or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac Software › An extensive look at Apple's new iWork.com service
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

An extensive look at Apple's new iWork.com service - Page 2

post #41 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paperdoll View Post

Second, "given a great desktop email client nobody would use webmail?" Are you absolutely retarded? Most people would prefer webmail if the interface was as awesome as gmail. Most peoples experience with webmail are the horrendous interfaces provided by Hotmail, the online version of Outlook, and squirrelmail. Even if something with a gmail interface as available on the desktop I would still use it online for reasons of accessibility and the fact that it saves everything forever.

Actually, I think it's about 50/50 - some people prefer web based mail, and power users prefer email clients with IMAP support. Most people just think email is a web based tool ONLY because that's how they're used to it (gmail, yahoo, hotmail). An email client is weird and unfamiliar, even though for the most part, they're much more flexible and powerful.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Paperdoll View Post

AppleInsider writers need to stop writing this absurd pat-yourself-on-the-back style of writing and get back to real facts and analysis. This stuff is just too self aggrandizing. The road to snow leopard articles were great because they were factual and not full of baseless judgments.

I can pretty much tell when a Prince article comes by just by skimming the first paragraph. His style is so full of hyperbole that it's really sad and completely destroys the actual meaning of the article.
post #42 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave K. View Post

I think this is a waste of time, money, and resources for Apple for a product that has a very limited scope of users. This needs to be integrated into Mac OS X Server or another server application (like Microsoft's Share Point).

People are not going to keep handing money over to Apple for these "services".

That's interesting that you mention Sharepoint. Since when is Sharepoint free? The Sharepoint services that ship with Windows 2003 and 2008 have the cost of the OS license and server hardware. Sharepoint Server is a $10,000+ software solution itself. iWork.com is a bargain especially for SOHOs that don't have the dough or knowledge to set up Sharepoint. Not to mention that the backend of Sharepoint is SQL Server so the complexity has its costs too.

When I heard of iWork.com I immediately thought of Sharepoint as you did. My problem with iWork.com is that it should be integrated in with MobileMe so you could make Sharepoint-like web portals. Maybe they already allow that and I just missed the details. This is a good step for Apple to make in taking on MS and Google.

This move helps Apple side step creating their own RDBMS as with Sharepoint's dependency on SQL Server. I'm interested in what RDBMS Apple uses for the backend of iWork.com. Most likely not MySQL or PostgreSQL. Oracle?
post #43 of 83
1. change the silly "mobileme.com" name!

2. one subscription address for all your online apps.

On a side note:

I was well impressed by the new iPhoto. I can see places and faces being part of the next generation address book! The facebook and flickr integration is very impressive and a way better alternative than sharing your pictures on the mobile me web gallery.

Could it be that the new iPhoto is a small teaser of things to come in Snowleopard? Imagine your address book being updated by your friends on Facebook?! That is, whenever a friend changes his address and contact details on facebook.
post #44 of 83
I used iWork.com today for the first time, and I must say it is very impressive.

It's not trying to do too much, and what it does, it does very well. I was able to get feedback from various people on a 100mb file which is too big to email and few people were interesting in downloading.

iWork.com was a great solution.


As for paying for it, I normally roll my eyes at people who want everything to be free and awesome. I don't mind paying for it.

But for this service, I must admit I don't think I would pay very much. The thing is I don't share docs that much to warrant much of a fee. I think it should be included with mobileme or a fee for people who don't have mobileme.

Finally, there should be corporate bundles. e.g. 20 users for $200 per year, etc.
post #45 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by mr O View Post

..... The facebook and flickr integration is very impressive and a way better alternative than sharing your pictures on the mobile me web gallery.

...

Why is Flickr better than a Mobile Me gallery for you?
post #46 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by Abster2core View Post

Has anybody tried it yet?

I have been using it since yesterday.

First impression. Absolutely beautiful.

Fast. Simple. Fast. Simple.

Tested with one of my staunch 'PC' big pharma client and they were amazed. Sent over a Pages document to comment on and allowed them to downloaded the Word format. They couldn't tell the difference between Pages on screen and the Word file.

Their comment. How the hell did you do it so fast?

Best thing about it, any documents that I am generating are being commented without them getting and messing with the original which can be a dog's breakfast to track. Since there is a perception that everything must be done in Word, so far I have been posting documents in Pages and nobody has noticed any difference. Except, they look better and more professional.

I've been playing with it, too - and I'm liking it. iWork.com is a treat.
post #47 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ed Pummelon View Post

Why is Flickr better than a Mobile Me gallery for you?

Well, both Facebook & Flickr are part of a context, community if you like. A place where people can discover, tag, share and comment. Mobile lonely me is more like an isle.

However, Facebook is alotmore personal than Flickr! And you can fiddle with the privacy settings to share your really personal pictures. Facebook is a great place to share your pictures because it is perfectly integrated with the lives of my friends and beloved ones. And you have the added bonus to find out more about the people tagging your pictures

To summarise. Facebook = friends and beloved ones. Flickr = for those without a facebook account.

Maybe the mobile me picture gallery is a great way to give people access to your hi-res pictures. But first, they have to get to know you. It could work as a link in your facebook profile
post #48 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by mr O View Post

Well, both Facebook & Flickr are part of a context, community if you like. A place where people can discover, tag, share and comment. Mobile lonely me is more like an isle.

However, Facebook is alotmore personal than Flickr! And you can fiddle with the privacy settings to share your really personal pictures. Facebook is a great place to share your pictures because it is perfectly integrated with the lives of my friends and beloved ones. And you have the added bonus to find out more about the people tagging your pictures

To summarise. Facebook = friends and beloved ones. Flickr = for those without a facebook account.

Maybe the mobile me picture gallery is a great way to give people access to your hi-res pictures. But first, they have to get to know you. It could work as a link in your facebook profile

Interesting, thanks
post #49 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ed Pummelon View Post

I couldn't log into the service with my @mac.com address that I still use, I had to change it to @me.com. Anyone else?

My @mac.com works fine.

It will be interesting to see how many responses you get here. Afterall, you need iWorks 09, a .Mac account and the necessary Mac which most of the posters don't even have.
post #50 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

I guess Apple can count on you to pay for the service!

Apple can count on him to pay for anything they slap an Apple logo onto.
post #51 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacTel View Post

That's interesting that you mention Sharepoint. Since when is Sharepoint free? The Sharepoint services that ship with Windows 2003 and 2008 have the cost of the OS license and server hardware. Sharepoint Server is a $10,000+ software solution itself. iWork.com is a bargain especially for SOHOs that don't have the dough or knowledge to set up Sharepoint. Not to mention that the backend of Sharepoint is SQL Server so the complexity has its costs too.

When I heard of iWork.com I immediately thought of Sharepoint as you did. My problem with iWork.com is that it should be integrated in with MobileMe so you could make Sharepoint-like web portals. Maybe they already allow that and I just missed the details. This is a good step for Apple to make in taking on MS and Google.

This move helps Apple side step creating their own RDBMS as with Sharepoint's dependency on SQL Server. I'm interested in what RDBMS Apple uses for the backend of iWork.com. Most likely not MySQL or PostgreSQL. Oracle?

I didn't say Share Point was free. You are right. It is very costly. But it's also significantly more powerful than what iWork.com offers. Microsoft offers Share Point online for about $7 per user.

My point is that I feel Apple is wasting its time and money developing a separate solution. I agree with you and that is at a minimum, it should be included with a MobileMe subscription (I don't think they stated that the price of this service will be on top of fees for a MobileMe subscription -- the impression is that it will be a another fee-based service though). Or as I suggested, bundle this document collaboration functionality into Mac OS X Server so that a small business would have an easier time choosing an Apple-based solutions for their businesses.
post #52 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by Abster2core View Post

Has anybody tried it yet?

I have been using it since yesterday.

First impression. Absolutely beautiful.

Fast. Simple. Fast. Simple.

Tested with one of my staunch 'PC' big pharma client and they were amazed. Sent over a Pages document to comment on and allowed them to downloaded the Word format. They couldn't tell the difference between Pages on screen and the Word file.

Their comment. How the hell did you do it so fast?

Best thing about it, any documents that I am generating are being commented without them getting and messing with the original which can be a dog's breakfast to track. Since there is a perception that everything must be done in Word, so far I have been posting documents in Pages and nobody has noticed any difference. Except, they look better and more professional.

That's pretty cool.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

I guess Apple can count on you to pay for the service!

If it helps to get and keep clients, I don't see the problem. Though it's not totally certain that it's a separate fee. I don't need to do collaboration like that yet, though I am looking for better alignment features than the old version has. Next time I go near an Apple store I'll have to check in and try it out.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mr O View Post

To summarise. Facebook = friends and beloved ones. Flickr = for those without a facebook account.

Depending on the settings, you can use Facebook to show pictures to people without a facebook account. They even provide you with a link to send.
post #53 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by minderbinder View Post

This is a cool idea, but I just don't see how Apple imagines it to be competitive.

Google offers a full web based text editor for free.

Apple offers a web based way to view documents and make notes, with a usage fee (in addition to already buying the full app).

It just doesn't add up to me.

iWork.com is a testing ground so when Mac OS X 10.7 Server is released, businesses will have an iWork server component at their disposal. I am not saying Apple will be making a play for the corporate world, but due to the success of the iPhone, they really can't ignore it.
post #54 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregoriusM

Plus, I can't find Bollox in the dictionary. I can find a word with a different spelling. Are you sure that you have the spelling right, Ireland?

Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of the rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of the rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
post #55 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregoriusM View Post

Plus, I can't find Bollox in the dictionary. I can find a word with a different spelling. Are you sure that you have the spelling right, Ireland?

It's 'bollocks', as in balls, as in testicles
post #56 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by mr O View Post

1. change the silly "mobileme.com" name!

2. one subscription address for all your online apps.

1. Gotta say I agree

2. Hopefully there will be some integration in the future. Seems silly to have to deal with two separate subscription services.
post #57 of 83
How does iwork.com differ from this free service?

http://www.getbackboard.com/
post #58 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by paxman View Post

It's 'bollocks', as in balls, as in testicles

in my dictionary "Bollox" is defined as a cross between Bull "Shat" and Botox... which I find to be an odd combination.
post #59 of 83
I hate this all or nothing. In my case there have been many times I bough a track or album which I found I loved and then bought the real physical CD for perfect sound and package. I'd hate to have to upgrade those. Although I assume I could delete the old downloaded versions from my iTunes. If I did that would they still show up as purchased so I'd have to upgrade? But there are songs I have dowloaded and do want to keep but don't want to have to upgrade. A couple guilty pleasures.
post #60 of 83
I'm with the majority here, who would pay for this? Any group of people that would need to collaborate on a document isn't using iWork. Sounds like the only organization that uses iWork to collaborate is Apple Inc, and I'm sure they get to use the service for free.
post #61 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by jawporta View Post

I'm with the majority here, who would pay for this? Any group of people that would need to collaborate on a document isn't using iWork. Sounds like the only organization that uses iWork to collaborate is Apple Inc, and I'm sure they get to use the service for free.

That why they are doing the beta so they can find what demand there is. There may not be the demand Apple see with their sales numbers so it may eventually get wrapped into MobileMe (which it should at some level regardless).
post #62 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by jawporta View Post

I'm with the majority here, who would pay for this? Any group of people that would need to collaborate on a document isn't using iWork. Sounds like the only organization that uses iWork to collaborate is Apple Inc, and I'm sure they get to use the service for free.

It looks like you're inadvertently presenting it as a chicken and egg problem without seeing it as one. If there aren't many collaboration tools available for iWork, then how are people supposed to collaborate with it?
post #63 of 83
Steve Jobs teased with a response to a criticism of .Mac with something like, "I couldn't agree more, and Apple is working on it..."

So here comes an opportunity to amp up MobileMe with an addition that seems custom made for Mobile Us. I'm Mobile and need to collaborate with others on a particular document...

Seems like a missed opportunity to offer a stronger set of features to MM. And yet another fee, although voluntary. And in this economy, it seems a little greedy.

It could very well be fantastic and a clear value, once it's out of beta. I can't wait to see what 3rd party developers do to copy Apple's approach. Maybe Apple will reverse course and throw it in with MM or iWork purchase.
post #64 of 83
I was hoping this would be a good way to give keynote presentations on a Windows PC, because there is no keynote player for Windows and Powerpoint exporting isn't perfect. Unfortunately, "viewing" documents in iwork.com doesn't currently include presenting. Hopefully that will come.

Another thought: This is eventually going to be heavily linked in to iPhone. Apple will push this as the way to share docs between iphones and computers.
post #65 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ireland View Post

Yeah, you can even see his face in the badly blurred out image. He's Dan. He's the main editor, and the contributing editor here lol. He's also the secretary and works part time in the cloakroom @ the weekends

I don't know any inside information but I always assumed that "Prince McClean" was actually Daniel but with editing "help" or oversight. The articles he produces here are a little less, um .. enthusiastic? It feels like someone has gone over one of his Roughly Drafted articles and taken out all (or most) of the emotionally based parts and toned down the rhetoric a bit. If "Prince McClean" 100% Dan then he is doing an excellent job of editing himself IMO.
In Windows, a window can be a document, it can be an application, or it can be a window that contains other documents or applications. Theres just no consistency. Its just a big grab bag of monkey...
Reply
In Windows, a window can be a document, it can be an application, or it can be a window that contains other documents or applications. Theres just no consistency. Its just a big grab bag of monkey...
Reply
post #66 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by mr O View Post

Well, both Facebook & Flickr are part of a context, community if you like. A place where people can discover, tag, share and comment. Mobile lonely me is more like an isle....

Wow, I've been saying this for ages. Nice to hear it from someone else.

"Community" is the biggest thing missing from MobileMe IMO.
(and probably from Apple in general too).
In Windows, a window can be a document, it can be an application, or it can be a window that contains other documents or applications. Theres just no consistency. Its just a big grab bag of monkey...
Reply
In Windows, a window can be a document, it can be an application, or it can be a window that contains other documents or applications. Theres just no consistency. Its just a big grab bag of monkey...
Reply
post #67 of 83
design a Keynote presentation on my computer, place in on iWork.com with all my fonts and run with slide transitions from a PC, I'm definitely on board.

At my job, our creative department uses Macs, but everyone else uses PC's. I always get stuck designing presentations in PowerPoint and have to use Arial font so it will be compatible with their computers.

It blows people away when they see Keynote presentation, but it's worthless unless I present it on my Mac which isn't always an option.
post #68 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by rorober View Post

design a Keynote presentation on my computer, place in on iWork.com with all my fonts and run with slide transitions from a PC, I'm definitely on board.

At my job, our creative department uses Macs, but everyone else uses PC's. I always get stuck designing presentations in PowerPoint and have to use Arial font so it will be compatible with their computers.

It blows people away when they see Keynote presentation, but it's worthless unless I present it on my Mac which isn't always an option.

Unfortunately you can't do that - see my post a few above yours. I imagine it would be difficult to get all the cool effects, but at least it should be possible to do simple presentations. I personally avoid anything fancier than "Appear" anyway.
post #69 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by rorober View Post

design a Keynote presentation on my computer, place in on iWork.com with all my fonts and run with slide transitions from a PC, I'm definitely on board.

At my job, our creative department uses Macs, but everyone else uses PC's. I always get stuck designing presentations in PowerPoint and have to use Arial font so it will be compatible with their computers.

It blows people away when they see Keynote presentation, but it's worthless unless I present it on my Mac which isn't always an option.

Best way I found was to save the Keynote presentation in QuickTime
post #70 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ireland View Post

Hello Dan!

I think it's an oversight that there's no iWork.com landing page. There should be one just like there is for me.com A stupid oversight on Apple's part. They could add a "buy now" button on the page for iWork '09 if they must. Sometimes you can't help but just wonder with Apple. Ridiculo-so!

publish.iwork.com
post #71 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

Apple's new iWork.com service lifts one of the biggest obstacles facing its iWork office productivity suite by making it easier for iWork users to collaborate with others using Windows PC and Microsoft Office. Here's a first look at how the service works and what it does.

If this is included in the cost of iWork then they have a powerful incentive to dump windows/office. The ability to interact with office users without pain is a godsend. The ability to drop windows/office all together is even better.
Charging for it as a separate service would be a great disappointment.
Folks are not interested in being simply milked..
AV
post #72 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amavida View Post

If this is included in the cost of iWork then they have a powerful incentive to dump windows/office. The ability to interact with office users without pain is a godsend. The ability to drop windows/office all together is even better.
Charging for it as a separate service would be a great disappointment.
Folks are not interested in being simply milked..
AV

Let me get this straight.

You think that a software company should host up to a GB of your materials on their servers for up to 4 months so that others could view and comment on them for free.

In addition, let people view your materials without having to have the fonts on their computers that you used in your creation.

As well, let viewers download copies of your materials in the application you created them on, as a pdf or in a competitive program of their choice.

And if they don't do all this for 3 programs that cost you $26.33 each for free, you are being milked.

Sounds like you don' mind yanking a few teats.
post #73 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by Abster2core View Post

Let me get this straight.

You think that a software company should host up to a GB of your materials on their servers for up to 4 months so that others could view and comment on them for free.

In addition, let people view your materials without having to have the fonts on their computers that you used in your creation.

As well, let viewers download copies of your materials in the application you created them on, as a pdf or in a competitive program of their choice.

And if they don't do all this for 3 programs that cost you $26.33 each for free, you are being milked.

Sounds like you don' mind yanking a few teats.

So you would pay extra for a service that lets you do these things? If so, my guess is that you're in a very small minority. Even Apple doesn't think people will pay for this right now. It's just barely more convenient than putting files on a server somewhere, or even just emailing.
post #74 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by BRussell View Post

So you would pay extra for a service that lets you do these things? If so, my guess is that you're in a very small minority. Even Apple doesn't think people will pay for this right now. It's just barely more convenient than putting files on a server somewhere, or even just emailing.

Only those with the most myopic of vision cannot see the trajectory that iWork.com is on. Apple's going to get thousands of people using iWork.com and getting familiar. They may expose editing online eventually during the free beta but I'm willing to bet cold hard ducats that Apple is going to enable editing from the get go in the paid version.

They're being pragmatic about iwork.com. Let people beta test it and let the infrastructure grow underneath before tossing in all of the features. Come on we all know collaboration tools have to be better than simply viewing a document and adding tracked changes. Hell Adobe Reader does that in conjunction with Acrobat Pro.

Apple needs and will likely extend iWork.com and iWork '09 to support the ability to fire up iWork and pull down the iWork.com changes without having to download the entire file again.

This will likely be exposed in a point release update for the suite prior to going live with the editing features.

iWork.com for $$$ is going to be much more featured than the iWork.com we see today. Apple is not stupid though the Apple press likes to feign stupidity for the sake of cranking out another article to generate add revenue.
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
post #75 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmurchison View Post

Only those with the most myopic of vision cannot see the trajectory that iWork.com is on. Apple's going to get thousands of people using iWork.com and getting familiar. They may expose editing online eventually during the free beta but I'm willing to bet cold hard ducats that Apple is going to enable editing from the get go in the paid version.

Can't agree.

For those of us who made a living writing which involved input by others, and particularly when the composition had to be passed through more than a couple of people, the best format started with triple spaced hard copy, identifiable proofing pens (i.e., different colors), and a lot of patience.

The idea that sending out a manuscript and allowing others to change the copy is fraught with danger, i.e., whose edit supersedes another, who determines a change is correct and supported, who determines the final change and who keeps records of all the changes and where as it floats through space. Remember, the author is the usually the person that has the responsibility to accept, reject or incorporate an idea, a change or a correction.

As the adage goes, the more choices, the longer it takes to make a decision.

If we think about it, iWork.com is basically the way that we have passed along most of our documents for proofing, editing and approval, i.e., viewers simply highlight the copy in question and make their mark, beit a spelling or grammatical correction, a recommendation or suggestion re content or a deletion via on a post-it note. Each, identifying the proof-reader and thus making the author's decision to accept or reject the proposed alteration easier. Just like the origninal concept that underlines the basic principle of the Mac–keeping it simple stupid.

For those that feel otherwise, they can still download the original copy in their favorite application, do their dirty work and send it back for the author to cross-check it line-by line with other returns.

Either way, the process of sharing it with others is significantly faster, easier and safer than opening up your email program, attaching the file and then sending it; and remember, just how many times we have sent or received email with missing attachments?

Now with iWork.com, being notified of a 'change' can be immediate. Speeding up the decision process easier, faster and even faster than ever before.

I would suggest to that those that can, try it. I have been using it since day one, and man, it works beautifully. Uf anything else, it gives me another reason why I like MobileMe. Speaking of which, I am predicting that the fee for iWork.com will be nominal, and if any, a small incremental upcharge to those who subscribe to MobileMe.
post #76 of 83
In re-reading my message I don't think I articulated my point very well. let me add some clarification.

Editing :

I don't believe that everyone should get the right to actually edit the document whereby the document is modified on the spot.

I think the more accurate description would be.
  1. Document originator completes rough draft and publishes to iwork.com
  2. Those with permissions to view and markup document add their markups
  3. The original document is "linked" to this only version. It can be refreshed at anytime to see the most recent markups.
  4. The document originator can then accept/reject changes right from the desktop and have all changes merged back to the desktop without the need to download the file again

I think Apple is going down this path and with the linked documents feature in iWork the next step is simply to add this sort of linking to the published version of docs on iwork.com.
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
post #77 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmurchison View Post

In re-reading my message I don't think I articulated my point very well. let me add some clarification.

Editing :

I don't believe that everyone should get the right to actually edit the document whereby the document is modified on the spot.

I think your suggestion would be a useful addition to the collaboration concept. But I don't see why multiple people can't add to the document itself if the document originator so chooses. Right now, Google Docs offers a chance to invite people as viewers or collaborators. I can't tell if the "viewers" can add notes or suggestions or not.
post #78 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by BRussell View Post

So you would pay extra for a service that lets you do these things? If so, my guess is that you're in a very small minority. Even Apple doesn't think people will pay for this right now. It's just barely more convenient than putting files on a server somewhere, or even just emailing.

But it's labeled as a beta project. I don't remember Apple ever charging for what they label a beta.

I think you're also being blind to the features and capabilities they are offering. It does offer this controlled mark-up ability (where others can't just change the base document itself) which was only a feature for Acrobat and other programs costing twice what iWork costs or more. Being able to project this capability to people that don't have iWork or a Mac has value too.
post #79 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmurchison View Post

In re-reading my message I don't think I articulated my point very well. let me add some clarification.

Editing :

I don't believe that everyone should get the right to actually edit the document whereby the document is modified on the spot.

I think the more accurate description would be.
  1. Document originator completes rough draft and publishes to iwork.com
  2. Those with permissions to view and markup document add their markups
  3. The original document is "linked" to this only version. It can be refreshed at anytime to see the most recent markups.
  4. The document originator can then accept/reject changes right from the desktop and have all changes merged back to the desktop without the need to download the file again

I think Apple is going down this path and with the linked documents feature in iWork the next step is simply to add this sort of linking to the published version of docs on iwork.com.

You in fact can do that now via file sharing, which would be 'live'.

The primary problem that I envisage with your procedure, is that the changes can get lost in the translation.

Word, as you know, has a great way to follow a proofing. However, I would bet the farm that many don't use it, know how to use, and if anything, know how to save 'Versions". In addition, reviewing changes in Word can be daunting. Accepting a change only to want to return to the original can be exceptionally difficult and time consuming.

Having a electronic document that someone has edited with post-it notes is virtually a hard-copy markup that much like the old days is faster and easier to notice, read and understand.

As most of us in the agency business has evidenced, proofing an add or editorial on a computer screen is suicide. Best to make a hard copy.
post #80 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

But it's labeled as a beta project. I don't remember Apple ever charging for what they label a beta.

Apple hasn't offered public betas very often at all, let alone charge for them. The difference here is that they've announced that they will soon be charging for this service. Maybe a few people like abster2core will pay for it, but I imagine it will be an exceedingly small number. The number of people who need a collaborative writing tool is already small, and the fraction of those people who will see this as a solution is far smaller still.

But I'd be all for a great service that only a few people use. Unfortunately it's barely better than simply emailing or file-sharing documents and getting suggestions back via email, and nowhere near as powerful as google's and others' free services. I'm working on collaborative papers all the time, and I can't imagine ever using this, let alone paying for it.

If they improve it significantly in the future, great - we can talk about it then.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Mac Software
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac Software › An extensive look at Apple's new iWork.com service