NOTE: use Perl; is on undef hiatus. You can read content, but you can't post it. More info will be forthcoming forthcomingly.
All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report
Stories, comments, journals, and other submissions on use Perl; are Copyright 1998-2006, their respective owners.
OSX (Score:1)
versions OS 9 etc.?
This of course makes
Were that I say, pancakes?
Re:OSX (Score:2)
No, it's not. There is no Mac OS 10. It is Mac OS X, version 10.
Afterall was it not common to call prior versions OS 9 etc.?
There is no version of Mac OS *after* version 9, so it isn't "prior" to anything. Mac OS X is not Mac OS; Mac OS 9 is not a prior version of Mac OS, it is the current version.
Mac OS and Mac OS X are different operating systems; it makes no sense to say that Mac OS X is a later version of the same OS, or that Mac OS 9 is an earlier version of the same OS. They are no
Re:OSX (Score:1)
I did. And still do. Please don't confuse what you have never heard with what doesn't exist. In the context of "Mac OS," I find "OS 8", "OS 9", and "OS X" all perfectly acceptable.
Re:OSX (Score:1)
And while you may find them acceptable, I do not. You are free to find them acceptable, and I am free to think they are stupid.
Re:OSX (Score:1)
To be honest, I still use the term 'System', as in System 6, System 7, System 9 =)
---ict / Spoon
Re:OSX (Score:1)
search implications (Score:1)
I was pleased to spot "Mac OS" in O'Reilly's style guide [oreilly.com], after seeing it the wrong way in several books over the years. "MacOS" looks like a cereal brand.