etresoft wrote:
DChord568 wrote:
In fact, I HAVE chosen to not upgrade any of the Macs at the small business where I work to Lion, because I know there would be howls of outrage at the changes that it has wrought in the saving paradigm.
No. You have not upgraded because you don't like Lion. You are making decisions for other people. Apple doesn't see to a market where people are forced to use systems they don't want. Apple can't compete in that market. Apple's market are people who would rather spend their own money for a Mac and keep a free PC in the closet.
I have no idea what you mean by your last three sentences. However, I want to congratulate you on a remarkable feat. You apparently know more about my fellow employees' work habits and level of computer skills than I do, despite the fact that I've worked with them for 23+ years.
FWIW, I am specifically *asked* to "make the decisions for other people" when it comes to computers in this office, because others don't care to be bothered in doing so. They just want their computers to work reliably.
But hey, you're right. I guess I just should have let my boss unknowingly upgrade to Lion instead of warning him about it (he thanked me, by the way, for doing so). I'm a big boy...I guess I could have handled the screaming that would have erupted the first time he found out he couldn't do a Save As any more.
However, you know full well (and hope we won't notice your omission) that this "choice" you describe here will only be available for as long as our current computers last. Eventually, they will have to be replaced — and then we will have no choice whatsoever.
You will always have a choice. You can get a Linux or Windows machine.
Apparently you must work for Apple. You're singing the same "**** you" song they're singing to their long-established, loyal user base.
This was the case with my Mac at home. It was severely underpowered and in need of replacement, and when I upgraded to a new one last summer, I was forced to use the Lion system software that was installed on it. I had no choice.
You could have started a question in the appropriate hardware forum here on Apple Support Communities to find out why your computer had slowed down over time. Perhaps all you really needed was a RAM and hard drive upgrade.
Once again, the all-seeing, all-knowing Etresoft. I'll give you credit: you're never shy when it comes to talking about things you know absolutely nothing about.
I'm happy to relieve you of your embarrasing ignorance. I had a first generation Mac Mini, long ago upgraded to its maximum RAM (all of 2GB). It was 5 1/2 years old. It was time for a change. If I wanted a new Mac (which I did), I had no options that didn't involve Lion.
Every one of your so-called "logical reasons" has been refuted. A simple check back in this thread will reveal that this is so, and that when you ran up against an argument that you had no answer for, you simply crawled back into your hole and pretended it was never made.
There is nothing simple in a 13 page thread.
Nice non-answer. I'm glad you agree with my description of your behavior.
We're not talking about "every part of the system" being configurable (nor optional — see my last paragraph). We're talking about a single operation — saving — that cuts across all application lines and affects nearly every one of them.
Hogwash. How about something that cuts across even more parts of the system? How about the CPU? Maybe Apple should have made the switch to Intel optional. That would give people years to upgrade. What could possibly go wrong with that?
Exactly what part of my statement is "hogwash"? That saving cuts across all application lines and affects users of every piece of productivity software? Citing another example (whose equivalence is debatable) doesn't negate the truth of my statement. More smoke and mirrors from someone who has no answers.
The method of saving on a Mac remained absolutely consistent from 1984 through the summer of 2011.
Nonsense. Saving files on a Mac has undergone at least 4 radical changes since then - MFS, HFS, FSSpec, FSRef, NSDocument, etc.
LOL! What a great geek answer!
Tell me...how did the changes you cite impact the *user experience* of saving a document in any way, shape or form? To refresh your memory, that's what we're talking about here.
This is exactly what distinguishes the loss of "Save As" from all other changes that came before it.
You miss the point. It isn't "Save As" that is gone, it is "Save". It isn't natural to expect people to "save" their work. It never was. Now it is technically possible to eliminate that step. Get used to it.
The point is exactly that Save As is gone. It has been replaced by a system that makes accomplishing the same thing more difficult. And a system that gives many Mac users the feeling they have less control over their documents.
Once again, you've entirely missed (and/or willfully ignored) the point that I'm fine with allowing the newer generation of Mac users who just can't manage the arduous task of keying Command-S every once in a while to have their way with Auto Save/Versioning as the Default. I would like to be able to disable this system at my discretion, because, on balance, it fixes a problem I never had in the first place, and makes working on the Mac less productive for me.
If you don't have this problem, that's great for you. But I do...and the evidence is clear that I'm not alone.