No, I agree with you, not bikeshedding ;)
I also had a similar question of someone that didn't know Universal would include M1 (As in, they knew the concept of Universal, it was just unclear if we already produced for M1). So maybe we can just instead of saying Universal mention Intel & M1 or something?

Looking at @orudge here mostly :)

Looking at @orudge here mostly :)

"Universal (Intel/Apple Silicon)" would be best perhaps - M1 is a specific chip, M2 will no doubt be along soon...

It is difficult to make this look nice .. too much information. I gave it a try. @orudge : if you have a better idea, you can edit via the webinterface in the right branch, if you like.

OK - I think with Apple Silicon being included, we don't need to state "11+" - that is implied by "10.9+" (and most Mac users would probably understand "Big Sur" better than "11" anyway).

Removed the "Universal" description, as for the time being at least it's perhaps not as widely-understood as it used to be for the PPC/Intel transition.

I disagree - the original reason I made the change was that it is unclear that "10.9+" includes 11. Adding "Apple Silicon" might help, but is easily overlooked

How about:

macOS 10.9+, including Big Sur and Apple Silicon

?

I disagree - the original reason I made the change was that it is unclear that "10.9+" includes 11. Adding "Apple Silicon" might help, but is easily overlooked

Given the version of macOS released this year is likely to be 12, are we going to need to do "10.9+", "11+", "12+"? That way lies madness, I'd argue. The fact that we will ultimately only have a single build for macOS available, and it will mention Apple Silicon, should hopefully be sufficient.

Could make it "macOS Mavericks or later", though I don't really care for that myself!

to me, 10.9+ implies 10.x, 11+ implies 11, 12, etc

In the end, we should be explicit but not verbose. I was looking at other OSes, we also do:

Windows Vista / 7 / 8 / 10

We could do: Windows Vista, 7+, but that only gives questions.

So, I just committed my new suggestion. It is explicit (10.9+, 11), mentions how Apple market things Big Sur and for those who really want to know if it will run native on their M1.

In the end, we will need to keep this updated anyway, no matter what happens. If a user lands on our website, they should not wonder: does this work on my OS, but know: this will work on my OS :) But that is my take in this :)

For the same reason we mention Ubuntu releases by their year (20.04) and by their codename focal. Explicit is good :)

Well, until or unless we come up with something better, that seems reasonable enough - perhaps by the time macOS 12 comes out users will be comfortable with "macOS 10.9 or newer". ;)

Hahaha, you made me laugh with that reply :D Stupid users :P