Re:Apple OS X El Capitan
by pmdulaney on Monday June 08, 2015 @02:02PM
(#9680892)
When Apple switched from the big cats naming scheme to "places in California" I predicted (mostly to my adult children, who all have Apple computers): "How much ya wanna bet it's gonna be a cold day in hell when they name a build after someplace in SOUTHERN California?" If I'm wrong, I suppose the first build named after something in SoCal will be called "Joshua Tree" -- nice tie in with U2.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Apple OS X El Capitan
by santaclaus on Monday June 08, 2015 @02:34PM
(#9681178)
I'm looking forward to OS X 10.12, La Brea.
Considering how 10.10 traps machines older than about 3 years in the digital equivalent thereof, they missed their chance.
Happily using 10.10 on a 6 year old macbook pro :)
Re:Apple OS X El Capitan
by jakobegger on Monday June 08, 2015 @05:20PM
(#9682523)
Me too :)
I don't know. Considering that Apple's entire notebook line is now un-upgradeable, I think the future may yet yield many opportunities for older machines to get good and stuck.
Yeah, tar pits are cool!
People call the Bay Area "Northern California", but it's really pretty central and it'll probably take even longer before Apple goes north for a name than it does to go south.
There are some good ones there too...Shasta, Lassen and Tahoe are all scenic (for the desktop background) and easy to remember. Other good candidates south (and east) of SF: Joshua Tree (already mentioned), Big Bear, Mammoth, Whitney, Buttermilks and Salton Sea.
Unfortunately, some of the parks in SoCal have names that simply won't work. Calling an OS "Death Valley" would be awkward and Windows already ruined "Mojave" as an OS name.
If they're going to name something after the Salton Sea they'd better hurry -- it may not survive the drought, seriously.
OSXI Tijuana? Let's go international.