On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 10:41 PM, Michel Fortin <[email protected]> wrote:
> To me it's clear that Darwin is the core on which Mac OS X and iPhone OS are > based on. Mac OS X looks like a marketing name to me; I wouldn't be > surprised if in a few years it gets renamed to Mac OS XI, or something else, > because Mac OS X 10.10 would sound bad, just as would Mac OS X 11. Perhaps > we'll see Mac OS 11, iOS or something; whatever the change, the "X" part > will have to move out at some point. > > I believe Darwin is a more stable identifier for the architecture than Mac > OS X. Out of all the arguments put forth so far, I think this is the strongest. OSX is just the name of Apple's 10th Mac OS. Why would we have version(OSX), but not version(WinXP), version(WinVista), version(LinuxUbuntuGutsy) etc. etc. etc.?
