or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac OS X › Insider Mac OS X 10.7 Lion: Auto Save, File Versions and Time Machine
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Insider Mac OS X 10.7 Lion: Auto Save, File Versions and Time Machine

post #1 of 73
Thread Starter 
Mac OS X 10.7 Lion makes a conceptual leap away from the Mac's original focus on opening apps to create files, launching a new task-centric interface borrowed from iOS. Lion apps can also auto save multiple Versions of the document for Time Machine-like recovery of previous iterations of a file.

Auto Save

Lion-specific apps, just like iOS apps, will largely manage the saving of documents themselves, allowing users to focus on what they're doing rather than managing file system concepts. While still a work in progress, Lion's new Auto Save feature goes beyond just saving a backup copy to prevent lost work (something apps like TextEdit and Microsoft Word already do).

Rather than just automatically saving an alternative background copy at set intervals, Lion's Auto Save feature actually saves documents as a series of differential changes to the same file, making it largely unnecessary to remember to save a new file or to save the file before quitting an app (at least in theory).

This flexibility, already implemented on iOS, focuses the user on the task they want to do, allowing the operating system to take over the tedious task of handling file management. It also allows users to incrementally step back though the changes they've made to a document.

Versions

Rather than manually selecting to "Save" a document and then later choosing to "Save As" a separate file, apps designed to take advantage of Auto Save and Versions in Lion will offer to "Save" and "Save a Version," as the new TextEdit does (below).



A Version is a snapshot of the document in time, not a separate file. Rather than littering the file system with separate versions of a file, changes are recorded to the file as internal Versions along with timestamps of when they were saved. This allows user to essentially undo changes or recover a previous state of the document as it has evolved over time.

Google's online Docs provide a similar type of versioning functionality, implemented as an "undo stack," where users can revert to a previous revision, or view (and copy data from) a previous version for restoring data that was edited out at an earlier point.

It appears Mac OS X Lion's Versions does something similar, based on previous work done for iOS. Apple's iWork iPad apps (Pages, Keynote and Numbers) enable the user to perform a series of undo operations even after closing and reopening a file, indicating that Apple saves each change as the user works, so that each edit can be undone at any future point.

In Mac OS X Lion, file Versions are presented in an interface similar to Time Machine; it depicts the existing version of the document, along with a historical timeline of incremental changes that have been saved as Versions (either manually by the user, or by Auto Save, which is scheduled to save a new version every hour, and also anytime you open the document to begin an editing session.)



Versions vs Time Machine

With Versions, users can step back through time to recover the previous state of a document, just as if they had saved a new copy of the document on a regular basis and kept backups of all the changed files. Similar to Time Machine's multilink backups, Versions only saves the changes to the document, avoiding duplication of all the data that hasn't changed.

Unlike Time Machine, Versions appends all the change snapshots within the local document file, avoiding a file system mess and the need to access backups from a Time Capsule or other external disk just to revert back to previous Versions created in the last several hours.

Versions also differ from Time Machine in that users aren't just limited to restoring a previous version. Instead, you can bring up the hourly snapshots (or any manually saved Versions) of your document, find a particular paragraph you added several days ago but then subsequently deleted, and then copy just that part out of the old snapshot and drag it into your current version of the document.

While Time Machine helps you step back in time to grab a missing file or contact or other item from your backups, Versions allows you to actually step back through time and selectively browse through the work you've done.

This makes Versions more similar to the "Previous Versions" (Shadow Copy) feature Windows users liked to compare to Time Machine. One difference is that Lion's Versions feature, like Time Machine itself, has been given an easy to use, visual interface.

On page 2 of 2: Versions and Time Machine integration, Auto Save and Version integration, Resume.

Versions and Time Machine integration

However, Windows' Shadow Copy is really intended for creating a snapshot of an entire volume for backup purposes; users can't trigger the creation of a new version of an individual file in Windows. This makes Lion's Versions a very different beast: its more akin to a versioning file system that works like Time Machine, but local to the user's own disk.

This also appears to be used to make Time Machine much faster to open, as the Time Machine user interface can now access local snapshots take between remote backups, a sort of "instant Time Machine" retained locally on the machine.

Prior to Lion, Time Machine only worked if you had a remote backup accessible from an network or externally attached disk. Now it can be opened immediately to access local snapshots. If you have both local snapshots and remote backups, Time Machine will let you browse both, with the remote backups depicted in a green timeline and the more immediate and recent local snapshots presented in black and white.



Auto Save and Version integration

In applications that Auto Save, regularly saved Versions are created automatically. Lionized apps like TextEdit no longer mark their documents as unsaved via a red dot in the window close button, as they should be saving documents automatically.

When an app quits, its documents should be saved, as they are on iOS; this wasn't always the case in our testing however. If an app quits or crashes, new changes since the last Version were sometimes lost. This is likely something that will be address as Lion continues to develop. Lion's TextEdit also didn't work correctly with bundle files (folders that act like files).

Rather than an unsaved red dot, Auto Save documents are now given a dropdown menu in the upper right corner of the window that indicates they've been edited since the last Version was saved. This menu also allows the document to be locked to prevent any new changes from being saved to the current Version.




When you attempt to make changes to a locked document, you are prompted to Unlock the file so the changes can be Auto Saved to the document as a new Version, or alternatively you can choose to Duplicate the file so your existing locked document remains unaltered.

Users who currently accept documents from another user and then Save As to a new file to make isolated changes can now Lock the file and Duplicate it to create two separate documents. Alternatively, documents can simply be edited over time with multiple internal Versions, allowing a previous version of the document in time to be compared, borrowed from, or restored.

Files in the Downloads folder are automatically locked by the operating system so the user is prompted to manually Unlock or Duplicate the file in an appropriate location for files that will be edited on an ongoing basis. Files are also locked after two weeks to prevent inadvertent changes introduced while opening and reading a document from being unnecessarily saved.

The Edited/Locked dropdown menu also allows the user to Revert the document to the last saved Version, or to browse all Versions saved within the file using the Time Machine-like, file Versions comparison interface.



Resume

Another Lion feature conceptually borrowed from iOS is Resume, which leaves apps in the state they were in when last quit. Because iOS documents are automatically saved, it's not necessary for users to manage the saving of open documents when an iOS app is quit, either by the user or automatically by the OS (such as to free available memory). When the user reopens an iOS app, it can resume to the state it was formerly left.

Lion brings similar functionality to the desktop, making file and app management less important for users to worry about. Prior to Mac OS X, the classic Mac OS reserved a set amount of RAM for each application as it was opened. This made quitting open apps a necessary step, because it freed up resources needed to open other apps. With the Unix-based Mac OS X, apps running idle in the background typically consume very little RAM or system resources, thanks to OS management of virtual memory allocation and preemptive multitasking, but there still may be reasons to quit apps that don't need to be open.

The classic Mac OS concept of manually quitting open apps remains in Mac OS X, and is somewhat inconsistent. Some apps automatically quit when their last window is closed (such as System Preferences), while others remain open in the background whether they have open windows or not (such as Safari or Mail). The Snow Leopard Dock indicates which apps are running with an indicator light.

In Lion, the indicator light is not shown by default (although it can be turned back on via a Dock preference) because it really doesn't matter to the user whether apps are open or not, particularly as apps begin to support Auto Save and can therefore be immediately quit without losing any data (or requiring any open document review by the user). Like iOS, this should eventually enable the OS to terminate apps that are open but not being used (if necessary), and provide more consistent behavior regarding whether an app is open whether it has windows open or not.

With SSDs and fast hard drives, it is not really necessary to leave apps open, because it doesn't take a significant amount of time to launch most applications. For users, this means they can simply ignore whether apps are running or not, because when they open a document or click on a Dock app icon, the app can launch without any real delay. Resume extends this feature to also restore the state of apps and their windows after the system restarts, such as after a system update.
post #2 of 73
i wonder if versions might take on mobile me and use the cloud for space.
post #3 of 73
Sometimes we need protection from these improvements meant to help us. Just one example, with "versions".

As I understand it, if i have a document three years old, and have edited it on a number of occasions, it's gonna exist in its original form plus all the overtly-saved "versions" AND all the auto-saves (default: once per hour). From the illustration, those versions are distinguished by date and time, but not renamed--as can be done using the save-as function. To find a desired "spot" in that continuum I have to search them all, instead of having useful, identifying filenames.

Say what?

Over the past two days, after a meeting with my attorney, I've revised my 2008 "Separate Writing" document that is a part of my will. When i initiated these recent edits, I opened the 2008 file and saved it as "Separate Writing v 2011". Pretty simple, right? I now have two "versions" of that separate writing--one with the suffix v 2008, and one with the suffix v 2011.

Which better serves my purposes? Clearly, the latter. From the illustration in this article, there's no option to "save as" and rename a file. So instead of two clearly identified (by filename) documents, I'd have perhaps 20 or more--all with the same filename, distinguished only by date and time that provide no insight into content, or intent.

So to me, this would be a step backwards. (Give me the ability to "save as version" AND rename that version, and i'm on board).
post #4 of 73
Quote:
Originally Posted by rtdunham View Post

Sometimes we need protection from these improvements meant to help us. Just one example, with "versions".

As I understand it, if i have a document three years old, and have edited it on a number of occasions, it's gonna exist in its original form plus all the overtly-saved "versions" AND all the auto-saves (default: once per hour). From the illustration, those versions are distinguished by date and time, but not renamed--as can be done using the save-as function. To find a desired "spot" in that continuum I have to search them all, instead of having useful, identifying filenames.

Say what?

Over the past two days, after a meeting with my attorney, I've revised my 2008 "Separate Writing" document that is a part of my will. When i initiated these recent edits, I opened the 2008 file and saved it as "Separate Writing v 2011". Pretty simple, right? I now have two "versions" of that separate writing--one with the suffix v 2008, and one with the suffix v 2011.

Which better serves my purposes? Clearly, the latter. From the illustration in this article, there's no option to "save as" and rename a file. So instead of two clearly identified (by filename) documents, I'd have perhaps 20 or more--all with the same filename, distinguished only by date and time that provide no insight into content, or intent.

So to me, this would be a step backwards. (Give me the ability to "save as version" AND rename that version, and i'm on board).

This is an excellent point. Seeing as Lion is only in developer preview form and about 4 to 6 months away from release, you should submit this as a bug fix to Apple. If you are a developer, I am sure you can submit it through your developer account or some other means.
post #5 of 73
I agree, there has to be a way to name files. And I think there will be—or maybe already is? Maybe you pick a name when make a New file, AND also when you Duplicate? (In other words, Duplicate is much like Save As after all?)

One good sign: the fancy new Finder features mean than good old named files are not gone!

But it’s not entirely clear to me how this all works. The new system needs some tweaking—and luckily Apple has months to do that in. (Right now it doesn’t feel “iOS simple” to me. And it could!)
post #6 of 73
Quote:
Originally Posted by rtdunham View Post

Sometimes we need protection from these improvements meant to help us. Just one example, with "versions".

As I understand it, if i have a document three years old, and have edited it on a number of occasions, it's gonna exist in its original form plus all the overtly-saved "versions" AND all the auto-saves (default: once per hour). From the illustration, those versions are distinguished by date and time, but not renamed--as can be done using the save-as function. To find a desired "spot" in that continuum I have to search them all, instead of having useful, identifying filenames.

Say what?

Over the past two days, after a meeting with my attorney, I've revised my 2008 "Separate Writing" document that is a part of my will. When i initiated these recent edits, I opened the 2008 file and saved it as "Separate Writing v 2011". Pretty simple, right? I now have two "versions" of that separate writing--one with the suffix v 2008, and one with the suffix v 2011.

Which better serves my purposes? Clearly, the latter. From the illustration in this article, there's no option to "save as" and rename a file. So instead of two clearly identified (by filename) documents, I'd have perhaps 20 or more--all with the same filename, distinguished only by date and time that provide no insight into content, or intent.

So to me, this would be a step backwards. (Give me the ability to "save as version" AND rename that version, and i'm on board).

Someone will need to confirm as I don't know, but I would guess that when you do 'Save a Version' you can choose the name of the file that will be created. That would be 'logic' for me.

You would have the main version of you document, then in 2008 when you had a 'finished version' you would save a "Separate Writing v 2008" version and then in 2011, edit again the main file and then save a "Separate Writing v 2011" version.
That's how I see it.


Someome having actually used Lion could confirm ?
post #7 of 73
Yes, Duplicate is like save as. When you pick it, you get a nifty little animation where your window will pop out and spawn another one. If you attempt to save that, you will be prompted to name it.
post #8 of 73
Are the changes all part of the actual file, or separate in the file system somehow? What happens if you edit a file type that is not a private type for that application; how do other applications that may not know how to interpret the revision data work with the file? For example editing an HTML file in TextEdit, and then viewing it in Safari? Does Safari only "see" the most recent revision? Does that happen automatically, or would Safari have to know about the revision data?
post #9 of 73
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cougar View Post

Yes, Duplicate is like save as. When you pick it, you get a nifty little animation where your window will pop out and spawn another one. If you attempt to save that, you will be prompted to name it.

Thanks
post #10 of 73
Wow, so many new features. When is this coming again?
post #11 of 73
Quote:
Originally Posted by WhiteRabbit View Post

Are the changes all part of the actual file, or separate in the file system somehow? What happens if you edit a file type that is not a private type for that application; how do other applications that may not know how to interpret the revision data work with the file? For example editing an HTML file in TextEdit, and then viewing it in Safari? Does Safari only "see" the most recent revision? Does that happen automatically, or would Safari have to know about the revision data?

And what happens if you open such files on an older Mac OS version? Or Windows? Or Linux?

Wasn't there also some controversy a while back about Microsoft Word files containing everything that the user had typed, even if they edited and resaved the file? And people would be able to go inside the file and see things the user did not intend for the readers to see?
post #12 of 73
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haggar View Post

Wasn't there also some controversy a while back about Microsoft Word files containing everything that the user had typed, even if they edited the file? And people would be able to go inside the file and see things the user did not intend for others to see?

I suppose that's why you have the save a version feature..
post #13 of 73
Quote:
The Snow Leopard Dock indicates which apps are running with an indicator light. In Lion, the indicator light is not shown by default (although it can be turned back on via a Dock preference) because it really doesn't matter to the user whether apps are open or not,...

Not shown by default? Does anyone see potential issues with this? The article refers to Mac OS X virtual memory management and the Resume feature in Lion, but fails to consider the following:

Will Lion automatically support Resume for all applications, or do they have to be specifically updated for that?

There are applications that can take up memory even when idle. One example is virtual machine software such as VMware.

Without the indicator light in the dock, applications that are open and hidden with the Hide command will look just like applications that are not open.

If the user specifically wants to quit all running applications, there would be no way to tell just by looking at the dock. If you just click every icon in the dock, you risk launching applications that were not open. Right clicking every dock icon to look for the Quit command is also inefficient.

There can be times where users would want to quit all applications. For example, before doing a forced restart or forced shutdown. Some apps might still be responsive even while the rest of the system is not. Even for applications that support Auto Save, there is still the time between auto saves, during which data loss could occur.

While it is good to have options, the defaults can still be questionable. For example, the "Open 'safe' files after downloading" option in Safari being enabled by default.
post #14 of 73
Quote:
Originally Posted by rtdunham View Post

Sometimes we need protection from these improvements meant to help us. Just one example, with "versions".

As I understand it, if i have a document three years old, and have edited it on a number of occasions, it's gonna exist in its original form plus all the overtly-saved "versions" AND all the auto-saves (default: once per hour). From the illustration, those versions are distinguished by date and time, but not renamed--as can be done using the save-as function. To find a desired "spot" in that continuum I have to search them all, instead of having useful, identifying filenames.

Say what?

Over the past two days, after a meeting with my attorney, I've revised my 2008 "Separate Writing" document that is a part of my will. When i initiated these recent edits, I opened the 2008 file and saved it as "Separate Writing v 2011". Pretty simple, right? I now have two "versions" of that separate writing--one with the suffix v 2008, and one with the suffix v 2011.

Which better serves my purposes? Clearly, the latter. From the illustration in this article, there's no option to "save as" and rename a file. So instead of two clearly identified (by filename) documents, I'd have perhaps 20 or more--all with the same filename, distinguished only by date and time that provide no insight into content, or intent.

So to me, this would be a step backwards. (Give me the ability to "save as version" AND rename that version, and i'm on board).

Uh, no Versions does not save a bunch of different files. Did you even read the article?

Even in your corner case example, is there some reason why you need two files? If so, you can lock the first file (which would apparently happen automatically in two weeks), then when you go to edit it you'd be prompted to Duplicate the file as it shows. You'd call it whatever you want.

Most people don't have one file them update every three years, but whatever.
post #15 of 73
this new version of the OS gives me a bad feeling in the guts. I am happy that apple has such success with the ipad, but i am NOT convinced that the operating system was the reason of the success. what works on the ipad will defenetly NOT work on the mac. for example: I hate the way the ipad manages files and folders. it is ok on the ipad, because you don't work on it, but it is very stupid on the mac. versions may sound cool in theory, but look at it closer: how many people have problems with timemachine and restoring old files? many! i feel unhappy if such unstable system is part of my secure business life!

it is also a question of trust. i don't like the idea that anyone who sits on my computer has a VERY high potential to for example read old information. someone suggested he wrote his last will and changed it. it's a nightmare to imagine all the side effects to this unnecessary feature!

when i hear that they removed rosetta or frontrow then i am not sure if the new OS is a step forward. at the moment i feel very unhappy about those changes. I feel like apple is on the wrong track, and we'll soon have updated all our systems, and will be very disapointed about all the lost features, wrongly changed user interface and even weird features under the hood (for example the removed "program is running"-dots).
post #16 of 73
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haggar View Post

Not shown by default? Does anyone see potential issues with this? But the tone of this article seems to be "nobody needs to know which applications are open because Mac OS X has virtual memory and Lion has Resume".

Will Lion automatically support Resume for all applications, or do they have to be specifically updated for that?

There are applications that can take up memory even when idle. One example is virtual machine software such as VMware.

Without the indicator light in the dock, applications that are open and hidden with the Hide command will look just like applications that are not open.

There can be times where users would want to quit all applications. For example, before doing a forced restart or forced shutdown. Some apps might still be responsive even while the rest of the system is not. Even for applications that support Auto Save, there is still the time between auto saves, during which data loss could occur.

obviously apple wants us to buy even more memoy for our systems and faster chips. everyone who reads this: just click on EVERY icon on your dock, start ALL programs, and you'll see how it works!

if apple was a car company, you could only fill up your car on the apple gas station, and once you drive into the station, your car will automatically be filled up with the most expensive fuel until there is no space left in your car.

this car will also have a steering wheel, but to go to a certain point, you'll have to type in the adress and the car automatically drives there in a way the apple car wants. a way that might be good, but maybe also totally wrong. but it's an apple car, you can not say anything, it just does it.
post #17 of 73
Apple is on the right track to give tools to stop worrying about geeky stuff.

People don't want to micro-manage their apps. People hate to think about saving and all

Geeks have to accept computers are tools, not the end.

-
All your point are moot : you can keep one version, you can lock, you can still create just the one version of your will.

But you seem to not imagine the actual mess files are for people. I saw terrible things with thousands of documents on the desktop named like "business-rapport-102199-45.doc"
post #18 of 73
The biggest problem with versions is other people seeing PREVIOUS VERSIONS of a document that you NEVER INTENDED THEM TO SEE!

If you're working on a long document to send to someone, and then you email someone that document, that person can GO BACK THROUGH YOUR ENTIRE HISTORY OF THAT DOCUMENT AND SEE ALL OF YOUR CHANGES THROUGHOUT TIME!

This is a GIGANTIC concern.

As a result, Apple has made our lives more difficult, because if you want to send a document to somebody else, you now have to duplicate that document or save it as a version, and then email THAT duplicate file to somebody else.

And if you forget to do that, then you're screwed.
post #19 of 73
Yeah, so can I disable all this shit? If not that could be a problem . . .
post #20 of 73
It all sounds pretty nice to me. I can't wait to get my hands on Lion. But maybe thats just due to actually understanding it. If you don't like it you can always stick with SL.
post #21 of 73
As I said earlier, yes to Auto Save, no to Versions. I want to be in control myself and I fear the mess Versions can create, if only the mess in my head because I can't keep up with what the Mac is doing with my documents.

Question: could this be the reason iWork 11 is still not released, and only will be released together with Lion?
post #22 of 73
Quote:
Originally Posted by bodypainter View Post

when i hear that they removed rosetta or frontrow then i am not sure if the new OS is a step forward. at the moment i feel very unhappy about those changes. I feel like apple is on the wrong track, and we'll soon have updated all our systems, and will be very disapointed about all the lost features, wrongly changed user interface and even weird features under the hood (for example the removed "program is running"-dots).

Everything Lion introduce is optional. IF you don't like versions - don't use whatever supports version. It won't be a universial feature, probably most software will not support it (right away). If you don't like the ipadish launchpad, don't use it. if you want everything to be as snow leopard, options are available for that. if you want front row, I'm quite sure it is available as seperate download. Rosetta might be gone, but can't say I care. I have the license to one software stuck back in the ppc days, but not installed in years.

I will try out the new feature before I judge them. And if I don't like them, so be it. but I look forward to the changes - espesially those below the surface, like improved security.
post #23 of 73
- misread a post -
post #24 of 73
I actually like the idea of automatic saving like it is done on iOS. For example on "pages" for iPad, you get a "folder" of all documents you have created inside the app. So when you want a overview of every pages document you have stored, you just open pages instead of browsing through finder.

I believe that does make document file management a lot easier for most users. But then again it is crucial that they add a way to create folders there.

-nilsen
post #25 of 73
It's a step in the right direction, but it's not there yet. There needs to be some way of providing user-differentiation between saved versions, rather than only having the timeline to help you choose from. It's versioning, but it's not version control.

I'd like to see the ability to add Tags when saving a version or include some system if identifying what type of version you have just saved. Having minor/major version control and version numbering could be useful, as well as the options to control sharing the file whereby the recipient only has access to the Current version, or only the most recent Major version, but not Drafts etc. A bit like what you can get when using a Sharepoint Document LIbrary.

This could be easily defaulted to the file ownership permissions, whereby the default version control as set per-app could be only the author can see all revisions, others can only see major versions, and everyone can see the current version.

As simple preference for "Tag on Save?" would allow you to set these each time you make a manual save (with auto-saves merely taking the existing tagging).

Although for those that were concerned, I think if you were to send a copy out and were worried about the history, saving as a duplicate does not carry over history, and would work fine.
post #26 of 73
Quote:
Originally Posted by scotty321 View Post

The biggest problem with versions is other people seeing PREVIOUS VERSIONS of a document that you NEVER INTENDED THEM TO SEE!

If you're working on a long document to send to someone, and then you email someone that document, that person can GO BACK THROUGH YOUR ENTIRE HISTORY OF THAT DOCUMENT AND SEE ALL OF YOUR CHANGES THROUGHOUT TIME!

This is a GIGANTIC concern.

As a result, Apple has made our lives more difficult, because if you want to send a document to somebody else, you now have to duplicate that document or save it as a version, and then email THAT duplicate file to somebody else.

And if you forget to do that, then you're screwed.

Is this something you know because you're running the developer preview, or are you just speculating?

It would appear to me that if you E-mail a file, it has to be compatible with every file system out there, so I can imagine it will not automatically include all previous versions of that file.

Most, if not all Lion concerns can be refuted with the following arguments:

1) There's an option to turn it off
2) Ignore the feature and do like you did in Snow Leopard
3) That's the OS's job, not yours, and it's actually a 30 year old flaw in OS design. Time to make a paradigm shift

I can imagine people missing Front Row, but there are much much more powerful freeware alternatives out there (Plex and XBMC for instance). As for Rosetta, well... do you really want to use software that hasn't been updated in the last 6 years? If so, you're really in a minority and you can still dual boot Snow Leopard. (or Tiger, like tose claiming that was the best OSX evahr)

Like someone else stated: operating systems are a means to an end, and should get out of your way as much as possible.
post #27 of 73
Quote:
Originally Posted by bodypainter View Post

this new version of the OS gives me a bad feeling in the guts. I am happy that apple has such success with the ipad, but i am NOT convinced that the operating system was the reason of the success. what works on the ipad will defenetly NOT work on the mac. for example: I hate the way the ipad manages files and folders. it is ok on the ipad, because you don't work on it, but it is very stupid on the mac. versions may sound cool in theory, but look at it closer: how many people have problems with timemachine and restoring old files? many! i feel unhappy if such unstable system is part of my secure business life!

it is also a question of trust. i don't like the idea that anyone who sits on my computer has a VERY high potential to for example read old information. someone suggested he wrote his last will and changed it. it's a nightmare to imagine all the side effects to this unnecessary feature!

when i hear that they removed rosetta or frontrow then i am not sure if the new OS is a step forward. at the moment i feel very unhappy about those changes. I feel like apple is on the wrong track, and we'll soon have updated all our systems, and will be very disapointed about all the lost features, wrongly changed user interface and even weird features under the hood (for example the removed "program is running"-dots).

Quote:
Originally Posted by bodypainter View Post

obviously apple wants us to buy even more memoy for our systems and faster chips. everyone who reads this: just click on EVERY icon on your dock, start ALL programs, and you'll see how it works!

if apple was a car company, you could only fill up your car on the apple gas station, and once you drive into the station, your car will automatically be filled up with the most expensive fuel until there is no space left in your car.

this car will also have a steering wheel, but to go to a certain point, you'll have to type in the adress and the car automatically drives there in a way the apple car wants. a way that might be good, but maybe also totally wrong. but it's an apple car, you can not say anything, it just does it.

Dell is having a sale on a PC, I recommend that you go buy one. You will be much happier, as will I.

Artificial intelligence is no match for natural stupidity.

 

"A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete...

Reply

Artificial intelligence is no match for natural stupidity.

 

"A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete...

Reply
post #28 of 73
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lorre View Post

Is this something you know because you're running the developer preview, or are you just speculating?

It would appear to me that if you E-mail a file, it has to be compatible with every file system out there, so I can imagine it will not automatically include all previous versions of that file.

Most, if not all Lion concerns can be refuted with the following arguments:

1) There's an option to turn it off
2) Ignore the feature and do like you did in Snow Leopard
.

I have used the Versions feature and can confirm

1) There is no way to turn it off in the apps that currently support it, the only way to avoid using it is to change your ways and use "Duplicate" instead of "Save as Version". There is no seperate "Save as" or just "Save"
2) You can't ignore it, you have to use it, or learn a new way to save

If you email a file to someone, then it largely depends on what they are running. If they are also running Lion, they will see the revisions. If they are running notepad on Windows you won't. It's not a filesystem distinction, it's a function of the application to understand the feature. That's why Leopard Textedit won't understand it, even if it has access to the file from the exact location where Lion Textedit saved it.
post #29 of 73
All these new features are fine, and represents the inevitable progression to the next level. Except that this new version is going to cost me dearly in order to keep up. In my business I use many apps that are PowerPC, and many of those are rather expensive. Lion will force me to buy new versions of all these even though the existing versions I have serve me well and I have no need or desire to upgrade them to the latest. (Why should I, if they serve my needs?) I was also planning to upgrade my Mac Pro (V8) to the latest & greatest Pro sometime this summer, but not if it comes with Lion. Lion would double the cost of an upgrade. So I guess I'll be hanging on to Snow Leopard until I absolutely HAVE to have a new system, or I win the lottery.

I have happily jumped on board with Apple's new systems since January 1984. But not this time.
post #30 of 73
For clarification, the article reads as though Time Machine can only see snapshots created for and of documents created with Versions compatible applications. This is wide of the mark, TM now supports creating differential snapshots at a file (not filesystem) level for any and all files on the system, not just versioned documents. These snapshots are stored on your machine locally until such time as you attach a Time Machine disk, and it then copies them off. So now TM is in effect backing up at a block not file level, and only backing u changes within files, not whole files. Even if you never attach a Time Machine backup disk, it will retain local copies in the same way as if they were on a proper backup disk - this will increase disk usage, but should be managed by the OS to remove snapshots as require should space be needed for other things. It's quite a big change, and not well understood at the moment, but a really great improvement. Also, TM backups can now be encrypted - just say so at the point in which you designate a disk for backups. This is independent of the actual machine encryption preferences.

Hope this helps
post #31 of 73
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wings View Post

All these new features are fine, and represents the inevitable progression to the next level. Except that this new version is going to cost me dearly in order to keep up. In my business I use many apps that are PowerPC, and many of those are rather expensive. Lion will force me to buy new versions of all these even though the existing versions I have serve me well and I have no need or desire to upgrade them to the latest. (Why should I, if they serve my needs?) I was also planning to upgrade my Mac Pro (V8) to the latest & greatest Pro sometime this summer, but not if it comes with Lion. Lion would double the cost of an upgrade. So I guess I'll be hanging on to Snow Leopard until I absolutely HAVE to have a new system, or I win the lottery.

I have happily jumped on board with Apple's new systems since January 1984. But not this time.

If you old apps still server your needs, then surely your old OS also still serves your needs? If you haven;t upgraded your Apps, then your existing setup should remain the same (to an extent) as they day you bought it. Why bother upgrading the OS if you don;t change your Apps? Are you on Snow Leopard? As that would be the most pointless upgrade ever if you weren't intent on using modern apps written in the latest APIs etc. If your Apps won't work and can't use the new OS features, why do you need a new OS?
post #32 of 73
Quote:
Originally Posted by stuffe View Post

For clarification, the article reads as though Time Machine can only see snapshots created for and of documents created with Versions compatible applications. This is wide of the mark, TM now supports creating differential snapshots at a file (not filesystem) level for any and all files on the system, not just versioned documents. These snapshots are stored on your machine locally until such time as you attach a Time Machine disk, and it then copies them off. So now TM is in effect backing up at a block not file level, and only backing u changes within files, not whole files. Even if you never attach a Time Machine backup disk, it will retain local copies in the same way as if they were on a proper backup disk - this will increase disk usage, but should be managed by the OS to remove snapshots as require should space be needed for other things. It's quite a big change, and not well understood at the moment, but a really great improvement. Also, TM backups can now be encrypted - just say so at the point in which you designate a disk for backups. This is independent of the actual machine encryption preferences.

Hope this helps

Sounds interesting... So does this mean that even if I delete a file, my Mac will still "keep" it soewhere so I can recover it afterwards? Even though I have no Time Machine drive attached?

Sounds like a really cool feature, but I wonder how this works on systems with small or nearly full hard drives. Imagine a 64GB MBA 11" for example.
post #33 of 73
Quote:
Originally Posted by rtdunham View Post

Sometimes we need protection from these improvements meant to help us. Just one example, with "versions".

As I understand it, if i have a document three years old, and have edited it on a number of occasions, it's gonna exist in its original form plus all the overtly-saved "versions" AND all the auto-saves (default: once per hour). From the illustration, those versions are distinguished by date and time, but not renamed--as can be done using the save-as function. To find a desired "spot" in that continuum I have to search them all, instead of having useful, identifying filenames.

Say what?

Over the past two days, after a meeting with my attorney, I've revised my 2008 "Separate Writing" document that is a part of my will. When i initiated these recent edits, I opened the 2008 file and saved it as "Separate Writing v 2011". Pretty simple, right? I now have two "versions" of that separate writing--one with the suffix v 2008, and one with the suffix v 2011.

Which better serves my purposes? Clearly, the latter. From the illustration in this article, there's no option to "save as" and rename a file. So instead of two clearly identified (by filename) documents, I'd have perhaps 20 or more--all with the same filename, distinguished only by date and time that provide no insight into content, or intent.

So to me, this would be a step backwards. (Give me the ability to "save as version" AND rename that version, and i'm on board).


If you bothered reading the entire article, you can still save as (who said this was no longer an option?), or even better use the new duplicate feature.
The UI for versions makes it easy to find, compare and retrieve.
You also don't get 20 files, just a one with appended changes.
Bloody hell why am I bothering with this, go read the friggin article.
I bet you don't even use colour coding for your folders/files, are you pray tell a newbie to Macs ?
post #34 of 73
The more I learn about Lion the more I can't wait for it.
As a computer programmer I believe simplicity is best.
That is the way Apple are now proceeding with OSX.
Yes merge some iOS into it, make it easier to use, put safety features (behind the scenes) for people not as computer literate as techies.
I feel I am an athena to the world of computers, a techie who prefers simplicity.
I guess that means I won't be buying any android garbage then !
post #35 of 73
Quote:
Originally Posted by White Rabbit View Post

If you bothered reading the entire article, you can still save as (who said this was no longer an option?), or even better use the new duplicate feature.
The UI for versions makes it easy to find, compare and retrieve.
You also don't get 20 files, just a one with appended changes.
Bloody hell why am I bothering with this, go read the friggin article.
I bet you don't even use colour coding for your folders/files, are you pray tell a newbie to Macs ?

I said Save As was removed, and that's from actually using it, not from reading the article. I can't say I liked the tone of your post I have to say.

EDIT: Addition - The article does not even say you can still "save as". You can:

1) Save - This is for new documents which do not have a filename.
2) Save Version - Once a document has a filename, this replaces the previous Save, and saves a new version under the same name
3) Duplicate - Again, only once a document has an existing filename, you can duplicate it, which presents a fresh copy without a filename, and you can only "Save" it.

I have no idea what your colour coding (Get it right, labelling) comments was all about, I never use them, I consider myself suitable experienced in most any computer OS. I had no idea that labelling your files was the differentiating factor in being a newbie, and a pro like yourself.

Edit 2: Yes, I know the above is probably a bit snarky, but honestly, I think you deserve it.
post #36 of 73
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lorre View Post

Sounds interesting... So does this mean that even if I delete a file, my Mac will still "keep" it soewhere so I can recover it afterwards? Even though I have no Time Machine drive attached?

Sounds like a really cool feature, but I wonder how this works on systems with small or nearly full hard drives. Imagine a 64GB MBA 11" for example.

Yes, all files get snapshots (there is an option to turn it off tho) for when changes are made plus I believe a final one on deletion for the whole file should no prior snapshot exist. It should rotate and remove as appropriate to manage space, but this is an area fir improvement, as currently deleting a file does not free up the space until it's snapshot is archived via Time Machine
post #37 of 73
Expect this to change before Golden Master.

Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of the rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of the rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
post #38 of 73
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ireland View Post

Expect this to change before Golden Master.

Ireland - nothing to do with the above, more your Sig - why do you not want the zoom button and a full screen button, what is mouse tracking for, and yeah, damn straight on the Quicktime (& Facetime/iChat) front
post #39 of 73
Quote:
Originally Posted by stuffe View Post

Ireland - nothing to do with the above, more your Sig - why do you not want the zoom button and a full screen button, what is mouse tracking for, and yeah, damn straight on the Quicktime (& Facetime/iChat) front

Mouse-tracking, as in, how the mouse moves and behaves. The good thing is I believe they have sped it up a bit. I just don't think it's not quite "Apple-good".

As for not wanting fullscreen in-addition-to zoom. There are far more regular users than "geeks". Most will be confused by this extra button. Even for myself I'd rather they just made zoom = maximize. And perhaps turned the + symbol on the green button into a fullscreen symbol. If users want to zoom content we can drag any corner of the window to our liking. It makes sense the fact that they just added this new dragging capability to get to the point and just kill the zoom button.

Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of the rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of the rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
post #40 of 73
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ireland View Post

Mouse-tracking, as in, how the mouse moves and behaves. The good thing is I believe they have sped it up a bit. I just don't think it's not quite "Apple-good".

As for not wanting zoom and fullscreen. There are far more regular users than "geeks". It's a fact that most will be confused by this. Even for myself I'd rather they just made zoom = maximize. And perhaps turned the + symbol on the green button into a fullscreen icon.


Hmm, at the risk of going off topic (I think this thread has died now anyway), of the apps that I always have open, there is no way I would ever want to maximise twitter/ichat/skype/ical all the time, yet their window sizes do vary. I like it the new way, so far, so long as people start to use zoom as zoom and not pseudo maximise - needs a keyboard shortcut for full screen tho!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Mac OS X
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac OS X › Insider Mac OS X 10.7 Lion: Auto Save, File Versions and Time Machine