Just read this article, and it's a fascinating read. I had no idea that Versions worked that way. On the one hand, I can see why Apple did it this way -- it makes sense for most Document-based applications. But they didn't think about apps which both work on and manage
multiple documents or pieces of documents (mainly I guess because they weren't counting on there being too many of those!) So despite my bitching (in another thread) about Scrivener not supporting Lion's nifty new features, I suppose there's a darned good reason after all that it doesn't! In fact, now I'm actually glad
that it doesn't! The current system that Scrivener uses is just fine, really, when I sit and think about it . . . I would much rather have a fast-loading, fast-acting Scrivener that can handle oodles of data, rather than a hobbled Scrivener chained to Lion's autosave and Versioning features, regardless of how cool I think they are in other programs.
This article is indicative of the fact that the developer truly does care about his users (unlike a lot of others, sadly), and the support ticket with Apple shows that he truly does care about making the best product out there. I hope Apple responds in a timely fashion, and I do hope the issue can be resolved; but if it can't, like I said, I'll take Scrivener doing things the "old fashioned way" to a Scrivener that does things the "new-fangled" way but gets hobbled in the process. Thus, I hereby recant my feature request!