 |
 |
Possible OS X 10.7 Cats? (Page 2)
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot 
Apple didn't start marketing OS X by the internal development codenames until 10.3 Panther.
And why would they? They weren't actively promoting OS X as a brand before 10.2, and thus, there was no need to use cat names to distinguish between various incarnations.
Regarding a different discussion, I've been making the statement that Apple's OS X didn't really make sense as a mainstream OS until 10.3 anyway. By 10.3, it was starting to feel quite a bit more mature*, and I suspect their marketing tactics changed to reflect that.
* I ran 10.1, but it felt like a very early beta to me. 10.2 was better but still was beta-ish. 10.3.x felt more like a commercial release, albeit somewhat buggy at times.
Originally Posted by Andy8
Hello Kitty.
That would be completely awesome.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: UK
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by SpaceMonkey
Garfield.
 Worth posting this pic up again, from, erm, a different OS X cats thread.
|
It'll be much easier if you just comply.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Apr 2010
Status:
Offline
|
|
|
|
|
--------------
lhn555
I've had my MacBook for like 3-4 years and iBook PowerPC G3 1-2 years so I am a total geek.
iBook Clamshell (Blue) PowerPC G3 running Mac OS X Public Beta
MacBook (Black) with OSX 10.5.2
Obama:"We the farters!"
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Tampa, Florida
Status:
Offline
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by lhn555
Mac OS Y? OS11?
No. It will be Mac OS X 10.A, 10.B, 10.C, etc.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Junior Member
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Cody WY - USA
Status:
Offline
|
|
I think Apple has just about used up the whole Big Cat thing.
In place of, and better suiting their current demeanor, it might be time to start naming the OS after notable Pigs instead.
I say this because OS-10.6 really wasn't a full upgrade from Leopard at all . After all, it sold for $ 30 , not the full $ 130 we would expect, and was still named after a Leopard. But it was enough for Apple to impetuously drop all support for my Tiger G4 Machine. Grrr.....
Or should I say Oink !?!?
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Wasilla, Alaska
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by DewD
But it was enough for Apple to impetuously drop all support for my Tiger G4 Machine. Grrr.....
Your Tiger G4 machine just up and stopped working when Apple released 10.6?
The last machines not able to run 10.5 were discontinued in 2002-2003. If you're still on one of those machines, I don't think you have jack squat to complain about.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status:
Offline
|
|
How about OS 10.7 "Tom" ?
-t
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: in front of my Mac
Status:
Offline
|
|
Jerry would be better. 
|
|
•
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 
|
|
|
Forum Rules
|
|
|
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Top