Q: What happened to Save As?

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.

tonza...

thank you for your reply.... 

but we will need your help as everyone else to move over to the new architectures.  And we need someone like you who obviously like to read and research, then show us where to find the important details and how to use these tools

I too have used apple II, Lisa macplus  and all....   In fact I was the technology manager for one of the largest banks in North America.  My job .  Evaluating, introducing new hardware, software etc including maintenance of software/hardware, managed the largest test facility  for one thousand programmers etc.  Likewise the first in-house time sharing facility.   I know about change, having to introduce/manage radical changes and the staff who did all the detailed work to introduce this to programmers, end users and all.  You do not just roll over everyone and shock them.  You educate, train and evolve slowly into a new world where everyone's job depends on you and the tools you give them

My main challenge/problem in the corperate world:   my staff also bought thousands of PC's add main frame IBM's  and I had the only Mac in the organization on my desk  and I used it to show what I and the end users were looking for        we got.....       windows 3.1

so much for my past     No more(promise)        I am now semi retired.   owned an art gallery and have hundreds of art images that I need to look after for my clients who expect the same identical images/prints to be available forever.  No accidents etc..

I am now at the users end. Getting on in years.   Need to get the job done by myself.  Every lost hour, every mistake costs me money and time.

this is why I use forums etc..   to get help, assistance, and some logical direction...... 

cheers elo 

tonza wrote:

 

What, so now you want me to write something?

Um...usually that's how an exchange of ideas works. One person posts something...the next reacts and posts something in reply to the ideas advanced...the conversation continues based on an exchange of those ideas.

Your method, unfortunately, is to ignore the majority of ideas others post and just carry on with your own agenda, as if those ideas had never been put forth. That's fine, but it leaves the impression that you're unable to withstand challenges to your own ideas, so you just ignore them and hope no one will notice.

We notice.

OK, look.  What I write here has only been met with insults and a poor effort to engage in an understanding...

Apparently your definition of "understanding" is "only my ideas matter...yours are so insignificant I won't even acknowledge them."

IMHO, any "insults" you've received here have been earned.

...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.

As I've explained many times (as have others), my only priority is to provide for the option to continue using a system that has worked very, very well for Mac users over the last 27+ years. The system can "change" all it wants to, as long as we're given that option.

You have yet to demonstrate that a) this is a bad idea; and b) that it can't be done.

There is simply no reason this has to be an "either/or" paradigm.

 

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.

 

These paragraphs have been answered by Kurt. I refer you to his statements...although it's likely you'll just ignore them too.

 

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

Translation: I'm getting out before I embarrass myself any further. This way, I can continue to ignore statements I realize I have no answer for.

You've obviously made up your minds, and no amount of explaining is going to make you think any differently.

It might have helped had your "explaining" had anything whatsoever to do with the issues at hand.

Meanwhile, the irony of the last three words of your sentence above is delicious.

This thread is so entertaining!

Just googled the word "Drongo" - besides being a kind of bird, it is slang very frequently used in Australia to describe fellow citizens and it means "a stupid, inept, dimwit or slow-witted person". It is also used from time to time on computer forums to insult average apple users who just want to be reassured that apple software has not suddenly veared off the rails and is heading off in a direction that will prevent them from being able to work in a simple and logical way.

I also googled the term "core data" which is a framework Apple provides to developers that is described as a schema - driven object graph management and persistance framework" - oh, right, I suppose we should all know that and therefore be able to understand where Tonza is coming from.

And the morel of this story is that if you are a drongo and you want to continue eating the apple you have to swallow the core as well and like it.

markinbali wrote:

 

This thread is so entertaining!

 

Just googled the word "Drongo" - besides being a kind of bird, it is slang very frequently used in Australia to describe fellow citizens and it means "a stupid, inept, dimwit or slow-witted person".

Thus proving tonza's First Theorum:

Others insulting tonza = bad

tonza insulting others = good

About as logical as everything else he's posted here.

It is also used from time to time on computer forums to insult average apple users who just want to be reassured that apple software has not suddenly veared off the rails and is heading off in a direction that will prevent them from being able to work in a simple and logical way.

 

I also googled the term "core data" which is a framework Apple provides to developers that is described as a schema - driven object graph management and persistance framework" - oh, right, I suppose we should all know that and therefore be able to understand where Tonza is coming from.

 

And the morel of this story is that if you are a drongo and you want to continue eating the apple you have to swallow the core as well and like it.

Well-played!

@elol

>The thing that I have liked about communities and forums is that everyone is trying to help each other along.

Yes and they have helped! Why?

Because some of us know more (in an area concerned) than others, that's why we /they can help.

And this has been (part of) the strength of Apple: its Apple dedicated community.

Look back to the 90ies when Apple was almost done and gone.

@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.

But every positive input is welcome, it doesn't have to be that thick.

(Even if the contributor thinks we - the rest - are stupid, at least he shouldn't show it),

better still would be to explain new concepts (such as Auto Save and Resume) patiently in a way people could understand and appreciate.

_IF_ Apple keeps on moving toward a user-friendly direction and serving the Apple user community, especially the professionals, such explaining will be useful and understandable.

However here there are doubts. It may be that Apple is moving toward the general mass customer segment à là iOS and Digital Restrictions Management. And we have heard about how Apple has discontinued Final Cut Pro a year ago and made it a much simple application, forcing the movie professionals to change over to Adobe Premiere, etc.

Apple will lose a lot if they want ignore their community and only look for the dollars.

/ Omar KN

Omar.KN wrote:

 

But every positive input is welcome, it doesn't have to be that thick.

(Even if the contributor thinks we - the rest - are stupid, at least he shouldn't show it),

better still would be to explain new concepts (such as Auto Save and Resume) patiently in a way people could understand and appreciate.

All of us understand the concepts of Auto Save and Resume perfectly well. (And as Kurt noted, explaining the "under-the-hood" mechanisms by which they work really isn't relevant to the discussion here.)

We understand the concepts, and would probably be in favor of them if it weren't for the fact that they've come at the cost of a very useful Mac function, Save As. What we're saying is that the trade-off isn't worth it. The cost of having Auto Save/Versioning is too high to pay if it means we can't have Save As.

And it's not just that...the new paradigm also plays havoc with viewing files in Preview, performing destructive editing of a file against the user's will. I agree a thousandfold with Kurt's earlier comment — they're OUR files. We should get to decide when and if they're saved.

Therefore, we should be able to choose to work with our files in the same way we've been accustomed to for as many as 27 years. Why? Because for our purposes, it simply works better that way.

Meanwhile, we've had yet another real-world example of this — markinbali's comparison of using Duplicate vs. Save As to perform the same task. Since you believe that the new paradigm is the wonderful wave of the future, I'm curious, tonza —  why did you choose to make no comment on markinbali's post? You visited after the time he made it. Please tell us why you chose to ignore it.

 

_IF_ Apple keeps on moving toward a user-friendly direction and serving the Apple user community, especially the professionals, such explaining will be useful and understandable.

However here there are doubts. It may be that Apple is moving toward the general mass customer segment à là iOS and Digital Restrictions Management. And we have heard about how Apple has discontinued Final Cut Pro a year ago and made it a much simple application, forcing the movie professionals to change over to Adobe Premiere, etc.

Apple will lose a lot if they want ignore their community and only look for the dollars.

I share your concern, and add to it my anger. Which is very unusual. During my nearly 24 years as a Mac user, I have evangelized tirelessly for the platform and its superiority. So it's an odd and uncomfortable position for me to be in.

Apple needs to do the right thing and jettison this "We know what's best for all users, and we intend to ignore anyone who's unhappy" position they've taken.

What an entertaining thread! I am new to Mac. Having a few problems that don't feel right. So I come here.

When I came across this thread I was stunned that Save As was gone! But after reading Tonza's detailed reasoning behing Duplicate and Save a Copy functions, then trying it out in Pages, I like the change.

But there are some situations where Save As is the only thing that works best. It can still be done but in a multiple steps.

I don't see the harm of leaving Save As as an item in the File menu. But then again, when I duplicate, I get to see both docs on screen and I can make changes to one or the other and when I save them I can see the difference.

At first I was completely against it but Tonza made me re-evaluate the whole process and I like it! If the OS can be trusted to safely keep a history of changes we can revert to then this is a really good thing.

I don't usually turn so quickly. This is a good thing that I just proved to myself that I am not against changes for the betterment, AND that the few negative feelings I have about Lion is not based on any lingering bias towards Windows.

"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 thought I'd respond to this because it has technical merit which I'd like to answer.

Neo Office probably doesn't use the new APIs, like BBEdit 10.  They may have their own stuff which does something similar to what Lion does, but is hand-built themselves.  Bare Bones does the same thing—I know because BBEdit 10 runs on Snow Leopard too, and can also auto-save and resume on that OS, too.

So, that statement "couldn't be any more wrong" couldn't be any more wrong.

—tonza

Neo Office probably doesn't use the new APIs, like BBEdit 10.

Probably? Boy, that sure sounds like proof! Why in the world would they bother to reinvent the wheel, tonza? The APIs are already there. Why would the makers of Graphic Converter do that?

You are WAY past grasping for straws with that answer and will say anything to be "right". Your "proof" is nothing more than bad guesses.

I know because BBEdit 10 runs on Snow Leopard too, and can also auto-save and resume on that OS, too.

And you actually have the gall to think that's proof of anything the makers of BBEdit are doing? You don't know anything. Gosh, then Microsoft must have been doing the same thing form years with Office. I wonder how they got Apple's code years ahead of the release of Lion?

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

You are also, very unsurprisingly, a liar. Or, said another way (which fits you to a tee); "Better to be thought a fool than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt."