Apple Already Working on Mac OS X 10.7 Development

By +Frank B.
in Back Page News

 Share

Recommended Posts

Grand Master

+Frank B. Subscriber²

Posted
  • Subscriber²
Posted

Less than three months after the launch of Mac OS X 10.6 Snow Leopard, evidence has surfaced that Apple is already working on the next version of OS X, presumably to be designated Mac OS X 10.7. The information comes from an entry posted earlier today in a database of changes to the open source "launchd" framework, which oversees booting of Mac OS X and administers processes running on the system. In particular, today's entry cites an error message containing the text string "11A47", a reference to the Mac OS X build number being used.

< rdar://problem/7386864> 11A47: SecurityAgent no longer visible via Accessibility

Apple's build numbering scheme utilizes a numerical prefix indicating the major release version, followed by a letter code indicating the minor release version and a numerical suffix indicating iterations of that version throughout its development. For example, the initial shipping version of Mac OS X Snow Leopard was termed Build 10A432 while the 10.6.1 update carried a designation of Build 10B504 and the 10.6.2 update released last week was termed Build 10C540. Meanwhile, Mac OS X 10.5 (Leopard) carried a build number of 9A571 when it first launched.

Based on this numbering scheme, the "11A47" entry cited in the launchd change database would refer to the initial version of Mac OS X 10.7, with the "47" suffix indicating that, while still early in the development process, Apple has been working on builds of the next major operating system revision for at least the last month or two.

Of course, news that Apple appears to be working on Mac OS X 10.7 is certainly not surprising given the long development time required to refine and polish Apple's major operating system releases. While 10.6 incorporated many "under the hood" changes, however, some have speculated that we may see more radical end-user changes in 10.7.

souricon.gif News source: Mac Rumors

Mentor

rawr_boy81

Posted
Posted

Given the movement of more drivers and hardware becoming 64bit - when 64bit kernel has been moved over, hopefully by then we'll see 64bit Flash, 64bit Adobe and Apple applications, and 64bit drivers. Hopefully they won't leave the 32bit intel people out to dry.

Veteran

SkyDX

Posted
Posted

Maybe they will go with something absurd that nobody expects, OSY :p

No but really this is hardly news, companies always do that.

What I wonder is if Apple introduces a new/updated interface, I love Apple UI designs^^

Grand Master

Ci7

Posted
Posted
Given the movement of more drivers and hardware becoming 64bit - when 64bit kernel has been moved over, hopefully by then we'll see 64bit Flash, 64bit Adobe and Apple applications, and 64bit drivers. Hopefully they won't leave the 32bit intel people out to dry.

32bit CPUs = obsolete

Veteran

Phantom Helix

Posted
Posted
Maybe they will go with something absurd that nobody expects, OSY :p

No but really this is hardly news, companies always do that.

What I wonder is if Apple introduces a new/updated interface, I love Apple UI designs^^

I love the visual design to, I just wish they unlock and centralize the UI so it is not a nightmare to theme it

Grand Master

FloatingFatMan

Posted
Posted
Apple needs to stop selling servicepacks to people.

If the Beatnik Brigade are dumb enough to pay for patch fixes, Apple will charge for them! :p

Microsoft would do it too, if they thought they could get away with it. Luckily, most Windows users aren't so gullible.

Grand Master

Elliott

Posted
Posted
Apple needs to stop selling servicepacks to people.

:rolleyes: Tell me, which Windows XP service pack incorporated features like Expos?, Dashboard, Automator, VoiceOver, a built-in dictionary/thesaurus/Wikipedia browser, Parental Controls, QuickLook, Spaces, Time Machine, Grand Central Dispatch, Exchange integration (oh, which in all ironies of ironies, still isn't in Windows unless you buy Office), etc.

Oh, and I guess Windows 7 is a waste of money because it's just Aero Snap, Aero Peek, Aero Shake, few rearrangements here and there, and under-the-hood speed improvements?:pp

Service Packs in OS X are free. They're the 10.x.x releases. The only difference here is that Apple releases OSs more frequently than Microsoft does.

Veteran

REM2000

Posted
Posted
If the Beatnik Brigade are dumb enough to pay for patch fixes, Apple will charge for them! :p

Microsoft would do it too, if they thought they could get away with it. Luckily, most Windows users aren't so gullible.

As pointed out these are full releases just like Microsoft Windows, so does that mean apple users aren't so guilible.

Microsoft have stated that they are going to have a short development turn around on future releases just like Mac OSX, which is something they did during the 90's with Windows 9x.

It appears to be a problem that the naming scheme for versions and service packs are just too simplistic for some people to understand that 10.x.y, x referring to the version i.e. vista, windows 7, xp etc and that y refers to the service pack.

Collaborator

cpressland2

Posted
Posted
Apple needs to stop selling servicepacks to people.

A major build is hardly even close to a Service Pack, Mac OS X gets 'Service Packs' once every couple of months. Hell, by this logic you could say Ubuntu gets a service pack every time you update the Kernel, and that could be several times a month.

What people need to understand and get their heads around is, Every Operating System is different and has a different method of rolling out Updates and Fixes. Mac, Windows, Linux and BSD all have different methodology of rolling out updates and a major update like Snow Leopard or 10.7 is far from a Service Pack.

:rolleyes: Tell me, which Windows XP service pack incorporated features like Expos?, Dashboard, Automator, VoiceOver, a built-in dictionary/thesaurus/Wikipedia browser, Parental Controls, QuickLook, Spaces, Time Machine, Grand Central Dispatch, Exchange integration (oh, which in all ironies of ironies, still isn't in Windows unless you buy Office), etc.

Oh, and I guess Windows 7 is a waste of money because it's just Aero Snap, Aero Peek, Aero Shake, few rearrangements here and there, and under-the-hood speed improvements?:pp

Service Packs in OS X are free. They're the 10.x.x releases. The only difference here is that Apple releases OSs more frequently than Microsoft does.

What he said:DD

??▲

▲?▲

Grand Master

Southern Patriot

Posted
Posted
Microsoft would do it too, if they thought they could get away with it. Luckily, most Windows users aren't so gullible.

Windows 2000 = Windows NT version 5.0

Windows XP = Windows NT version 5.1

Windows Server 2003 = Windows NT version 5.2

Windows Vista = Windows NT version 6.0

Windows 7 = Windows NT version 6.1 (don't give me Microsoft's BS about it being version 7.0, since nearly every place you look in the OS reports it as 6.1, so that's what most users see)

How exactly is that different from the way OS X version numbers are presented?

This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.