I have not experienced any of those bugs. Not simply haven't noticed them or don't use those features, but they don't happen for me. I'm not questioning whether they do for you, but unless you can show me that a significant portion of users are affected by a significant number of bugs (as I stated in my last post), stating that Lion is "BUGGY" is simply not justified, especially not in the context of advising that people not use it.
jW
jW,
What you are requiring is untenable. Neither he, nor anyone can demonstrate this to you , not in lion, not in piece of commercial software. Even if someone's supporting lion (or again in commercial software) they cannot perform and then evidence a study on bugs and users reporting them. Only apple can do this and they have of course vested interests not. So you are asking to be provided with evidence that cannot be attained.
Even if someone could provide you with such evidence, they don't have to prove that a significant number of users are troubled with significant bugs. We are in 2012, if this was the case that significant no of users had a significant (whatever this means btw) no. of bugs that wouldn't mean lion is buggy, that would be that it's the biggest regression in software engineering history.
A lot of us have come to the understanding that lion is buggy via a. personal experience (bugs in preview, safari, ical, smb networking, app store and mail for me, in four macs I own - this is almost every core os application - and similar bugs in friends' macs), b. reading the .1 reports of other users and their experiences, every single one buggy, and in every single one apple far behind fixing these bugs c. reading support threads on apple's forums about lion and comparing them to previous os releases. No one can prove this to you though. Lion is far buggier than any previous os releases since tiger, and people who are old enough to remember and compare can attest to this. It has been a sloppy and rushed release with not enough care put into it.
Besides the bugs there are ui changes such as save state, autosave, duplicate, auto shut down of apps, reopen windows that have been poorly implemented and have not provided the supposed benefits they were to provide. Almost no one is ecstatic about them and thinks that these brought anything great to the table to os x, some people don't mind that much, and they've caused a lot of nuisance to a number of users.
I am sure if we did take a poll here and asked do you find autosave, auto shut down, and save state & reopen windows useful and would you mind if they were not there to begin with as in sl, I would wager that upwards of 80% (at least) wouldn't mind at all for them to go away, and I am sure the majority would be relieved that they did go back to how they were in sl. This whole cross pollination of os x from ios in said areas has been a marketing sham with no real added benefits on aggregate and a lot of nuisances to users. Let's face it, apple didn't bring much to lion, no fs change, no resolution independence, some security upgrades and a rebranded less capable in a lot of respects (more in others) mobileme, and they had to show something, to market lion via something so enter a few ipad like features like the once I mentioned of very dubious use or need in os x (why would an app such as text edit autoshutdown in os x with systems of 2gb ram and upwards? Why should an app save its state (this was due to ios not having real multitasking that the need presented itself)).
That's why people refer to lion as apple's vista, because a. it's buggy (and I am afraid to say it's buggier than vista...) and b. it aims for some ui and new ways of doing things that are neither very helpful nor well implemented and verging on bloatware.
