5 ms·
It says 10.9 is 'internally codenamed' so I assume Cabernet not the the final release name. Fingers crossed for OSX Ocelot.
by smickie 13y ago
It says 10.9 is 'internally codenamed' so I assume Cabernet not the the final release name. Fingers crossed for OSX Ocelot.
- Samuel_Michon 13y agoI think ‘Lynx’ would be neat, as it is the last major version before OS X 11 (or whatever they will call it), linking it to the next generation. It also reminds us of the lowly text web browser and the fact that the web is only 20 years old.
- evan_ 13y agoYou don't think they'll do OS X 10.10?
- Samuel_Michon 13y agoEm, no. Of all the possibilities, I’d say that is one of the least likely. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_versioning#Sequence-based_identifiers http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_versioning#Sequence-ba...
- evan_ 13y agoAre you sure you read that correctly? I quote: > In this system, the third digit (instead of the second digit) denotes a minor release, and a fourth digit (instead of the third digit) denotes bug-fix/revision releases. Because the first digit is always 10, and because the subsequent digits are not decimals, but incremental values, it is likely that a hypothetical 11th major version of OSX, should it exist, would be labeled "10.10" rather than "11.0". They did 10.4.10 and 10.4.11 so I'd say its within the realm of possibility.
- Samuel_Michon 13y agoAll very good points. I think it would look silly, but sure, it’s possible. However, I think Apple would only choose it if the version after 10.9 didn’t look all too different from 10.9. If they did some kind of UI overhaul, it would be a good time to jump to a new major version – maybe even ‘OS XI’ or ‘OS 11’.
- Tyrannosaurs 13y agoMy money would be on Cave Lion or White Lion (the two lion types other than mountain that aren't geographically described), though for giggles I'd prefer East Dillon Lion.
- shrikant 13y agoUbuntu 11.10 was Oneiric Ocelot, so Apple might not want to muddy the waters there.
- sjtgraham 13y agoI really think Apple couldn't care less about that, e.g. Cisco IOS.
- shrikant 13y agoThey didn't just ride rough-shod over an existing trademark, and in fact licensed it from Cisco. [I'm aware that Ubuntu release code-names are probably not trademarked since they don't refer to the official release of the OS. Still, reusing another codename that's popular public knowledge in the tech community? That would not be cool.]
- sjtgraham 13y agoClearly Apple licensed it from Cisco, I didn't claim otherwise. My point is Apple does not care about naming collisions with existing products in the market place, which you haven't addressed.