Disable autosave

No, this misses the point. I'm not worried about the files being able to sync, or whether the various versions of the files will sync, too. To illustrate, here is how an identical scenario plays out differently within Snow Leopard vs. with Lion. Imagine a file that is synced using dropbox between two computers. A user on one computer is working on the file. At the same time, a user on another computer opens the file just to view it, and closes it without saving the file, so as not to disrupt the work of the first user.

Snow Leopard (and before): The first user is able to continue working on the file, and the second user accessing it does not disrupt the work. Because the second user closes without saving the file, Dropbox does not try to sync it and it does not interfere with the first user.

Lion: When the second user views the file, autosave automatically updates the file locally on their machine, even if they do not intend to make or keep any changes. This triggers Dropbox to sync the file back to the first computer. But the file is already open on the first user's computer, so Dropbox creates a conflicting copy.

Try this if you don't believe me. Open a file that is synced with Dropbox, tinker around but don't save any changes (even revert to last saved if you want). Too late, Dropbox has already replaced the file on your other computers with your new autosaved version. Ack!

This is indeed a major drawback (one more).

In my work I rely strongly on modification dates, and not only for synchronization matters.

I don't see how I can work if the modification dates change whenever I or someone else open or preview a document even without saving it.

I'll test this asap.

If this bad behaviour is confirmed, (and if it is no more possible to buy Leopard Snow and install it on a new machine), I will have to posponed my order for a new MacBook Pro planned for this week, until Apple changes the system and gives us the possibility to turn some of the new "features" off.

BTW contrary to what is said here and there, I remind many instances where Apple did make adjustments asked by users; Firewire, spring folders, dock icons and piles come to mind.

Try this if you don't believe me.

I believe u. It's a mess, but they must have a plan for iCloud. We will see.

Now this might explain a phenomenon I have discoverde when I was searching files. Sorting for "recent", there were files listed I have never opend lately. I guess it's Spotlight or time machine or whatever touching those files and triggering a false date for change or last opened. I assume that's why they added that autolock thing in TM where it says "prevents unwanted changes...".

Maybe it would have been a nice feature, if implemented according to common sense, not blindly applying the iPad ideology to OS.

When working with documents(pdf drawings) on the company's server, Preview will not even allow to rotate the view! It considers it as modifying and requests file to be unlocked! If, sadly for everybody, file is not locked, Preview will save versions (if file size if around 200MB, it actually slows down to crawl and while updating something, freezes even for few minutes) just to announce upon close that volume cannot store permanent versions (!!).

There is an option to lock files that have not been modified for 1 day, 1 week etc. to prevent accidental modification. Now, who in his right mind would not imagine that such of accidental modification is NOT there for files located on the shared volume and created by other user? Yet, there is no such option to lock all these! All files regardless who created them and where are they located, are "unlocked" if modified more recently than set in the above option.

It goes even further, xCode appears to change plist files without save confirmation, and does not appear to even save the versions!! Is that even possible ?

I must say This autosave is extremely annoying.

Apple has the right to implement what it thinks is usefull for its OS/users but It should also leave the options open to people that want to be able to disable some of these "features"!!!.

SL is looking better by the minute and Windows isnt looking bad either

Playin' the windows card... Pathetic, baby!

"Duplicate" is highly annoying for three reasons: (1) it is not obvious what it means, i.e. does it duplicate the file copy on disk, make another version in the aether, or leave a copy in the memory with no name (2) it adds an extra step to saving a copy of a file and a short delay while it duplicates the working version (3) "save as" is commonly used in many many applications, so one does not have to search forums just to make a second copy! If this were not a feature, I would call it a bug. One more thing, this thread is now so long, I have no idea where this comment will appear or whether it is just adding the cacophony. Perhaps if I have to resort to using Forums more frequently, I will learn. -j

CT...

Who me? lol

Why not, I havent used windows for a while but at least it was configurable

Nice dog though!!!

papalapapp wrote:

"RicksonQ, I am totally with you on that. Sadly the trend is the other way round: The less options the easier it is to use, the more people will use it. Personally I consider this as a not so good concept. The optimum is somewhere inbetween: remove complexity but not funcionality." (Quote)

I do not think complexity should be removed, difficulty needs to be removed. Remember, complex is not the same as difficult. Well implemented features with built-in options make the work easier.

And this is why:

The more options, the more possibilities of tailoring the system to individual needs. All that is needed, is that we as users make the point sufficiently clear.

I should not have to choose "Lock" on every single file I don't want to change. If anything, it should be the reverse.

If you *do want a new MBP, Eddy K, and were about to buy one, you *might find what you want in the Refurbished area of your 'store, as I have just done.

On the basis of pre-.7 info revealed, I took two weeks to deeply analyse the current line-up and for a box to carry me through this murky mac-period, & decided on a non-standard build MBP (it took ages to find just which processors each box came with!), and ordered it asap, with a proviso that it *must* boot 10.6. Two weeks later I was informed that "Good News! Your new MBP will come with queer cat" (gosh, did I miss-quote that?)

Cancelled order after further negotiations, then accidentlally discovered 'my' ordered Mac in the Refurb dept. Grabbed it last night. It is quad-7 MBP running SL, and it will be my work machine for the next ten years. I expect that computing as we know it will be so radically changed by then, that it wil be whole new ball game, and by then I'll be 80, so who cares. Personally I wish I could sit in 10.5, where everything works for me.

All those ex-MS programmers xx_seconded to_xx now working for AAPL certainly are putting their stamp on things, I'd reckon.

Squidge (and others who wish to stick with or revert to Snow Leopard),

Only the new model MacBook Airs and Minis require Lion and cannot be reverted to Snow Leopard. ALL other available Macs, regardless of being new or refurbished, will operate perfectly fine with Snow Leopard. It does not matter whether a MacBook Pro has Lion pre-installed; that can be blown away and Snow Leopard installed. If it is not provided, you'll have to locate the model-specific Snow Leopard "restore" DVD for the Thunderbolt MBPs and iMacs -- the retail Snow Leopard DVD will not boot them. I'm sure someone will have these DVDs available on eBay, or perhaps you might have a good enough relationship with a Apple retailer that a copy could be burned for you. I believe these DVDs have version 10.6.7 on them. Upgrading to 10.6.8, or having a 10.6.8 "clone" OS on an external drive, will also allow you to boot and clone back over Snow Leopard to Thunderbolt MBPs and iMacs.

A-ha!

That sounds promising. I've had a Macbook for some years, and was recently speccing out a new MBP. However, after installing Lion, living with it for 4 days and then restoring SL, I'd pretty much given up on an MBP, as I assumed it would have Lion on it and that would be that.

So potentially, I could make a bootable backup, via SuperDuper!, from my Macbook, buy a new MBP, wipe the drive and install the SL OS from an external drive?

If so, things are looking up!

No, it seems that you read too fast.

If your MBP isn't one of the first Thunderbolt embedded ones, its operating system will be rejected by the new machines.

Yvan KOENIG (VALLAURIS, France) mardi 16 août 2011 12:35:26

iMac 21”5, i7, 2.8 GHz, 4 Gbytes, 1 Tbytes, mac OS X 10.6.8 and 10.7.0

My iDisk is : <http://public.me.com/koenigyvan>

Please : Search for questions similar to your own before submitting them to the community

To be the AW6 successor, iWork MUST integrate a TRUE DB, not a list organizer !