“Apple’s next Mac operating system could be an exciting one, with rumours that the new OS X – whether it’s called OS X 10.10 or OS X 11, or maybe even OS 11 without the X – will have a flatter, more minimalist design like iOS 7,” Ashleigh Allsopp reports for Macworld UK.
“Apple released OS X 10.9 Mavericks in October of 2013, after previewing it several months before at the Worldwide Developers Conference in June. Just days after its launch, OS X 10.10 was spotted in web analytics reports, suggesting that Apple is already hard at work on the next version of the software,” Allsopp reports. “With Jony Ive’s expanded design leadership reaching the software side of Apple, we can expect to see his influence prominantly in the next Mac OS X.”
“It’s possible that Apple may go to OS X 11. But would the ‘X’ make sense here? Will Apple decide to go to OS 11, or perhaps OS XI?” Allsopp reports. “With June’s WWDC rapidly approaching, it’s possibly that Apple will use that event as a platform to launch the new Mac OS, so the unveiling could be a matter of months away.”
Much more in the full article here.
Apple’s OS X 10.10 Syrah for Mac likely to tout iOS 7′s ‘flat’ look – March 26, 2014
Mac OS X 10.10: Will your Mac be able to run it? – March 26, 2014
“…whether it’s called OS X 10.10 or OS X 11, or maybe even OS 11 without the X…”
All credibility lost.
“OS X 11” <- Dementia. (0_o)
Operating System changes can be big or small.
Every large, major change, the system stepped up one number.
7.1, 7.2,…. Then major change 8.1, 8.2…..
So its pretty sure that it will go to OSX 10.11.0, 10.11.1, etc.
Anyone want to wager. When there is a major change, it will go to OS 11, but they will need to break from the basics of OSX.
I think OS 11 will only come about once a 3-D style user interface complete with hand, face, and eye gestures is ready to go. Maybe after OS 10.12.
I vote macOS 11, iOS 8, etc
Then iOS 9, 10, 11, then appleOS 12
You’re stupid! OS X means OS 10? The X is a Roman numeral for 10. It’s not OS X 10, idiots. Of course it would be just OS 11 or maybe even OS XI, although more likely to be just OS 11. But why the duck would you even think it would be called OS 10 11?
There, there, “One”. Just take your tranquilizers. Or maybe get flaming mad about something worthwhile, like corporate corruption, or starving children.
‘…[G]et flaming mad about something worthwhile.’ Umm….are you new here? Or are you a pharmaceutical rep selling tranquilizers?
If it’s the latter, you are so in the right place.
Because Apple (most likely) is not willing to give up he “X” name brand.
Unfortunately it’s a name brand that’s now been thoroughly tarnished by Xp and Xbox so when young folks see “X” they generally think RROD or BSOD.
Why the name calling. If you look in “About this Mac” it states OS X Version 10.9.2 so the OS X (X=10) and the version number are separate no reason it can not be OS X Version 11
TEN dot 9 dot 2. X=TEN.
OS X 11 makes NO sense.
No sense, in that, why would they skip 10.10?
If I remember correctly, the ‘X’ in OS X stands for UNIX and not the numeral 10; therefore the numbering sequence would be appropriate.
Partly correct. It is an inside UNIX joke. Also Apple went from OS 9 to 10 and used the Roaman X. When they introduced Mavericks they said they had run out of cat names and were going to use California names. They have started calling their new pro software X and calling it ten. FCP X, Logic X. Why would they then stop with OS X. People should do a little resurch. Like watching the show they did when they released the last OS.
Well actually such numerical usage is quite common in books and other heavily sectioned written material so perhaps not as stupid as you think.
“OS X means OS 10?”
Yes. *golf clap* Welcome to the party.
So obviously the next OS will be either call OS 11 or something else, but we are in no rush to drop the X naming convention. They could do yearly updates 10.10,10.11 until the Mac is “dead”…
A new OS 11 coming out and “Mavericks” is still buggy on the Mail side. It will be nice to see what the new OS 11 or whatever they call it when they show a demo in June, but I’m still having some issues with “Mavericks” and wish they would continue improving it till it’s working flawlessly. Maybe thats to much to ask out of Apple!
I can tell you that 10.9.3 beta is currently being tested. Several 10.9.2 problems are being ironed out.
That is good to hear. Thanks
I wish I could go into detail, but Apple would kill clobber me with their NDA stick. I can duck & cover and tell you 10.9.3 has some ways to go before it becomes public.
If they follow the beach name meme, how about Jupiter or Juno?
Or Mad River?
Should be Stinson or Muir. Muir beach is nice. It is just north of SF. Close to Muir woods. Possible problem with the John Muir estate. Part of Muir beach is clothing optional.
Perhaps, “OS X Trona.”
OK perhaps not 😉
That’s not what they said they were doing with the naming. It’s major CA landmarks, not just beaches.
Thankfully, this article is rubbish. If OS X 10.10 does go ‘flatter’, I personally would not appreciate it, to say the least. As ever, I’m still cheer leading 3D elements in the GUI.
They could do OS XX now … OS 1 – 10.0 and now about to have our 10 version of 10 post 10.0 … Right?
Stupid minimalist flatter brain dead.
Just for kicks they should name it “TenTen”
I’d be surprised if they just switched to a different naming scheme to only have one version. I think they’ll go to 10.10.
What’s with all the OS X articles today?
…and why do people get so confused with version naming and numbering?
The operating system is, “OS X”
The current version name is, “OS X Mavericks”
The current version number is, 10.9.2
The next version name will be “OS X ”
The version number will start at 10.10.0
There are plenty of possibilities for …
Sequoia, Yosemite, Big Sur, Mohave, Badwater, Sierra, Napa, Tahoe, Hollywood, Monterey, etc.
Where the hell did this guy get “11” from?
Apple doesn’t put a superfluous zero at the end of a version number. It was not 10.9.0, or even 10.9.0.0.0.0.0 (which means the same thing), just 10.9
Apple’s operating systems originally didn’t have names. They were always called System or Operating System (OS) with a version number. There was OS 8, OS 9 and then OS X. The numbering scheme got side-tracked by an excessive number of bugs in OS X, so they put out 10.1 for free. That caused a divergence from the industry-standard method of assigning version numbers. Everything got pushed one space to the right, “OS X 10” became the operating system family, and the second digit in the version number became the name of the operating system. People used the code name for the operating system, and finally Apple made it official. (After Mavericks, I hear they are switching to place names.)
We are in danger of getting an OS X 10.10.10 ( OS ten ten ten ten).
It’s entirely possible that they will clean up the version numbering, put the name after the OS, then drop the X and the redundant 10. They could go back to industry practice:
OS X 10.10 Renegades
OS X 10.10.1 Renegades
and so on…
OS Renegades 1
OS Renegades 1.1
OS Renegades 1.2
OS Vigilantes 1
OS Vigilantes 1.1
…and so forth
It’s also possible that they will not.
“Apple doesn’t put a superfluous zero at the end…”
The extra zero I used was just to denote a number reset, I know Apple doesn’t include the minor number on a major release.
The Classic Mac versioning system used the three numbers (A.B.C) for,
A – Major (full upgrade),
B – Minor (feature update),
C – Maintenance release.
To maintain compatibility with the old versioning system, they decided to freeze the major value at 10 and just continue to update the other two values as major and “update” release numbers. This was simply done for the fact that version 10 was a significant architectural change (a complete rewrite). Which is also why the name was changed to Mac OS X. The “10” in the version number is the “X” in the name.
“‘OS X 10’ became the operating system family, and the second digit in the version number became the name of the operating system.”
The name of the OS is, “OS X”, it is not “Mavericks”. “Mavericks”, is the name of the latest version. Kinda like, The name of Microsoft’s OS is “Microsoft Windows” and the name of the versions are, “XP”, “Vista”, “7”, “8”
Or Google’s OS, “Android”, and the version (code) names are “Kit Kat”, “Jellybean”, etc.
It’s very simple… take version number 10.9.2 and you end up with,
10 -> OS X
9 -> Mavericks
2 -> Revision 2
Furthermore, you will never* see “OS X 10.9.2” in any of Apple’s literature. It will always be written as “OS X v10.9.2”. Read as, “OS ten version ten point nine point two”. (*caveat, when specifying the system software version; “OS X 10.9.2 (13C64)).
I hope they don’t perpetrate the eye-gouging iOS7 flat design that a fifth-grader could draw with a ruler and five crayons in an afternoon. It should not be as stunning as Medusa, as ground-breaking as a gravedigger, or as simple as Forrest Gump. It should be beautiful, usable, and pleasant enough to look at that we can work at our Macs for eight hours without pain.
I know someone who traded his iPhone in for a Galaxy because he couldn’t stand to look at iOS 7. I thought that was stupid, until I realized that the best phone in the world is worthless if you can’t stand to look at it.
If OS X Renegades, or whatever they call it, assaults my eyes as badly as iOS 7, I’ll give it a pass.
I’m with you. iOS 7 interface is so ugly and hard to read that I refuse to get a new iPhone. Will hold my nose and buy a 5s for a family member just cuz I promised before I saw the interface downgrade. Am keeping my stock 4S until Apple puts the USER back into USER interface. Wouldn’t take any iOS 7 phone for FREE for myself.
The number on the iOS7 Calendar Icon is so thin that a guy can’t just slip the phone out of your pocket and read the date from hip level & “Forgettaboutit” reading the day of the week!!!
How about OSX2? Pronounced “ecks”, not ten.
Maybe Tim Cook can get someone to fix the email FAIL by the release date. IMAP email, key to many business use cases, has been broken since Mavericks release and apple seems clueless as to a fix.
Please Mr. Ive, don’t lose sight of functionality in your “design” ios7 clearly does not consider those whose eyesight is less than average. On the balance, even with the recent update, ios7 is not as good a ios6 visually. Making various interactive graphic elements appear cryptic and as symbols is not functional. Please don’t fuck up OSX like that.
It should be called OS XI 11.1.