's clearly been using them lately to denote the "tick-tock" strategy of updates that they've been following lately (with the exception of Mavericks). If you look at the intent of the naming strategy, rather than going into pedantic details like the genetic makeup of the cats :rolleyes:, it's pretty clear.

    OK, so what is the tick-tock of 10.1 "Puma" and 10.8 "Mountain Lion" or 10.3 "Panther" and then 10.5 "Leopard"? Do you really want to go on record that they backtracked from 10.8 to re-lreased 10.1 again or that they made a mistake with 10.4 to re-released 10.3 against as 10.5 by using these big cat synonyms? You'd be foolish to not accept how each of these updates had major changes to them.

    What's your point with that video? That they built upon their previous OS? OF COURSE THEY FUCKING DID, JUST AS THEY HAVE DONE WITH EVERY RELEASE.
  • Reply 9 of 40
    I just go by the nomenclature that the company that produces the software uses to determine how they should be designated.

    Everyone's got a naming scheme:

    OS X: all-new name == major update, something derived from the name of the previous one == minor update.

    Windows: x.0 == major update, x.1 or Service Pack == minor update.

    iOS: x.0 == major update, x.1 == minor update.

    Android: new dessert name == major update, same dessert name as the previous one == minor update.
  • Reply 10 of 40
    solipsismysolipsismy Posts: 5,099member
    OS X: all-new name == major update, something derived from the name of the previous one == minor update.

    You're wrong. Each new name is a major update. Each new name comes with it 100s of new features, it's own presentation and demo. Just because you don't consider a low-level, behind the scenes update to be nothing more than a "bug fix point update doesn't mean it's not substantial. This is why what you call a minor update will have a point updates to resolve issues for the next year. Even now, as El Cap is in its fifth beta there is a new point update beta for Yosemite that is also available.
  • Reply 11 of 40
    OK, so what is the tick-tock of 10.1 "Puma" and 10.8 "Mountain Lion" or 10.3 "Panther" and then 10.5 "Leopard"? Do you really want to go on record that they backtracked from 10.8 to re-lreased 10.1 again or that they made a mistake with 10.4 to re-released 10.3 against as 10.5 by using these big cat synonyms? You'd be foolish to not accept how each of these updates had major changes to them.
    700

    The "tick-tock" thing is obviously something that started with Leopard / Snow Leopard, and not a ball of wibbly-wobbly timey-wimey stuff. Beyond that, I have no idea what you're even trying to say in this paragraph.
    solipsismy wrote: »
    You're wrong. Each new name is a major update. Each new name comes with it 100s of new features, it's own presentation and demo. Just because you don't consider a low-level, behind the scenes update to be nothing more than a "bug fix point update doesn't mean it's not substantial. This is why what you call a minor update will have a point updates to resolve issues for the next year. Even now, as El Cap is in its fifth beta there is a new point update beta for Yosemite that is also available.
    I'd say it's most comparable to what Android has been doing lately (again: that doesn't mean all the way back to the first version :no:). 4.1 was Jelly Bean, 4.2 was... Jelly Bean. A better Jelly Bean, if you will. Similarly, 5.0 was Lollipop; 5.1 is also Lollipop. Apple's clearly been doing the same thing with their releases; if you go back and click on that YouTube link I posted, you can even see Bertrand Serlet describe Snow Leopard as "a better Leopard." The minor releases don't focus on adding new features, but focus instead on stability and performance, and they get a name that's based on the previous one. They don't contain nearly as many user-visible changes. That does not make them "bug fix point updates," but they're clearly not as "splashy" as the major updates.
  • Reply 12 of 40
    solipsismysolipsismy Posts: 5,099member
    700

    The "tick-tock" thing is obviously something that started with Leopard / Snow Leopard, and not a ball of wibbly-wobbly timey-wimey stuff. Beyond that, I have no idea what you're even trying to say in this paragraph.

    You claimed that the cat nomenclature was undeniable proof of something and I pointed out that the names mean very little, which is why you can't now claim that El Cap is only a mere point update to Yosemite. Your logic isn't even holding because the tick-tock of the cat name including the tick name with a tock name prefix name included. With El Cap you're changing it to a geographical reference to El Cap residing within Yosemite National Park. Mountain Lion (aka Cougar aka Panther aka Puma) is NOT residing within a Lion so you can't say they are the same.

    All you can do is speculate that with Apple's new OS X naming convention that they will move their tick-tock convention from a single to double cat name where the second name is the same across both generations of OS X to a geographical system where the tock landmark will physically reside within the tick name, but you have no pattern for anythjng other than a weak hypothesis.
    if you go back and click on that YouTube link I posted, you can even see Bertrand Serlet describe Snow Leopard as "a better Leopard."

    And Yosemite is a better Mountain Lion. Do you really think they would say the next generation of their OS is worse than the previous year? For what reason would that even be an option for your comparison?

    It's all about building on the last and you know it's the next generation OS because they demonstrate and promote it as such, but even if that wasn't enough proof for you just look at the fucking feature list to see that this is not a fucking point update.
  • Reply 13 of 40
    solipsismy wrote: »
    You claimed that the cat nomenclature was undeniable proof of something and I pointed out that the names mean very little, which is why you can't now claim that El Cap is only a mere point update to Yosemite.
    You posted a garbled and nonsensical paragraph, namechecking various OS X versions, all of which preceded the update strategy I'm talking about (and are thus irrelevant).
    And Yosemite is a better Mountain Lion. Do you really think they would say the next generation of their OS is worse than the previous year? For what reason would that even be an option for your comparison?
    Yosemite isn't a Mountain Lion at all. It's something completely different. That's kind of the point.
  • Reply 14 of 40
    solipsismysolipsismy Posts: 5,099member
    You posted a garbled and nonsensical paragraph, namechecking various OS X versions, all of which preceded the update strategy I'm talking about (and are thus irrelevant).

    I don't think I can make it any more clear the cat names are not some magic naming convention.
    Yosemite isn't a Mountain Lion at all. It's something completely different. That's kind of the point.

    None of the generational OS X updates are the same thing. That's kind of the point.
  • Reply 15 of 40
    solipsismy wrote: »
    I don't think I can make it any more clear the car names are not some magic naming convention.
    Unfortunately, that's probably true.
    None of the generational OS X updates are the same thing. That's kind of the point.
    Except Snow Leopard, Mountain Lion, and El Capitan clearly are derived from the previous one.

    This isn't some crazy thing I'm making up, either. In the intros for each of those OS versions, the WWDC speaker specifically points out the connection to the previous one. In the recent one for El Capitan, Federighi made a whole big deal about how they went "inside Yosemite" to get the name for this one. The next big "features" release will have a name that is not inside Yosemite, guaranteed.
  • Reply 16 of 40
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,399member

    The audio error I had with 4 is still in 5. It could very well be my hardware collapsing around me, but I sure hope it’s just the software… Oh! I didn’t have the problem in Windows just before my GPU exploded again, so it must just be software.

  • Reply 17 of 40
    solipsismysolipsismy Posts: 5,099member
    Unfortunately, that's probably true.
    Except Snow Leopard, Mountain Lion, and El Capitan clearly are derived from the previous one.

    This isn't some crazy thing I'm making up, either. In the intros for each of those OS versions, the WWDC speaker specifically points out the connection to the previous one. In the recent one for El Capitan, Federighi made a whole big deal about how they went "inside Yosemite" to get the name for this one. The next big "features" release will have a name that is not inside Yosemite, guaranteed.

    Yea, it is some crazy thing you're making up because the connections are completely different between the new and old conventions, and have nothing to do with the back-end heavy, generational update only being a mere "point update," not to mention your inexplicable ignorant on the cat names being used.

    You're trying to marginalized Apple's efforts with OS X. This is no different than people like you saying the 'S'-series iPhones aren't worthwhile HW updates despite the major revisions to the internals.
  • Reply 18 of 40
    ktappektappe Posts: 759member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SolipsismY View Post





    You're wrong. Each new name is a major update. 

     

    Actually, no, you're wrong. A new name and a new number do not always mean a major update. You've been around here long enough to know better than to make that claim.

     

    10.6 Snow Leopard, 10.8 Mountain Lion, and 10.11 El Cap are all specifically efforts by Apple to solidify the previous release. They have fewer new feature and more bug fixes and minor refinements. Those are very specifically stated Apple goals. 

  • Reply 19 of 40
    solipsismy wrote: »
    I wouldn't, but I also wouldn't consider every single 10.x release to be "next-generation."

    10.1, for example, was mostly just fixing things that were broken in 10.0 (granted, there were a lot of those, but still). 10.6 and 10.8, likewise, were refinements of the versions they followed, and their names reflected that (Leopard / Snow Leopard, Lion / Mountain Lion).

    But those refinements lead to what was the next generation of that OS. I would say that the 1967 Pontiac GTO is the pinnacle of the GTO line in terms of looks after the 1966 design, and that the 1968 design and onwards are horrible, but I wouldn't say that the 1968 Pontiac GTO is not the next generation of the GTO after 1967 simply because I didn't like the direction they went.
    El Cap is the same story — it's a refinement of Yosemite, given away by the fact that the actual El Capitan is a rock formation in Yosemite National Park.

    I wouldn't read too much into the names because technically a Panther is the same as a Leopard, and if we start looking at their genetic makeup then the nomenclature has no focused direction.

    Ha!

    I shoulda' assumed you were a Goat guy:

    1000
  • Reply 20 of 40
    solipsismysolipsismy Posts: 5,099member
    ktappe wrote: »
    Actually, no, you're wrong. A new name and a new number do not always mean a major update. You've been around here long enough to know better than to make that claim.

    10.6 Snow Leopard, 10.8 Mountain Lion, and 10.11 El Cap are all specifically efforts by Apple to solidify the previous release. They have fewer new feature and more bug fixes and minor refinements. Those are very specifically stated Apple goals. 

    1) Nope, major update, not a point update. They are filled with features is key. Not having as many features or as many UI changes as the previous major OS release DOES NOT MEAN it's just a point update. The fact that it has it's own marketed code name and the numerous features that are demoed is a big fucking clue that this isn't a point update.

    2) Are you not aware that Yosemite has a point update in the works even after El Cap was announced? If El Cap is just to fix bugs in Yosemite then why are they continuing to fix Yosemite bugs with actual point updates?
Sign In or Register to comment.