Feeds

Apple said to have let the name of the next OS X cat out of the bag

It's not Garfield, Felix, Bill, nor 'in-the-Hat'

Boost IT visibility and business value

Apple is said to have chosen the feline nomenclature for its next iteration of OS X, and according to the customary "reliable source," that name is to be "Lynx".

We suggest, however, that you take this rumor with more than the traditional grain of salt. As AppleScoop reports, their source is not a Cupertinian per se, but rather a worthy "who claims to have talked to someone from inside the walls of Apple."

That said, Lynx would fit in well with the gaggle of kitties that have been used to name Apple's OS X – changed from Mac OS X with the release of Mountain Lion – since it came out of public beta in March 2001.

That beta, by the way, was named after Ursus arctos middendorffi – aka Kodiak – a rather large, nasty North American brown bear.

After OS X's developer preview released in March 1999, an exceptionally problematic public beta was made available in September 2000. The first shipping version that was graced with a version number was released in March 2001, but even the most fervent fanbois reluctantly agree that Mac OS X wasn't fully baked until version 10.2, Jaguar, in August 2002.

Here's a chronology of the various iterations of Mac OS X, beginning with the aforementioned public beta – which, by the way, wasn't a free beta, but rather one which charged the faithful $29.95 for the privilege of buggy endurance:

  • Public Beta: Kodiak - September 2000
  • 10.0: Cheetah – March 2001
  • 10.1: Puma – September 2001
  • 10.2: Jaguar – August 2002
  • 10.3: Panther – October 2003
  • 10.4: Tiger – April 2005
  • 10.5: Leopard – October 2007
  • 10.6: Snow Leopard – August 2009
  • 10.7: Lion – July 2011
  • 10.8: Mountain Lion – July 2012

We may learn whether AppleScoop's "reliable source" is correct about Lynx during the opening keynote at Apple's as-yet-unscheduled 2013 Worldwide Developers Conference, likely to be held in June or thereabouts, a common venue for OS X announcements.

What remains both unknown and unrumored, however, is what Apple plans to do after OS X 10.9 – OS X 10.10? Perhaps by then, however, Cupertino will have merged OS X and iOS into "One OS to Rule Them All", as Microsoft chairman Bill Gates says is the future of Windows 8 and Windows Phone 8. ®

Build a business case: developing custom apps

More from The Register

next story
Why has the web gone to hell? Market chaos and HUMAN NATURE
Tim Berners-Lee isn't happy, but we should be
Microsoft boots 1,500 dodgy apps from the Windows Store
DEVELOPERS! DEVELOPERS! DEVELOPERS! Naughty, misleading developers!
'Stop dissing Google or quit': OK, I quit, says Code Club co-founder
And now a message from our sponsors: 'STFU or else'
Apple promises to lift Curse of the Drained iPhone 5 Battery
Have you tried turning it off and...? Never mind, here's a replacement
Linux turns 23 and Linus Torvalds celebrates as only he can
No, not with swearing, but by controlling the release cycle
Scratched PC-dispatch patch patched, hatched in batch rematch
Windows security update fixed after triggering blue screens (and screams) of death
This is how I set about making a fortune with my own startup
Would you leave your well-paid job to chase your dream?
prev story

Whitepapers

Top 10 endpoint backup mistakes
Avoid the ten endpoint backup mistakes to ensure that your critical corporate data is protected and end user productivity is improved.
Implementing global e-invoicing with guaranteed legal certainty
Explaining the role local tax compliance plays in successful supply chain management and e-business and how leading global brands are addressing this.
Backing up distributed data
Eliminating the redundant use of bandwidth and storage capacity and application consolidation in the modern data center.
The essential guide to IT transformation
ServiceNow discusses three IT transformations that can help CIOs automate IT services to transform IT and the enterprise
Next gen security for virtualised datacentres
Legacy security solutions are inefficient due to the architectural differences between physical and virtual environments.