How do I get the 'Don't replace' option presented in Snow Leopard and previous vs the 'Keep both files' found in Lion when copying duplicate files to a folder? I save copies to multiple devices and syncing them is so much slower now that I must choose replace or keep both... I'd love to have the don't replace back to retain my workflow..
Mac OS X (10.7)
tried it, didn't work. interesting though, it gave me a choice of "don't replace" for the entire folder.
is there a merge command or is this supposed to be automatically??
It's true - enough complaints must have been received that Apple has (albeit silently) offered us the old "Don't Replace" functionality back as "Skip" with 10.7.2.
Kudos and thanks to everybody who griped about it here & directly to Apple. Apple, learn your lesson about taking away power in the name of "simplicity"!
Now if they can only fix the Finder bugs, network mount bugs, Safari bugs and countless other issues Apple has introduced with Mac OS Vista (oops... I mean Lion) then I'd possibly install it on more than just my laptop. đ
I had the same problem, i.e.: copying vast number of files (wallpapers and family photos, mostly) and I used the SL Don't replace option all the time. Now, with Lion, there was not an obvious solution. HOWEVER, my ever trust in Apple paid off and I found the solution. When you get the message box saying you have duplicate files, SIMPLY PRESS THE OPTION KEY and the "Keep Both FIles" button turns into a "Skip" button, which does the same as "Don't Replace" option we've all been missing!
For the record, I would prefer that Apple make the "Keep Both Files" the hidden option, and made the "Skip" option the default button (as well as keep it the same name).
Again, to get the "Don't Replace" option, simply press the Option key when the dialoge box apears.
I'm not sure this thread is relevant to me, but you guys are mentioning the copying system Apple uses.
I copy a folder from my Mac, click within the folder on my USB backup drive, then PASTE items. I know there are fodlers within the source location and destination location named the same, I want Finder to merge the folder contents to the USB backup.
But my options are:
"Don't Replace - Stop - Replace"
Means nothing to me.
I want to merge.
Merge is an internationally recognised command, meaning ... to merge things together.
Without reeling off a huge list of complaints, I just think Apple have lost the plot, or never had the plot in the first place. Computing has always been about the software. The hardware just makes it happen faster. Apple are so focused on making things look awesome (thanks to Jony), that the software and user-experience in OS X is trash in comparison to Windows. Now Scott has been ejected maybe we will see REAL improvements, not just a bunch of apps bundled together and called an OS update.
Why wont Finder remember my column widths? Or why is there not an option for Finder to auto size my colum widths based on my file lengths? It's driving me .... bananas, every time I open Finder I have to manually set the **** column widths ... WHY????
AJLynn2 wrote:
No, it's to complain and then find some workaround. Though "cede to your wishes" has a negative tone that's just so not productive - I'm not in competition with Apple, I'm the customer.
This is a user forum, you're complaining in the wrong place.
Please direct your comments to http://www.apple.com/feedback/macosx.html
And as far as a 'negitive' tone, what would you call your use of "idiotic solutions" when given the workarounds that you say that you came here for?
Tony
colemedina wrote:
talk about keeping mulitple copies of the same file, wait!, wasn't this exactly what Lion was not supposed to do???
There is a reason why you would want this:
Merge folders
When you try to combine two folders with the same name, the Finder now offers to merge them into a single folder.
Peter Norman1 wrote:
Why do they turn their back on longtime users so easily? Who do longtime users have to change in order to make it easier for new users? Am I just an old crank? Possibly, but that doesn't make me wrong. I'm enjoying a lot of the new features in Lion; my MacBook Air
Did Apple really ignore you when you submitted your complaint to http://www.apple.com/feedback/macosx.html ?
Not sure if this was in 10.7.1, but in 10.7.2, when presented with the dialog box, hold the 'option' key and "Keep Both Files" will change to "Skip"
Credit for this find goes to: https://discussions.apple.com/thread/3247340?answerId=16496055022#16496055022
I just discovered this issue as well.
I came back from a 2 week trip and I had thousand of pictures to trandfer back from my Mac book to my home Mac. A lot of the pictures were already there. So I should have had only to transfer a few GB of data. But because of that new "feature", I had to transfer all of the images, tens of GB, not knowing which one I was missing, and it is taking hours, instead of minutes.
This is the most frustrating experience and really a red eye on Apple. No wonder they are having problems.
I submitted a product compliant to
http://www.apple.com/feedback/macosx.html
just now
Unfortunately, Lion isn't worth that one aggravation at present. I used "don't replace" to move large data sets around all day long without replacing existing / already copied sets. This is a standard power-user modality for the Finder in 10.6 and earlier.
Using Time Machine to revert back to 10.6.x until Apple figures out how dumb this change really is!
I'm not sure rsync or Chronosync are the solutions. Like the original poster, I am syncing between devices. In this case, I copy files from my Mac HD to two external drives - I just want to copy the new files, not replace all the thousands of files that might already exist.
If a file was updated on you Mac HD, why wouldn't you want to update it on the Exernal Drive?
In addition to copying new files:
Rsync finds files that need to be transferred using a "quick check" algorithm (by default) that looks for files that have changed in size or in last-modified time. Any changes in the other preserved attributes (as requested by options) are made on the destination file directly when the quick check indicates that the file's data does not need to be updated.
Here is what I started doing in Lion, and it's working effortlessly and wonderfully for me...
I used to be a chronosync user till I discovered http://www.superflexible.com/. This tool rocks! I set my entire documents dir to sync with other machines on the LAN, and with no intervention whatsoever (or client app sitting on the clients) it will mount drives and keep everything in sync, at any time interval required. So when I am working hard I set the time to 30 minutes and when the machine is idle, I set the time for longer. Now I never have to worry about having different versions of document files on all my machines...they are always the same, no matter what seat I am working in. The sync jobs run with no notable performance hit, and it just works. Happy as a clam so far with this solution. Cheers, coocoo.
I don't have any suggestions to add here - was looking for an answer, but I have to add to the discussion so that Apple realizes this is an important issue for many. I'm a photographer and I often update files to my external drive - I need the "don't replace" option so that only new files are added. Big mess up here. And no explanation for why...
I don't have an answer, just want to express agreement with the OP. All I want to do is drag and drop a mess of files to copy them between machines on a network. Some of the files are duplicates and I don't want those copied. Surely the OP and I are not the only ones who ever do that sort of thing. I am not downloading new software to do it or using the command line and rsync - those are both idiotic solutions.
'don't replace' vs 'keep both files'
