Not sure how long it's been live, but if you visit the Apple Support article mentioned, at the bottom is states:
ash471 wrote: »
I don't understand why they didn't clearly communicate this when they released the new version. They should have given power user's the heads up and/or had a beta phase. Duh. It isn't as if they haven't been through this before.
teaearlegreyhot wrote: »
In my opinion, the iWork'13 rollout was a fiasco of grander proprortions than last year's iOS Maps debacle (http://www.apple.com/letter-from-tim-cook-on-maps/). I wonder who Tim will fire over this? Richard Williamson is already gone....
(edited to correct ex-employee name)
mike eggleston wrote: »
I think everyone is missing the big reason why they did this. They are not just doing iWork for Mac and iOS, but also for the Web.
I can tell you first hand, doing any kind of editing of text, especially Rich Text, is not an easy thing to do on the web. I look at it this way, they are making this to be a direct competitor to Google and their Web Apps. If they continue to add these features that people are wanting to all three platforms of iWork, this is going to be the de facto office application, even over Microsoft Office.
Yes, it is bare now, but be patient, continue submitting feature requests, and it will get there.
What's the issue here? Apple did not overwrite the old versions. They created a "new" iWork and set it alongside the old one. If the new one didn't do the trick for you, no problem; use the old one.
Possible courses of action for Apple are to:
1. Delay the launch so that you have have a feature-complete app with feature parity to meet the needs of 10% of the market.
2. During the announcements state that it's not as feature-complete as '09.
3. Just let it roll and deal with the 10%.
#3 is the only right answer. They could probably have helped a bit by having a "migrating from iWork '09" message when you start iWork or when you import an older document. Surely there could have been a way to phrase it such that it would not freak out the 90% for the benefit of the 10%.
zoolook wrote: »
I am fine with them taking this approach, like they did with FCP. I am not fine with them removing iWork '09 and all traces and support of it, until they close the gap. They want people to use their software (which I do) but then I become dependent upon it and hit issues when the functionality vanishes. Back to Office 2011 for 6 months then I guess...
Because they wanted to see what they could get away with before having to respond? If nobody complains, then Apple would assume that they don't need to do anything else.
It is called a calculated risk. Or better, a calculated play. They a) wanted to get the software out b) had reached full x-platform compatibility c) had completed the interface overhaul (always a work in progress), d) knew they would please the vast majority of users. e) had a plan in place to restore lost features.
I suspect a fair bit of denial was at play, however. I think Apple is prone to that. It would have been easy to circumvent the wave of frustration and disappointment that has followed the release with a little bit of humility and most of all, communication.
He's the one Eddy Cue is said to have fired because of Maps.
christopher126 wrote: »
I would rather have cross platform capabilities as opposed to "power" user capabilities...
<p style="margin-bottom:.7em;margin-left:0px;margin-right:0px;margin-top:0px;">I would use iWork '09 to make rather elaborate charts for my real estate listings...I spent too much time to make them look pretty.</p>
<p style="margin-bottom:.7em;margin-left:0px;margin-right:0px;margin-top:0px;">When I got my iPad I redesigned the charts to be more simple so I could update them on my iPad. In doing so, it suddenly dawned on me that the more simple approach to my work flow was the way to go. I now achieve the same results with a lot less time and effort. And anything I can do on my iPad is more fun than on my iMac.</p>
<p style="margin-bottom:.7em;margin-left:0px;margin-right:0px;margin-top:0px;">I know this does not apply to power users, but I like Apple's approach. The ability to do my work on my mobile devices is the best! </p>
quadra 610 wrote: »
But Joe Average doesn't know or "get" why "feature parity" is significant. All they know is that it went from "it just works" to "WTF??"
This "feature parity" stuff was never even announced.
Not very user-centric, which is what Apple is supposed (and expected) to be. Part of the Apple Experience is that things are supposed to appear and behave in obvious, expected and efficient ways. The new iWork rollout was anything but.
haggar wrote: »
If any other company released "updated" versions of their applications with so many missing features, everyone here would ridicule them for rushing premature software out the door. Why is Apple treated differently in this case?
manfrommars wrote: »
Apple yanking features and telling its customers to suck it is nothing new. But Apple admitting the omissions and deciding to return the functionality? This is very new indeed.
Oh come on guys, seriously?
This behaviour is exactly Apple-like. Any statement containing "expected" is certainly not Apple-like.
We all know this from the recent transition to FCP X but also form other transitions in the past, such as the transition to Intel or even the transition to OS X. Sure, there were few big native Intel apps in the beginning and sure, there were few native OS X apps in the beginning. And that's why people kept on using the old system and that's why there was Rosetta, that's why there was the old version of FCP and that's why the old versions of iWork remained on your hard drives.
That's how Apple does things, something slightly on the radical side, but rarely in such a way as to completely abandon its users. Most of the times this results in better products in the future.
Considering that exporting and reverting to the old file format is that easy, there is really no problem whatsoever, since people can keep on using the old versions until the new ones get the features people are missing that much.
However, also consider the bigger picture: iWork, while being fantastic had a limited audience. Those were paid apps, they didn't always exist on iOS nor in iCloud and they were an inconsistent mess.
With iOS 7, new iPhones and new iPads, as well as the move to make those apps free, Apple needed to do something about this state of affairs. iWorks audience will tenfold suddenly, because everyone buying a new device will get this software. Having a consistent and compatible experience across platforms and the browser is important and appealing, even if some power users won't be satisfied immediately. And let's be honest here, whomever didn't know the old iWork, will probably get going with the new one without missing anything, unless you're a total MS Office power user.