The Macintosh name has been rebranded for at least four years. It's Mac now.

Quote: Originally Posted by vinster Version numbers are purely marketing anymore so I don't think OS XI will be much different from OS 10.9x When OS X first came out, I remembe…

Quote: Originally Posted by Big Mac So you concede that Apple's Intel PCs won't be Macs? Only if you concede that Apple's PowerPCs aren't Macintosh.

Quote: Originally Posted by - - e r i k - - The Macintosh name has been rebranded for at least four years. It's Mac now. http://store.apple.com/ still lists all of the Macs …

I thought I purchased a macintosh myself As for OS 11, who knows, I cannot fathom what will be in the next point upgrade never mind a whole new version. Mike

Maybe Apple could have the Spinal Tap guys do a campaign... "But this one goes to 11!"

Mac OS X will be around for at least a decade, possibly longer. And the next big change (like the one from Classic to X) will not be XI. X is a marketing ploy, not a version numb…

The only problem with the Mac OS X brand is all those knuckleheads going on about how you have to pay for "point" upgrades (i.e. 10.3-->10.4), but heck. I can live with that, an…

I agree with msuper69 that X is a marketing ploy, let's face it. 11, or even XI, does not hit you between the ideas as the combo of the letter 'x' and roman numeral 10. X implies e…

It will be snappier. And maybe they FTFF.

Mac OS X.X (10.10) should be out by hmmmm 2010ish... 2011ish.

Quote: Originally Posted by analogika The only problem with the Mac OS X brand is all those knuckleheads going on about how you have to pay for "point" upgrades (i.e. 10.3-->…

I think they will stick to OS X for a very long time... They could even say OS X 11.0 considering the current name is OS X 10.4.2

Mac OS Y?

Why not. It's nearly Yunix anyway.

Mac OS X-Trem Ultimate Pro Edition x2 Mellenium

How about take the Final Fantasy route? OS X-2. Quote: Originally Posted by production_coordinator They could even say OS X 11.0 considering the current name is OS X 10.4.…

You know how Intel had the 286 processor, then the 386, then the 486... and then they gave the 586 the moniker "Pentium" to emphasize the five-ness of it, and then marketed the hec…

Quote: Originally Posted by CharlesS You know how Intel had the 286 processor, then the 386, then the 486... and then they gave the 586 the moniker "Pentium" to emphasize the fi…

Quote: Originally Posted by CharlesS You know how Intel had the 286 processor, then the 386, then the 486... and then they gave the 586 the moniker "Pentium" to emphasize the fi…

Since it's called Mac OS X 10.4.2 they could call it Mac OS X 11 indeed. 10.9 being less than 10.10 is mathematically wrong I would say. Then we still have the cats as well, don't …

I believe Apple said at one time that the Classic OS lasted about 20 years, and that they expected OS X to last about 20 years. I think OS X will be around for a long time. Beyond…

Quote: Originally Posted by Appleman 10.9 being less than 10.10 is mathematically wrong I would say. ,,, The versioning system used by Apple is not mathematical but logica…

Quote: Originally Posted by msuper69 The versioning system used by Apple is not mathematical but logical. Each part of the version number is considered separately, therefore 9…

10.10. is higher than 10.9 because 10>9. See? It's just tradition that the parts of the version number are separated by dots. They could be dashes too: 10-9, 10-10, etc. Chris