How to disable Versions completely

etresoft wrote:

softwater wrote:

My theory as to why they haven't is to encourage take up. They didn't put all that effort into re-writing the OS to have people trenchantly stick to their ways. Apple is re-defining the way OS X will work, and they are dragging the rest of us along kicking and screaming whether we like it or not.

I don't see what is "theoretical" about that statement. That is precisely the reason it isn't optional.

Haha, etresoft, even when you agree you have to turn it into a disagreement. I haven't heard Apple announce that this is the reason why its not optional, hence my use of the word 'theory'.

etresoft wrote:

That is part of the rationale. If Apple keeps changing the operating system, those 3rd party developers that really aren't committed to supporting the market will get cleaned out on a regular basis. This will provide openings for new developers to fill the gap.

Now you're just making stuff up.

etresoft wrote:

I use Linux every day and know it well. It's a nightmare.

I don't know how to use it either, but I know those who do and it comes highly recommended. If you're finding it difficult, that would explain why Lion's restrictive UI so appeals to you.

softwater wrote:

Haha, etresoft, even when you agree you have to turn it into a disagreement. I haven't heard Apple announce that this is the reason why its not optional, hence my use of the word 'theory'.

Apple doesn't need to announce common sense. No matter what innovation Apple comes up with, its competitors will copy it. The past few years, Apple has been rapidly innovating to stay ahead. Some "old timers" can't handle the pace of change and are complaining. That's too bad. MacOS X is Apple's software and they can do what they want with it - including using applications to show off new features in the underlying operating system. If you don't want to use those features then use something else.

etresoft wrote:

That is part of the rationale. If Apple keeps changing the operating system, those 3rd party developers that really aren't committed to supporting the market will get cleaned out on a regular basis. This will provide openings for new developers to fill the gap.

Now you're just making stuff up.

Prove that I'm just making it up. And I want to see numbers - preferably done using Quicken running on Lion. You could also write a program using Codewarrior or design a poster in Quark.

etresoft wrote:

I use Linux every day and know it well. It's a nightmare.

I don't know how to use it either, but I know those who do and it comes highly recommended. If you're finding it difficult, that would explain why Lion's restrictive UI so appeals to you.

Perhaps you didn't understand. I use Linux every day and have for the past several years. My Linux software processes about a terabyte a day I think. It could do more but the systems engineers can't figure out why the new 64-core servers are slower than the older 8-core machines. The problem is that every single Linux machine is different - unlike any other Linux machine in the world. And guess what? Five year old Linux software doesn't work on the new systems. It turns out you have to do something called "upgrade" every so often on Linux.

I don't know what is so restrictive about the Lion user interface. Is this all because the Finder sidebar doesn't have colors anymore? That is like moving to another country because your neighor repainted his house. It's his house and he can paint it whatever color he wants. Would you want someone telling you what color you could paint your house?

If you are convinced that Linux is the Land of Milk and Honey, don't let anything stop you. Install it. Won't cost a cent.

etresoft wrote:

I don't know what is so restrictive about the Lion user interface. Is this all because the Finder sidebar doesn't have colors anymore? That is like moving to another country because your neighor repainted his house. It's his house and he can paint it whatever color he wants. Would you want someone telling you what color you could paint your house?

😁 😁 😁 Logical reasoning is not really your strong point is it! I'd stay away from any more arguments by (mis)analogy if I were you.

But let's get away from your poor reasoning and speculations, self-proclaimed as 'fact' and 'common-sense' (fortunately your understanding of 'sense' is not so common) and talk about specifics.

What's so restrictive about Lion?

Can't turn off Autosave

- the problems with this are well-documented and I'm not going to waste time repeating them or answering any silly objections, assertions or comments about this feature that have been argued about ad nauseam since July

Can't turn off Versions

- ditto the above

Can't turn off Resume without a hack

- ditto the above

Can't delete non-app store apps from Launchpad

- but you can delete app store apps from LP.

This means the user now has to remember themselves which apps came from where, or go through trial & error each time.

Can't set preferences for Launchpad

- why the restriction? Why not have a pref pane for LP in which the user gets to choose what is or is not included? You can do this via a hack, of course, so its not that its not possible, its just restricted in the UI

Can't manipulate Mission Control with as much flexibillity as Spaces

- nor can you move around the various spaces/desktops with as much ease.

Can't protect your computer from even basic intrusion without FileVault 2

Security's never been good on Mac's but at least with SL not just any Tom, Dick or etresoft could restart your computer and reset your admin account password without the install disk. Thanks, Apple, for the Recovery HD! A great aid to data thieves. Note also, the rationale for this security disaster is Apple's desire to sell the OS through the App store primarily for the sake of the Air, not to mention saving costs on DVD production. While FV2 is a great solution, you need to have both the speed to run it AND the disk space. If not, your Mac is an open book to all and sundry.

Poor visual communication/usability interface

And while we're on about the colours, note that colour is not just a preference, but a usability issue. Visual communication is fundamental to human-computer interaction. If I even have to argue about that, you're not qualified to comment.

Oh, I could think up some more, but I've got work to do (serious work, so that'll be on my Snow Leopard install and not on this toy Lion one).

Enjoy thinking up your illogical answers. Try not to embarrass yourself (again)...

softwater wrote:

Enjoy thinking up your illogical answers. Try not to embarrass yourself (again)...

Not likely to happen, is it? That's why this thread is so much fun.

I could add a very long list of questions I've posed to etresoft that he's simply run away from (rather than owning up to the fact that he can't answer them), but no sense in piling on.

softwater wrote:

I'm not going to waste time repeating them or answering any silly objections, assertions or comments about this feature that have been argued about ad nauseam since July

You're not going to waste time in a 14-page rant thread? You should have thought of that a long time ago. You have been wasting your own time and that of many other people in this forum. People come here for help and you spew out anger and insults.

Security's never been good on Mac's

Really?

etresoft wrote:

People come here for help and you spew out anger and insults.

Anger? This 😁 is a sign of laughter (and there were THREE of them in my last post).

But I apologise etresoft. What help is it that you need?

etresoft wrote:

sotwater wrote:

Security's never been good on Mac's

Really?

Yes, really. So there was hardly any call to go making it even worse by adding the Recovery HD.

DChord568 wrote:

I could add a very long list of questions I've posed to etresoft that he's simply run away from (rather than owning up to the fact that he can't answer them), but no sense in piling on.

I only reply when I think there is some possibility of enlightenment for either you or some potential reader. If you want me to reply, you must either ask for help or spout some misinformation. But, at a bare minimum, it has to be interesting one way or another.

etresoft wrote:

DChord568 wrote:

I could add a very long list of questions I've posed to etresoft that he's simply run away from (rather than owning up to the fact that he can't answer them), but no sense in piling on.

I only reply when I think there is some possibility of enlightenment for either you or some potential reader.

LOL! "Enlightenment." So that's what you've been dispensing here, eh? Well, thank you so much for favoring us with your great words of wisdom. We're so honored.

You make a statement. I challenge the veracity of that statement or your understanding of the issue as a whole. You make no further reference to the question. I personally find this to be very enlightening. It tells me you know you were mistaken, but don't have the guts to admit it.

The least you might have done was say "Yes...you were right and I was wrong...my bad." But you would have to be a man to do that.

If you want me to reply, you must either ask for help or spout some misinformation. But, at a bare minimum, it has to be interesting one way or another.

But of course, you don't find all of the misinformation you spout or the misapprehension you demonstrate to be "interesting."

I guess I can understand you wanting to just sweep it under the rug.

DChord568 wrote:

LOL! "Enlightenment." So that's what you've been dispensing here, eh? Well, thank you so much for favoring us with your great words of wisdom. We're so honored.

You are most welcome.

You make a statement. I challenge the veracity of that statement or your understanding of the issue as a whole. You make no further reference to the question. I personally find this to be very enlightening. It tells me you know you were mistaken, but don't have the guts to admit it.

The least you might have done was say "Yes...you were right and I was wrong...my bad." But you would have to be a man to do that.

Does that mean a woman would never admit she was wrong? Or are you just making sexist statements?

I never make a posting unless I am absolutely sure I am right. If I'm not sure about something, I will mention my doubts or just not respond. Of course, that only applies to those postings that I find interesting enough to read in the first place.

When I am wrong, I freely admit it and openly express my appreciation for having been taught something new or having been corrected. In fact, I believe one of those situations happened early in this very thread or one very similar. Initially, I was very opposed to the loss of "Save As". I even went to the trouble to re-package Snow Leopard's Preview application so it would run on Lion. But someone took the time to work with me and showed me that there was always a better alternative. It turns out I didn't need Save As after all.

etresoft wrote:

DChord568 wrote:

You make a statement. I challenge the veracity of that statement or your understanding of the issue as a whole. You make no further reference to the question. I personally find this to be very enlightening. It tells me you know you were mistaken, but don't have the guts to admit it.

The least you might have done was say "Yes...you were right and I was wrong...my bad." But you would have to be a man to do that.

Does that mean a woman would never admit she was wrong? Or are you just making sexist statements?

Your insinuation might have merit if I were foolish enough to believe, as you apparently do, that the word "man" has only one antonym.

For reference, you might consider the currently popular phrase "man up" (I particularly like the part that says "[to take] responsibility for the consequences of one's actions")...or the classic one, "Are you a man or are you a mouse?"

Meanwhile, since you made no response, I'm glad to see you agree with my first paragraph.

I never make a posting unless I am absolutely sure I am right. If I'm not sure about something, I will mention my doubts or just not respond.

Judging by the great number of my challenges to your statements that you chose to "just not respond" to, it appears you were "not sure about" about a great many things. Your "doubts" would have been welcomed as a topic for further discussion, but you just clammed up instead.

When I am wrong, I freely admit it and openly express my appreciation for having been taught something new or having been corrected.

I'm still waiting for my "appreciation" for the following instances in which you've been shown to be wrong (many of these fall into the "just not respond" category too):

1. XXX

2. XXX

3. XXX

4. XXX

5. XXX

6. XXX

7. XXX

(OK, I took mercy on you and everyone else and deleted my list...but I saved it and will gladly post it if you doubt what I'm saying.)

Let's cut to the chase here:

1. You like Auto Save and Versions.

2. You just can't understand why everyone in the world (and/or their workflow) isn't just like you/yours.

3. Your responses (when you make them at all) to their detailed explanations of their differing views fall short.

4. When this is shown to you, rather than acknowledging your errors, you just ignore them and hope no one will notice.

5. So the only thing you have left is "You're stuck in the past."

Erm, I don't know, perhaps they should spend some time figuring out what their users need?

Seriously Etresoft, I won't bother going through and making the same responses to your post as others have made many, many times on this thread. The new functionality is not necesary, it is annoying and disruptive, and no, using templates does not fix it.

Thanks for playing.

Hi Thread and Etreoft,

i make time lapse films, long ones. 160,000 frames for example. I image process images, rescaling, sometimes cropping and color correcting.

Mac OS Preview.app is the fastest tool for this task, significantly faster than Photoshop. As for other utility software options, they cannot handle the amount of files, crash and have other difficulties. Yes I have tested many.

Now that I have installed 10.7, preview has become useless. I cannot even test settings without Preview making versions. The application has also slowed down dramatically; wastes storage space; by versioning the files i cannot seperate out the edited from the original to reclaim that space; also playback and editing of the movies is made difficult when processed using QuickTime Pro for Final Cut because each file it is trying to access requires more overhead.

Mandatory versioning is AWFUL, it has wrecked my workflow and forced me to either take 3 times longer to process the images (note we are talking 40 hours to 120 hours as an example) and then suffer serious playback and editing problems. Or use Photoshop which was already way slower than Preview, in some cases extending my pre-processing time out from 2 days to 2 F.ING weeks.

What pearl of wisdom might Etresoft offer up, am I stuck in the past by not wanting to endure 3 to 7 times longer processing time, or is there something wrong with me because I like to edit video in realtime without destroying image quality.

Moving forward computing wise tends to mean faster and more efficent, so when a feature makes it slower and less efficent it isn't forward. To compare I may as well go and buy a 5 year old mac and work faster than the latest release.

Versions, you are great in a text document, you are worse than useless when managing lots of data.

I am pretty sure Preview was never intended to do what you are using it for. It is a consumer-level program for manually editing individual files. It does the job for which it was designed very well.

I suggest you use ImageMagick instead. You could do all that in a few minutes instead. If you want more details, I suggest starting your own question on the topic. Remember Apple Discussions isn't just meant for pointless, rage-filled rants like those in this thread. It can also be used to solve problems or to find better ways to get things done. All you have to do is ask.

I think it is fair to say that I was not rage filled but indeed the thread has been charged up by the tone of your responses for example. The issue with not being able to select if you want Versions active or not for a project is the sort of thing to create a range of emotions and is easy to stir up.

Your musings on what Preview is or is not designed for don't really come into it. That aside, Preview is actually capable of doing complex batch edits on thousands of files very well, out of the box as it is designed to do. Software capable of batch edits, examining EXIF data, transcoding files etc is not consumer level.

Preview is but the front end for the system level image engine used across any app that is designed to access it, so one would suggest it is industrial rather than consumer.

The unforeseen issue in adding Versions to Preview.app is that each edit you make causes a version to be created. So a scale, crop and rotate are three versions; due to the large change in data made by those edits a lot more data is recorded. This slows down the application, in the example by a minimum 3 times. A third the performance.

If you are batching 100 or 100,000 images the storage waste and time overhead created by Versions is an issue.

Further, if we argue that Versions as implemented is good and will be implemented by all developers over the next few years the problem will expand to include Adobe et al. For the single file, this is nice. If you are working with large data sets or large file sets Versions is an issue no matter what. If you are a business in any industry, the Mac OS with the current implementation of versions creates huge waste of storage and impedes the workflow of your staff.

I feel it is a great idea and have used it with joy, for a Word Processing document. The concept expanded out though is not fully thought through. Images, movies, audio, all media files create problems for Versions, they are large to start with and changes are not as easy to encode due to the variation across the data. Text doc, no worries.

It is a most unfriendly advancement for media files.

Thanks though for your tip on ImageMagick. I will give it a try. I had to laugh at your suggestion of minutes, it strikes me as odd that someone of your experience would think anything you do 100,000 times would take a few minutes, especially when each thing is a couple megabytes. The software would not have even loaded let alone processed that many files. The system itself cannot from a ram disk even display 1,500 5meg images a minute, ram disks way exceed SSD, let alone HDD

FYI, it is something that I have posted to Feedback. Not complaining, simply explaining the issues it causes for media file edits. I just came to this thread to see if there was a way, seems I could hack the old preview in but that sounds like trouble.

Thanks again.