That's an overly simplistic attitude. Your analogy is not applicable in the slightest.
Yes there are some amazing, great advances ... collaboration is awesome for example, cross Apple device support amazing, but yes they dropped some features that will be crucial for many users. Yes I expect those features to come back. It's simply about the time Apple had to get the product ready for the show and tell IMHO.
The fact remains if you have the old versions nothing much has really changed. Beyond that people seem to be up in arms over features I've never used. So you can see where I just don't care about the whining.
As I already posted, I feel Apple might have been better launching them as beta products and keeping the '9 iWork going until '13 was fully up to speed. Then everyone would be happy. It's all about psychology in the end, as a beta folks would use it but also use the previous version when needed,
I don't buy this either. Some people won't use beta software, beyond that iWork on the web was in business for a long time as a beta.
they can do that now all we hear is bitching as folks feel forced to use a product with features they need missing, plus fear '9 won't be there at all soon.
This is the problem though, they aren't forced into anything. This is perhaps the most perplexing part of this whole discussion and is why I have no respect whatsoever for the people crying in their soup over this upgrade.
One can almost predict Apple announcing they will keep '9 available till '13 fully up to speed any day now to calm users down. As a beta that would have been implicit.
Honestly there aren't that many people with valid complaints. Beyond that why would they announce something that already exists. The old versions of iWork didn't go away and In fact where recently updated, most likely to support Mavericks. So given that I'd expect the 09 versions to work for at least a year. Not that that will do Apple a lot of good as that just keeps people from updating their data.
I'd be the first to admit that I'm a bit disappointed with the Numbers upgrade as I was hoping for more capability there. However I see no justification for wailing on Apples forums about how evil the new versions are. Especially when those new versions do deliver things that I wanted.
It's very apparent to me. The roadmap was for cross platform parity. In order to do this, now was the time to bring things down to the common denominator and develop them side by side. It had to be done eventually and bulking up the OS X version wasn't going to make it any easier.
That's your opinion, to which you are certainly entitled. It's not mine, or that of a great many people posting in the Keynote area at Apple. These are mostly people (like me) who use the present version as a basic tool all the time. Deriding criticism of Apple's move as coming from the uninformed, luddites, or Micro$oft trolls is not a useful response. Why it was necessary to replace the functionality of the existing product with a different (and in important respects less functional) product, aimed at a distinct and to some extent different market, continues to elude me.
Even if that did happen, you could have (and still can) use time machine to get the older version back.
That seems hardly optimal because Versions isn't that good of a versioning tool for any moderately complex document. The time machine interface doesn't highlight the differences between two versions (as a diff tool would, for example) so the only way to compare two fifty-page documents is to visually inspect all fifty pages. Consider also the scenario where someone opens a document in Pages 5, notices and accepts some of the changes but doesn't notice the one on page 142 until later? Since versions in an autosave chain are annotated by nothing more than a timestamp, someone would have to remember exactly when he first opened the document with the new Pages. The changes in iWork would have caused fewer headaches had the iWork apps saved to a new file by default instead of overwriting the old one.
You can get the old version for a new machine by using the Migration Assistant when you set the new machine up, or even afterward by dragging the application over File Sharing from the old machine, or a Time Machine backup. Apple will never remove the old version or files. They will always be there.
No, I dont' think this is the way for an organization to acquire legal software for their new hardware. You just can't do that. And if the new hardware isn't replacing something old but rather augmenting the office, you're going to be up the proverbial creek. Unless Apple is continuing to sell iWork'09. But we have a track record on Apple's part of forcing upgrades. For example, nobody is able to use their legally-purchased Appleworks on any hardware bought in the past 6 or so years, because Apple chose to phase it out. As they appear to be doing with iWork. Since Apple cannot be relied upon to provide ongoing stable solutions, we have no choice but to turn to Microsoft (or perhaps an open-source solution).
Unfortunately, software companies come and go as well, so there is no guarantee for the future. I maintain a System 9 Mac for purposes of running legacy software from outfits that are no longer in existence. Similarly, I maintain a Tiger Mac so I can run the best graphics program ever made (Canvas), despite that the founding company folded and the new owner has inexplicably killed off the product. I never expected iWork to be a permanent solution in an evolving world, but I never expected it to be quite so ephemeral as it's turning out to have been.
For the time being, it appears that Apple has gimped Pages. They've gutted it.
This is supposed to be a Word Processing/Page Layout app, but now it has no customizable toolbar, and what appears to be, for example, no flow between text boxes. Just to name a couple of things in a disappointingly long list.
Apple dropped the ball with this one. Hopefully they have some substantial updates in store for it. And if they do, what's puzzling is that they didn't seem to foresee the obvious reaction they'd get *in the meantime*, which I'm guessing they could do without. Might have been a good idea to actually do the app right, *before* release. It's a friggin' page layout app, not an entire operating system. Or a Mapping app. It doesn't require any first-release incubation period.
I miss ClarisWorks. LOL, ancient, I know. But nothing really catastrophically bad was done to the software version to version (in its heyday.)
The dumbing down continues. Did apple learn nothing from the FCX fiasco or are they still too arrogant?
Stop lying, please.
Originally Posted by G13
don't be a dick, brosephine. iwork autosaves.
Of course, this is somehow evil to some people. The fact that software keeps your work from being destroyed is the worst thing since the introduction of USB, forcing people to buy new peripherals, instead of HOW IT SHOULD HAVE ALWAYS BEEN FROM 1976 ON.
Originally Posted by geojohn
Apple doesn't get it. Either backwards compatibility or a file upgrade path are essential for useable and reliable software. Removal of key features is not an "upgrade" but a downgrade.
I’m happy for feature parity. I’m upset that they were stupid enough to remove features to get it. But iWork has always been unable to open newer versions of its files with older versions of the software. You didn’t see anyone whining about it until right now.
How many more messages does Apple need to send to pro users that they cannot rely on their software products over time?
Given that this keeps happening, could it POSSIBLY be that YOU are the one who is wrong and Apple is not? You know, since they keep selling those products, after all?
In this context, why bother making the new trash can Apple Pro? Who is going to buy it and what Apple software will they run, at risk of application and file death down the road?
Once again, did the thought ever enter your mind that you might not be 100% correct and accurate in your assessment here?
iWork/Pages 5 should never have been released as such, but given a different name.
Come off it.
With billions in (overseas) bank accounts, Apple could spend a little more to understand their customers needs and provide reliable software development paths.
Money ? right.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Linguist
But you haven't told me how to get the old ones for a new machine
Buy a copy of iWork ’09. How is that a difficult idea to formulate?
…or what to do when Apple “ installs” the old ones in a future OS X update…
If you don’t have a Time Machine backup, that’s YOUR fault. And they’re not going to do that, first of all. Stop with the FUD.
…why I should buy into the notion that unlike Micr$oft products, my day to day productivity software won’t be seeing any more updates in the future…
I dunno; what in the world gives you that idea in the first place, since Apple has given no such indication thereof?
Originally Posted by TeaEarleGreyHot
…legally-purchased…
Oh, come off it. You want a refund for your decade-old software, do you? Get over it. I bet you’re upset that Safari doesn’t work on your Performa, too. There was absolutely no reason for you to have used this phrase.
Since Apple cannot be relied upon to provide ongoing stable solutions, we have no choice but to turn to Microsoft (or perhaps an open-source solution).
Thanks for the FUD.
I maintain a System 9 Mac for purposes of running legacy software from outfits that are no longer in existence. Similarly, I maintain a Tiger Mac so I can run the best graphics program ever made (Canvas), despite that the founding company folded and the new owner has inexplicably killed off the product.
Beyond that what sort of silly ass university teaches the use of a specific app instead of the art behind the creation of the product. If any thing the students should be exposed to a number of editing tools rather than just one.
I totally agree on that one. The pressure comes from the students though. They are worried whether the tools they learn are "industry standard" and will remain so in the future. I guess a lot of them are after some quick money after graduating. Fair enough. Of course the university is teaching art and design, not software. Still we have to decide how to outfit our studios and what workshops we offer.
Don't get me wrong on Adobe by the way. I remember the faith of FreeHand. It's just that Apple is becoming notorious for cutting to many "loose ends".
Btw. why am I writing this? Because I love working with Apple products and I hope Apple will eventually take these considerations into account.
That seems hardly optimal because Versions isn't that good of a versioning tool for any moderately complex document. The time machine interface doesn't highlight the differences between two versions (as a diff tool would, for example) so the only way to compare two fifty-page documents is to visually inspect all fifty pages. Consider also the scenario where someone opens a document in Pages 5, notices and accepts some of the changes but doesn't notice the one on page 142 until later? Since versions in an autosave chain are annotated by nothing more than a timestamp, someone would have to remember exactly when he first opened the document with the new Pages. The changes in iWork would have caused fewer headaches had the iWork apps saved to a new file by default instead of overwriting the old one.
In the time it took you to complain about timestamps, Time Machine, and requesting that iWork create a new file automatically... you could have searched for "diff tool" and found that there are quite a few on the market to allow your COMPUTER to do the job for you.
I'm not criticising Apple for starting again from scratch and ensuring feature parity with iCloud and iOS as a top priority...these are great things for which they should be commended, but...
If you're going to put out a clearly unfinished product be open and honest about that and don't try to pass it off as an upgrade until it's ready! Call it a beta and people will be much more forgiving and probably even more willing to help in the development process by way of feedback and feature requests.
It's just astonishing to me that it's now the third time in as many years they've made exactly the same mistake, even more so now with the benefit of hindsight regarding the FCP X and Maps fiascos.
Is it that hard for them to say: "We love iWork but sometimes you have to start again and we wanted to make a suite that has feature parity across all your Macs, devices and the web. It's not ready yet but we're offering a free public beta of the new iWork for OS X today and we'd love to work with you to make it the best possible platform to get work done as quickly, easily and fun as possible."
Seriously is that so freaking hard??? Or is that not arrogant enough for Apple these days?
Well said.
Interestingly, for iPhone, Siri was the big new thing not too long ago and a major reason lots of people bought iPhones. It was beta, and only recently became an adult. So it's not that Apple doesn't push out beta software...
<span style="line-height:22px;">Welcome to the world of computers. But y</span>
ou should probably just go back to using a typewriter.
No - I will continue to use Microsoft Office for business purposes because Microsoft does a better (not perfect, but better) job at maintaining backwards compatibility.
The dumbing down continues. Did apple learn nothing from the FCX fiasco or are they still too arrogant?
Hey newbie - if you are going to post in these forums, go get yourself a good education first. When FCP X was released it was actually a complete rewrite and a V1.0 release. The iWork suite is the same. Do you really think that Apple has no development roadmap for these products? Just like FCP, Apple will continue to add functions and apabilities to their products, but without the bloat ala MSFT. In the case of FCP they provide API's for other specialty companies to add functionality and features as well making it a very powerful tool set. These things take time.
The new iWork apps for the Mac, iPages, Keynote and Numbers are buggy. Many users are experiencing crashes when they open the app or open files in the apps. The Support Communities are filled with reports of crashes and with suggestions for resolving the problem, some of which work for some users, while other don't. I've had to learn to remember not to open files from within these apps, but to open them in Finder. Otherwise the app crashes. Too frustrating and not what I expected from Apple.
No - I will continue to use Microsoft Office for business purposes because Microsoft does a better (not perfect, but better) job at maintaining backwards compatibility.
You got that right. Microsoft: The world leader in not looking forward.
The new iWork is a phenomenal piece of garbage. Numbers is too focused on being cute than usable. And now iWork 08 documents are "too old" and can't be used! I was going to jump into iWork/iCloud for mobility, but google has a better product
For the time being, it appears that Apple has gimped Pages. They've gutted it.
This is supposed to be a Word Processing/Page Layout app, but now it has no customizable toolbar, and what appears to be, for example, no flow between text boxes. Just to name a couple of things in a disappointingly long list.
Apple dropped the ball with this one. Hopefully they have some substantial updates in store for it. And if they do, what's puzzling is that they didn't seem to foresee the obvious reaction they'd get *in the meantime*, which I'm guessing they could do without. Might have been a good idea to actually do the app right, *before* release. It's a friggin' page layout app, not an entire operating system. Or a Mapping app. It doesn't require any first-release incubation period.
I miss ClarisWorks. LOL, ancient, I know. But nothing really catastrophically bad was done to the software version to version (in its heyday.)
If they could foresee it, would they care? Sometimes they act like they don't.
I miss Claris Works, too. If the new iWork would have a drawing app...
The new Pages is very buggy, nearly unusable when it comes to creating and grouping objects in the document. Apple needs the same quality control in its software as it has in its hardware. I'm shocked this software was actually released. C'mon Apple. You're better than this. Or are you...?
In the time it took you to complain about timestamps, Time Machine, and requesting that iWork create a new file automatically... you could have searched for "diff tool" and found that there are quite a few on the market to allow your COMPUTER to do the job for you.
Kaleidoscope looks like a nice diff tool, but how does that help an iWork user whose old file versions are hidden away in some opaque database in the root directory? Because that's how the autosaved versions are stored. Does OS X Versions support alternative front-ends?
Comments
LOL, that's harsh ...
Honestly there aren't that many people with valid complaints. Beyond that why would they announce something that already exists. The old versions of iWork didn't go away and In fact where recently updated, most likely to support Mavericks. So given that I'd expect the 09 versions to work for at least a year. Not that that will do Apple a lot of good as that just keeps people from updating their data.
I'd be the first to admit that I'm a bit disappointed with the Numbers upgrade as I was hoping for more capability there. However I see no justification for wailing on Apples forums about how evil the new versions are. Especially when those new versions do deliver things that I wanted.
It's very apparent to me. The roadmap was for cross platform parity. In order to do this, now was the time to bring things down to the common denominator and develop them side by side. It had to be done eventually and bulking up the OS X version wasn't going to make it any easier.
That's your opinion, to which you are certainly entitled. It's not mine, or that of a great many people posting in the Keynote area at Apple. These are mostly people (like me) who use the present version as a basic tool all the time. Deriding criticism of Apple's move as coming from the uninformed, luddites, or Micro$oft trolls is not a useful response. Why it was necessary to replace the functionality of the existing product with a different (and in important respects less functional) product, aimed at a distinct and to some extent different market, continues to elude me.
Even if that did happen, you could have (and still can) use time machine to get the older version back.
That seems hardly optimal because Versions isn't that good of a versioning tool for any moderately complex document. The time machine interface doesn't highlight the differences between two versions (as a diff tool would, for example) so the only way to compare two fifty-page documents is to visually inspect all fifty pages. Consider also the scenario where someone opens a document in Pages 5, notices and accepts some of the changes but doesn't notice the one on page 142 until later? Since versions in an autosave chain are annotated by nothing more than a timestamp, someone would have to remember exactly when he first opened the document with the new Pages. The changes in iWork would have caused fewer headaches had the iWork apps saved to a new file by default instead of overwriting the old one.
You can get the old version for a new machine by using the Migration Assistant when you set the new machine up, or even afterward by dragging the application over File Sharing from the old machine, or a Time Machine backup. Apple will never remove the old version or files. They will always be there.
No, I dont' think this is the way for an organization to acquire legal software for their new hardware. You just can't do that. And if the new hardware isn't replacing something old but rather augmenting the office, you're going to be up the proverbial creek. Unless Apple is continuing to sell iWork'09. But we have a track record on Apple's part of forcing upgrades. For example, nobody is able to use their legally-purchased Appleworks on any hardware bought in the past 6 or so years, because Apple chose to phase it out. As they appear to be doing with iWork. Since Apple cannot be relied upon to provide ongoing stable solutions, we have no choice but to turn to Microsoft (or perhaps an open-source solution).
Unfortunately, software companies come and go as well, so there is no guarantee for the future. I maintain a System 9 Mac for purposes of running legacy software from outfits that are no longer in existence. Similarly, I maintain a Tiger Mac so I can run the best graphics program ever made (Canvas), despite that the founding company folded and the new owner has inexplicably killed off the product. I never expected iWork to be a permanent solution in an evolving world, but I never expected it to be quite so ephemeral as it's turning out to have been.
For the time being, it appears that Apple has gimped Pages. They've gutted it.
This is supposed to be a Word Processing/Page Layout app, but now it has no customizable toolbar, and what appears to be, for example, no flow between text boxes. Just to name a couple of things in a disappointingly long list.
Apple dropped the ball with this one. Hopefully they have some substantial updates in store for it. And if they do, what's puzzling is that they didn't seem to foresee the obvious reaction they'd get *in the meantime*, which I'm guessing they could do without. Might have been a good idea to actually do the app right, *before* release. It's a friggin' page layout app, not an entire operating system. Or a Mapping app. It doesn't require any first-release incubation period.
I miss ClarisWorks. LOL, ancient, I know. But nothing really catastrophically bad was done to the software version to version (in its heyday.)
Stop lying, please.
Of course, this is somehow evil to some people. The fact that software keeps your work from being destroyed is the worst thing since the introduction of USB, forcing people to buy new peripherals, instead of HOW IT SHOULD HAVE ALWAYS BEEN FROM 1976 ON.
I’m happy for feature parity. I’m upset that they were stupid enough to remove features to get it. But iWork has always been unable to open newer versions of its files with older versions of the software. You didn’t see anyone whining about it until right now.
Given that this keeps happening, could it POSSIBLY be that YOU are the one who is wrong and Apple is not? You know, since they keep selling those products, after all?
Once again, did the thought ever enter your mind that you might not be 100% correct and accurate in your assessment here?
Come off it.
Money ? right.
But you haven't told me how to get the old ones for a new machine
Buy a copy of iWork ’09. How is that a difficult idea to formulate?
If you don’t have a Time Machine backup, that’s YOUR fault. And they’re not going to do that, first of all. Stop with the FUD.
I dunno; what in the world gives you that idea in the first place, since Apple has given no such indication thereof?
…legally-purchased…
Oh, come off it. You want a refund for your decade-old software, do you? Get over it. I bet you’re upset that Safari doesn’t work on your Performa, too. There was absolutely no reason for you to have used this phrase.
Thanks for the FUD.
Utter nonsense.
Beyond that what sort of silly ass university teaches the use of a specific app instead of the art behind the creation of the product. If any thing the students should be exposed to a number of editing tools rather than just one.
I totally agree on that one. The pressure comes from the students though. They are worried whether the tools they learn are "industry standard" and will remain so in the future. I guess a lot of them are after some quick money after graduating. Fair enough. Of course the university is teaching art and design, not software. Still we have to decide how to outfit our studios and what workshops we offer.
Don't get me wrong on Adobe by the way. I remember the faith of FreeHand. It's just that Apple is becoming notorious for cutting to many "loose ends".
Btw. why am I writing this? Because I love working with Apple products and I hope Apple will eventually take these considerations into account.
In the time it took you to complain about timestamps, Time Machine, and requesting that iWork create a new file automatically... you could have searched for "diff tool" and found that there are quite a few on the market to allow your COMPUTER to do the job for you.
I personally recommend Kaleidoscope :smokey:
I'm not criticising Apple for starting again from scratch and ensuring feature parity with iCloud and iOS as a top priority...these are great things for which they should be commended, but...
If you're going to put out a clearly unfinished product be open and honest about that and don't try to pass it off as an upgrade until it's ready! Call it a beta and people will be much more forgiving and probably even more willing to help in the development process by way of feedback and feature requests.
It's just astonishing to me that it's now the third time in as many years they've made exactly the same mistake, even more so now with the benefit of hindsight regarding the FCP X and Maps fiascos.
Is it that hard for them to say: "We love iWork but sometimes you have to start again and we wanted to make a suite that has feature parity across all your Macs, devices and the web. It's not ready yet but we're offering a free public beta of the new iWork for OS X today and we'd love to work with you to make it the best possible platform to get work done as quickly, easily and fun as possible."
Seriously is that so freaking hard??? Or is that not arrogant enough for Apple these days?
Well said.
Interestingly, for iPhone, Siri was the big new thing not too long ago and a major reason lots of people bought iPhones. It was beta, and only recently became an adult. So it's not that Apple doesn't push out beta software...
No - I will continue to use Microsoft Office for business purposes because Microsoft does a better (not perfect, but better) job at maintaining backwards compatibility.
Hey newbie - if you are going to post in these forums, go get yourself a good education first. When FCP X was released it was actually a complete rewrite and a V1.0 release. The iWork suite is the same. Do you really think that Apple has no development roadmap for these products? Just like FCP, Apple will continue to add functions and apabilities to their products, but without the bloat ala MSFT. In the case of FCP they provide API's for other specialty companies to add functionality and features as well making it a very powerful tool set. These things take time.
You got that right. Microsoft: The world leader in not looking forward.
God have mercy on the poor souls using iWork in a regulated environment. That would definitely be "worst".
For the time being, it appears that Apple has gimped Pages. They've gutted it.
This is supposed to be a Word Processing/Page Layout app, but now it has no customizable toolbar, and what appears to be, for example, no flow between text boxes. Just to name a couple of things in a disappointingly long list.
Apple dropped the ball with this one. Hopefully they have some substantial updates in store for it. And if they do, what's puzzling is that they didn't seem to foresee the obvious reaction they'd get *in the meantime*, which I'm guessing they could do without. Might have been a good idea to actually do the app right, *before* release. It's a friggin' page layout app, not an entire operating system. Or a Mapping app. It doesn't require any first-release incubation period.
I miss ClarisWorks. LOL, ancient, I know. But nothing really catastrophically bad was done to the software version to version (in its heyday.)
If they could foresee it, would they care? Sometimes they act like they don't.
I miss Claris Works, too. If the new iWork would have a drawing app...
- - - - -
For what it's worth:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/10/28/apples_massive_software_update_fail/
They could do without the media attention. They could do without the fuel for the next stupid Samsung commercial.
In the time it took you to complain about timestamps, Time Machine, and requesting that iWork create a new file automatically... you could have searched for "diff tool" and found that there are quite a few on the market to allow your COMPUTER to do the job for you.
I personally recommend Kaleidoscope
Kaleidoscope looks like a nice diff tool, but how does that help an iWork user whose old file versions are hidden away in some opaque database in the root directory? Because that's how the autosaved versions are stored. Does OS X Versions support alternative front-ends?
No rtf support in Pages? That's huge. Some things can't be handled by TextEdit.