Q: What happened to Save As?

I think that what makes this whole thing worse is that the 13 step work around gives you the same outcome as the old Save-As and does not require the removal of Versions. That is, Apple could have programmed that set of steps into a function called... Save-As, allowing everyone to have what they wanted. But they didn't. They removed Save-As without needing to. It does not need to be the way it is. They gain NOTHING from this arrogance. They can keep their precious Versions and give us the workflow we want in a function. But instead they announce the return of Save-As, calling it a new "feature" of Mountain Lion, then secretly make it something else all together. It is as if Tim Cook is sitting there rubbing his hands together with a croocked smile saying "I'll show you, telling me you want Save-As back." This us versus them attitude is the OPPOSITE of what Steve Jobs did. It has brought me to writing an ebook about this whole phenomenon because it will become a business school case study in 10 years time. The Decline Of Apple or something like that. It is just insane. Really. (PS we got to 60 pages, the goal someone set. Nice.)

Hi.

I want save as back.  however I like all of you have to get some work done.

I found that by changing the preferences in Time Machine   "OPTIONS" to lock fileafter one(1) day have helped me by forcing me to duplicate (then save as new file name) without making all the silly mistakes.  I always kept the old file anyway.  So I in this case only have one more step.

Still more steps but stops me from changing last months statements/status of an account by mistake.  I rarely access my files same day.

however when I do my yearly tax accounts ????   disaster......  changes every hour for several days...   Will have to see how I deal with this..

.

cheers elo

Next change to the horror show called SAVE AS:      

The 10.8.2 update also includes general operating system fixes that improve the stability, compatibility and security of your Mac, including the following fixes:

- An option to discard the changes in the original document when choosing Save As

Lets see what it brings us

cheers elo

Eliminating the "Save-As" convention that has existed for 40 years in personal computing is Apple fixing what ain't broke.  As a recent Apple user (iMac '09), I find the mantra that Apple's software is "intuitive" to be vastly overstated; perhaps it would be intuitive had one started on the original Macintosh but given that the majority of Apple's users (since at least 1995) are PC-converts, "intuitive" is a relative term.

It is MUCH EASIER to open, modify and Save-As a file than it is to duplicate, rename, save and then change that file. Too smart by half on this one Apple! 

The next update should include a USER OPTION to change files the way the USER (i.e. buyer) wants to change them; not the way some product manager in Cupertino thinks they ought to be modified.

In the Lounge area of these forums (for level 6 users and higher) John Galt made this thoughtful comment. It is slightly modified as it was a response to an individual. So I changed just a few words to make it read as a general statement.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Apple dominates the mobile device market, and appears to be pushing OS X in the direction of iOS. Computers are no longer just professional tools, they have become appliances like your kitchen toaster. I bristled when Steve Jobs proclaimed the end of this era ("they're going to be like trucks") but as is usually the case time will prove him right.

People don't want PCs. They're too complicated, they crash with disturbing regularity, they succumb to malware and viruses. As appliances like a kitchen toaster, they're a failure. It's already happening: Intel just cut its forecast on declining PC sales.

Like common appliances, intelligence will not be required to operate the Macs of the future. In fact, consumers will demand they become less "dangerous", less difficult to use, and completely invulnerable to malware. Consider the sort of questions being asked here, and the apparent level of intelligence of those asking them. Encountering a coherently worded, grammatically correct question is becoming rare. Look around you - is it not obvious that the world is becoming dumber?

A computer can be a powerful tool, but powerful tools are dangerous when wielded by dolts.

Apple has two choices: continue to make computers that require a level of technological literacy to use them, or adapt to the pressing needs of a society that is evidently becoming dumber at an accelerating rate. How is that going for them? Unlike every other PC boxmaker, sales of Apple computers is actually increasing: http://www.gartner.com/it/page.jsp?id=2079015

Face it - we're dinosaurs. We're tilting at windmills.

For the truly computer-literate among us, we can only hope that Apple will continue to offer some high level access to "their" computers, perhaps through some kind of developer status like there is for iOS. Don't be surprised if we have to pay for the privilege, and that it could be revoked for whatever minor transgression they deem appropriate.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Sadly, I have to agree with pretty much all of this. Long gone are the days when being a computer owner meant that you either had to take the time to learn a myriad of tricks and technical knowledge just to keep it running, or hire someone else to do it.

All you have to do is look around. His reference to a toaster is perfect. The younger generation knows nothing of tweaking config.sys and autoexec.bat files to get MS-DOS systems running as efficiently as possible, while still getting programs which both could or couldn't handle "extended" memory working at the same time. Or the days of OS 9 and earlier where it was practically an art to figure out what order to get extensions to load in so they wouldn't interfere with each other, or cause the system to crash with alarming regularity. They expect a computer to be like a toaster. Turn it on, and darn it!, it better work without my having to think about it. This despite the great complexity and interaction of hardware, firmware, drivers and software.

When you look at it from that perspective, that is what Apple is catering to. The newer users who really believe the "It just works." statement. The simpler they can make the OS, the more appliance like and goof proof it (hopefully) becomes. The huge downside of that is users who do know how to make the most of a computer's capability aren't even allowed to, as "features" which get in your way can't even be turned off.

Now for the other side of the coin. A computer is simply not a toaster. That is the whole point of a computer. They are highly configurable devices. The basic hardware is the same from machine to machine. It's the software that makes them do what they do. They can be set anywhere for the user "who doesn't know nuttin", to "master user". A computer is not, and never will be as simple as a toaster, and the attempt to make them so will only continually frustrate the advanced user who just wants the OS to get out of their way.

Kurt, this is not true. My friend is a teacher in Australia, and kids were given laptops by the government, with controls so they could not use Facebook and watch ****. Within weeks the kids had hacked the security and made proxy sites to allow them to do what they want. Not the genius kids, all the kids. I know that my iPad is convenient, but only because I have a laptop to sync it to. I want my iPad to be smarter, to do more than it does. I want it to be like a laptop. I used to want my laptop to be like a desktop years ago. Now most laptops are that powerful. People want an iPad or iPhone that has a full operating system, but they will accept a dumbed down operating system for now. Microsoft Surfare has a full operating system version. Android is running on laptops. I pay $15 for a toaster. I pay $400 for an iPad. I pay $1,300 for a laptop. I pay $2,500 for a fully equipped desktop. I don't want my $2,500 desktop to have the brain of my $15 toaster. As Android gets smarter and Intel pushes their mobile technology small computers will get smarter. Apple therefore is likely to find themselves selling very expensive very good looking toasters. Give it 5 years to unfold.

Kurt.    Thank you for your contribution to this discussion with the  thoughts on the future.

At first I thought a certain monsieur had written the whole thing but then I realized that it was way too nice and logical to read.  (in the monsieur's own technical way he was trying to tell us to just accept the new world and that apple knew what was best for us.  I rebelled at that approach as I like to make my own decsions and choose my own path)

I tend to agree with your version of the future.  My other half get really frustrated when she have to ask me to do something for her on her Mac Book     She just wants everything to work.   ie everything that was said in your two entries.

My concern is more the way it was done by apple.  one day I was able to use my  work flow to do my day to day things for my clients.  The next day I had to rethink, tinker with the workflow, replace some software and as of now I must watch everything coming along  to make sure they do not mess me up again.

Mind you.    That it what all my users (1000 application and software developers) said back in the dark ages of IBM mainframes when we changed operating systems/compilers/hardware and things suddenly things did not work as they did the day before.

The world has not changed.     only one thing       this time they did it to me     and I do not like it anymore than by clients did back then.

I have already as a result of this major change modified my work habits, set up backup and recovery differently, use Numbers in a different way, Instead of Pages for letters I use Bean and I now watch out for software that does not work the way I like it to work. 

The world moves on and so must I.

But I still do not like SAVE AS/Version implementation.....please give me the option to turn it on and off.  We know it is possible as others have done it.

Mind you they also just dropped in a new connector cable for the Iphone5 that does not have any backward compatibility with other devices.....???????

cheers elo 

Message was edited by: elol

Re the toaster analogy, actually I believe we do want a toaster. A toaster is a device designed to enable the user to do a job in a simple, logical and intuitive way - like Apple computers before Lion.

What Apple has done is taken a perfectly good toaster and fixed what ain't broke.

With the toaster we have been using for 40 years you took a slice of bread, put it in the toaster, set the degree of darkness, and switched it on. You had the option to keep back a second slice of bread in case you burnt the first slice.

Now what you do is you put in a slice of bread, then you press the "clone" lever. The machine makes a second slice which you have to remember to take out and save. In the confusion you switch the toaster on before you remember to set the degree of darkness, and burn the first slice. But that's OK because you still have the duplicate slice which unfortunately you saved in the dog's bowl instead of the original packet.

What's not stated in the "toaster" argument is that there is no earthly reason the Mac OS could not be configured in such a way to keep 100 percent of the Mac user base happy.

As I've been repeating for well over a year now...make the new Autosave/Versioning/No Save As paradigm the default for all future operating systems — but give the user the option to turn it off in System Preferences and revert to the methods that have worked perfectly well for nearly three decades. There are no technical barriers whatsoever to accomplishing this; it has already been done by more than one independent developer.

This same philosophy could be applied to other aspects of the system's operation that would benefit from both "easy" and "custom" configuration.

It's probably (and sadly) true that there are more "dummies" out there than there are accomplished users who would like to exert a bit more control over their computing experience. But the latter group is not insignificant in numbers...and Apple at this point seems perfectly content to drive them away.

As a Mac user of 24+ years, I find this saddening...and maddening.

Within weeks the kids had hacked the security and made proxy sites to allow them to do what they want. Not the genius kids, all the kids.

there is no earthly reason the Mac OS could not be configured in such a way to keep 100 percent of the Mac user base happy.

Sorry all, I wasn't trying to start an argument here. Just wanted to present a different point of view.

The reason my second comment ended up as a separate post was because I ran out of time to edit the post. I also thought about it a bit longer afterwards and realized, "No, that can't be right. Why did I say I agreed with that?" People are not that stupid. As Steve noted, kids grow up with computers. They know more about them than many adults. And I mean 10 year olds who can make their parents look like computer idiots.

So what I was hoping to stress in the second post was that I don't agree. Apple is taking the wrong path trying to turn a valuable tool into an overly simplistic device. Almost, and maybe even deliberately, removing the user's ability to use that expensive device to its full potential by blocking you at every turn.

Most of the recent major changes (beyond the truly awful Autosave/Versions with no off switch) are in security. Gatekeeper even kept me from installing i1 Profiler in Mountain Lion until I went into the System Preferences and told it to get out of my way. What if Apple had treated Gatekeeper the same, with no off switch? How in the world would I get my software installed?

Just like hiding the Library folder of your account, not allowing you to delete apps you'll never use in the Applications or Utilities folder, Apple is going overboard trying to protect the user from themselves. It won't work. No matter how many restrictions they try to put on the OS, experienced users and independent programmers will find, and post ways to get around them so they can use their computer the way they want to.

Apple, so far, has done a tremendous job of stopping users from turning Autosave/Versions off for their apps. Users have found ways, but applying them makes the apps behave strangely. Turning it off globally causes the OS itself to act badly. The only good way at this time to avoid Autosave/Versions, at least so far, is to protest by refusing to buy or use any app that forces you into that paradigm.

Kurt, keep the thinking coming, I find it useful for my upcoming ebook about Apple. Thanks. Steve.

It is characteristic of the spirited man that he takes an expansive view of the boundary of his own stuff - he tends to act a thought any material things he uses are in some sense properly his, while he is using them – and when he finds himself in ... spaces that seem contrived to break the connection between his will and his environment, as though he had no hands, this brings out a certain hostility in him.  Consider the angry feeling that bubbles up in this person when, in a public bathroom he finds himself waving his hands under the faucet, trying to elicit a few seconds of water from it in a futile rain dance of guessed-at mudras.  This man would like to know :  Why should there not be a handle?  Instead he is asked to supplicate invisible powers.

            It is true, some people fail to turn off a manual faucet. With its blanket presumption of irresponsibility, the infrared faucet does not merely respond to this fact, in installs it, giving it the status of normalcy.  There is a kind of infantilization at work, and it offends the spirited personality.

Matthew Crawford

In “The case for working with your hands, or why office work is bad for us and fixing things feels good.”

Polished in the US under the title “Shop Class as Soulcraft”

I highly recommend this book, it is very light but informative reading.  Ironically, there was one dumb thing about the book that I found offensive:  the universal use of contractions such as doesn’t and aren’t and isn’t for does not and are not and is not.  I found this very distracting and have corrected them in the excerpt above.

oxcart wrote:

 

I highly recommend this book, it is very light but informative reading.  Ironically, there was one dumb thing about the book that I found offensive:  the universal use of contractions such as doesn’t and aren’t and isn’t for does not and are not and is not.  I found this very distracting and have corrected them in the excerpt above.

I found this excerpt very interesting and entertaining as well.

However, by taking it upon yourself to rewrite the author's words, aren't you in effect doing the same thing Apple is doing that p*sses us all off: assuming that you know better than someone else how things should be done?

In my work as Copy Director for a small agency, I often find myself doing exactly the opposite of what you've done — that is, substituting "doesn’t" and "aren’t" and "isn’t" for "does not" and "are not" and "is not." The reason: this is how people talk in normal conversation, and in all but the most formal writing, it's entirely appropriate.

The difference between you and me is that I'm asked to do this as part of my job, whereas this author did not ask you to correct his words.

As a writer, your goal is (or should be) to effectively communicate your ideas by inviting your intended audience to read your words — not to demonstrate some imagined level of erudition through the use of language that is, frankly, often stilted and off-putting.

Well, excuse me!  ...OK, I stand corrected over the single example I changed.

In my work as Copy Director for a small agency, I often find myself doing exactly the opposite of what you've done — that is, substituting "doesn’t" and "aren’t" and "isn’t" for "does not" and "are not" and "is not." The reason: this is how people talk in normal conversation, and in all but the most formal writing, it's entirely appropriate.

I think you have to assume that if the author wrote 'does not' that that is what he/she intended.  You may be asked to make these changes on behalf of the disembodied power represented by the distributed interests of your publisher's share holders, but if you stop and think for a moment, you will see that you are placeing the author in a "space[s] that seem[s] contrived to break the connection between his will and his environment, as though he had no hands... [which will likely] bring out a certain hostility in him."

Going further is to get off topic... However, I would argue that contractions such as doesn't and aren't should be reserved for reporting speach, for example, in a novel when a characters words are rendered between quotation marks.  To say that contractions are appropriate in all but the most formal language you imply that 99% of the greatest English language literature suffers from the inappropriate absence of contractions.  I am always ready to be proved wrong, but I am willing to bet that if you take any Hemmingway novel, for example, or most any recent novel above the level of pulp, you will be hard pushed to find a single contraction outside of quotation marks.

Having said all that, I still stand corrected for corrupting Mr Crawford's words.  He probably had good reason for affecting a chatty style.  Probably, he was talking down to the victims he was trying to reach.  But I probably shouldn't try to second guess his intention.