Previous 1 8 9 10 11 12 Next 695 Replies Latest reply: Dec 13, 2011 1:27 PM by DChord568 Go to original post
  • Rubens H Level 1 Level 1

    You put in words just the way I feel about Lion. Great example with the cameras, I think we're going to end with Lion Home Premium and the Lion Ultimate versions. I would pay double for a Lion for Pros, not visual cosmetics, no learning curve, no nanny at all.


    Some people would ask me: Wy to change if everything keeps the same as SL?

    Visually yes, but the important things about a new OS development is the code. The code always go forward and usually brings better performance to the computer and solve many serious bugs from the previous version.


    Thank you!

  • Tom in London Level 4 Level 4

    hairy- just be sure to keep your messages to Apple SHORT and CLEAR. Nobody is going to read long messages, such as the one you just posted, and to which I am replying,

  • RegimeChanger Level 1 Level 1

    Tom in London wrote:


    hairy- just be sure to keep your messages to Apple SHORT and CLEAR. Nobody is going to read long messages, such as the one you just posted, and to which I am replying,


    They will read anything of any length. I posted a well thought out long user experience (detailing autosave and versioning) feedback for lion on the app store forum and received this from apple:



    Dear iTunes Customer,


    This message is to inform you your privileges have been revoked from posting comments on iTunes and/or Mac App Store. Posting content that is in violation of the iTunes terms of service, reference, is not tolerated.  You can still access your iTunes account and purchase content.




     iTunes Customer Experience




    They also included my email address in list form with 39 other people they just knocked off for feedback. Thanks for the privacy and  FU apple.

  • hairynugget Level 1 Level 1

    Hi Tom


    Understood - ta!



  • macboya Level 1 Level 1

    Yeah I agree, I love apple and lion but this autosave thing is too much. It creates more hassles than help ease my life. Why the need to assume that everybody is an idiot who forgets to save...


    For instance, I like using automators and created a work flow so it can be used repetitively. What does Lion do for me? It ruins my automator every time by saving a version which cannot be reverted to its original "version" later. This totally contradicts the logic of automator according to the function I use it for.


    For example, I normally use a saved workflow to resize photos so I can email them to friends. I use it once and discard the details of what I resized, but lion saves the details and thus next time I have to delete the details before I can use it. Even if I can revert it back to original, that's still an additional step that's unnecessary.


    Please make it possible to turn off autosave apple... or someone please produce a software to overwrite this nuisance.

  • Level 8 Level 8



    Here is my own tip.


    When I want to keep a Pages document untouched, I rename it as azertyuiop.template

    for a Numbers document, I rename it azertyuiop.nmbtemplate


    This way, when I double click one of them, the doc behave as a template and what I get is a fresh unnamed copy with no versions 'embedded'.

    As long as I don't decide to save, it remain only in memory. If I want to play safe in case of power surge or other accident, I save it with the name and the location of my choice.


    Back to Pages and Numbers.

    They were awfully slow before Lion so the problem doesn't change a lot. After a system update, a snail remain a snail, it can't become an antelope.

    I just hope that iWork engineers will learn the lessons of AppleWorks and will stop rebuilding the entire documents after every change. It seems that they did that for iOS dedicated versions so I'm optimistic.


    Yvan KOENIG (VALLAURIS, France) jeudi 4 août 2011 14:37:14

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

    My iDisk is : <>

    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 !

  • Level 8 Level 8

    Here is a listing of the content of the folder storing autosaved datas on my external HD dedicated to Lion.


    Macintosh HD:.DocumentRevisions-V100:.cs:

    Macintosh HD:.DocumentRevisions-V100:.cs:ChunkStorage:

    Macintosh HD:.DocumentRevisions-V100:.cs:ChunkStorage:0:

    Macintosh HD:.DocumentRevisions-V100:.cs:ChunkStorage:0:0:

    Macintosh HD:.DocumentRevisions-V100:.cs:ChunkStorage:0:0:0:

    Macintosh HD:.DocumentRevisions-V100:.cs:ChunkStorage:0:0:0:3

    Macintosh HD:.DocumentRevisions-V100:.cs:ChunkStoreDatabase

    Macintosh HD:.DocumentRevisions-V100:.cs:ChunkStoreDatabase-wal

    Macintosh HD:.DocumentRevisions-V100:ChunkTemp:

    Macintosh HD:.DocumentRevisions-V100:db-V1:

    Macintosh HD:.DocumentRevisions-V100:db-V1:db.sqlite

    Macintosh HD:.DocumentRevisions-V100:db-V1:db.sqlite-wal

    Macintosh HD:.DocumentRevisions-V100:PerUID:

    Macintosh HD:.DocumentRevisions-V100:PerUID:501:

    Macintosh HD:.DocumentRevisions-V100:PerUID:501:10:


    Macintosh 31-4061-8987-7C26611542F1.pages:

    Macintosh HD:.DocumentRevisions-V100:PerUID:501:11:


    Macintosh 2F-46D2-8587-250098AC6C72.numbers

    Macintosh 93-461C-8C13-14A33E4CEA85.numbers

    Macintosh 5F-4CAE-B1AE-8763413BC755.numbers

    Macintosh 2C-4BE1-8126-ADBE835E5E70.numbers

    Macintosh B1-43D4-967C-DBF2E729F3A2.numbers

    Macintosh FA-4318-B6CC-EA9042C54B07.numbers

    Macintosh HD:.DocumentRevisions-V100:PerUID:501:12:


    Macintosh 1C-4DA0-A21D-67BC6E7D524E.pages:

    Macintosh HD:.DocumentRevisions-V100:PerUID:501:13:


    Macintosh 7B-428B-B557-17580BFD3B69.pages:

    Macintosh 59-4298-B407-22963F61100F.pages:

    Macintosh 08-469C-ADA1-DE3B2E8CDE69.pages:

    Macintosh HD:.DocumentRevisions-V100:PerUID:501:14:


    Macintosh 8E-4BB3-8153-61383CA3958F.pages:

    Macintosh 68-4910-99D8-42867276894F.pages:

    Macintosh 67-4FF3-A289-7455C7B68641.pages:

    Macintosh 2F-4B6E-848A-DC50963BE772.pages:

    Macintosh 8D-49D9-BB88-C3CABF83F0E1.pages:

    Macintosh 75-4BAE-8028-48D5A04EB43B.pages:

    Macintosh B3-4024-8E95-ABA67A66EE8A.pages:

    Macintosh C0-45A7-AF3A-B10969A22A8E.pages:

    Macintosh EB-420A-BA56-72428B63284E.pages:

    Macintosh HD:.DocumentRevisions-V100:PerUID:501:15:


    Macintosh 69-4C72-B69E-F8661B8E710B.pages:

    Macintosh B6-4801-93BF-878BC0FDD864.pages:

    Macintosh HD:.DocumentRevisions-V100:PerUID:501:16:


    Macintosh 2A-4DBE-80DC-7E0C49A23937.pages:

    Macintosh HD:.DocumentRevisions-V100:PerUID:501:3:


    Macintosh 6-4D63-BEA2-B5E4E8C1B814.rtfd:

    Macintosh E-4219-B9F3-DCC10673C093.rtfd:

    Macintosh HD:.DocumentRevisions-V100:PerUID:501:e:


    Macintosh 4-4241-9921-A6F42204FC76.numbers

    Macintosh D-42BA-8239-F389BF1E7347.numbers

    Macintosh D-45DA-B9D1-A406B76FBD2E.numbers

    Macintosh 0-4C97-9F25-9103C665B005.numbers

    Macintosh 1-49FC-A0D8-E2CC86F9B5D7.numbers

    Macintosh B-4806-9ED3-E65890157552.numbers

    Macintosh HD:.DocumentRevisions-V100:PerUID:501:f:


    Macintosh B-427F-BFE3-F8EABF77CDF7.numbers:

    Macintosh 4-4FCC-9937-D12D04F3BCD1.numbers:

    Macintosh B-469C-A72A-33410CF1EBD2.numbers:

    Macintosh C-48CD-ABF7-6C96206062D3.numbers:

    Macintosh C-4B0A-A90E-767863CAE49A.numbers:

    Macintosh HD:.DocumentRevisions-V100:staging:


    What is really puzzling me is that I understood that the Autosave feature was designed to store the small modified chunks.

    In fact, the stored files are the entire ones.

    I guess that knowing that, everybody may understand why it may become a powerful brake.



    Yvan KOENIG (VALLAURIS, France) jeudi 4 août 2011 16:45:39

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

    My iDisk is : <>

    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 !

  • Matt Schultz Level 1 Level 1
    Windows Software

    Agreed - Apple truly needs to make auto-save user selectable. I do not want versions of financial documents or personal letters saved by my application! I lock many of these away from prying eyes. This is so personally intrusive that I use Lion for Mail and perhaps internet searching now… and use Snow Leopard for critical, heavy-duty & important tasks that need to remain private, without spurious copies floating around within some text or spreadsheet application. I just cannot emphasize more how intrusive, invasive and **** snoopy this "feature" is.


    I suppose if you're in Eighth Grade, you'll be delighted with auto-save when banging out your book report in between giggling text messages & Justin Bieber tracks. In business, having unwanted versions of confidential documents floating about, saved in some app is just really bad practice.


    Give us the wherewithal to shut it off!

  • Marc Troy Level 1 Level 1

    I've stumbled across this old post today and it remind me of Apple's always-on autosave blessing.


    "If you think your users are idiots, only idiots will use it." Source

  • Matt Schultz Level 1 Level 1
    Windows Software

    Well, I rather like Lion - just don't care for the intrusive auto-save function or the restore button. The rest of the stuff is primarily things I'll never use, like Launchpad, but those are easily bypassed. But I find Lion stable and relatively fast. Not sure it's heads above Snow Leopard but heck, it was only thirty bucks, what do folks expect?


    I've unchecked the do not restore button ~20 times, yet it just keeps coming back for more. Infuriating. I remember when Macs used to OBEY our commands!


    Have used Pages with auto-save & it's just really difficult to compose confidential documents on. I bought Office 2011 only because it did not support auto-save! The more I think about that, the weirder it gets... ended up not even installing it yet, went back to my trusty old MacBook Pro.


    I put my brand new MacBook Air back into the box it shipped in... I can't risk having someone at work see any of my documents saved by the OS, even though I never wanted them saved to begin with. Maybe 10.7.1 will give us the tool needed to disable auto-save, and I can start using my cool new toy! Sort of like the little 'book... :-)

  • stefano67 Level 1 Level 1

    I am making some tests about features I really dislike (autosave is one of them, the worst together with mission control - that should be renamed Missing Control - IMHO).


    Many times I work on a doc and want to save it with a different name. E.g., MyGreatDoc.pages becomes MyGreatDocV2.pages or MyGreatDocExecSummary.pages.


    With SnowLaopard we do the following:


    0. Open doc

    1. File->SaveAs (or command-shift-S)

    2. Set the new name and save


    With Autosave on Lion:


    0. Open doc

    1. File->Duplicate

    2. Close the original copy

    3. File->Save (command-S)

    4. Set the new name and save


    Is this an improvement in workflow? Not in my case.

    I hope this helps.

  • coocooforcocoapuffs Level 3 Level 3

    With SnowLaopard we do the following:




    0. Open doc


    1. File->SaveAs (or command-shift-S)


    2. Set the new name and save




    With Autosave on Lion:




    0. Open doc


    1. File->Duplicate


    2. Close the original copy


    3. File->Save (command-S)


    4. Set the new name and save




    Is this an improvement in workflow? Not in my case.


    I hope this helps.

    Does not bother me. Seems like a good tradeoff for the added benefit of having versions. Cheers

  • eddy kestemont Level 2 Level 2

    I completely agree with you. I have send feedback to Apple:


    Working with big documents, I need to be able to turn autosave off (better: off by default and on by choice).

    Transferring a (autosaved) file  to an externat drive should be done with all versions.

    Also resume should be off by default and on by choice.

  • Tom in London Level 4 Level 4

    what? There's a "do not restore button"? Where is it?

  • Werner P. Level 1 Level 1

    Actually I would be perfectly happy if Apple just would  version whenever I save. Pretty much every system

    which does local versions has done this for a decade now.

    And btw. if you do not do autosave anymore the autolocking could go away as well and save as could stay.

    That just shows how brain dead Apples approach on this matter is especially since the workflows they follow have been banned more or less in other fields for 10 years as not working.

    I think that they do not diff the binaries in certain programs but save a new file every time shows how unfinished this all is.


    Auto save should really be optional, but versioning should not be turned off by auto save, for those who dont need it they will need a separate switch. I see versioning simply as a second safety net which if done well really is useful. (I have been using similar mechanisms in other programs for more than a decade)


    Now it is getting a little bit technical.

    Actually the funny thing is that with Lion there are two versioning systems underneath.

    a) The local time machine snapshots which make hourly snapshots

    b) The local versions of the files which are semi independend of a)


    This is really interesting, because time machine for now cannot do delta saves on single files (which is a huge waste of hd space imho but rsnapshot cannot do either) which b) can but programs sometimes do not use it. It is almost like two separate teams were working on the mechanisms and b) is only half finished. The first used rsnapshot as a base (you can clearly see this by the patterns the snapshots happen) while did whatever it did.

    In the end the entire solution to a and b from apples side is relatively inelegant. a) was done as is, because they never moved away from HFS, if they really had added zfs/hammerfs/btrfs a better snapshotting could have been done on file system level. b) I dont know why they did not build upon systems like git or hg which can handle binary deltas even with unknown sources.


    In the end the entire versioning system seems like a wild hodge podge mixture of things which were partially in the wild because Apple cannot get rid of hfs+ in favor of a decent filesystem. I am also not sure what prevented apple to move over to ZFS. Apparently 3 years ago, the path was opened, Sun even was happy that Apple was adopting ZFS (And Schwarz said it just before an apple conference where they were apparently were dropping the big news - Big mistake, never step on the toes of Steve almighty) and after the Schwarz comment nothing was heard anymore over the upcoming kernel revisions all traces of the integration work were removed again and Apple users are stuck with half assed implementations of what ZFS could have had delivered for free in a sane manner. Apparently the guys who were working on the ZFS kernel integration now have their own company working on an OSX ZFS driver, but I am not sure how far they are or if the company still exists.

Previous 1 8 9 10 11 12 Next