“OS X.2” ??
What a strange and obfuscating style decision. Care to elucidate, Adam?
Likely because the article details both iOS 18.2 as well as macOS Sequoia 15.2.
It’s supposed to be “OS X.2” but there are some systems that can’t display the character. Where did you see this one?
The problem is simple. There are now seven operating systems being updated at once, and the Apple Intelligence changes apply to three of them. Titles need to be relatively short, but just listing out the operating system names and ersions is ridiculously long.
The key fact is that these are .2 updates—we have macOS 15, iOS 18, watchOS 11, and visionOS 2—so the X seemed like a good way to wildcard the main version number.
So instead of
OS X.2 Updates Boost Apple Intelligence and More
I could have written:
macOS 15.2 Sequoia, iOS 18.2, and iPadOS 18.2 Boost Apple Intelligence, with More Features in watchOS 11.2, visionOS 2.2, tvOS 18.2, and HomePod Software 18.2
Or I could have done something that said nothing about names or versions:
Apple Updates Operating Systems with New Apple Intelligence Features and More
I’m open to suggestions for ways of dealing with this—I’ve been using the OS construction for a while now in issue titles, where space is even tighter.
1 Like
Arc Search (for iOS) didn’t show me the glyph. And the problem with the missing glyph is that the headline became “OS X.2,” which of course is close to what macOS used to be called a few years ago.
I understand the challenge, but I think the alternative of just “Apple updates operating systems” is more readable and less confusing than the singular “wildcard” notation you attempted, even if the glyph did appear.
1 Like
How about “AppleOS X.2”?
You pronounce “OS” as “AppleOS” anyway, don’t you?
I was also confused by the title, wondering why OS X 10.2 Jaguar was back in the news
3 Likes
Maybe using a date would be better, e.g., “Apple December 2024 Updates”, especially since you elaborate on the specific releases in the article body.
I think the distinction between OS X.2 and Mac OS X.2 is very clear, especially as the use of the Apple logo symbol to mean ‘Apple’s various OS’ses’, only seemed to have occurred in TidBITS after we switched from Mac OS to macOS.
I think the OS X or capital X is the main confusing element because it was previously used by Mac OS X, compare the following and it’s the only one that could be misconstrued:
- X
- x
- n
2 Likes
Curious—it does for me.
Noted. I had thought the glyph was clever, but had never been entirely happy with how it wasn’t universal. And the the 
and 
emoji just seem wrong for Apple.
A good suggestion, and yes, I do say “AppleOS” to myself. But I acknowledge it’s a completely invented term that no one else uses as far as I know.
Also a good suggestion.
A lowercase x would address that, and might imply a bit more of a placeholder or variable than an uppercase X.
Sounds like a job for a poll!
1 Like
Apparently the Apple glyph (“”) is also missing from the URL to this TidBITS Talk thread, or at least it wasn’t there when I looked at the URL in iOS Safari :
Even though it appears in the title of the thread:
I think that “Apple’s OSes” is clearer than “AppleOS”; somehow the term needs to be both possessive and plural.
My opinion: better to not do this. It is like referring to a classic MacPro as “cMP” :-).
The only way it even makes sense is because it happened to be that this time, Apple released a major feature update at the same time, across all devices, and the upgrade happened to be point release .2. That’s something that almost never happens, so no one is expecting there to be a convention for referring to it.
I’d prefer one of the “December update” headlines.
But I am glad that you referred to the specific releases in the first paragraph. One problem I run into is you’re searching for some old information, and you find articles that talk about some feature being released, but they don’t give the release number! An article written today should still make sense 10 years from now.
1 Like
I figured a chunk of the protests about OS was from people chafing at the acronym ban.
Yup, better to rewrite than try to salvage the awkward construction. I’d suggest something like “Apple’s x.2 OS Updates Boost…”
I feel sure that going forward there will never be an update to a MacOS version that was once called OS X. The last update to Catalina was 2022; to Mojave was 2021; to High Sierra was 2020.
“Apple’s 2024 OS releases all updated to xx.2” isn’t a bad headline, though.
Personally I am really hoping that Apple decides to coordinate all of the numbers to the same thing to make it easier on everyone. Maybe when iOS 20 is ready they can all go to 20 and skip the in-between numbers?
I think that often happens. In the past, watchOS has sometimes been a point number behind iOS, MacOS, and iPadOS (e.g., iOS and iPadOS came out with 14.3 while watchOS was at 7.2), and maybe tvOS as well, but I think in the last few years that they generally match up and tend to be released at the same time. It’s the xx.y.z minor releases that can be out of match, as they are sometimes bug patches to support new hardware, or security patches that don’t affect all of the OSes.
1 Like
As a software developer, I might use *.2 or to compeltely nerd-out, .*\.2$. But that would really confuse the rest of the world.
1 Like
That’s the problem—my brain trips over “OSes” every time I see it because it’s a shortening of “operating systems” so ending in “es” gets me every time.
I’m also not a fan of standalone “OS” as an abbreviation for “operating system” because it looks so much like iOS.
Oh man, I wish. That would make my life so much easier. Even remembering what each of seven operating system versions is can be tough.
I’ll avoid OS in article titles from now on, but I may keep using it in issue titles where it has been for many months with no quibbles.