[lpkmckenna]

I love the Mac App Store. I'd say it's better than Steam, because there's no concern all your purchases might stop functioning someday because Valve decided to block you for some reason, and it doesn't eat up 5-10% of your processing power running in the background all the time.

[turtle777]

Yeah, I agree, the App Store couldn't be much better. It's a very fair deal and implemented well.

-t

[toronado455]

Any guesses as to when new Macs will ship with Lion already pre-installed? Will it be around the same time the Mac App Store starts selling it, or will it be later?

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by toronado455 

Any guesses as to when new Macs will ship with Lion already pre-installed? Will it be around the same time the Mac App Store starts selling it, or will it be later?

There are plenty of guesses.

In the past, Apple shipped new machines pretty much at the same time as the new OS came available.

However, in stores, especially non-"Apple Stores", you might still have machines with the old OS sold for weeks and months.

-t

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by voodoo 

The turnoff is probably the consuming-oriented aspect of Lion. I don't use a computer to consume, and I despise the Mac App Store.

I don't see that: on the user end, arguably the most prominent feature is iCloud and not some `consuming-oriented' features (what are those?). Other important features that were taken/inspired from iOS (resume and sandboxing) will benefit the user, but I don't see how that turns your Mac into machines for consumption or toys.

Originally Posted by voodoo 

Honestly, if someone would ask me whether Apple would even be in the business of computers (desktops or laptops) in 5 years.. I wouldn't know what to reply. Probably not?

It's a tens of billions of dollars per year business for Apple, why would they stop? Would Canon stop making dslrs, because they have a larger turn-around with printers?

Originally Posted by exca1ibur 

... and more so the Mac App Store. ...
The only thing I DO like about the App Store is Apple and Steam seem to be the only ones passing the distributing and packaging savings to the customer.

I can tell you for a fact that small developers love the app store. To sell shrink-wrapped software abroad is a major pain (localized boxes that need to be produced, transported and managed, tax issues, etc.). It has done a lot to revive the development community.

As long as we're not forced to get software from the app store, I don't see the big deal here.

[exca1ibur]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie 

As long as we're not forced to get software from the app store, I don't see the big deal here.

Actually we are with Lion and Final Cut X, being stage 1. I expect all Apple apps to follow going forward.

As far as consumer oriented. The main UI focus is all about being turned into iOS, the way its marketed. Launchpad and Mission Control are the main examples. The focus seems to be moving from computer to appliance. However, since I haven't used Lion yet I can't pass judgement on it enough to say I hate it or that this is what it's going to be, for fact. I'm just basing on what I see them putting the big focus on. Hopefully these features are just IN ADDITION, to how things work now, in which my personal concerns with the direction OSX, won't be a major concern.

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by exca1ibur 

Actually we are with Lion and Final Cut X, being stage 1. I expect all Apple apps to follow going forward.

I don't think you can derive from Apple choosing to use its own App Store to distribute its own apps (eat your own dog food) that we will eventually be mandated to install all apps from the App Store.

Originally Posted by exca1ibur 

As far as consumer oriented. The main UI focus is all about being turned into iOS, the way its marketed.

I think you're misunderstanding Apple's strategy: taking pieces like auto save, resume, versions and sandboxing from iOS doesn't make Lion more `consumer-oriented' in my opinion. Quite the contrary: versions is a feature for power users in my opinion.

Originally Posted by exca1ibur 

Launchpad and Mission Control are the main examples.

There is no equivalent of Mission Control on iOS, Mission Control has grown out of Spaces, Exposé and Dashboard.

[hart]

OK, so I skipped some pages in late March through early May. Bit much in there. But I just looked at Apples info pages, read details of about half of the "250+ new features" and I'm left with the following questions:

How does the itunes/app store/Apple account linkage work with all ones authorized computers? I've had repeated difficulties with the way authorization works and it seems possible that this could screw up purchasing Lion for multiple computers. I had two computer die completely over the last year and because you can only clear your authorizations once a year it left me with the possibility of not being able to use my five official authorizations for months.

So it seems that purchasing Lion once allows that OS to be used on all your authorized computers. Right or wrong? And if so does that mean that having problems with authorization will mean having problems with your OS?

By the same token, does an app store purchase (non-Lion) allow that app to be used on all authorized computers as ipod apps can be used across multiple ipods?

One issue with the app store becoming the only conduit for some installs is that often apps, including Apple apps are available cheaper elsewhere. Does this mean we'll always be paying whatever Apple decides to charge for everything?

I have one computer left running 10.5. I'm still not completely clear if I'm going to have to transition it through 10.6 or not. Can someone give me an aye or nay on that? And will this depend on whether I want to have troubleshooting options in the future?

[exca1ibur]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie 

I think you're misunderstanding Apple's strategy: taking pieces like auto save, resume, versions and sandboxing from iOS doesn't make Lion more `consumer-oriented' in my opinion. Quite the contrary: versions is a feature for power users in my opinion.

There is no equivalent of Mission Control on iOS, Mission Control has grown out of Spaces, Exposé and Dashboard.

I specifically didn't mention Resume, sand boxing, and auto save because I agree with those parts not being specific to iOS. Those are natural evolutions and necessities at this point, IMO. My main concern I see is Mission Control and Launch Pad, at some point becoming your Finder, hence my iOS concerns. As long as this isn't the ONLY method, or to be the future replacement method, I have no issues, is all I mean.

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by exca1ibur 

I specifically didn't mention Resume, sand boxing, and auto save because I agree with those parts not being specific to iOS.

All of those (- versions) were features taken from iOS.

Originally Posted by exca1ibur 

My main concern I see is Mission Control and Launch Pad, at some point becoming your Finder, hence my iOS concerns.

I agree that Launch Pad is clearly taken from iOS, but Mission Control? What iOS feature resembles Mission Control? I see it as a combination of different, independently developed OS X features (namely Dashboard, Exposé and Spaces).

I don't think I'll use Launch Pad too much, I've grown accustomed to Quicksilver.

I'd like to better understand the underlying sentiment you seem to have: are you concerned about `losing control' over your computer, e. g. that you will only be able to install OS X apps via the app store, for instance? Or that OS X will become `too simple,' because `it's a truck and most people don't need trucks?'

[exca1ibur]

I don't like having things dumbed down too far and having software being locked to systems and services are a major concern for me. With digital software I always want to know if there is an option to save what I download (I still haven't heard anything solid on this). Having no backup that I can rely on under MY circumstances not theirs is a problem, being I have 5 computers in my household. As a customer I shouldn't have to jump through hoops or call anyone to access my own software or data I have purchased. If I decide to get a new HDD, which does happen, we'll have to go through all this activation crap and re-download apps. It's like having someone over your shoulder while to work. Mission control is pretty much the multitasking framework they added in 4.1.

In iTunes, for example, you can activate up to 5 computers. I always sell computers when I upgrade, I always zero data and restore. However if you don't deactivate the itunes account it sticks on your account as having another system still activated. In order to 'reset computers' this you must call, and this will reset everything.

The way that we have devices already flooding the market dumbed down (Smartphones and Tablets), I'd still like to at least have the option to have a device with some freedom and isn't locked in, especially for development.

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by exca1ibur 

I don't like ... having software being locked to systems and services are a major concern for me.

That's the achilles heel of vertical integration: you have to adapt to it or use something else which is less integrated. It's the same for Google: if you're happy to use all of their services, having your e-mail analyzed for keywords so that they show you `suitable' ads, go right ahead. Microsoft could combine all its existing web offerings, but so far hasn't.

For me, the iCloud ecosystem, for instance, could solve the problems I have using OmniFocus on my iPod touch: right now it's useless, because there are all sorts of problems keeping the databases in sync. I expect OmniGroup to take advantage of iCloud and solve this issue for me.

Originally Posted by exca1ibur 

With digital software I always want to know if there is an option to save what I download (I still haven't heard anything solid on this).

I don't quite understand what you're trying to say: if you use some form of backup (I use Time Machine and Synk in tandem), then you can simply restore from backups. With the new options on the app store, once they're available on the Mac, you can also re-download them if you want, but that's an additional option.

Originally Posted by exca1ibur 

Having no backup that I can rely on under MY circumstances not theirs is a problem, being I have 5 computers in my household. As a customer I shouldn't have to jump through hoops or call anyone to access my own software or data I have purchased.

Regarding to music and videos, yes, DRM is a pain.

Originally Posted by exca1ibur 

If I decide to get a new HDD, which does happen, we'll have to go through all this activation crap and re-download apps. It's like having someone over your shoulder while to work.

I don't remember being asked to re-authenticate after upgrading my harddrive. But even if you are, I agree, DRM is a pain and should be done away with.

Originally Posted by exca1ibur 

Mission control is pretty much the multitasking framework they added in 4.1.

No, it's not, the two have nothing to do with each other: iOS 4 introduced a way to switch between `active' apps. The interface is taken from the normal app launcher on the bottom. I write active in quotation marks, because iOS may decide to quit an app and relaunch and resume it for you. The necessary pieces of technology are related to Auto Save and Resume on 10.7 Lion, but they have nothing to do with Mission Control. Actually, OS X Lion is also able to transparently quit apps for you if you run out of memory and then relaunch and resume them if necessary.

Mission Control combines existing OS X technologies that have no iOS equivalent.

Originally Posted by exca1ibur 

The way that we have devices already flooding the market dumbed down (Smartphones and Tablets), I'd still like to at least have the option to have a device with some freedom and isn't locked in, especially for development.

So far, the Mac isn't locked in and I don't see it being locked in in the foreseeable future. Users would raise a major, major stink: I rely on quite a few unix apps and I rely on the command line for my work. If I can't use that, I can't use my Mac. I also don't see the advantage for Apple to imitate the iOS model for their OS X-based ecosystem.

And as long as you can install apps any way you like, you can choose not to use the App Store.

[exca1ibur]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie 

I don't quite understand what you're trying to say: if you use some form of backup (I use Time Machine and Synk in tandem), then you can simply restore from backups. With the new options on the app store, once they're available on the Mac, you can also re-download them if you want, but that's an additional option.

For me, I'm more referring to a disk image. I don't want to have to re-download 2+ gig apps more than once if I can avoid it. I have 3 computers and not all are setup the same way. I don't time machine either of them. I just backup my data, not the apps, as I have images or DVDs for the programs.

So far, the Mac isn't locked in and I don't see it being locked in in the foreseeable future. Users would raise a major, major stink: I rely on quite a few unix apps and I rely on the command line for my work. If I can't use that, I can't use my Mac. I also don't see the advantage for Apple to imitate the iOS model for their OS X-based ecosystem.

And as long as you can install apps any way you like, you can choose not to use the App Store.

I agree, I just hope we aren't headed this way where it is. Currently, if we want Lion we have no choice but to use the App Store and this might be a following trend for more companies. However, as I was saying with Apple and Steam they at least pass the savings to the customer so I that definitely helps relieves one main concern with the App Store. With XBox Live, and The Playstation Network, there is no way in hell I'd download a full game when I can go to the store and get a physical copy for the same price.

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie 

For me, the iCloud ecosystem, for instance, could solve the problems I have using OmniFocus on my iPod touch: right now it's useless, because there are all sorts of problems keeping the databases in sync. I expect OmniGroup to take advantage of iCloud and solve this issue for me.

That's odd, I store my OmniFocus database on my own WebDav server, and I have never had issues with syncing between 2 Macs, an iPhone and an iPad.

Have you tried the OmniSync services ?

-t

[OreoCookie]

@turtle
I've tried using their servers, but as far as I understand, I still have to manually update, something that doesn't seem to work well for me. Perhaps I'm doing something wrong?

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by exca1ibur 

For me, I'm more referring to a disk image. I don't want to have to re-download 2+ gig apps more than once if I can avoid it.

As far as I have heard you can simply copy applications from one computer to the next. I've not tried it, though, since I only have one machine.

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie 

@turtle
I've tried using their servers, but as far as I understand, I still have to manually update, something that doesn't seem to work well for me. Perhaps I'm doing something wrong?

I haven't used the Omni service, so I can't tell how it works.
Have you got WebDav ? I'd try that. I can post my settings later.

You can get free WebDav space courtesy of MS 's SkyDrive.
See here: http://www.ilovefreesoftware.com/20/...e-folders.html

-t

[Person Man]

Originally Posted by exca1ibur 

For me, I'm more referring to a disk image. I don't want to have to re-download 2+ gig apps more than once if I can avoid it. I have 3 computers and not all are setup the same way. I don't time machine either of them. I just backup my data, not the apps, as I have images or DVDs for the programs.

There is nothing stopping you from copying an app purchased from the Mac App Store from the Applications folder to an external hard drive or burning it onto a CD or a DVD. I have done this with several Mac App Store purchases and restoring from the backup that I made works great. No need to redownload from the store, but, if something ever happens to my backup then I can redownload if necessary.

I have three Macs, one at work and two at home. When I purchase an application from the Mac App Store I download once, and then just copy the programs from the Applications folder to a thumb drive, which I use to install the software on other machines. This is how I plan on installing Lion too. Download once, back up to DVD, and then copy it to the other machines to install.

I agree, I just hope we aren't headed this way where it is. Currently, if we want Lion we have no choice but to use the App Store and this might be a following trend for more companies.

And what if it is the only way to get software from some companies? As I said above, you can back your purchases up and reinstall them by copying them to your Applications folder.

[exca1ibur]

Originally Posted by Person Man 

And what if it is the only way to get software from some companies? As I said above, you can back your purchases up and reinstall them by copying them to your Applications folder.

IF they follow the guidelines. Try dragging over Adobe CS 5.5. Which does not. Luckily Adobe provides a DMG file when you download it. Options are all I ask for.

Download once, back up to DVD, and then copy it to the other machines to install.

Good to know, that is all I was asking for. iTunes movie digital copy allows you to download it once, it's locked to that machine, AND you have a limited time to do it. I was hoping the App Store did not have these restrictions.

[angelmb]

Originally Posted by Person Man 

I have three Macs, one at work and two at home. When I purchase an application from the Mac App Store I download once, and then just copy the programs from the Applications folder to a thumb drive, which I use to install the software on other machines. This is how I plan on installing Lion too. Download once, back up to DVD, and then copy it to the other machines to install.

Should those Macs have…?
- same Mac OS X user name account
- unique App Store account
- both
- none of the above

TIA.

[Person Man]

Originally Posted by exca1ibur 

IF they follow the guidelines. Try dragging over Adobe CS 5.5. Which does not. Luckily Adobe provides a DMG file when you download it. Options are all I ask for.

If they don't follow the Mac App Store guidelines, then they don't get to be sold from the Mac App Store. Don't have to worry about that.

iTunes movie digital copy allows you to download it once, it's locked to that machine, AND you have a limited time to do it.

No, once downloaded, iTunes Digital Copies are not locked to the machine you download them to. I have a large collection of Digital Copies that play just fine on my MacBook Pro, Mac Pro, iMac at work, and my HP Pavillion Media Center PC, not to mention my iPad, my iPod touch, and my iPhone. You do, however, have a limited time to redeem your Digital Copy. Maybe the Windows Media versions of the Digital Copies are machine-locked, but the iTunes ones are subject to the same restrictions as movies you buy yourself from the iTunes Store.

[Person Man]

Originally Posted by angelmb 

Should those Macs have…?
- same Mac OS X user name account
- unique App Store account
- both
- none of the above

TIA.

You don't need the same user names, but you should be using the same App Store account. I haven't tried running a program on a machine with a different App Store account.

[angelmb]

Originally Posted by Person Man 

You don't need the same user names, but you should be using the same App Store account.

Makes sense. Thank you.

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by exca1ibur 

IF they follow the guidelines. Try dragging over Adobe CS 5.5. Which does not. Luckily Adobe provides a DMG file when you download it. Options are all I ask for.

Adobe's apps are not sold via the App Store, so I'm not sure why you expect it to adhere to app store standards. The only app in the App Store where you can't simply drag & drop is XCode: if you purchase XCode, you actually download an installer (which you can copy elsewhere).

[exca1ibur]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie 

Adobe's apps are not sold via the App Store, so I'm not sure why you expect it to adhere to app store standards. The only app in the App Store where you can't simply drag & drop is XCode: if you purchase XCode, you actually download an installer (which you can copy elsewhere).

As long as you can get a dmg or some type of installer, that you can burn or backup, I'm good with that.

In the future, I'm sure they want to push most Mac apps to be sold this way much like the App Store for the iTunes system, so it's going to have to follow some type of standard, at some point.

[Person Man]

Originally Posted by exca1ibur 

As long as you can get a dmg or some type of installer, that you can burn or backup, I'm good with that.

In the future, I'm sure they want to push most Mac apps to be sold this way much like the App Store for the iTunes system, so it's going to have to follow some type of standard, at some point.

All applications, except for some of Apple's own apps, have to follow Apple's Guidelines to be sold in the Mac App Store, and one of those Guidelines is that all applications have to be self-contained packages... installation of pieces/parts to other places is not allowed. Therefore, all you have to do to back up the app is to copy it to another location.

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by exca1ibur 

As long as you can get a dmg or some type of installer, that you can burn or backup, I'm good with that.

Again, you don't need an installer, with few exceptions (XCode being one of them), all you need to do is copy the app bundle and you're done. With XCode, you must copy the installer rather than the /Developer directory.

Originally Posted by exca1ibur 

In the future, I'm sure they want to push most Mac apps to be sold this way much like the App Store for the iTunes system, so it's going to have to follow some type of standard, at some point.

There already is a standard: if you distribute apps via the app store, everything must be packaged inside the app bundle.

[Spheric Harlot]

Does that mean that /Library/Application Support is dead?

[OreoCookie]

I don't know, I haven't checked to be honest. But as far as I remember I have only put additional stuff like custom sounds in my ~/Library/Application/Support folder that are more like user data rather than essential elements for the app to work.

[Big Mac]

Yeah, I think by self-contained Apple means that the application's installation files need to be contained in its app bundle (as most app bundle apps do), but an app has to be able to put user data outside of itself.

[Don Pickett]

Originally Posted by exca1ibur 

As far as consumer oriented. The main UI focus is all about being turned into iOS, the way its marketed. Launchpad and Mission Control are the main examples.

I think you can go further: the desktop OS, as a product, is essentially finished. The next ten years will see it gradually wound down until there is one, seamless user experience from desktop to mobile and back. You will work at whatever passes for a desktop machine. When you're done, you pick up your mobile device and it's all there when you travel. And, if it isn't all really there--as desktop storage will continue to outpace mobile storage--there will be enough of an abstraction for you to work as if it's all there.

[Salty]

For those who are worried about Launch Pad. If you don't like it, drag it out of the dock. Boom, it's gone. Just like Dashboard, don't want it? Don't use it, it won't load into RAM. I haven't found it overly useful aside from providing quicker access to my Adobe Apps than having the application folder in my dock.

[imitchellg5]

The Lion GM is out right now.

[angelmb]

Is the motto still 'roar the world' ?

[jmiddel]

Don, I think you hit the nail on the head! It makes total sense to have the same set of actions in all settings. The final OS frontier at this time seems to me to be subvocal human-machine interface. I imagine a tiny device attached to my throat that picks up my silent speech and controls the machine, including alphanumeric input. Regarding the storage, in a few years folks will have their data backed up in the cloud, so I'll simply download the files I'm needing, then re-upload them off my mobile device when done.

[Doc HM]

Originally Posted by imitchellg5 

The Lion GM is out right now.

I hope they've gone fix crazy as the last developer preview seemed very much a work in progress.

Slipping back into SL from Lion makes SL seem very slick by comparison. And much much faster too.

[imitchellg5]

The bugs that I had in the last preview seem to be gone.

[Salty]

Originally Posted by Doc HM 

I hope they've gone fix crazy as the last developer preview seemed very much a work in progress.

Slipping back into SL from Lion makes SL seem very slick by comparison. And much much faster too.

I've had the opposite experience. I've been using Lion since DP2 and back then it was kinda rough. The only thing that's seemed rough or awkward was that Vuze wasn't working ... actually I should check and see if it's working yet. If not uTorrent is fine, though it will mean that I'll have to wait to switch my parents over.

A friend bought an i5 MacBook Pro the other day, and I was setting it up and everything in Snow Leopard just looked a bit old. The squared off buttons for example, not sure why that matters to me but they feel better. Safari in Lion is worlds better, in general I'm super content with Lion.

[Brien]

Originally Posted by Salty 

I've had the opposite experience. I've been using Lion since DP2 and back then it was kinda rough. The only thing that's seemed rough or awkward was that Vuze wasn't working ... actually I should check and see if it's working yet. If not uTorrent is fine, though it will mean that I'll have to wait to switch my parents over.

A friend bought an i5 MacBook Pro the other day, and I was setting it up and everything in Snow Leopard just looked a bit old. The squared off buttons for example, not sure why that matters to me but they feel better. Safari in Lion is worlds better, in general I'm super content with Lion.

I've gotta agree. They really seem to have gone through the UI with a fine-toothed come this go around. UI elements that have been untouched in ages have been redrawn, and everything is much slicker due to all of the CoreAnimation work. No scroll bars and rounded bottom window corners, for example, really do make SL look dated.

[freudling]

I like how the pages feel alive and slippery in pretty much everything, including inertial scrolling and the elastic band effect.

Anyone using the Server component which is a separate download?

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Salty 

I've had the opposite experience. I've been using Lion since DP2 and back then it was kinda rough. The only thing that's seemed rough or awkward was that Vuze wasn't working ... actually I should check and see if it's working yet. If not uTorrent is fine, though it will mean that I'll have to wait to switch my parents over.

A friend bought an i5 MacBook Pro the other day, and I was setting it up and everything in Snow Leopard just looked a bit old. The squared off buttons for example, not sure why that matters to me but they feel better. Safari in Lion is worlds better, in general I'm super content with Lion.

Why should anybody switch their parents over to Lion? We're at the point where I'd say that non-savvy users really don't benefit a great deal from OS upgrades.

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

Why should anybody switch their parents over to Lion? We're at the point where I'd say that non-savvy users really don't benefit a great deal from OS upgrades.

Take a gander at Apple's Lion page.

A bunch of features (especially LaunchPad) are aimed specifically at making things easier for people like his parents.

[P]

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot 

Take a gander at Apple's Lion page.

A bunch of features (especially LaunchPad) are aimed specifically at making things easier for people like his parents.

Yes, but the cost of relearning is high enough that it may not be a net benefit. This is the reason interface elements like the Windows explorer still persist.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by P 

Yes, but the cost of relearning is high enough that it may not be a net benefit. This is the reason interface elements like the Windows explorer still persist.

Exactly. To them if it ain't broke, why fix it? For those who don't log an enormous number of computing hours in a day/week, why should they learn something new?

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

Exactly. To them if it ain't broke, why fix it? For those who don't log an enormous number of computing hours in a day/week, why should they learn something new?

Generally, each new version brings a few desirable features. E. g. 10.5 brought Time Machine to my (former) boss' MacBook Pro. Going from 10.5 to 10.6 was relatively painless since nothing really changed for the end user (other than that backups, for instance, were a lot speedier).

Going from 10.5 or 10.6 to Lion will be more noticeable, but I think my father would appreciate full screen mode to write e-mails, for instance.

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

Exactly. To them if it ain't broke, why fix it? For those who don't log an enormous number of computing hours in a day/week, why should they learn something new?

Because for a surprisingly large number of people, the current system IS broken enough to warrant change.

That fact is often enough the reason why people hardly use their machines.

[chabig]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

Exactly. To them if it ain't broke, why fix it? For those who don't log an enormous number of computing hours in a day/week, why should they learn something new?

Just because something isn't "broken" doesn't mean it can't be improved upon.

[turtle777]

Exactly. MS/DOS wasn't broken.

-t

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by chabig 

Just because something isn't "broken" doesn't mean it can't be improved upon.

Exactly.
There were (and in MS' case are) lots of things that could have made a difference to the average end-user: painless backups, for instance, and versions. Those are features that could be vastly improved for 95 % of the users (i. e. those using Windows). Microsoft has the technology for it and if you need to change the UI of the Explorer to do that, then IMO you should definitely do it.

Do you know how much time tech savvy people have to spend answering calls from your proverbial sister `I think I've lost my master's thesis, because I've inadvertently re-installed Windows …' Those are 6-8 hours I'd rather have back.

Another one is cloud integration: Microsoft could integrate all its `cloud' services (e. g. Hotmail and Skydrive) into the OS in a similar way to Apple with iCloud or Google. I'm surprised they haven't done so already, but this is also a feature that could have made a difference to the average user. Perhaps those features will come with Windows 8, we will see.

[besson3c]

I'm not saying that it can't be improved upon, but to many users learning the new and improved way is not worth it if the existing thing they are used to is good enough.

I'm not speaking negatively about Lion, I'm looking forward to it myself, and maybe Salty's parents are different, but if mine are considered normal I really don't see why they ought to care about Lion so long as they can check their email and access websites. My brother has, though, switched them to iPads when they are at their second home. Maybe this better represents my feelings, perhaps your prototypical parents are better suited for iPads than a desktop OS like Lion?