iOS and macOS 27: Did Apple change its strategy away from “Snow Tahoe” and towards new features? | News
Systems always have code names internally at Apple, although these only become public through leaks. That name and the finished title (e.g. Tahoe, Sequoia) have nothing to do with each other. Typically, the codenames mentioned remain the same even if features or schedules change – only to be replaced by the next with one .x update. However, in the case of iOS and macOS 27, there is a noticeable change, as Mark Gurman documents in his “Power On” newsletter. “Buttercup” and “Honeycrisp” are now suddenly “Rave” and “Fizz”, which could indicate a change of strategy in the middle of the development phase. Such changes are rare – and often meaningful
In many companies, a code name change in the middle of development is a sign that the core focus of the project has shifted or that some kind of restart is to be marked internally. If you look at the reports from the last few days, you can quickly find the reason. Initially it was said that System 27 was primarily a stability-oriented release, similar to Snow Leopard – few new functions, the main focus was on bug fixes and reliability. But now that the collaboration with Google is dry and Gemini can offer the basis for Siri and the Foundations Models, this topic area is likely to be in the foreground at WWDC 2026.
But no “Snow Tahoe”, but big features again?
It is important to note that only the project rename is considered secured. Everything else is speculation based on this observation. Although the conclusions sound logical, the change does not necessarily mean a change in strategy. Since the planned deep integration of Gemini-Siri into all core apps is certainly no small undertaking, at least one thing has become quite likely: the idea of a pure “Snow Tahoe” will probably have to be abandoned. According to initial comments, this is causing concern among some users that Apple should once again implement changes and new functions everywhere without paying attention to the software problems that are becoming increasingly visible. Whether there is enough time for both given the short annual cycle remains questionable.
