New in OS X: Get MacRumors Push Notifications on your Mac

Resubscribe Now Close

Apple Seeds Third macOS Sierra 10.12.1 Beta to Developers

Apple today seeded the third beta of an upcoming macOS Sierra update to developers for testing purposes, nearly one week after seeding the second beta and two weeks after releasing the new macOS Sierra operating system to the public.

macOS Sierra 10.12.1 beta 3 can be downloaded from the Apple Developer Center or through the Software update mechanism in the Mac App Store.

macossierra
macOS Sierra 10.12.1 appears to focus on bug fixes and under-the-hood performance improvements to address issues that have been found since the operating system's release. Few outward-facing changes were discovered in the first two betas, but it does include Photos support for the new iPhone 7 Plus Portrait feature introduced with iOS 10.1. New features discovered in the third 10.12.1 beta will be listed below.

macOS Sierra is a significant update that brings features like Siri support, a new storage optimization option, cross device copy paste, auto unlocking with the Apple Watch, and more. For full details on macOS Sierra, make sure to check out our roundup.


Top Rated Comments

(View all)

26 months ago
Yes, but...
Rating: 25 Votes
26 months ago
I wish i could unsee that.....


Sierra 10.12.1 on Late 2016 MacBook with Fusion 3D Touch trackpad.





Rating: 12 Votes
26 months ago

It's the one OS Apple makes that isn't designed for babies or really old people, the two target groups who get confused by a real file management system


There was a time when people said similar things about a graphical operating system.

And there are plenty of people whose iPads help them to achieve incredible work. Industries such as science, medicine, graphic design — you know, those industries that are dominated by babies and really old people.
Rating: 5 Votes
26 months ago
Sierra 10.12.1 on Late 2016 MacBook with Fusion 3D Touch trackpad.




Rating: 5 Votes
26 months ago

what the hell so 3rd beta and still no beta 2 for iOS hmmmm


Rating: 4 Votes
26 months ago

in the last few betas I have seen zero difference or anything new or better, what are they actually changing


Presumably features that will be supported in the new MacBook Pro. It's meant to be sent off to the factory shortly to be installed on new machines.
Rating: 4 Votes
26 months ago
Going into courage overdrive.
Rating: 4 Votes
26 months ago

MacOS Sierra 12.12.1 are coming very soon

12 point what now?
Rating: 3 Votes
26 months ago

Thank you for the detailed response. :)

There's been word on the grapevine about Windows being compiled for ARM — not a watery Windows RT, but a proper version. However I haven't read anything that definitively supports this and I'm not sure how effective virtualising the x86 code would be.


No problem :-)

You could emulate x86 code, but it's so complex that anyone who seriously tried, failed.
In addition x86 is a CISC architecture vs ARM is RISC, (x86 can execute more complex machine instructions and is not limited to one instruction per clock cycle), which would result in x86 code being emulated on ARM to take about 50% hit compared to native execution, which is huge.

Out of curiosity, what makes you so excited about ARM in the MacBook?
I fail to see any obvious benefits apart from battery life, where Intel is catching up faster than ARM is in terms of performance.
Rating: 3 Votes
26 months ago

Whaaaat? How "failed"? Ever heard of VirtualPC? I used it for years to run Windows98 on a CRT iMac.



I think you have that pretty backwards. CISC is characterized by more complex machine instructions... but "complex" is bad, because that meant that a single instruction traditionally needed multiple cycles; in contrast, one of the advantages of RISC is that they could reach 1 Instruction Per Cycle much more easily. CISC architectures had to fight hard to approach the same 1 IPC.

Anyway, that fight happened 15 years ago. Architectures converged so much that talking about differences is mostly academic now. AMD64 is a RISC with a CISC interface – which is a burden necessary for compatibility.



Mhm. Is this one of those cases where 95% of people mentioning percentages are making them up in the moment?


It's a popular myth that RISC is better because of 1 instruction per clock, yes, it's cleaner, but Intel has done some amazing optimisations to its CISC architecture, where it almost emulates RISC when there's an advantage but is able to execute complex CISC instructions where needed, whereas in RISC you use simpler instructions to build up more complex ones, resulting in more complex, less efficient compilers and assemblers as well as generally code that is not as well optimised.
Rating: 2 Votes

[ Read All Comments ]