What happened to Save As?

Thanks for pointing this out. If third-party developers like NeoOffice's and the one I mentioned earlier (Graphic Converter) can accomplish this, it's obvious that Apple could implement something similar for its iWork Suite. They would just have to have the will to do so.

Incidentally, how interesting that this thread's latest apologist for Apple's intransigence has crawled back into the woodwork again, just as all of his predecessors have done.

It's apparently too much for any of these people to actually take responsibility for their statements when they're challenged. So they just turn tail and run away. That tells you all you need to know about them.

Kurt Lang wrote:

Which is what Apple and every third party vendor should do for their apps so the user has a choice.

Bear in mind that Apple forces every App Store app to use the new API for saving, alongside sandboxing. The deadline was just pushed back to July 1st.

The strangest part is, most users who use Macs for work don't know about versions or autosave. It will be fun when they discover one day their web developement apps like Coda, BBEdit, Text Wrangler or Espresso have developed a life of their own. In web development it is crucial to know when your last save was done, also a lot work is done on remote volumes.

Those are the types who are likely to make a noise in the blogosphere. It will be too little, too late I'm afraid.

Bear in mind that Apple forces every App Store app to use the new API for saving, alongside sandboxing.

Which is extremely sad that Apple's programmers seem to think they know better than their users what they want to do with their files.

Good thing I guess that there's (currently) nothing in the Apple store I even care about that I can't purchase elsewhere. Other then any future Mac OS downloads, since that's the only place you'll be able to get them. Especially if Apple decides to stop even making them available as a USB stick installer.

Adobe doesn't really need Apple's help selling their apps, but of course do offer them through Apple. No sense turning down another way for users to find and purchase your products. But forced versioning on Photoshop? Can you think of a better way to make such an app utterly useless? I'd be spending more time watching the OS save yet another version than getting actual work done.

Kurt Lang wrote:

But forced versioning on Photoshop? Can you think of a better way to make such an app utterly useless?

Perhaps this is Apple's goal: to marginalise professionals, designers, coders, all that high-maintenance clientele who were Apple's customer base in Power PC era and now are the ones who have most demands and only bring in an insignificant margin of sales.

Perhaps this is Apple's goal: to marginalize professionals, designers,...

I hope not, but it sure seems that way. Other than a few minor changes, 2010 with the introduction of the Westmere CPUs was the last time we saw a significant change to the Mac Pro. Is Apple designing and still testing a whole new and more powerful design, or are they just catering to a now small portion of their sales with what they have (read, little development)?

A person can't deny Apple is currently making money hand over fist on the consumer products. But what a wreck that would make of the entire desktop publishing (prepress, design) market since it was, and continues to be entirely built around the Mac OS, if they cease production of both computers and an OS that works at a level this market needs.

elol wrote:

Pixelmator 2.02 is theversion that only supports versions... etc.....

even sent an email to them and said I would not buy because of it...

Pixelmator is an Apple Design Award winning application, they would be insane not complying with whatever Apple say and risking not being put on the store front from time to time anymore.

Alas! I bought Pixelmater from SmithMicro in 2010 so can not get the free upgrade. 1.6.7 runs perfectly well in Lion but I want tor try the new features of 2.02 so I will have to buy it. That's OK because its cheap enough but I do not like the idea of the added complication of versions. Its just an extra step to make mistakes when you are focussed on your work. Question: Can I install ver 2 and still keep ver 1 so that I will have both options in Lion? I mean after all I own them both.

Ya,, you own them, but still the way they implement those apps is their control,

so I think vs.2 will probably install itself on vs.1.

Otherwise copy vs. on another disc, no this won't work either... but copy the entire account, with Library etc. on another disk, that should work hopefully.

P.S. Not everything new is better.

bw, Omar KN

re pixelmator

why not download the trial version useable for 30 days...(from their own site not the app store...) they have a try button on their home page..

worked for me...

however I did not own any copy at all

cheers elo

Thanks guys!

Downloaded the trial version and installed it in its own directory so I have both versions. The file name is the same for both versions so if I drag it into the apps folder it will overwrite the old version. (Actually I found the original dmg file for ver 1.5 so I'm safe anyway.)

I opened a 15MB file, and played around with it.

My primitive speed test results using MacMini with 2 gigs memory were:

"duplicate" took between 15 and 22 secs.

saving the duplicate copy took 10 secs.

"save a version" varied between 10 and 17 secs.

reopening a file saved with versions took 20 secs.

revert and restore took 45 secs.

Using version 1.6.7 with the same file

"save as" took 5 secs

reopening took 4 secs.

Conclusion:

1. Working with "save as" is much faster.

2. Since I continually make backup copies using "save as" , autosave and versions is no advantage, but a hindrance.

Cheers (Storm Pale Ale - yum)

"Incidentally, how interesting that this thread's latest apologist for Apple's intransigence has crawled back into the woodwork again, just as all of his predecessors have done."

Don't think I'm not listening, drongo!

—tonza

tonza wrote:

"Incidentally, how interesting that this thread's latest apologist for Apple's intransigence has crawled back into the woodwork again, just as all of his predecessors have done."

Don't think I'm not listening, drongo!

—tonza

Great! I look forward to you answering my questions — as opposed to ignoring them, which has been your modus operandi to-date.

Hi:

The thing that I have liked about communities and forums is that everyone is trying to help each other along. If some hardware/software does not work, then what can we do to get the job done? If changes come along then we help each other to get the job done until we either learn how to deal with the new world or try to get the supplier to fix the damage etc.

Most of the time a supplier will change or offer options to use the old way for a while. Look at Apple with the movie software. Users cried and they listened.

Apple offered an emulator to handle PowerPC software(appleworks etc) on intel and it should be easy to offer facilities to soften the new step(versions) for those of us whose day to day living depend on getting the job done quickly, accurately and with the least problems possible.

On this forum we are asking apple not to eliminate the new world but offer us an opt out until we get accustommed to the changes and can adapt to a new workflow to suit our businesses.

Some folks on this forum do not really work with us in the spirit of cooperation and do no not try to understand what it is doing to some businesses. For me to suddenly change 15 years of work flow is not easy and is very time consuming. Our evangilists should help us soften this change-over instead of preaching that all changes are only goodness.

So maybe we could all including our two evangilists work together and come up with solutions, approach apple and see what happens next.

Apple certainly do not wish to some of us going over to the dark side.

cheers elo

chhers elo

What, so now you want me to write something?

OK, look. What I write here has only been met with insults and a poor effort to engage in an understanding—obviously, your priorities are to ensure that your system doesn't change so as not to break the workflows that you have been using, and I can understand that very well.

For me to explain to you what all this change is about is going to take something like a thick text book in order to explain the concepts behind Auto Save and Resume. You need to understand that the changes that Apple have introduced in Lion is not just a change to the name of one solitary command in the "File" menu... it's a whole new architecture in managing user data. If Core Data means anything to you beyond its name, then you can understand where I'm coming from.

Granted, Save As is not going to work with every existing application on the market today, because to take advantage of Auto Save and Resume, an application has to be designed for it. Existing applications can't just use the new APIs and expect to work.

And there's also a need to change the expectations of how users use the new data management models in OS X Lion, just like Grand Central Dispatch and 64-bit computing changed the expectations of how users could (not) run older applications that needed Rosetta or Java or whatever legacy technologies were available prior. I just had a head-start on you: I own and use a Newton, have used OpenDoc before that, and used a Lisa before that. So I'm well familiar with what Lion and iOS have introduced.

So I have decided not to say anything more about it. You've obviously made up your minds, and no amount of explaining is going to make you think any differently.

—tonza

For me to explain to you what all this change is about is going to take something like a thick text book in order to explain the concepts behind Auto Save and Resume.

There's nothing to explain. It's completely unnecessary for the user to know the grit behind the process. The functions at the user level are extremely easy to understand. If you feel "we're just not getting it" and need to have it explained, that is an incorrect assessment.

Existing applications can't just use the new APIs and expect to work.

That couldn't be any more wrong. Did you not notice the images showing how Neo Office, which has been around for a very long time, had no trouble not only implementing the new APIs, but also allow you to choose? Or Graphic Converter, which also allows you to use the new paradigm, or the standard workflow?

I just had a head-start on you: I own and use a Newton, have used OpenDoc before that, and used a Lisa before that. So I'm well familiar with what Lion and iOS have introduced.

Uh, okay. Even though your familiarity with very old, defunct Apple equipment has absolutely nothing to do with this subject.

So I have decided not to say anything more about it.

I'll believe that when I don't see it.