After two days of running Lion, I have restored both Mac's to SL. Lion caused a couple problems that I could live with until Apples fixes the bugs (Screen Sharing doesn't work, et. al.), but there was one change to Finder that I just can't live with. I know, you are going to read this and think that it isn't a big deal, but it is to me.
I try to keep many of the directories in sync between my two Mac's (MBPro + iMac.) In the SL finder, if I were to highlight all the contents of a dir on the iMac and dragged it to the matching dir on the MBPro and released the mouse button, Finder would inform me that there were duplicate files/subdirs. It would then present the options to "Don't Replace" (the target files with the source files,) "Stop" (to stop the copy) or "Replace" (the target files with the source files.) And of course, there is the "Apply To All" option. These options make PERFECT sense.
The Lion Finder presents different options. Imagine I am trying to sync 9GB of data between the two Mac's where almost all of it is already in common. When the new Finder notices the duplicates, the options are "Keep Both" (copy everything to the target and append an unique number where there are duplicates,) "Stop" (to stop the copy) or "Replace" (the target files with the source files.) If I choose "Keep Both" Finder is going to copy an additional 9GB to the target. If I choose "Stop" the process ends and if I hit "Restore" it is once again going to copy the 9GB to the target. This means that in 2 of the 3 cases I'm going to be copying 9GB rather than just the differential files - which might just be 10MB.
To me, changing "Don't Replace" with "Keep Both" is a SERIOUS design BLUNDER! Having developed software for > 30 years, I would LOVE to hear the rationale behind the change: how often do users actually want "Keep Both" over "Don't Replace?"
Thanks for reading this: I feel so much better after my rant ....
I try to keep many of the directories in sync between my two Mac's (MBPro + iMac.) In the SL finder, if I were to highlight all the contents of a dir on the iMac and dragged it to the matching dir on the MBPro and released the mouse button, Finder would inform me that there were duplicate files/subdirs. It would then present the options to "Don't Replace" (the target files with the source files,) "Stop" (to stop the copy) or "Replace" (the target files with the source files.) And of course, there is the "Apply To All" option. These options make PERFECT sense.
The Lion Finder presents different options. Imagine I am trying to sync 9GB of data between the two Mac's where almost all of it is already in common. When the new Finder notices the duplicates, the options are "Keep Both" (copy everything to the target and append an unique number where there are duplicates,) "Stop" (to stop the copy) or "Replace" (the target files with the source files.) If I choose "Keep Both" Finder is going to copy an additional 9GB to the target. If I choose "Stop" the process ends and if I hit "Restore" it is once again going to copy the 9GB to the target. This means that in 2 of the 3 cases I'm going to be copying 9GB rather than just the differential files - which might just be 10MB.
To me, changing "Don't Replace" with "Keep Both" is a SERIOUS design BLUNDER! Having developed software for > 30 years, I would LOVE to hear the rationale behind the change: how often do users actually want "Keep Both" over "Don't Replace?"
Thanks for reading this: I feel so much better after my rant ....