Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 13th Jun 2013 14:35 UTC
Mac OS X The third and final WWDC product I want to talk about is - of course - OS X 10.9 Mavericks. While iOS 7 was clearly the focus of this year's WWDC, its venerable desktop counterpart certainly wasn't left behind. Apple announced OS X 10.9 Mavericks, the first OS X release not to carry the name of a big cat.
Thread beginning with comment 564839
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: About time
by osvil on Sun 16th Jun 2013 09:08 UTC in reply to "About time"
osvil
Member since:
2012-10-25

It is so much better a progression like 3.1 -> 95 -> 98 -> 2000 -> XP ->Vista -> 7 -> 8 (I am probably missing some version).

I think on mac there is an actual numerical version that makes sense and is widely used (in "about this mac" I get 10.8.4 and not the non-sense mountain lion marketing name). So it is not as bad.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: About time
by MOS6510 on Sun 16th Jun 2013 14:19 in reply to "RE: About time"
MOS6510 Member since:
2011-05-12

You missed ME, but that's a good thing. Erasing ME from history and our collective memory would be great.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[3]: About time
by BallmerKnowsBest on Sun 16th Jun 2013 17:21 in reply to "RE[2]: About time"
BallmerKnowsBest Member since:
2008-06-02

You missed ME, but that's a good thing. Erasing ME from history and our collective memory would be great.


You could say the same thing about the OS that Apple was peddling at the time.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[3]: About time
by darknexus on Sun 16th Jun 2013 17:23 in reply to "RE[2]: About time"
darknexus Member since:
2008-07-15

You missed ME, but that's a good thing. Erasing ME from history and our collective memory would be great.

Better not, or else we'll just repeat it. Then again, we don't seem to learn much from history anyway...

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[3]: About time
by zima on Thu 20th Jun 2013 22:30 in reply to "RE[2]: About time"
zima Member since:
2005-07-06

Somehow, Me was good for me ...I suspect large part of issues was because people were trying "tricks" from earlier 9x releases, which - due to too big changes in the underlying OS - often broke the system.

Or maybe the mix of VxD and WDM drivers causes the issues... (my newish PC would have only WDM)

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: About time
by BallmerKnowsBest on Sun 16th Jun 2013 17:08 in reply to "RE: About time"
BallmerKnowsBest Member since:
2008-06-02

It is so much better a progression like 3.1 -> 95 -> 98 -> 2000 -> XP ->Vista -> 7 -> 8 (I am probably missing some version).

I think on mac there is an actual numerical version that makes sense and is widely used (in "about this mac" I get 10.8.4 and not the non-sense mountain lion marketing name). So it is not as bad.


LOL WUT? ...you do realize that 2000 comes after (19)98, which comes after (19)95... and that 8 comes after 7, right? RIGHT?!?!?

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[3]: About time
by rr7.num7 on Mon 17th Jun 2013 19:32 in reply to "RE[2]: About time"
rr7.num7 Member since:
2010-04-30

LOL WUT? ...you do realize that 2000 comes after (19)98, which comes after (19)95... and that 8 comes after 7, right? RIGHT?!?!?


And 7 and 8 come waaay before 95. Also, XP and Vista aren't even numbers, so, your point is... ???

Edited 2013-06-17 19:33 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1