Q: What happened to Save As?

Yes that is right, every one has their level of knowledge. That is why the Library folder is hidden. I have been in there a few times. That is why the Terminal is not promoted in the user guide. I have used it a few times. But these options are STILL THERE. You can choose to use a stack folder on your dock, all the way up to smart folders, your own file structure, whatever. The ability for everyone to choose. Now they want to remove choice. Regardless some users hack their iPhones, hack their iPads, run Linux on an Apple computer etc. That is their choice. People are looking for ways to turn off Versions to have that choice. It is all about choice. You make the main operating system simple and safe for those who don't understand, and there are layers deeper for those that do understand. You don't just block it off. Because you don't know how many users want that extra functionality. Even though I just had to use the terminal and change a file in the library a few times, I still had that choice. If instead there is no choice, those few times I cannot do what I want, they are enough to make me leave this.

It's true that the new strategy seems aimed at dumbing things down to make the devices easier for people to use.  I get it.  And when I'm using my iPad while I am out and about, I can behave like a dumbed down person and really appreciate the simplicity.  You know, I get into my car with my iPhone and it just seamlessly connects to my Volkswagen's bluetooth system, and I don't have to sit there like i used to do with my crappy Samsung phone pressing a dozen buttons in Windows Mobile to make it connect every time I got into the car. 

And I also get the way the hardware manufacturing can keep the cost down by getting us to learn how to use gestures on a trackpad instead of a mouse with its moving parts and LED lights and more complex assembly, easier to damage, all that.  But that's where it needs to stop - that's where the guys who design the software for professional users need to step in and say, hey wait - don't forget about the pro's who have been using a mouse for precision pointing since the 1980's.  I'm sure there are some Photoshop users who can use gestures and swipes but the precision needed to select pixels in Photoshop or vector handles in Illustrator definitely needs the better control of a mouse.  At least it does for me. 

When I'm using my mobile device, I accept the fact that moving the cursor to an insertion point midway into an already written paragraph of text is more difficult than I would like it to be.  That's my compromise for being able to work on a phone or a tablet.  Kudos to the engineers who made Pages and Keynote and Numbers into remarkable apps that actually function on the phones and tablets in a way that is really acceptable as the next-best-thing to a desktop environment and much better than carrying a heavier laptop or wating until you're back at your desk.

But that's where they need to draw the line and remember that professional users are not willing to have their work environments behave exactly like their mobile devices.  It's fine if OS-X is going to borrow some cool features from iOS and vice versa, but to remove SAVE AS completely is just inexcusable, indefensible, and unforgiveable.

If they tell me I will someday have to pay extra to use a mouse, I will pay the price willingly, just like those who paid extra for a diskette drive,or a telephone modem and later, for optical drives when the hardware was manufactured without those built-in components.  But I shouldn't have to pay extra for a menu command, that is just absurd.

Dennis, if you were a religion I would be a true believer.

You absolutely nailed it. I'll pay for a bluetooth keyboard for my ipad so that those times I want a physical keyboard and not a screen one, I can have it. But I won't pay for something that can be engineered into the operating system for a few thousand dollars and then enjoyed by millions.

And I won't pay for an operating system that un-engineers things that were already there and working.

Masterfully stated, Dennis. I've also noted (quite a few times in various threads) that my workstation desktop Mac is NOT a giant iPad, and I don't want it to ever behave like one. If my Mac were as locked down as in iPad, it would be literally impossible for me to work as I do now. At best, my output would be reduced to a third of what I can do now.

What's particularly galling is that Apple played "deal with it" with one feature. On their apps, anyway. Thank goodness Adobe didn't pay attention to Apple wanted them to do.

By "deal with it", I'm referring to the numerous options Lion introduced. The default is no scroll bars on file windows. You can turn them back on if you want. The default is window content scrolling as if you were using an iPad or iPhone. You turn change it back if you want. There are numerous other GUI features that you can change, turn on/off, revert to previous functionality for all but one thing. Autosave/Duplicate. Why?

That's the best question of all. Kurt:  "why?"

With such a rich tradition of building an operating system that is adaptive to the needs (Universal Access, for example) and personal preferences of users of all age groups, genders, nationalities, languages, etc., it really makes you wonder what reason can there be for a programmatic insistence that denies this choice.  Especially one that does not require new, additional engineering but merely the preservation of something that already exists.

Not that I want to hear more from certain other contributors to this thread that answers the question "why" by saying "because it's the future and you need to get with it," but I truly would welcome any rational explanation for why the versions and auto-saving cannot peacefully co-exist with a Save As command.

To those who have provided useful examples, like yourself, I say thank you and express my continued hope that someone at Apple is paying attention to this thread, at least the more recent and less vituperative posts that stick to the subject. 

I should also note that the 10.7.4 Lion update gave us the option to turn off the checkbox that you see on every restart and shut down and have it remain unchecked, so that your Mac does not automatically re-boot with the same open windows and apps that were present before the restart or shutdown.  While I would have rather seen that change with 10.7.1 and not have to wait for it to manifest itself 9 months after I first began using Lion, it is at least an indication that listening to users is not a myth.  Let's continue beating this drum and maybe we will see our requested change in Mountain Lion.

Denis, the answer I believe is simple. Because Steve Jobs is no longer running the show. I worked at a multi national oil company for a brief time and I learned that the person at the top can change a whole culture. If they decide that a company will take a certain direction, everyone who wants to keep their job (99% of the people) will do what they say despite any belief in the contrary opinion. Just as Steve Jobs saved Apple when he came back he also doomed them when he left Tim Cook in charge. They are entering a recession by opening more stores, upsetting their customers and giving $40B back to shareholders and for staff share schemes. They are in a real danger of finding themselves with a big cash-flow problem, something Steve Jobs would have avoided.

Since I am writing an ebook about this I have been appreciative of your great comments here.

I'm glad you find my comments useful for your e-book, but I'm not sure I agree with your conclusion about the company's downfall in the aftermath of the Steve Jobs era.  I guess I don't know enough to make a judgment and I doubt that there are many outside the board of directors and executive ranks who are in a position to know.

Lots has already been written and spoken about the Jobs leadership of the company, but we're only guessing about how long his infuence will last.  I think we're also guessing when we speculate that things we are seeing in Lion or future releases were part of his game plan before his death.  I paid close attention to the remarks Al Gore and Bill Campbell made at the memorial service.  Jobs had a reason to trust Tim Cook with the CEO job, even when his absence from day-to-day manageent was only "temporary."  Sometimes, I wonder if we can extrapolate from the post-Jobs success at Pixar to learn what will happen at Apple.

I guess at this stage my conclusion is that we just don't know for sure, but we can safely bet that within the senior ranks at Apple there are those who are driven by "what would Steve do" and those who are not.  It might be a good practice, going forward, to make that a consideration when evaluating new products, ideas, and changes, but I think it might be too constraining because it presumes that SJ already knew everything and ignores the fect that he was able to adapt and change, too.  Ultimately, the company must outgrow its founder or it will not survive.  Somewhere along the way, Ford Motor Co. decided that they could offer colors other than black.  Polaroid had the entire market for instant photography for a while, and where are they today?  The senior management of Scripto declared in the early 1960's that "America will not accept a 19¢ ballpoint pen" when Bic had already made its entry into the British stationery market.  

If Apple had listened to the prevailing conventional wisdom about retailing, there would be no Apple Stores.  The genius in Steve Jobs was, in my opinion, his ability to think beyond the contextual limits that constrain most conventional thinking.  Sometimes, to convert his vision into reality, he had to engage with others like cellular carriers or Hollywood studios or book publishers.  If it was only the power of his personality that persuaded those folks to work alongside Apple, then the company will be unable to make similar breakthroughs without a new charismatic leader.  With no disrepect to Tim Cook and an appreciation for his special talents, he does not appear to be that type, but he does have the ability to recruit or promote such a person to be the evangelist of "think different."

When it comes to the topic that brought us together, the challenge, as I see it, resembles Apple's ability to improve Apple-TV, or learn from what it did with the Newton 20 years ago.  Not every product needs to hit a home run, but if it can get on base and into scoring position, the next one that comes to bat can put another run on the scoreboard.   I think what we're both saying about Lion is that it was lucky to get to first base but if they don't pay attention to the untied shoelaces, it could stumble on its way to 2nd.

Dennis, you are the man. You have some great ideas here.

I will leave you with this thought. The people on the current board of directors didn't want to do Apple Stores. Steve Jobs had to secretly make a prototype store and show them before they approved it. The man brought in to run the stores has left for JC Penny. That means that no one there now would have had the idea that changed Apple or implemented it if someone else had that idea. They even rejected it when Steve first suggested it. These are the people who are now running the show.

Lastly, since I study human behavior, it is possible that some part of Steve wanted Apple to fail when he left. Then he would be seen as the guy who made the company, the guy who the company failed without (when they kicked him out), the guy who came back and saved the company, and the guy who the company again failed without. While I don't have proof of this, I have signs that this might have been his subconscious intention.

If I can refer to your words here I would really appreciate that. I think you have some great insights.

re: Dennis's comment that Apple will have to stay nimble to survive, there's a great article in this week's New Yorker, "When Giants Fail," about Clay Christiansen and his work on disruptive innovation:   http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2012/05/14/120514fa_fact_macfarquhar

If Apple's going to remain the disruptor and not the disrupted, they have their work cut out for them.

Hi Jezra, thanks for the tip to the New Yorker article.  I read it with interest.

It touches a spot in my professional past. My first career was in the ballpoint pen business, beginning around 1970.  My dad was in it before me, starting in 1947, so I sort of grew up in the business.  My Dad's company was a non-branded manufacturer of pens sold as advertising specialties, today called promotional products.  In the 1950's there were few retail brand names in the low-price category.  Brands like Parker, Sheaffer, and A.T. Cross were the high-end "jewelry" gifts and names like Scripto and Paper Mate were the popular affordable stationery brands ... but nothing was sold retail for under a dollar.   Scripto bought my Dad's company in 1958 and kept it running for 20 years as a private label subsidiary.

My Dad saw the Bic phenomenon in England in 1961 and tried to urge Scripto to awaken to the market rival before Bic bought Waterman to enter the US market.  Scripto was content with their $1.59 product and refused to put their famous name on something so low-priced.  My Dad urged them to use his factory to create a new retail brand name for inexpensive pens but Scripto stubbornly declared that Americans would never settle for a 19¢ product. 

To be sure, the early Bic products were inferior to high quality fountain pens or even the good-quality ballpoints. But on television, American consumers saw Bic pens fastened to ice skates and subjected to other destructive punishment like being shot through plywood … and they still wrote. (Of course the TV viewer didn't see how a minute later, the same pen also leaked ink everywhere.)  Paper Mate countered with TV ads and Art Linkletter showing how their pens could write on butter or under water, and Americans responded by buying Bic and Paper Mate pens while the Scripto brand faded into oblivion. 

Today, nobody under the age of 50 even remembers that the brand name they see on barbecue/fireplace lighters was once the most popular writing instrument brand in America.  Meanwhile, the Bic and Paper Mate brands have increased their quality and now dominate the stationery market with only a few foreign competitors.

I think Apple has sometimes been able to avoid being disrupted by being the disruptor themselves.  The consumer loyalty to the Apple brand has kept customers interested in whatever new item Apple introduces, even if it displaces a product line that Apple previously relied on.  Look at each successive generation of iMacs,for example.  We've seen the X-Serve come and go.  We're now on the 6th generation of the iPod Nano, which has gotten smaller, then bigger, then smaller again.

But the one thing that has always sustained the company when its products commanded a slightly higher price is the quality and user satisfaction. 

I have always wondered why the same people who would brag about how much money they spent on a vacation or a stereo or a fur coat or a bottle of wine will also brag about how much money they saved on their computer purchase.  I was a guest at the home of someone in the Bay Area where there were 3 Porsches in the garage.  When the owner asked me what I do for a living and I said graphic design, he said: "Oh, you probably have a Mac."  I asked, "Is there something wrong with that?"  He said he would never use a product that has only a 50% market share, so I responded:  "Yes, I know what you mean.  That's why I drive a Plymouth, not a Porsche"

People will always pay more for quality. Bang & Olufsen has no problem selling all the units it can produce. Hyatt Regency hotels commanded a higher price and had higher occupancy rates because the customer experience was worth the price.  When airlines found that they could sell more business class tickets by giving more value, they added more seats and enlarged the business class cabin.

I just hope that there is a next-generation at Apple that is not so insulated from its customers that it fails to see itself in the mirror.

I hope so, too, Dennis.  And your Dad's experience is exactly what Christensen later described (and spoke of to thousands of executives who, I would imagine, lauded his thinking while ignoring his advice).  The new technology *****, but it's cheap, so the big guys ignore it while it steadily improves, steadily corners more and more of the market, gets capitalized, and, ultimately, eats their lunch.

I've only been an Apple user since 2010, but I would also grieve the loss of its extraordinary user-friendliness. 

And you're so right, WHAT IS WITH THESE PEOPLE who pinch pennies on their computers???

Duh!!

Steve Maximus wrote:

 

The ability for everyone to choose. Now they want to remove choice. Regardless some users hack their iPhones, hack their iPads, run Linux on an Apple computer etc. That is their choice. People are looking for ways to turn off Versions to have that choice. It is all about choice. You make the main operating system simple and safe for those who don't understand, and there are layers deeper for those that do understand. You don't just block it off. Because you don't know how many users want that extra functionality. Even though I just had to use the terminal and change a file in the library a few times, I still had that choice. If instead there is no choice, those few times I cannot do what I want, they are enough to make me leave this.

This is the crux of the matter, and I'm simply amazed that Apple doesn't get this — particularly as it's something they've always historically got before.

I would like to urge everyone here to keep the pressure up and not let it slacken. Silence will leave the impression that everyone has just given up and accepted this fiat from Apple.

Joining the "Bring back Save As" Facebook group that was promoted here a few posts back would be a good idea. For reference, here it is again: http://www.facebook.com/groups/356767911010984/

Dennis Burnham wrote:

 

That's the best question of all. Kurt:  "why?"

 

With such a rich tradition of building an operating system that is adaptive to the needs (Universal Access, for example) and personal preferences of users of all age groups, genders, nationalities, languages, etc., it really makes you wonder what reason can there be for a programmatic insistence that denies this choice.  Especially one that does not require new, additional engineering but merely the preservation of something that already exists.

 

Not that I want to hear more from certain other contributors to this thread that answers the question "why" by saying "because it's the future and you need to get with it," but I truly would welcome any rational explanation for why the versions and auto-saving cannot peacefully co-exist with a Save As command.

I have been asking this very question, both here and in other forums, for months and months now.

Not once has the "rational explanation" you seek been put forth. Most of Apple's defenders don't even make the attempt — they just crawl back into their holes and clamp their hands over their ears.

The very small number who have attempted an answer have had it shot down immediately with logic — and logic being a quality that is in very short supply on their end, have simply slunk away and not even bothered with a rebuttal. (Small wonder, as there is none...but you might have thought they would have at least had the guts to admit this.)

DChord,

A successful company filled with great people can change in an instant when the CEO changes. Steve Jobs was sick for a long time before he died. In the last months he couldn't even speak to people for more than a few hours a day. Therefore Tim Cook has been running Apple for some time. Steve Jobs used to have the energy to stand up to people and get his own way. With his lack of energy that would have diminished greatly. Therefore these decisions have probably been with someone else for some time. If the boss says "This is what we are doing" everyone will just do it. It is rare for people to speak out against their boss. And if a few do and get fired the probability diminishes. A friend is an architect working on some new Apple stores. He said that they may not be including the amazing glass staircases any more. If the new boss has no vision the company has none. Changing just one person at the top can change everything.

Steve.

Hi:

I am not a member of facebook, twitter etc...  just refuse to get on any of them...

However I am continuing my battle of many years with suppliers of software.  I am at this point in time communicating with companies that have implemented the new apple versions.  they basically said they had to because that was how it worked.

I then told them of how others on the app store and not on app store had implemented opt-in/out functions. 

first reply cannot change    then I emailed screen samples of implementation.    they acknowledged receipt, Explained they would go back to ???   and will get back to me...

could be a long wait!!!!

however    they are now aware of the issues....

will continue the battle from this front. they will all ( I believe) let Apple know that their potential clients are walking away.......   because of Versions.....etc...

cheers elo