Thoughts
blog posts will not hurt in making that happen...
True, I don't imagine development within Apple being hindered by blogs and the like.
I can understand the excitement around a highly desirable feature but (with respect) I sense, in this topic, some overexcitement around what is essentially an issue with documentation.
I
am recently uncharacteristically harsh in my criticism of a few areas of Apple's work, and those areas include documentation (HIG, new and old, in particular), but I reckon that the current gaps in public knowledge around continuity do not deserve great harshness.
-----
Without wishing to single out the following post (there may be many with similar sentiments)
In support of my point about why Apple didn't enable the feature even though MR readers think that they could have
Consider the number of months (above) multiplied by up to a million public beta testers in wildly varied test environments. The automated and other feedback from all of that, to Apple. Imagine that mass of data, processed in systematic ways to highlight areas of explained, part-explained or not yet explainable troubles with continuity.
Compare that lot with the test results from individuals here. I assume that some of these individuals tested both pre- and post-release (relatively broad experience), and some of those individuals might have tested comprehensively and with expertise, but it simply can't match the richness of data that I expect Apple to continue working with.
Piecemeal, partial explanations from Apple could be more frustrating than satisfying, so I'll encourage people to take a calm and fairly methodical approach to this.
HTH
(Side note: I don't expect to find time to read all of this topic just disorganised skipping through, so if I overlook an important point: sorry.)