|
|
Why 10.5?
Okay, this is a pet peeve of mine, but I really hope Apple doesn't name their new operating system "OS 10.5." I'm not a fan of arbitarily jumping numbers because the update is too big to warrant a sequential numbering scheme. It's a totally arbitrary distinction ("hmmm... the new upgrades and features make this look like a 10.7 to me..."), and I see it as little more than a marketing ploy. Besides, it'll make all the little kiddies sitting in their future computer history classes have to remember that there was no version 10.2, so we'll be setting up future generations to fail their tests, all so we could make a statement ;)
Why 10.5?
I agree, it is a blatant marketing gimmick. However, don't you think Apple is afraid of 11? I think they might slow down the numbering to avoid having to deal with OS XI or 11 or whatever they're going to call it.
Why 8.5?
They've done it before. 8.1 -> 8.5, with nothing in between. The entire positioning of that page is that Jaguar is NOT 10.2. They call it the "next major upgrade" to OS X. Major upgrades have historically been more than .1 increments. And yes, it's arbitrary, but I don't think there's any argument that there's more content added from 10.1.4 -> Jaguar than there was from 10.0.4 -> 10.1.
Why 10.5?
This version numbering scheme is very common practice. And while every company might have their own particular rules for version numbering, the system has evolved into something that can convey the degree of upgrade pretty well (e.g. version 1.0 -> 1.0.1 = bug fixes & minor stuff, 1.0 -> 1.1 involves small enhancements, etc). |
SearchFrom our Sponsor...Latest Mountain Lion HintsWhat's New:Hints1 new Hints in the last 24 hoursComments last 2 daysNo new commentsLinks last 2 weeksNo recent new linksWhat's New in the Forums?
Hints by TopicNews from Macworld
From Our Sponsors |
|
Copyright © 2014 IDG Consumer & SMB (Privacy Policy) Contact Us All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. |
Visit other IDG sites: |
|
|
|
Created this page in 0.14 seconds |
|