Mac OS X 10.10 release date, naming, rumors, and more

“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.

Related articles:
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

42 Comments

    1. 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.

  1. 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?

      1. ‘…[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.

    1. 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

      1. 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.

    2. “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”…

  2. 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!

    1. 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.

  3. 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?

    1. 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…

      Becomes
      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.

      1. “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)).

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.