What happened to Save As?

Umm... that's overly simplistic... even if it is a nice little analogy.

"I'd like to know, how exactly does the preservation of Save As "thwart development"???"

Because you cannot support automatic saving with "Save As..." as it used to exist. The concept is that the kernel—not the user—is responsible for the management of processes, and this has to be doable without the cost of data loss (ie., the kernel has to tell apps to save their data at a moment's notice, and without interruption). "Save As…" cannot cater for this.

—tonza

If I may add, there may be apps that do things when you open a document automatically, such as change today's date on a word processing file. For example, Microsoft Word has fields which allow you to insert the current day into the document whenever this information needs to be updated.

Since this constitutes a change to the document, then it will be saved and the modification date updated as a result. In such cases, either the app needs to have a mechanism to not update documents unless allowed, or the system could use the lock (nouchg) flag on the app's behalf.

However, other things, like showing or hiding a ruler, or changing a window's size, should not constitute a change ot the document and should not be saved—this is classified as optional document state, and is only saved when there is an opportinity to save that when the document content has actually changed and needs to be saved with it.

Apps should manage this for you automatically. I wouldn't expect an app to re-save a file just because you changed the size of its window, for example.

—tonza

tonza wrote:

"Congratulations on a perfectly marvelous set of non-answers! Very typical of all I've engaged in this discussion over these many months."

Oh, the answers are there alright... you just don't want to see them. Go through the thread again for my responses and read them. Warning: you may need to do some thinking.

Not taking this bait, sorry. Please continue to congratulate yourself on your cleverness, while I continue to ignore it.

"And all completely irrelevant to the discussion we're having in this thread. What everyone else except you is interested in is the user experience of having vs. not having a Save As command — not all of this geek under-the-hood stuff."

This geek under-the-hood stuff matters because it's what affects the user experience.

When third-party developers write software that introduces bad ideas, then firstly, you have to put up with it and learn it, no matter how bad the ideas.

Please explain, in simple terms, why Save As is a "bad idea." (Particularly in light of the fact that, for 27 years, it was a very good and useful idea, serving the needs of millions of users.)

Please explain, in simple terms, why taking several additional steps to accomplish the same thing Save As used to accomplish is a "good idea."

And in a few years when Macs work more like iOS devices today, people will be appreciating these advances even more.

Only if they accept the notion that a desktop computer should function in exactly the same way as a device with a tiny screen that you hold in your hand. (And thus, that it should be crippled by having things that can't be accomplished effectively on such a tiny device forced upon it.)

I don't accept this notion...and I'm hardly alone.

I'd love to hear your argument in favor of it.

Every Mac system release that Apple has worked on in the last 10 years has had to live within split personalities: preserving the previous (n – 1) generation APIs for apps that do things in older ways, and the current generation APIs for introducing more efficient, more effective and more useful ways of doing things, since for various reasons, older technologies are no longer relevant to the kind of systems that are being built out of some of the most amazing hardware technologies to date.

Please explain in simple terms how a method of working with one's files (in this case, basing a new document on an older one) that takes several more steps to accomplish what used to be accomplished in two steps is a "more efficient, more effective and more useful" way of doing things.

For this decade, that technology is solid state non-volatile storage that will make the entire concept of a disk filing system redundant. Say goodbye to HFS Plus in future... because it's not going to be needed.

Translation: I don't need it, so no one will need it.

I'm constantly amazed (and amused) when people who obviously have no experience in real-world situations confidently state what those of us who do work in real-world situations "need" or don't need.

And incidentally, third-party developers will be going through the usual cycle of trying new technical avenues provided by Apple and sending them feedback on issues that matter. I'm sure that Apple will respond to that feedback as their system software is refined to solve the little problems that EVERYONE has, not just yours.

As I've pointed out in the past, I know of at least one "third-party developer" who has done exactly what I have suggested (and you, once again, have ignored): he has given his users the option as to whether to implement Auto Save/Versioning, or stick with the old method of saving (and thus preserving Save As).

He managed this even though he is basically a one-man shop, and he managed it within weeks of Lion's release to the market.

Once again I ask: please explain in simple terms why this is a bad idea.

And once again I repeat: the loss of Save As isn't a "little problem"...it's the single biggest change in the way we interact with our Macs on a daily basis in the history of the platform. (I notice you haven't disputed this.) Nor, judging from the comments in this thread and many others like it (both here and on many other forums) is it merely "my" problem and no one else's.

Through three updates to Lion (plus a preview of Mountain Lion), Apple has so far NOT "responded to feedback" from unhappy Mac users — even though it's been louder and more widespread than any previous feedback I can recall seeing.

My fear is that this is because the powers that be at Apple are every bit as arrogant and seemingly all-knowing as you come across.

I have said that I understand and prefer Apple's new changes to Lion in file and process management, and that these operating system technologies have been long overdue. But I never said that "there's no way that anyone else could possibly have a problem". Rather, all I'm saying is that there is no solution to your problem, and here's why. I dare say that in all your efforts in delivering your rather interesting style of remarks to me in particular, you still haven't some to a solution to your problem, have you?

I stated a simple solution to my problem in two earlier posts, and have stated it again in this one. Are you really this dense, or do you just like to hear yourself talk?

I'm glad you find my style of remarks "interesting." I find yours quite laughable.

I can confidentally speculate this: Apple's future system releases are going to head away from the age-old concepts of 30-year-old micromanagement and into a new era of fault-tolerant personal computing. And I for one don't want to see this development thwarted... not again.

I find it fascinating that someone with such a geek orientation wants to turn around and be "fault-tolerant" of all the bozos who just can't seem to manage keying Command-S every once in a while as they work...even after repeatedly losing work because of this failure.

As I've said, I'm OK with accommodating these bozos...but don't force me, as a responsible Mac user, to take the fall for them by messing with a capability that I use many, many times in the course of doing productive work on a Macintosh.

Because you cannot support automatic saving with "Save As..." as it used to exist. The concept is that the kernel—not the user—is responsible for the management of processes, and this has to be doable without the cost of data loss (ie., the kernel has to tell apps to save their data at a moment's notice, and without interruption). "Save As…" cannot cater for this.

There, you finally say why you think Save As shouldn't exist. And guess what? The whole reason people want an option for Save As is specifically because they don't want the OS to do ANY automatic saving. How you possibly have missed this simple notion so many times?

Kurt, you are 100% right.

The reason this simple notion has been missed so many times is because of the inherent hypocrisy in those writer's arguments. On the pedastal of praise for an operating system that is flexible enough to speak to people around the world in dozens of languages, a system that allows the use of literally thousands of fonts, a system that is replete with System Preferences that are designed to give each and every user the ability to decide how their computer's behavior is tailored to their own needs and desires ..... these same people also insist that the kernel doing auto-saving should be operating at all times on all files.

Here's a simple example:

I use Time Machine, and I'm sure many others in this discussion do too. It is a revolutionary way of performing backups in a way that eliminates almost 100% of the user's participation in the process. If you're not using a Wi-Fi time capsule, all you have to do is make sure your backup device is connected and powered on. But the Time Machine interface doesn't insist that you back up EVERYTHING. There is a button called "OPTIONS" which allows you to exclude certain volumes or directories that you do not want backed up.

The principle of user preferences is so fundamentally simple that to even have to debate this point with stubborn closed-minded people who, paradoxically, defend OS-X for its departure from that principle is discouraging to say the least.

For those who agree with me ... and any Apple engineers who might be reading this thread … I can report that I have talked with dozens of Apple employees in their retail stores and AppleCare support lines who share our view that this was a mistake. Not only because they have to answer these questions and complaints from disgruntled customers, but also because they are also users of the same operating system themselves.

As usual Dennis, your arguments are well thought out. Always a pleasure to read.

The main question, which or course has been repeated numerous times, is why users like tonza can't seem to grasp that no one is asking to take away the new features. We just want the option to choose.

Are there people who like this hand holding and prefer not to have to think about saving their work? Sure! And that's exactly the type of user it's aimed at.

But, the massive failure the programmers at Apple made with this decision is that these are my files. I, me, and only myself should be able to decide when, or even if I want any changes I make to be saved. This is my data, not theirs.

You know, Kurt, I see how on my mobile devices, auto-save makes more sense. I don't have a file system to navigate. The mobility alone makes the hardware more vulnerable, the storage device is volatile memory, and there are surely other reasons.

Still there are risks. I was on a flight from DC to DFW in December. Created s Keynote document that was really important to me, and turned off the iPad when we approached Dallas, as I was told to do by the flight attendant. When I got home, the presentation was gone. Nobody can explain why it did not auto-save. I cared more about the loss on December 14 that I do today, but I have not forgotten the incident, and AppleCare can't explain it either.

When I first began saving data to optical disks (CD-ROM's) I was told by a reputable firm that specializes in archival prints that these plastic discs only have a 70-year life span. I don't expect to test that out when I celebrate my 118th birthday.

Why has Apple not made the mouse an obsolete device and required us all to begin using trackpads instead? Because some people prefer the mouse as a pointing device and either have no need for "gestures" or they can wait a while to learn them. Some people are crazy enough to prefer keyboard shortcuts to mouse clicks because their work proceeds faster. How radical!

I can confidentally speculate this: Apple's future system releases are going to head away from the age-old concepts of 30-year-old micromanagement and into a new era of fault-tolerant personal computing. And I for one don't want to see this development thwarted... not again.

This seems to say it all. The "age-old" management have gone and the geeks are taking over so that they can implement all the crazy ideas (read: the development that was sensibly thwarted) that they have been itching to do for years.

I for one can confidentally speculate this: Things will get worse before they get better but eventually common sense will prevail and the concept of using time machine just to save a file will be gone.

You know, Kurt, I see how on my mobile devices, auto-save makes more sense. I don't have a file system to navigate.

Yup, you have to have it on those devices because they are so locked down. We have an iPad, but I would never try to do any serious work on one.

Some people are crazy enough to prefer keyboard shortcuts to mouse clicks because their work proceeds faster.

My left hand sits over the keyboard almost all day long. Mousing the menus is okay when you're a new user figuring out where and what the commands are. But once you learn which can be activated with a keystroke, you realize (with practice and a good memory) that you can work at least twice as fast by not constantly moving the mouse pointer to the menu bar. I almost never click on the tool palette in Photoshop. It's much faster to select the tools with your left hand, while the mouse remains over your work area.

Creating a path in particular benefits from this. Instead of constantly going back to the various pen tools (add, remove, modify or move an anchor point), you just leave it on the main draw tool and get at the rest of them by holding down the appropriate modifier key(s) with your left hand. Course, it helps to be right handed for this stuff. Likely drives left handers crazy.

>

>The whole reason people want an option for Save As is specifically

>because they don't want the OS to do ANY automatic saving.

What's wrong with automatic saving?

We can always revert to some earlier version if something went wrong.

That said, Save As should be implemented anyway!

/ okn

What's wrong with automatic saving?

We can always revert to some earlier version if something went wrong.

That is exactly what's wrong. I shouldn't need to, nor do I want to waste my time having to remember to revert something I've made changes to when I didn't want those changes to be saved in the first place. I do not want anything to do with this new paradigm. And no, it's not because I'm some sort of Luddite. Read back through various posts on this subject, which is spread across more than a few such threads. The reasons are valid.

Omar.KN wrote:

What's wrong with automatic saving?

We can always revert to some earlier version if something went wrong.

We can't. Not when the file is moved to another drive, not when it is shared in some way, e.g. emailed. The versions belong in the computer the file was autosaved on and only there.

keep fighting.... they fixed the movie pro version because of the cry????

however... where are th pro??? machines

why all the changes that causes pro's and real heavy users problems... colour sync, printing path etc...

consumer view only at this time..... contact apple get to scott forstall the ios man....

many pro's are thinking of going over to the dark side( some have). it works... and does not seem to change...

apple survived the old days because of the pro's...

cheers elo

markinbali wrote:

I can confidentally speculate this: Apple's future system releases are going to head away from the age-old concepts of 30-year-old micromanagement and into a new era of fault-tolerant personal computing. And I for one don't want to see this development thwarted... not again.

This seems to say it all. The "age-old" management have gone and the geeks are taking over so that they can implement all the crazy ideas (read: the development that was sensibly thwarted) that they have been itching to do for years.

I think you've really hit on something here, Mark.

The geek says "Ooh, look how neat it is that we can do this! Now I get to do this programming and that programming to accomplish it. Yippie!"

What he doesn't say is "Maybe I should take a look at what the result of all this geeking around will be in terms of usability."

It's quite obvious that this question wasn't fully explored when it came to Auto Save/Versioning and the loss of Save As.

In my workflow, "micromanagement" of my files is a great plus. I can group files related to the same project in a folder together, even though they've been created with different apps. Or I can see a number of files created with different apps that are clustered around a given creation/modification date, and glean valuable information from this.

What suggestion do those gleefully looking forward to the day when "...the entire concept of a disk filing system [is] redundant" have for those of us who have happily and productively worked this way for decades?

Has anybody seen NeoOffice 3.2.1?

There is a nice menu allowing to use Lion's features.

If you do nothing you have Duplicate and all the Autosave/Versions crap.

If you check "Disable Mac OS X Versions" you get Save As and just ignore Autosave/Verisons.

It does not look hard to implement...