Monterey feels of a piece with maintenance-mode macOS updates like El Capitan or Sierra or High Sierra—change the default wallpaper, and in day-to-day use you can easily forget that you’ve upgraded from Big Sur at all. It’s not that there aren’t any new features here—it’s just that improving any operating system as mature as macOS involves a lot of tinkering around the edges.
But there are plenty of things to talk about in even the most minor of macOS releases, and Monterey is no different. The update refines the Big Sur design and rethinks automation and what’s possible via local wireless communication between devices. It also makes a long list of minor additions that won’t be exciting for everyone but will be interesting for some subset of Mac users.
It’s available now, but it does cut support for quite a few Macs that Big Sur still supported.
I’ve always been of the suspicion the Mac OS naming scheme was changed because someone wanted to butter up Tim Cook. “Big Sur” was around the same time as Tim Cook’s “courage” nonsense.
No, it’s literally because Apple ran out of “big cat” names. There are only 7 of them and Apple managed to slip in 2 more (Puma and Mountain Lion) for a total of 9 releases.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_cat
They never did use the name lynx either: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_largest_cats
Perhaps it is too similar in spelling to Linux.
It could be simply because the various number of products that have come out over the last few decades that has a name that was either similar to or having the exact spelling. For instance, the Atari Lynx, a handheld gaming console. Or lynx, and early text-only web browser. Links – another early (but much later than lynx) text-based web browser. And these are just a few of the hardware and software products that I can recall off the top of my head.
I know that Apple did release a Jaguar named OS, which of course would be similar in name to the Atari Jaguar, or the Jaguar automobile. So, if the fact that Apple ran out of big cats names to utilize is true, then it satisfies my curiosity.
To be honest, i think even Apple were surprised how long-lived OSX was. I’m sure they were anticipating that some great revolution would come about that would warrant a version number bump and change in naming schema before they ran out of names
(don’t give me that bullsh*t that 11.x is in any way signifcantly different to 10.x. It’s not.)
There are MANY products based around big cat names… You have Lion and Tiger as brands of beer, Jaguar as a brand of car, Puma as a brand of sportswear etc.
I don’t think obscure atari consoles were the issue why Apple didn’t pursue the name lynx
They simply considered macOS as being OSXI but that’s kind of awkward.
Tge new codename theme reflect the notion that as far as Apple is concerned is a new OS version not a point release of OSX
The “Big Cats” he’s referring to isn’t in reference to their size, but rather the members of the genus Panthera, plus the Cheetah and the Cougar, which while not members of Panthera are nonetheless considered Big Cats.
The Lynx is not universally considered a member. It isn’t Panthera, nor is it a member of the same genus as the Cheetah or Cougar
Woosh…
Ba-dum-tish.
In the mainstream media and on Slashdot everyone is so busy dick measuring between whether Microsoft or Apple will be the most valued company ever (both measured in *trillions*) nobody is stopping to ask whether this is a good thing or bad thing. We’re all supposed to cheer on like they are toddlers learning to walk.
The same types of people are now trying to manufacture a similar fight between Bitcoin and Ethereum. It’s the oldest trick in the marketing book. What happens is people switch their brains off and get sucked into the fight. It takes attention away from a proper discussion and steals attention away from competitors. None of these people really care who wins or loses. They just want to insert themselves into the market and montize the markets stupidity whether it’s taking their 0.001% from a million transactions per day, or a service contract for marketing or legal fees, or selling boxes of fungible servers. It doesn’t matter if you lose your shirt because they never have a stake in the outcome. They never expose themselves with their money.
HollyB,
Lots of people think these sorts of all-powerful companies are bad. We complain about monopolization all the time but it’s not like we can do anything to stop it. The incumbents have all the resources and we’re a captive audience to wherever they take the industry. Content-wise we’re in a huge echo chamber and so many major media outlets have lost their independence by folding into corporate conglomerates. They have to be careful not to bite the hand that feeds them, critical coverage doesn’t sell advertising.
These companies won’t be around for ever. Like every organism they rely on fresh meat to keep replacing their dying cells until brittleness sets in too much and they keel over. Most of them are at least half way through their lifecycle. Microsoft and Apple are a third of the way through. Few companies survive past 100 years. Sony are due to peg it in about 25. IBM made it past 100 just but IBM is no longer IBM. But for inertia I’m not sure they have a reason to keep going. As for ARM they jumped in to swim with the sharks and that’s not playing well however you look at it.
Companies that survived for that length of time have done so by adapting or diversifying, in any industry that isn’t resource production (oil, diamonds, etc) . Nintendo started out making playing cards for example.
Microsoft have adapted by transitioning to becoming a cloud and services company. Apple managed to hit 3 big waves in its history, personal computing, digital music and mobile phones.
As is ever the case, they may hit the next wave or miss it. Even the once dominant forces cease quickly (Nokia or Blackberry in the mobile space) if they don’t see and respond to changes in the market.
Expanding on the point I made up thread read this article to deconstruct fake competition:
https://theconversation.com/musk-v-bezos-real-rivals-or-fake-feud-our-research-gives-a-clue-170314