Talk:MacOS
(Redirected from Talk:Mac OS)
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Важно
Прошу эту статью НЕ УДАЛЯТЬ. Она важна и интересна, для тех кто работает на Mac OS X. --UR3IRS 09:13, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
Merged with Mac OS X
I merged the contents of the Mac OS X page into the Mac OS page, since there was no distinguishing information on either page. (And Mac OS X is also a Mac OS.) -- Pbb 20:40, 20 July 2012 (BST)
- It's true that Apple itself is now abandonning the trademark Mac OS X to return now to simply Mac OS. Mac OS X was just a major version (with several subversions named after animals), that has stayed there for several years. Instead, Apple wants to unify the user experience (probably iOS will merge with Mac OS too, Apple is abandonning its use of iOS, which is not even its own trademark but licenced from Cisco). People don't care about the OS, they care amore about apps and want their apps to work across all devices, even if there are presentation differences only to adapt to the display size or to input devices for the UI.
- Microsoft is now doing the same, no longer distinguishing versions of Windows starting at Windows 10 (which has now many incremental subversions), but only distinguishing the Home vs. Pro, plus Server and Enterprise with different licensing schemes. The Server family has been simplified a lot, and the Enterprise version is a Pro version working within a Server environment but basically this is now the same OS (including for phones and tablets). The main differene is then how Microsoft will define some presets (advertizing, Cortana, Windows Store, Microsoft Updates...), and the level of support or how one version such as Home or Pro can be easily converted to use the Enterprise version for clients. In fact Windows 10 is no longer monolithic. But the Winver tool forgets to give some important details (notably for upgrades), such as the localisation of the kernel.
- Linux distributions are also slowly being integrated with less differences (but for mobile hosts and embedded devices, most devices have now many proprietary layers which are not compatible with each other due to too many dependencies and too many patches made by various vendors; even Android, based on Linux, is now fragmented too much and Google now supports several distributions).
- All OSes have now basically the same set of features. Only Windows has now a very distinct look and feel for its home menus, and less windows in fact, despite of the name, less icons, more tiles, and lot of behind-the-scene automation. But all distributions now leave less choices to the user to set the feature they want (too many things preinstalled and running instead of being installed on demand, this will probably change because of mobile platforms and more local storage constraints, but more connectivity with various "cloud" services, and more virtualization). Slowly the concept of local OS is disappearing in favor of virtual network OS and web services, and less maintenance or tuning at the local level. Now the OS is the browser, that must just be using web protocols (HTTP, REST Apis, HTML5, CSS, Javascript, WebDAV...). The next step will be the global transition to IPv6 for interconnecting more appliances with user profiles on the net for each application. The danger for users is they don't know where their data is located or how it is reused by third parties (due to obscure licences for web services...) and if they'll need later to pay to keep an access to these data (and this is alarming also for privacy). — Verdy_p (talk) 12:43, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
- Actually, the new name is macOS instead of Mac OS, this to unify. I haven't seen anything indicating if macOS Sierra will be Mac OS 10.12 or macOS 11.1, and are following this with interest, as I follow any other changes done by Apple. macOS Sierra will be available as Public Beta shortly, but I will not participate in Beta this year, and as free upgrade this fall, probably late September. The valid version is still Mac OS X, though collecting all documentation in one page might be good, maybe think of moving the name to macOS? --Skippern (talk) 13:06, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
- There has been several announcements by Apple itself, which now only speaks about Mac OS (may be macOS, like iOS); Sierra is just a code name for the release (just like Google names its Android major versions initially with a single letter (Android N) before choosing the name of some sugar goodies ("N" is "Nougat"; the next letter will be "M" ans may be named "Marshmallow" or something like that). After that Google will start a new letter series with another theme. But those names are just easier to communicate and remember with on social networks rather than using numbers. "X" in MacOS X was just the Roman number 10... But Apple wants to unify the numbering: after iOS 9 and MacOS X, there will probably be the same version numbers and Apple is paving the way to unify the two kernels with a common API for application developers, just like with Windows (even if internally the kernels are very different: Windows uses now .Net and client-side compilation, the deployed apps are the same, and most of the UI is now based on HTML5, and there's less need of native code based on Win32 APIs which are internally layered in .Net libraries and don't need to be managed by applications themselves. Desktop integration is now part of the OS and don't need to be manged by applications that are simpler to install or remove. And the same applications may work as well on classic internet sites from any modern HTML5-compliant browser on desktops or mobiles. Apple has also doen the same thing for its own applications (including on Windows), such as iTunes... Applications developers don't want to support many OSes, they want a single application model and minimal tweaking for the deployment and integration. Apple, Microsoft and Google all want to sell now online services that will work across devices and OSes. Only Linux is a bit late for unifying the experience and for integrating the browsers in applications with enough isolation and security (and there's a lack of standard for applciation deployment on Linux). Today's APIs for modern apps are now web-based. There will remain small niches for maintenance tools but many people don't want to perform any maintenance, they just want apps that work out of the box and immediate experience, and remote administration of updates and security. Geeks however want to scrutinize the code and evaluate the security of APIs (most problems now exist on the web on server sides and affect equally users of very different local OSes or devices). People want the same capabilities when they switch from one device to another, from their PC to their smartphone or tablets, or smartwatches or smart TVs or other appliances. They hate cables and want wireless (WiFi/Blutooth) everywhere, or a single Ethernet cable for local performance. Interoperability is the key. — Verdy_p (talk) 15:38, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
- I agree that interoperability is great, and a bundle with iOS10 + macOS is a step in the right direction, though the more interoperability seems like the distances between the 3 platforms seems to increase. It is great that HTML5+AJAX is powerful enough to build cross platform apps, but they lack access to large parts of the hardware as that often need to be accessed through specific libraries and firmware commands. Until Google/Android, Microsoft/Windows, and Apple/iOS can agree on a set of common library access methods, the platforms will remain segregated from each other. Now, I am pretty certain the frist release of macOS will be named Sierra, as the 3 previous upgrades was named as announced on WWDC, while I have seen no official announcements regarding the actual version number. Mac OS 10 was branded Mac OS X, and revolutionised the platform per se, and my gut feeling is with rebranding to macOS comes a major version increase as well, so I feel it is fair to bet that macOS Sierra will be Mac OS 11.1. Now what Google, Microsoft and Linux decides to do with their systems have nothing to do with the Mac documentation on this wiki, so lets stay on topic. --Skippern (talk) 16:21, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
- There has been several announcements by Apple itself, which now only speaks about Mac OS (may be macOS, like iOS); Sierra is just a code name for the release (just like Google names its Android major versions initially with a single letter (Android N) before choosing the name of some sugar goodies ("N" is "Nougat"; the next letter will be "M" ans may be named "Marshmallow" or something like that). After that Google will start a new letter series with another theme. But those names are just easier to communicate and remember with on social networks rather than using numbers. "X" in MacOS X was just the Roman number 10... But Apple wants to unify the numbering: after iOS 9 and MacOS X, there will probably be the same version numbers and Apple is paving the way to unify the two kernels with a common API for application developers, just like with Windows (even if internally the kernels are very different: Windows uses now .Net and client-side compilation, the deployed apps are the same, and most of the UI is now based on HTML5, and there's less need of native code based on Win32 APIs which are internally layered in .Net libraries and don't need to be managed by applications themselves. Desktop integration is now part of the OS and don't need to be manged by applications that are simpler to install or remove. And the same applications may work as well on classic internet sites from any modern HTML5-compliant browser on desktops or mobiles. Apple has also doen the same thing for its own applications (including on Windows), such as iTunes... Applications developers don't want to support many OSes, they want a single application model and minimal tweaking for the deployment and integration. Apple, Microsoft and Google all want to sell now online services that will work across devices and OSes. Only Linux is a bit late for unifying the experience and for integrating the browsers in applications with enough isolation and security (and there's a lack of standard for applciation deployment on Linux). Today's APIs for modern apps are now web-based. There will remain small niches for maintenance tools but many people don't want to perform any maintenance, they just want apps that work out of the box and immediate experience, and remote administration of updates and security. Geeks however want to scrutinize the code and evaluate the security of APIs (most problems now exist on the web on server sides and affect equally users of very different local OSes or devices). People want the same capabilities when they switch from one device to another, from their PC to their smartphone or tablets, or smartwatches or smart TVs or other appliances. They hate cables and want wireless (WiFi/Blutooth) everywhere, or a single Ethernet cable for local performance. Interoperability is the key. — Verdy_p (talk) 15:38, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
- Actually, the new name is macOS instead of Mac OS, this to unify. I haven't seen anything indicating if macOS Sierra will be Mac OS 10.12 or macOS 11.1, and are following this with interest, as I follow any other changes done by Apple. macOS Sierra will be available as Public Beta shortly, but I will not participate in Beta this year, and as free upgrade this fall, probably late September. The valid version is still Mac OS X, though collecting all documentation in one page might be good, maybe think of moving the name to macOS? --Skippern (talk) 13:06, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
I moved the page to macOS. I'm not sure what to make of the wall of text above, but this move is consistent with Wikipedia and Apple documentation, and readers will be least surprised by this title going forward. – Minh Nguyễn (talk, contribs) 02:07, 1 October 2016 (UTC)
Section JOSM
Section on JOSM need an update, JOSM now requires a higher version of Java, but there have been a great deal of work within JOSM developer team so that (most?) shortcuts works, menubar is located as expected, etc. I do not know what version of OS X is required, though believe that 10.4 and 10.5 no longer is supported due to Java. Anyway, are there many computers left using 10.4? --Skippern (talk) 11:45, 5 July 2016 (UTC)