Copying a file so as to get intermediate drafts is an inferior solution to proper versioning, as any developer using a version control system will tell you (mor

Copying a file so as to get intermediate drafts is an inferior solution to proper versioning, as any developer using a version control system will tell you (moreso if, like me, they started programming before VCSs were a widely used industry standard). I agree proprietary lock-in is a pain and a huge risk, but I'm talking about fundamental storage models here, not particular implementations (where the problem is lack of interoperability, not the storage model; a proprietary file system doesn't create lock-in, because there are open standards to get your data out of it). The best content storage model for end users I've seen is the wiki, where you get content versioning for free, although it doesn't separate storage from publication. A wiki where you could keep local separate branches of content would be ideal, but a.f.a.i.k. the only wiki system using that model (shareable local copies) is the Smallest Federated Wiki[1], and it hasn't gained much tracktion. [1] https://github.com/WardCunningham/Smallest-Federated-Wiki https://github.com/WardCunningham/Smallest-Federated-Wiki > And asking the user if he really wants to save the file is probably just a good idea. If he ignores the message and throws away some work, he has learned a valuable lesson See, that's the kind of comment explaining why users secretly (or openly!) hate computers and think they go after them. Too many developers creating their software are actively disrespecting user's work and their time, even decades after human-computer interaction specialists found the best practices for caring about the user and making their life easier.