Apple's website hints 'OS X' to be rebranded as 'MacOS'

2»

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 32
    wood1208wood1208 Posts: 2,913member
    Apple what took you so long. Should have done long time back.
  • Reply 22 of 32
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,727member
    sockrolid said:
    Whether it's "MacOS" or "macOS", it's definitely time for the change.
    But will it be 10.12 or 11.0?
    I see you point.
  • Reply 23 of 32
    cwingravcwingrav Posts: 83member
    Funny how MacOS bothers me since tvOS and iOS are lower camel case. Like most people here, was wondering when they would slip out of version 'X' and call it something else. There's still a part of me that wants all the 'mac', 'tv' and 'i' to be the same number of characters.
  • Reply 24 of 32
    sphericspheric Posts: 2,560member
    crowley said:
    System
    Mac OS
    Mac OS X
    OS X
    macOS

    Meh, just a name.
    MacOS it will be, I'll bet. MacBook, iMac, not macBook, imac.
  • Reply 25 of 32
    volcanvolcan Posts: 1,799member
    I'm more interested in which California landmark name will be used for the nextOS.

  • Reply 26 of 32
    zoetmbzoetmb Posts: 2,654member
    cwingrav said:
    Funny how MacOS bothers me since tvOS and iOS are lower camel case. Like most people here, was wondering when they would slip out of version 'X' and call it something else. There's still a part of me that wants all the 'mac', 'tv' and 'i' to be the same number of characters.
    I think there's medication for that. 
    ai46
  • Reply 27 of 32
    disneylandmandisneylandman Posts: 297member
    The article is incorrect.  The 'classic' OS was only known as MacOS from 1997 to 2001, with the introduction of MacOS 7.6 to the final version, 9.2.2.  It was also changed to MacOS because that was the time when the MacOS clones were introduced by Power Computing, UMAX, etc.  The name was changed for licensing for the clones.  Versions prior to 7.6 were simply known as "System 1.0 to System 7.5.5".

    Unless the entire foundation of OS X changes, it will continue to be version 10.x and so on.  That is the way the numbering scheme has been based on since 2001.  Look how dumb FireFox has become.  They increase the version number for every bug fix.  Of course Microsoft skips version 9 completely and decides to go with version 10.  What's up with that?
  • Reply 28 of 32
    disneylandmandisneylandman Posts: 297member

    volcan said:
    I'm more interested in which California landmark name will be used for the nextOS.

    With Apple Music and Beats 1, the next version could be OS X Compton.  You know, the 'landmark' for rap music.
  • Reply 29 of 32
    disneylandmandisneylandman Posts: 297member
    It was a typo on Apple's website since they have already changed it back to OS X.
  • Reply 30 of 32
    2oh12oh1 Posts: 503member
    Remember when Apple came out with Mac OS X, how quick Microsoft was to call its next OS: "XP"? 
    They were afraid to look old fashioned without an X in the Windows version name.

    The question remains: will it be troublesome for Microsoft to select a meaningful copycat Windows name?
    Funny you should mention that.  I assume that if Apple sticks to version 10 and keeps updating with point numbers, as they've done from 10.0 Cheetah through the current 10.11 El Capitan, Microsoft will also stick with Windows 10.  I also think it's funny that Microsoft skipped version 9, as if reaching version 10 makes them more like Apple.
  • Reply 31 of 32
    JoeCassaraJoeCassara Posts: 1member
    System 10
  • Reply 32 of 32
    abedossabedoss Posts: 14member
    They switched back to OS X now.
Sign In or Register to comment.