OS X 10.11.4 hidden framework hints Apple could rebrand it as 'macOS'

Posted:
in macOS
Following the naming conventions of iOS, watchOS and tvOS, Apple's Mac operating system could soon return to the name "macOS," if code spotted in the latest release of El Capitan is to be believed.




Digging through the frameworks of OS X 10.11.4, a reference to "macOS" was discovered by developer Guilherme Rambo. The mention was found in a private framework called "FlightUtilities" -- a feature that he says enables tracking flights, but is not currently in use by El Capitan.

Rambo even went as far to create a sample application using the new, untapped framework. He theorizes that both it and the new "macOS" branding could debut as part of the next-generation Mac operating system, widely expected to be introduced at Apple's annual Worldwide Developer Conference in June.


Courtesy of Guilherme Rambo.


The framework can be found in OS X 10.11.4 at "/System/Library/PrivateFrameworks/FlightUtilities.framework" and was later independently verified by MacMagazine, which speculated that the next release could be "macOS 11" instead of OS X 10.12.

Of course, a rebranding as "macOS" would be something of a back-to-the-future move for Apple -- its operating system was known for years as Mac OS, even retaining the name as Mac OS X throughout its releases up until recently. Starting in 2012, Apple dropped the name Mac from its operating system branding, simplifying it to OS X.

Such a move wouldn't be unprecedented: In 2010, Apple dropped the word "phone" from iOS because its mobile operating system ran on other non-iPhone devices --?the iPad and iPod touch.

Perhaps even more significantly, in 2007 Apple rebranded itself as "Apple, Inc." and removed the word "Computer" from its name. At the time, Apple co-founder Steve Jobs said traditional computing had become just one part of the company's business, as it was joined by newer product lines like the iPhone and iPod.

Whether it's known as "macOS" or OS X 10.12, Apple's next-generation operating system is rumored to bring Siri, the company's voice-driven personal assistant, to the Mac. Apple is also expected to make big changes to the Photos app for Mac, restoring some absent functionality that was found in its predecessor, iPhoto.
«134

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 71
    lkrupplkrupp Posts: 7,162member
    I for one would welcome such a return. I’m tired of reading posts from morons arguing about OS “EX” and whether there should be a point release higher than .9 (remember the dumbass discussions about what would come after OS X 10.9)?
    iSRSpmzJinTechmacky the mackyRayz2016nolamacguydysamoria
  • Reply 2 of 71
    I'm ok with the rebrand as long as apple don't reset the revision number counter. 
    pmztallest skilpscooter63dysamoria
  • Reply 3 of 71
    mobiusmobius Posts: 377member
    Makes sense. But I think they also need to address the confusing naming schemes across all of their product lines.

    What we have now is starting to echo the confusion that met consumers before Steve Jobs returned in 1997:

    Macbook, Macbook Air, Macbook Pro

    iMac 21.5" Retina 4k, iMac 27" Retina 5k, Mac Pro, Mac Mini

    iPad mini 2, iPad mini 4, iPad Air 2, iPad Pro 9.7", iPad Pro 12.9"

    iPhone SE, iPhone 6, iPhone 6 Plus, iPhone 6s, iPhone 6s Plus

    iPod Touch, iPod Nano, iPod Shuffle

    Apple TV, The New Apple TV

    Apple Watch, Apple Watch Sport, Apple Watch Edition

    I think the main problem is the iPad and iPhone naming schemes which is confusing for new customers. But the fact that there seems to be no naming convention between product categories makes navigating the various options less than simple - ironic for a company traditionally thought of as consumer friendly.
    tallest skilcalipaxmanspice-boythepixeldocdysamoriaZedcarskrioni
  • Reply 4 of 71
    iSRSiSRS Posts: 32member
    I'm ok with the rebrand as long as apple don't reset the revision number counter. 
    Well, it would allow for macOS 11...

    And it was Mac System 8, then Mac OS 8, Mac OS 9, and Mac OS X for a while. They stopped the Mac part with Mountain Lion, 10.8 in 2012.

    People forget, OS X is 16+ years old. Time to drop the X.
    bdkennedy1002nolamacguy
  • Reply 5 of 71
    pmzpmz Posts: 3,433member
    Good. I refer to it as macOS anyway, as even seasoned Apple users better understand the reference.
    dysamoriaargonaut
  • Reply 6 of 71
    wood1208wood1208 Posts: 1,988member
    What took so long to come up with such simple naming for MAC OS.
  • Reply 7 of 71
    jupiteronejupiterone Posts: 1,564member
    Haven't we moved passed the "start everything with lowercase" yet?  First it was eEverthing, then myEverything, then iEverthing.....What's wrong with "Mac OS"?
    dysamoria
  • Reply 8 of 71
    macplusplusmacplusplus Posts: 1,888member
    Is this a joke ?! If not this is just another example of extreme ignorance from AppleInsider...

    Why don't you claim that it will be called Nextstep since that .nib extension of that file means "Nextstep interface bytestream".

    OS X APIs (Application Programming Interface) are full of "NS" abbreviations, prefixes etc. yet OS X is called what it is, not Nextstep. That Mac abbreviation in the name of that file just signifies the Intel platform, not a commercial brand and never what OS X will be called. That is beyond divination !... Naming conventions in software engineering have nothing to do with commercial branding...


    mdriftmeyerdysamoriaargonaut
  • Reply 9 of 71
    mike1mike1 Posts: 1,911member
    mobius said:
    Makes sense. But I think they also need to address the confusing naming schemes across all of their product lines.

    What we have now is starting to echo the confusion that met consumers before Steve Jobs returned in 1997:

    Macbook, Macbook Air, Macbook Pro

    iMac 21.5" Retina 4k, iMac 27" Retina 5k, Mac Pro, Mac Mini

    iPad mini 2, iPad mini 4, iPad Air 2, iPad Pro 9.7", iPad Pro 12.9"

    iPhone SE, iPhone 6, iPhone 6 Plus, iPhone 6s, iPhone 6s Plus

    iPod Touch, iPod Nano, iPod Shuffle

    Apple TV, The New Apple TV

    Apple Watch, Apple Watch Sport, Apple Watch Edition

    I think the main problem is the iPad and iPhone naming schemes which is confusing for new customers. But the fact that there seems to be no naming convention between product categories makes navigating the various options less than simple - ironic for a company traditionally thought of as consumer friendly.
    With the exception of the Apple TV naming, I don't think it is wrong at all. By bringing iPad Pro to the mx in multiple screen sizes, it is actually more logical. Why are you harping on the differences in screen size with iPad and iMac. There's an iPad Pro available in two screen sizes. There's an iMac available in diffeent sizes. Still an iMac.
  • Reply 10 of 71
    rogifan_newrogifan_new Posts: 4,148member
    sog35 said:
    mobius said:
    Makes sense. But I think they also need to address the confusing naming schemes across all of their product lines.

    What we have now is starting to echo the confusion that met consumers before Steve Jobs returned in 1997:

    Macbook, Macbook Air, Macbook Pro

    iMac 21.5" Retina 4k, iMac 27" Retina 5k, Mac Pro, Mac Mini

    iPad mini 2, iPad mini 4, iPad Air 2, iPad Pro 9.7", iPad Pro 12.9"

    iPhone SE, iPhone 6, iPhone 6 Plus, iPhone 6s, iPhone 6s Plus

    iPod Touch, iPod Nano, iPod Shuffle

    Apple TV, The New Apple TV

    Apple Watch, Apple Watch Sport, Apple Watch Edition

    I think the main problem is the iPad and iPhone naming schemes which is confusing for new customers. But the fact that there seems to be no naming convention between product categories makes navigating the various options less than simple - ironic for a company traditionally thought of as consumer friendly.
    Don't compare Apple today with Apple in 1997.

    Apple is a much bigger company and services a much bigger market.

    Apple sells almost 300,000,000 devices/computers a year.  Its only reasonable to expect the lineup to expand because of how many units they sell and how many different types of customers they are selling to.

    Its a fantasy to expect Apple to only have one iPhone or one iPod. Those were the days when Apple was a much smaller company selling to a much smaller market.

    I see no problem with giving customers choice.

    Most of the lineup has 3 tiers (good, better, best)

    Macbook
    Good - Macbook Air
    Better - Macbook
    Best - Macbook Pro

    iPhone
    Good - SE
    Better - iPhone6
    Best - iPhone6s

    iPad
    Good - Mini
    Better - Air
    Best - Pro

    And in addition to that you have different sized screens (12.9 iPad Pro and 6s+)
    Not confusing at all
    The problem with this is it's not that simple or really accurate. One could argue the MBA is better than the MB in every thing except display and weight. But it seems obvious that the MBP will probably shed weight and become the retina MBA everyone wanted while the MB will get faster and come down in price. And thr MBA will probably be phased out within the next 2 years.

    With the iPhone, the SE is pretty much a 6S in a 5S body so in what way is the 6 better? If you want a bigger screen get the 6S or 6S Plus.

    iPads are the most confusing of all. Both the mini 4 and Air 2 start at $399 for 16GB but the mini 4 offers a 128GB storage option; Air 2 does not. Why is that? What makes the Air 2 better than the mini 4? And if you ask someone which iPad Pro is the "best" how do they answer that question? The 12.9" model has 4GB RAM and faster USB 3 support but it's 9.7" sibling has a better display and camera.

    Apple needs to make choices more simple. IMO Apple needs to get to a good, better, best lineup and then update those products every year or two or 18 months. Stop with the numbering scheme and stop keeping older models in the lineup just to hit a price point. If Apple can sell the iPhone SE for $399 than surely they could have axed the iPad mini 2 and reduced the price of the mini 4 to $299. Having two different iPad sizes selling for the same price is really odd.

    Bottom line is Apple's lineup is not simple and straightforward like it could be. No, they won't be able to go back to Steve's 2x2 grid but things could be much simpler than they are now. But that would require a change in mindset from focusing on price points and margins to having a simple, clean lineup.
    edited March 2016
  • Reply 11 of 71
    calicali Posts: 3,495member
    I've been wondering when they'll do this.

    sog35 said:
    The new iPad Pro.

    It can run both iOS and MacOS.

    Why not?

    I was against Apple's regular iPad line running MacOS because some people just want a simple device running iOS. But since we now have the Mini/Air line and the Pro line why not?  Having the ability to run both iOS/MacOS would make the iPad Pro a game changer.

    Can A-series chips run MacOS or does it need Intel chips?
    Or will A-10 chips be fast enough to run MacOS?

    IMO we will see a MacOS iPad very soon.
    That sounds too confusing. I believe Apple is slowly improving iOS until it's comparable to OS X. Don't worry it'll happen. 
  • Reply 12 of 71
    rogifan_newrogifan_new Posts: 4,148member
    sog35 said:
    The new iPad Pro.

    It can run both iOS and MacOS.

    Why not?

    I was against Apple's regular iPad line running MacOS because some people just want a simple device running iOS. But since we now have the Mini/Air line and the Pro line why not?  Having the ability to run both iOS/MacOS would make the iPad Pro a game changer.

    Can A-series chips run MacOS or does it need Intel chips?
    Or will A-10 chips be fast enough to run MacOS?

    IMO we will see a MacOS iPad very soon.
    No. Apple will make iOS for iPad more capable, perhaps even creating padOS or something before they ever copy Surface. But if the ever do copy Surface than we can all call Apple the new Samsung.
  • Reply 13 of 71
    seanie248seanie248 Posts: 174member
    mobius said:
    Makes sense. But I think they also need to address the confusing naming schemes across all of their product lines.

    What we have now is starting to echo the confusion that met consumers before Steve Jobs returned in 1997:

    Macbook, Macbook Air, Macbook Pro

    iMac 21.5" Retina 4k, iMac 27" Retina 5k, Mac Pro, Mac Mini

    iPad mini 2, iPad mini 4, iPad Air 2, iPad Pro 9.7", iPad Pro 12.9"

    iPhone SE, iPhone 6, iPhone 6 Plus, iPhone 6s, iPhone 6s Plus

    iPod Touch, iPod Nano, iPod Shuffle

    Apple TV, The New Apple TV

    Apple Watch, Apple Watch Sport, Apple Watch Edition

    I think the main problem is the iPad and iPhone naming schemes which is confusing for new customers. But the fact that there seems to be no naming convention between product categories makes navigating the various options less than simple - ironic for a company traditionally thought of as consumer friendly.
    Have to completely agree. I don't mind the different spec in a line up, but why do we have to have iPhone5/6/7 iPad 2/3/4 etc
    The iMac has always been just that throughout the years, it wasn't the iMac 1 then 2, then 3 etc.
    So lets have just the iPhone. When you go to buy it, the sales rep can ask what screen size/rez and storage. Same for iPad. Same for iMac.
    Macbook should then be the same. Make it just a Macbook. then pick the size and processor, ram and storage.

    Apple used to be very good at this, and there is no reason for it not to be still simple, no matter how many products.

    Bet we see the "iPad Performa" before long !!! 


    Oh, and how cool is that guy in the story, his name is Rambo !!
  • Reply 14 of 71
    spice-boyspice-boy Posts: 882member
    The move from Mac OS to Mac OS X was a major leap in technology the first two versions where only for the brave. Mac OS X has had a great evolution and we have had a stable OS for a Macs for many years now. As the platform has expanded beyond hardcore fans to casual users Apple has softened the OS number designation towards real world objects (the cats) and now locations in California of natural beauty. Since updates are now on a yearly basis even die hard Apple fans like myself tend to forget if I am running Mavericks, or El Capitain especially since there are only minute visual changes with the interface. New versions of Mac OS X are always welcome but their significance does not really require the fanfare and perhaps renaming as it has in the past. 

    If Mac OS X is just changing it's name to something like Mac OS, I understand it from a marketing point of view. I would of course prefer the name change was due to something bigger like an OS re-built perhaps not from the ground up but perhaps foundation up. This is highly unlikely and most likely not necessary. 

    We must not forget Apple is a company like most that depends of marketing it products and services, naming or products is not taken lightly and must play nice with the larger frame of the brand. Mac OS X 10.11.4 is precise but not something the average person (who is the majority of Apple's customer's) will understand or really care about. A rebranding of the Mac OS may be long overdue. 
  • Reply 15 of 71
    Convergence is coming, and it will be the next big 'un... Only a matter of when, when all the pieces fall into place.
  • Reply 16 of 71
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,399member
    mike1 said:
    With the exception of the Apple TV naming, I don't think it is wrong at all.
    We don’t need any suffixes! Just delineate by screen size.

    And what’s wrong with “Apple TV”?

    sog35 said:
    Problem is unlike the Mac the iPhone and iPad sells models that are 3 years old.  What are you going to say?  I want to buy the iPhone 2013? How lame would that sound?
    We’ve been over this before.

    “Hi, I’d like an iPhone.”
    “You want the cheap one or the best one?”
    “What’s the difference?”

    Boom. Employee explains the differences. People, on average, are blithering idiots these days, and that’s accelerating, but they’re still capable of comprehending this sort of thing.
    You guys are underestimating the Apple consumer.

    Sounds like you’re underestimating their intelligence.

    edited March 2016 toddzrx
  • Reply 17 of 71
    sog35 said:
    The new iPad Pro.

    It can run both iOS and MacOS.

    Why not?

    I was against Apple's regular iPad line running MacOS because some people just want a simple device running iOS. But since we now have the Mini/Air line and the Pro line why not?  Having the ability to run both iOS/MacOS would make the iPad Pro a game changer.

    Can A-series chips run MacOS or does it need Intel chips?
    Or will A-10 chips be fast enough to run MacOS?

    IMO we will see a MacOS iPad very soon.
    No, they're not. Apple will continue to expand on iOS, not scale down OS X. You will need ARM chips faster by an order of magnitude than we have now to handle the performance penalty of running code translation. Rosetta worked in the PPC-x86 transition because Intel's chips were a quantum leap ahead of the final PPC chips. 
    tallest skilsphericmacky the mackynolamacguydysamoria
  • Reply 18 of 71
    rogifan_newrogifan_new Posts: 4,148member
    sog35 said:
    No. Apple will make iOS for iPad more capable, perhaps even creating padOS or something before they ever copy Surface. But if the ever do copy Surface than we can all call Apple the new Samsung.
    They would not be copying Microsoft. A computer running multiple operating systems has been around for decades.

    The Surface is simply a Windows laptop with a touch screen.

    An iPad Pro that runs both MacOS and iOS would be a real game changer. Literally the best of both worlds.  The Surface does not even run a decent tablet operating system.

    It would be nice for padOS to be more capable. But that does not change the fact that many of the software makers won't be willing to bring their full software packages to padOS.

    Bottom line is Microsoft had a good idea of combining a laptop OS with a tablet OS.  Lot of companies can think of good ideas. Its those that EXECUTE the idea successful are the innovators.  If Apple makes a dual OS tablet it won't mean they copied Microsoft.  It means they solved an obvious problem the market wants solved: give me the ease of use of a tablet with the power of a laptop.

    When the iPad first came out there was already talk that it would run OSX eventually. In fact many though it would run OSX only.  So its not like Microsoft had some grand vision with bringing out the Surface.
    Sorry, a touch enabled version of OS X is copying Microsoft full stop. And everything Tim Cook said about toasters and refrigerators would be seen as a joke. 
    tallest skil
  • Reply 19 of 71
    iSRS said:
    I'm ok with the rebrand as long as apple don't reset the revision number counter. 
    Well, it would allow for macOS 11...

    And it was Mac System 8, then Mac OS 8, Mac OS 9, and Mac OS X for a while. They stopped the Mac part with Mountain Lion, 10.8 in 2012.

    People forget, OS X is 16+ years old. Time to drop the X.
    I am not quite understanding your statement. Windows is a moniker a name for a system platform. Windows name is something like 30 years old. OS X is a moniker, a name for a system platform. The fact that its 16 years old has nothing to do with why they would change the name.
  • Reply 20 of 71
    mdriftmeyermdriftmeyer Posts: 7,292member
    The MacOS references have been around since the creation of OS X out of NeXTSTEP/OpenStep. It's developer nomenclature that has hung around. The company and all its development was adamant [I was there] that MacOS is dead and the future in all incarnations is OS X.

    It really stands for Operating System Ex, not Operating System 10. It's the reason they have OS X 10.x.x instead of OS 10.10.x.x.

    MacOS Is dead.
    tallest skilration al
Sign In or Register to comment.