Just tried with Pixelmator and once again it did not open any files by merely clicking on a folder in an open and save dialog.
There's something potentially awry with your install.
Try it with Preview. It does exactly what it should do. It's a great little polish to this great app. I am now organizing my images and PDFs in such a way that i can have them all open at once with the ease of clicking on the folder in which they reside.
TEST:
File a folder with test images.
Open up Preview from Spotlight or Finder.
Choose File » Open?. Make sure you are looking at Column View or CoverFlow View.
Find the folder. Click once to see items in the folder. Now double-click folder to have all its content shown in Preview.
Tell us how choosing File » Export... instead of File » Save As? adds three steps to the process? You not only get more options but the current format is choose by default so it remains just as dumb as the basic Save As? option that preceded it if you choose to do nothing but rename it and place in a new location.
becuase FILE - > SAVE AS allows me to save a new version of the file with a different name without having to write over the original.
Snow Leopard Process:
-Double click a screen snapshot. Crop and annotate. FILE - SAVE AS "screen01-use case 01".
-Double click the same original screen snapshot, Crop and annotate. FILE - SAVE AS "screen01-use case 02".
Obviouly I am not the only person recognizing this issue. Quoting a CNET review:
Quote:
Unfortunately, the Duplicate option does have a drawback in that it makes saving explicit duplicates a bit more cumbersome than previous options. Whereas both Save As and Save a Copy immediately created new documents on disk in the desired locations, Duplicate requires you to first create the duplicate and then save it to disk if you wish to retain it.
FWIW I've been using Macs since the 128k in 1984, so I know something of what I speak. I'm not hung up on the past and I like Apple, etc, but Lion is a dog.
And for the other commenter, there is nothing wrong with my MBP - It has all the firmware, etc, updates, and has performed flawlessly since I replaced Lion with Snow Leopard.
Apple designed it so a user can easily open all the files in a folder from within preview without the extra effort of highlighting them all yet you have the audacity to claim "i'm not doing it wrong, Apple designed it wrong" Jesus, man!
How about this, when you want to see the items in a folder you click it once instead of two times, but for this to work you have to remember that items in Finder windows will automatically show up as they appear so no need to "refresh" the contents.
I'm not in a Finder window - I'm in the Preview APP, in the OPEN DIALOG. And, when they are stored on a Windows file server, they do not always show up right away...
Good night - I have better things to do than debate UI issues.
I'm not in a Finder window - I'm in the Preview APP, in the OPEN DIALOG.
Finder is default file manager. Open Dialogue boxes access Finder. You are purposely trying to be obtuse because your whinny comments about Save As now being called Export are getting tiresome.
Am I alone in thinking that this also has a lot to do with the fact that Lion requires a Core 2. All of my Apple computers in the house are running Core Duos. I have no need to buy new Macs right now because I don't require powerhouses for what I use them for. That said, I have bought all the latest operating systems from Tiger through Snow Leopard and would gladly update if I was physically able to.
My situation exactly. I think it was a mistake to exclude the Core Duo processors from the Mac OS 10.7 update.
My situation exactly. I think it was a mistake to exclude the Core Duo processors from the Mac OS 10.7 update.
Some things to consider.
How many Core Solos/Duos did they sell?
How many of them are still in use when Lion was launched?
What percentage of their market did they make up when Lion was launched?
From what I can see the Core Duo "Yonah" Macs had a very, very short shelf life. The first Intel-based 15" MBP was released in February 2006, the 17" MBP in April 2006, the 13" MacBook in May 2006", and each was discontinued for Core2 Duo "Merom" Macs between October and November of that same year.
We're talking almost 6 years ago since the transition started and not too many units in comparison to today. After PPC was dropped for Snow Leopard it was fully expected that Core Duo would be dropped for the next OS. I would expect the next one to even drop any 32-bit addressing, something that affected "Merom" from November 2006 to October 2007 in MacBooks. From October 2007 to October 2009 they use PAE to get 4GB, but after they were full 64-bit. That makes me wonder if Mac OS X 10.8 will cut off at 2009 Macs. If we consider that it will have a 2013 release date that could be right about time for an OS cutoff, though a little short.
Frankly, I am not surprised at all by this. Of the six Macs in active use in our household, I have upgraded one (and the other, an MBAir bought a couple of months ago came with it), and I have left the others untouched.
It has all sorts of connectivity issues -- Bluetooth and wifi connectivity has been a mess -- and I am not at all a fan of the autosave crap, now modified with a messy "Unlock, Duplicate....." etc nonsense that pops up (please bring back "Save As", Apple, save me the extra step). I have not used it in Launchpad mode once. And, many types of software I use (e.g., SPSS, Camtasia) are not compatible with it. Xcode has all kinds of issues. I could go on.....
So far, it has been a somewhat marginal, eye-candy, cute-sy, gee-look-we-have-something-new-for-the-sake-of-something-new upgrade for me.
Bottom line: People are not stupid.
No doubt. I upgraded my MBA 11 (late 2010), have a MBA 11 i7 on it (since it came pre-installed), and upgraded an iMac in the house. I haven't moved my real work machine (Mac Pro) or my wife's iMac because... well, autosave is just not something I want in general, the way Spaces was modified is not how I use it on my desktop, Launchpad is pointless, Xcode is unstable, and in general Snow Leopard was a much tighter OS.
The Lion file versioning/autosave stuff is scary if you do a lot of temporary file changes to try things out (images, diagrams) where unless you can disable it, you're going to most likely be ready to shoot the OS in about 15 minutes as you realize your 'what if' modifications have become part of the document history that you have to try to revert out. Ugh. I'm really hoping apps that have opted in to that Lion feature will start to provide preferences to opt back out of it. It's an interesting concept, but is terrible in practice for doing creative work.
That said, I do like Lion on the laptop for how it manages full screen mode, the updated Safari gestures, and the 'natural' scrolling, so I guess that's something?
I use a Mac at work for normal office stuff and have a few older PPC programs that need Rosetta. Not many, but one or two that are essential for the business. I also don't want a "toy" OS on my desktop, although its fine on my iPad. It seems like Apple are making Microsoft's mistake in reverse - MS want the desktop OS on both desktop and tablet; Apple wants the mobile OS on both.
...
From running the Win8 beta, I'd say that Microsoft is pushing the 'toy' Metro look into the PC even more than Apple did with Lion, while at the same time bringing big chunks of the PC desktop to the tablets (hint: having a desktop on tablets didn't sell for the past decade guys...). A mess all-around.
But unfortunately that doesn't solve some of the quirks Apple added with Lion, it just means that the competition is working to make their desktop OS even more goofy and make Lion shine in comparison.
... I'd be severely tempted by a four CPU, 24 core, 48 thread machine with lots of memory and PCI lanes/cards/capacity so I can continue enjoying my multiple display antics;...
<snip>
... Beginning with Snow Leopard, OSX began moving in the wrong direction, and Lion... Lion is just a complete mess. Leopard supports 64-bit data models, that's the key tech that ensures the OS can handle big jobs. 64-bit program space isn't particularly significant.
...
Given the ease with which apps can soak up >4GB of memory (load up some nice global satellite images into CS5 - I've managed to use 16GB in short order!), I disagree that bringing 64-bit through the entire app stack isn't significant. Maybe not for email, but there are enough things I do daily that are quite happy to have the extra memory available, and just allowing 64-bit server jobs under Leopard wasn't enough.
That aside, Snow Leopard brought significant multithreading enhancements to both the APIs (GCD & blocks) as well as kernel improvements. I saw rendering speed boosts in the 20% range for the same version of apps thanks to improved thread-to-CPU-core affinity, which reduced cache misses & thrashing. If you really want a beast machine with 24 cores and 48 threads, I'd suggest you look beyond Leopard. You'll see performance increases just with the kernel improvements, Apple's apps are now using the threading APIs to boost their performance, and most likely the drivers that were missing years ago were updated in the meantime.
I would upgrade in a MINUTE if either the OS supported Quicken 2007, or, Intuit upgraded the product and didn't cripple it at the same time. This is the only thing holding me back. Personally, I think Intuit has dropped the ball, again... I have looked at the alternatives but they just don't provide what I need. What a pain.
I will be disappointed if CS6 implements this. I don't use any of the new iWorks stuff except as an intermediary for Windows Office documents, so I just delete them when I am through copying the content out of them. The only way to turn it off is to not upgrade or at least don't use applications that implement the feature.
It's particularly when using Creative Suite that I'm cringing at the very thought of this saving nonsense. It's not just the auto-save and versioning, but Export and Duplicate ALREADY have distinct functions in CS that are different from Save-As.
There's two problems with this. Adobe users will absolutely not want this saving behaviour, it will wreak havoc on workflows and cause a multitude of new problems. However, if they don't implement it, Apple will have different behaviours in different apps and new users could end up being blindsided.
It should be a user option. Make it the default, that's fine. Took me a while in Snow Leopard to find where to turn off a bunch of it's annoyances, but at least the option to change it was there.
FWIW I've been using Macs since the 128k in 1984, so I know something of what I speak. I'm not hung up on the past and I like Apple, etc, but Lion is a dog.
Well said.
A few folks here are too recalcitrant for it to be worth arguing with when it comes to "Apple sometimes does not get it or gets it wrong." Some 'features' of Lion are just plain annoying or stupid (including the lack of Save As).
Let's recognize it, agree to disagree, move along here.....
So, I need to buy a device that Apple is increasingly making an optional (and supposedly unnecessary) medium?
Ironic.
You can use Disk Utilty to copy to USB flash drive, SD card, partition in SSD or HDD. Whatever works best for you.
Personally I have two made. One on an SD card (slow as molasses), one on a partition of my Time Machine HDD.
But that's all beside the point for the average user who will never had to reinstall their OS. Apple's new system allows you to reinstall Lion directly from their server. The downside of that is you have to wait for the download of over 3GB, hence some users wanting to have a local version as a backup.
Comments
Just tried with Pixelmator and once again it did not open any files by merely clicking on a folder in an open and save dialog.
There's something potentially awry with your install.
Try it with Preview. It does exactly what it should do. It's a great little polish to this great app. I am now organizing my images and PDFs in such a way that i can have them all open at once with the ease of clicking on the folder in which they reside.
TEST:
Tell us how choosing File » Export... instead of File » Save As? adds three steps to the process? You not only get more options but the current format is choose by default so it remains just as dumb as the basic Save As? option that preceded it if you choose to do nothing but rename it and place in a new location.
becuase FILE - > SAVE AS allows me to save a new version of the file with a different name without having to write over the original.
Snow Leopard Process:
-Double click a screen snapshot. Crop and annotate. FILE - SAVE AS "screen01-use case 01".
-Double click the same original screen snapshot, Crop and annotate. FILE - SAVE AS "screen01-use case 02".
Obviouly I am not the only person recognizing this issue. Quoting a CNET review:
Unfortunately, the Duplicate option does have a drawback in that it makes saving explicit duplicates a bit more cumbersome than previous options. Whereas both Save As and Save a Copy immediately created new documents on disk in the desired locations, Duplicate requires you to first create the duplicate and then save it to disk if you wish to retain it.
FWIW I've been using Macs since the 128k in 1984, so I know something of what I speak. I'm not hung up on the past and I like Apple, etc, but Lion is a dog.
And for the other commenter, there is nothing wrong with my MBP - It has all the firmware, etc, updates, and has performed flawlessly since I replaced Lion with Snow Leopard.
Apple designed it so a user can easily open all the files in a folder from within preview without the extra effort of highlighting them all yet you have the audacity to claim "i'm not doing it wrong, Apple designed it wrong" Jesus, man!
How about this, when you want to see the items in a folder you click it once instead of two times, but for this to work you have to remember that items in Finder windows will automatically show up as they appear so no need to "refresh" the contents.
I'm not in a Finder window - I'm in the Preview APP, in the OPEN DIALOG. And, when they are stored on a Windows file server, they do not always show up right away...
Good night - I have better things to do than debate UI issues.
becuase FILE - > SAVE AS allows me to save a new version of the file with a different name without having to write over the original.
And your complete disregard of File » Export doing the exact same thing as File » Save As scares you because it has a new name?
I'm not in a Finder window - I'm in the Preview APP, in the OPEN DIALOG.
Finder is default file manager. Open Dialogue boxes access Finder. You are purposely trying to be obtuse because your whinny comments about Save As now being called Export are getting tiresome.
Am I alone in thinking that this also has a lot to do with the fact that Lion requires a Core 2. All of my Apple computers in the house are running Core Duos. I have no need to buy new Macs right now because I don't require powerhouses for what I use them for. That said, I have bought all the latest operating systems from Tiger through Snow Leopard and would gladly update if I was physically able to.
My situation exactly. I think it was a mistake to exclude the Core Duo processors from the Mac OS 10.7 update.
My situation exactly. I think it was a mistake to exclude the Core Duo processors from the Mac OS 10.7 update.
Some things to consider.
- How many Core Solos/Duos did they sell?
- How many of them are still in use when Lion was launched?
- What percentage of their market did they make up when Lion was launched?
From what I can see the Core Duo "Yonah" Macs had a very, very short shelf life. The first Intel-based 15" MBP was released in February 2006, the 17" MBP in April 2006, the 13" MacBook in May 2006", and each was discontinued for Core2 Duo "Merom" Macs between October and November of that same year.We're talking almost 6 years ago since the transition started and not too many units in comparison to today. After PPC was dropped for Snow Leopard it was fully expected that Core Duo would be dropped for the next OS. I would expect the next one to even drop any 32-bit addressing, something that affected "Merom" from November 2006 to October 2007 in MacBooks. From October 2007 to October 2009 they use PAE to get 4GB, but after they were full 64-bit. That makes me wonder if Mac OS X 10.8 will cut off at 2009 Macs. If we consider that it will have a 2013 release date that could be right about time for an OS cutoff, though a little short.
Frankly, I am not surprised at all by this. Of the six Macs in active use in our household, I have upgraded one (and the other, an MBAir bought a couple of months ago came with it), and I have left the others untouched.
It has all sorts of connectivity issues -- Bluetooth and wifi connectivity has been a mess -- and I am not at all a fan of the autosave crap, now modified with a messy "Unlock, Duplicate....." etc nonsense that pops up (please bring back "Save As", Apple, save me the extra step). I have not used it in Launchpad mode once. And, many types of software I use (e.g., SPSS, Camtasia) are not compatible with it. Xcode has all kinds of issues. I could go on.....
So far, it has been a somewhat marginal, eye-candy, cute-sy, gee-look-we-have-something-new-for-the-sake-of-something-new upgrade for me.
Bottom line: People are not stupid.
No doubt. I upgraded my MBA 11 (late 2010), have a MBA 11 i7 on it (since it came pre-installed), and upgraded an iMac in the house. I haven't moved my real work machine (Mac Pro) or my wife's iMac because... well, autosave is just not something I want in general, the way Spaces was modified is not how I use it on my desktop, Launchpad is pointless, Xcode is unstable, and in general Snow Leopard was a much tighter OS.
The Lion file versioning/autosave stuff is scary if you do a lot of temporary file changes to try things out (images, diagrams) where unless you can disable it, you're going to most likely be ready to shoot the OS in about 15 minutes as you realize your 'what if' modifications have become part of the document history that you have to try to revert out. Ugh. I'm really hoping apps that have opted in to that Lion feature will start to provide preferences to opt back out of it. It's an interesting concept, but is terrible in practice for doing creative work.
That said, I do like Lion on the laptop for how it manages full screen mode, the updated Safari gestures, and the 'natural' scrolling, so I guess that's something?
My situation exactly. I think it was a mistake to exclude the Core Duo processors from the Mac OS 10.7 update.
I think it was a mistake to have made Core Duo (Solo!) machines entirely. Apple should have hopped on at Core 2.
I use a Mac at work for normal office stuff and have a few older PPC programs that need Rosetta. Not many, but one or two that are essential for the business. I also don't want a "toy" OS on my desktop, although its fine on my iPad. It seems like Apple are making Microsoft's mistake in reverse - MS want the desktop OS on both desktop and tablet; Apple wants the mobile OS on both.
...
From running the Win8 beta, I'd say that Microsoft is pushing the 'toy' Metro look into the PC even more than Apple did with Lion, while at the same time bringing big chunks of the PC desktop to the tablets (hint: having a desktop on tablets didn't sell for the past decade guys...). A mess all-around.
But unfortunately that doesn't solve some of the quirks Apple added with Lion, it just means that the competition is working to make their desktop OS even more goofy and make Lion shine in comparison.
- Snow leopard broke many drivers and apps, so no upgrade
... I'd be severely tempted by a four CPU, 24 core, 48 thread machine with lots of memory and PCI lanes/cards/capacity so I can continue enjoying my multiple display antics;...<snip> Lion issues & Leopard positives removed </snip>
<snip>
... Beginning with Snow Leopard, OSX began moving in the wrong direction, and Lion... Lion is just a complete mess. Leopard supports 64-bit data models, that's the key tech that ensures the OS can handle big jobs. 64-bit program space isn't particularly significant.
...
Given the ease with which apps can soak up >4GB of memory (load up some nice global satellite images into CS5 - I've managed to use 16GB in short order!), I disagree that bringing 64-bit through the entire app stack isn't significant. Maybe not for email, but there are enough things I do daily that are quite happy to have the extra memory available, and just allowing 64-bit server jobs under Leopard wasn't enough.
That aside, Snow Leopard brought significant multithreading enhancements to both the APIs (GCD & blocks) as well as kernel improvements. I saw rendering speed boosts in the 20% range for the same version of apps thanks to improved thread-to-CPU-core affinity, which reduced cache misses & thrashing. If you really want a beast machine with 24 cores and 48 threads, I'd suggest you look beyond Leopard. You'll see performance increases just with the kernel improvements, Apple's apps are now using the threading APIs to boost their performance, and most likely the drivers that were missing years ago were updated in the meantime.
I will be disappointed if CS6 implements this. I don't use any of the new iWorks stuff except as an intermediary for Windows Office documents, so I just delete them when I am through copying the content out of them. The only way to turn it off is to not upgrade or at least don't use applications that implement the feature.
It's particularly when using Creative Suite that I'm cringing at the very thought of this saving nonsense. It's not just the auto-save and versioning, but Export and Duplicate ALREADY have distinct functions in CS that are different from Save-As.
There's two problems with this. Adobe users will absolutely not want this saving behaviour, it will wreak havoc on workflows and cause a multitude of new problems. However, if they don't implement it, Apple will have different behaviours in different apps and new users could end up being blindsided.
It should be a user option. Make it the default, that's fine. Took me a while in Snow Leopard to find where to turn off a bunch of it's annoyances, but at least the option to change it was there.
FWIW I've been using Macs since the 128k in 1984, so I know something of what I speak. I'm not hung up on the past and I like Apple, etc, but Lion is a dog.
Well said.
A few folks here are too recalcitrant for it to be worth arguing with when it comes to "Apple sometimes does not get it or gets it wrong." Some 'features' of Lion are just plain annoying or stupid (including the lack of Save As).
Let's recognize it, agree to disagree, move along here.....
It is trivial to burn a Lion install DVD from the App Store download. Just be sure you burn a copy before installing it, or it will disappear.
So, I need to buy a device that Apple is increasingly making an optional (and supposedly unnecessary) medium?
Ironic.
So, I need to buy a device that Apple is increasingly making an optional (and supposedly unnecessary) medium?
Ironic.
You can use Disk Utilty to copy to USB flash drive, SD card, partition in SSD or HDD. Whatever works best for you.
Personally I have two made. One on an SD card (slow as molasses), one on a partition of my Time Machine HDD.
But that's all beside the point for the average user who will never had to reinstall their OS. Apple's new system allows you to reinstall Lion directly from their server. The downside of that is you have to wait for the download of over 3GB, hence some users wanting to have a local version as a backup.
It is trivial to burn a Lion install DVD from the App Store download. Just be sure you burn a copy before installing it, or it will disappear.
Apple provides a utility now that allows for the creation of a Lion install disc without having the original file.
It's called Recovery Disk Assistant.
So, I need to buy a device that Apple is increasingly making an optional (and supposedly unnecessary) medium?
Ironic.
If by "ironic" you mean a high-speed 8GB USB Flash drive
The decision to sell a copy with install media only at much higher price probably have something to do with it.
No, no it doesn't.