And just as with Final Cut Pro X, the defense "it's a brand-new version" is Apple being treated differently.
It is a complete rewrite not a new version. There is a huge difference here. That really has nothing to do with why Apple is being treated differently, it has more to do with the fact that Apple hasn't done anything to prevent people from using their old versions of iWorks. People have lost nothing here, this is why we defend Apple.
Yes, it was receiving lots of complaints. But the complaints were generally dismissed and are still being dismissed by the Apple defenders. <span style="line-height:1.4em;">Would this happen for any other company?</span>
Of course they are being dismissed as a good portion of them are nonsense.
People need to understand a few things. One of which is that iWorks was a very old software suite built around old APIs in a 32 bit environment. At some point you either need to give up on the suite or rewrite it to support modern APIs and such. By their nature rewrites will have priorities for certain features that may not agree with everybody else's priorities. That doesn't mean that doing a rewrite is wrong or that the priorities where not selected properly. The current iWorks is an example of getting the right features in place to build up the suite on the new infrastructure.
They could have avoided the backlash if they'd just announced that features were missing and were going to be added back in shortly.
What good would that do. If somebodies pet feature goes missing do you really think that every pet feature will eventually get implemented? Raising expectations that you never intend to meet is a bad thing for any company. This is why Apples response is very non specific in saying that some features will come back.
This whole wall of silence maybe no one will notice bull shit does them no good!
That is BS, Apple knows damn well what is and isn't in the suite, if they thought it was a complete replacement for iWorks 9 they would have deleted iWorks 9 with the installation of the current suite. They didn't do that because there are obvious gaps in support. I'm not sure where all this Apple is evil garbage comes from, Apple was very clear about what priorities where stressed in the development of the new version.
I'm one of those disappointed by the new applications. I am disappointed because important features* disappeared from applications that I really like using and they have become incapable of meeting my needs (when previously I always felt they punched above their weight). The disappointment stems from the need to migrate to some new application for the long term, bringing a learning curve and migration work for existing and long-lived documents.
So I was pleased to see this announcement. But... looking at the examples from Apple for both Pages and Numbers, they all (with 1 possible exception) seem to be about the way in which you produce the document, not the document's actual content. If that's correct, then this isn't really any help Can anyone offer a more optimistic interpretation?
*An example that's far from trivial is double-sided documents in Pages. To produce these for print you need to be able to set mirror-image alternate page margins (to provide gutters for the binding) and two-page spread display for document design. As far as I can see, both of these have disappeared.
Unless you deleted iwork 09 from your mac it's still there. If you just bought a new Mac grab a copy of iWork off of eBay or amazon. Simple
People should not have to do these workarounds - it's Apple, it should "just work". I bought a new MBA for my wife (she's a writer) and the time machine backup dumped iWork 09. Sure enough, a crap load of her work didn't port nicely.
Now OK, I was able to resolve it easily by dragging the TM file manually and re-associating all of her saved docs with the old version. But should I have to?
I told a white lie before... she won't be going to Office (I use it for work though), she bought Scrivener - but I imagine won't go back to iWork. This is a real person, a real Mac person (since 1988), a writer, an iPhone and iPad user... a typical Apple demographic. Not some whiny twerp. I think this is a misstep on Apple's part, and I'm not sure why it's defended.
IMO - if they are putting these things back in in six months... they should have just waited.
Apple... you can seem so encorrigible sometimes.
I wouldn't expect all of the features in there in 6 months or even a year, but they will start adding them as they can along the lowest-common-denominator. This is the way to go, I only wish they would have realized this sooner.
Again, if one doesn't like it it's not like they removed iWork '09 app so what people are really complaining about are having more options, which is silly.
Now OK, I was able to resolve it easily by dragging the TM file manually and re-associating all of her saved docs with the old version. But should I have to?
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...
But Apple did not remove the previous version. It removed the old version to a separate folder.
I am disappointed because important features* disappeared from applications that I really like using and they have become incapable of meeting my needs (when previously I always felt they punched above their weight).
Exactly my point when it was released - they made it so all versions have feature-parity; and for that to happen a complete rewrite had to take place.
When "feature parity" is announced and a higher number version is shipped, normal people will expect that features missing from one version will be added, not that the better featured product will be gutted.
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...
But they didn't remove iWork '09. The old versions remain on the machine that you can still use.
The part about this that sucks is that these newer versions have SOME features that I want, but are missing features that the old version has. Yes, they are working on it, but now I've got to deal with TWO different softwares that are only marginally compatible with each other.
I get that this version is a complete re-write. But what happened (and is common in the software world) is that the software was released before it was complete. Now, if this was a brand new title, it wouldn't be as big of a deal, as new features can be added as improvements. But a re-write that comes out with less features doesn't make people happy. It doesn't mean the new software isn't functional, or have amazing growth potential as better software in the future, it's just a temporary step sideways.
Had Apple simply created a new identity for the software, they may have avoided the backlash, but the iWork suite names are already gaining traction in the market. Apple had to decide if the name was worth more than the backlash they would receive with this release. For new iWork users, it's better to get out this functional software as soon as possible. Old users can continue to use iWork 09 for a while yet until iWork2 is ready for prime time.
This pretty much reflects the transition we saw from OS9 to OSX. When OSX first hit the scene, it was barely usable, and now, it blows away anything that OS9 had to offer.
So many utterly irrational, sensational posts in this thread completely devoid of facts, context, or history.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TeaEarleGreyHot
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)
Yeah, it was another manufactured "fiasco", just like the maps "debacle". Creating completely new versions of iWork, with 100% file compatibility and syncing between 3 completely different platforms, while leaving the current version available. What a fiasco.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haggar
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?
If you honestly think rewriting such large pieces of software from scratch, developed for complete compatibility between the web, iOS, and OSX, will have EVERY damn feature of the old desktop-only version ready at launch, and this is feasible and realistic, then you live in an imaginary world.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zoolook
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...
What the **** are you talking about? The installer makes a point not to touch iWork09. It's still all there, unless you manually deleted it. These posts make me wonder if people like you actually own Macs, or are simply jumping on the bandwagon to troll. What you're stating has no basis in fact. Anyone that wanted to continue working in iWork09 could have done so with no issues whatsoever.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haggar
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.
Yes, you're so right. Because clearly Apple planned to completely discontinue development of iWork instantly after launch, and disband the entire iWork development team right then and there, with no future development planned whatsoever. How astute you must be. Any rational individual can see that was announced was obviously on the development timetable.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan
And Steve Jobs said Apple was a software company.
Please point me to a time where Apple had better/more reliable/more powerful software than they have now? I've been using Apple products for a while, and I certainly can't think of one.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pepechin
And, by the way.... who's the genius at Apple that is seriously thinking in parity between OSX-iOS versions?. Trying to use old Pages 09 power in the only-one-app little iPad screen is simply ridiculous.
No, you're right, in this day and age, NOBODY wants parity between mobile and desktop platforms, thats just crazy talk. I mean, who owns a table and/or smartphones, and/or a laptop these days, and would benefit from the same software suite behaving nicely between all devices? Such an insane scenario, right? Oh, and you might mock the use of Pages, etc on an iPad, but that doesnt mean millions of people don't use it to create or edit documents. And no, it's nowhere near ridiculous. Not everyone needs multiple windows visible all at once when writing/editing a document. Try to look beyond your own nose. iPad is being billed as a creation device, and I don't know what is more valuable than ensuring compatibility of these creations with other platforms.
Quote:
Originally Posted by manfrommars
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.
Apple never "yanked" anything. It simply prioritized what it wanted to add across all platforms while recreating the apps from scratch. But yeah, returning fucntionality is COMPLETELY new. It didn't happen with the new Final Cut X. Or Logic Pro. Or iMovie. No, that must have been in another, fictional world.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pondosinatra
And they removed them in the first place why????
Nothing was "removed" You seem to not comprehend the 1st thing about development, especially developing something completely new. You can't just "copy and paste" all the features back in there. Oh, and iWork09 is still present on your Mac, I assure you. Nothing was retro-actively "removed" from that either.
I'm all for constructive critisism, but seriously some of the things being spouted are just mind-numbing, especially when people try to present a narrative of Apple destroying their livelihoods/etc whatever after every new product. The new iWork doesn't suit your needs yet? Ignore it for now- absolutely nothing will change in your workflow. Meanwhile, millions of other "non-power" users will enjoy the benefits (of which there are many) of this new iWork, especially 100% compatibility, collaboration features, and increased useability in many areas.
But they didn't remove iWork '09. The old versions remain on the machine that you can still use.
The part about this that sucks is that these newer versions have SOME features that I want, but are missing features that the old version has. Yes, they are working on it, but now I've got to deal with TWO different softwares that are only marginally compatible with each other.
I get that this version is a complete re-write. But what happened (and is common in the software world) is that the software was released before it was complete. Now, if this was a brand new title, it wouldn't be as big of a deal, as new features can be added as improvements. But a re-write that comes out with less features doesn't make people happy. It doesn't mean the new software isn't functional, or have amazing growth potential as better software in the future, it's just a temporary step sideways.
Had Apple simply created a new identity for the software, they may have avoided the backlash, but the iWork suite names are already gaining traction in the market. Apple had to decide if the name was worth more than the backlash they would receive with this release. For new iWork users, it's better to get out this functional software as soon as possible. Old users can continue to use iWork 09 for a while yet until iWork2 is ready for prime time.
This pretty much reflects the transition we saw from OS9 to OSX. When OSX first hit the scene, it was barely usable, and now, it blows away anything that OS9 had to offer.
When electing to drop Carbon as a programming environment, Apple was forced to rewrite all of its Apps. It gave it the opportunity to rework the foundation of all its apps, but it came at the expense of the new apps not having all the features that took many releases to include.
This is true and has been said repeatedly. However, for an entire class of users, it does not help.
Today, I can use iWork '09 just like I did yesterday. But, in 3 years time, how much sympathy will you (or anyone) have for me when I say that my 3 years obsolete application no longer works on OS X 10.12? So, if I have documents (or templates or processes) that are long-lived then they have to be migrated to some other application or they will, at some arbitrary point in the future chosen by someone else, stop working. For some users that's just not acceptable. If it's just a letter to send tomorrow then it doesn't matter, if it's long-lived then it does matter (and guess which is likely to be the most complex).
And to repeat, I'm not upset because iWork isn't very good, I'm upset because it used to be so good! For example, I have used MS Word extensively for years and it stinks compared to Pages. But the latest Pages version is hobbled and I hope Apple fix that. Or perhaps it was wrong to assume that Pages could ever compete with Word.
Comments
Of course they are being dismissed as a good portion of them are nonsense.
People need to understand a few things. One of which is that iWorks was a very old software suite built around old APIs in a 32 bit environment. At some point you either need to give up on the suite or rewrite it to support modern APIs and such. By their nature rewrites will have priorities for certain features that may not agree with everybody else's priorities. That doesn't mean that doing a rewrite is wrong or that the priorities where not selected properly. The current iWorks is an example of getting the right features in place to build up the suite on the new infrastructure.
ummm they did have a beta phase.
Really, can you link to a time where anyone had access to iWork 13 Beta?
That is BS, Apple knows damn well what is and isn't in the suite, if they thought it was a complete replacement for iWorks 9 they would have deleted iWorks 9 with the installation of the current suite. They didn't do that because there are obvious gaps in support. I'm not sure where all this Apple is evil garbage comes from, Apple was very clear about what priorities where stressed in the development of the new version.
I'm one of those disappointed by the new applications. I am disappointed because important features* disappeared from applications that I really like using and they have become incapable of meeting my needs (when previously I always felt they punched above their weight). The disappointment stems from the need to migrate to some new application for the long term, bringing a learning curve and migration work for existing and long-lived documents.
So I was pleased to see this announcement. But... looking at the examples from Apple for both Pages and Numbers, they all (with 1 possible exception) seem to be about the way in which you produce the document, not the document's actual content. If that's correct, then this isn't really any help
Can anyone offer a more optimistic interpretation?
*An example that's far from trivial is double-sided documents in Pages. To produce these for print you need to be able to set mirror-image alternate page margins (to provide gutters for the binding) and two-page spread display for document design. As far as I can see, both of these have disappeared.
Unless you deleted iwork 09 from your mac it's still there. If you just bought a new Mac grab a copy of iWork off of eBay or amazon. Simple
People should not have to do these workarounds - it's Apple, it should "just work". I bought a new MBA for my wife (she's a writer) and the time machine backup dumped iWork 09. Sure enough, a crap load of her work didn't port nicely.
Now OK, I was able to resolve it easily by dragging the TM file manually and re-associating all of her saved docs with the old version. But should I have to?
I told a white lie before... she won't be going to Office (I use it for work though), she bought Scrivener - but I imagine won't go back to iWork. This is a real person, a real Mac person (since 1988), a writer, an iPhone and iPad user... a typical Apple demographic. Not some whiny twerp. I think this is a misstep on Apple's part, and I'm not sure why it's defended.
Exactly my point when it was released - they made it so all versions have feature-parity; and for that to happen a complete rewrite had to take place.
Did you mean 'feature-less' parity.IMO - if they are putting these things back in in six months... they should have just waited.
Apple... you can seem so encorrigible sometimes.
I wouldn't expect all of the features in there in 6 months or even a year, but they will start adding them as they can along the lowest-common-denominator. This is the way to go, I only wish they would have realized this sooner.
Again, if one doesn't like it it's not like they removed iWork '09 app so what people are really complaining about are having more options, which is silly.
Does revert not work?
But Apple did not remove the previous version. It removed the old version to a separate folder.
No features were removed from iWork '09.
When "feature parity" is announced and a higher number version is shipped, normal people will expect that features missing from one version will be added, not that the better featured product will be gutted.
"Numbers is set to regain multi-column sorting"
Wow. Hard to comprehend how that could have been dropped.
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...
But they didn't remove iWork '09. The old versions remain on the machine that you can still use.
The part about this that sucks is that these newer versions have SOME features that I want, but are missing features that the old version has. Yes, they are working on it, but now I've got to deal with TWO different softwares that are only marginally compatible with each other.
I get that this version is a complete re-write. But what happened (and is common in the software world) is that the software was released before it was complete. Now, if this was a brand new title, it wouldn't be as big of a deal, as new features can be added as improvements. But a re-write that comes out with less features doesn't make people happy. It doesn't mean the new software isn't functional, or have amazing growth potential as better software in the future, it's just a temporary step sideways.
Had Apple simply created a new identity for the software, they may have avoided the backlash, but the iWork suite names are already gaining traction in the market. Apple had to decide if the name was worth more than the backlash they would receive with this release. For new iWork users, it's better to get out this functional software as soon as possible. Old users can continue to use iWork 09 for a while yet until iWork2 is ready for prime time.
This pretty much reflects the transition we saw from OS9 to OSX. When OSX first hit the scene, it was barely usable, and now, it blows away anything that OS9 had to offer.
So many utterly irrational, sensational posts in this thread completely devoid of facts, context, or history.
Quote:
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)
Yeah, it was another manufactured "fiasco", just like the maps "debacle". Creating completely new versions of iWork, with 100% file compatibility and syncing between 3 completely different platforms, while leaving the current version available. What a fiasco.
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?
If you honestly think rewriting such large pieces of software from scratch, developed for complete compatibility between the web, iOS, and OSX, will have EVERY damn feature of the old desktop-only version ready at launch, and this is feasible and realistic, then you live in an imaginary world.
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...
What the **** are you talking about? The installer makes a point not to touch iWork09. It's still all there, unless you manually deleted it. These posts make me wonder if people like you actually own Macs, or are simply jumping on the bandwagon to troll. What you're stating has no basis in fact. Anyone that wanted to continue working in iWork09 could have done so with no issues whatsoever.
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.
Yes, you're so right. Because clearly Apple planned to completely discontinue development of iWork instantly after launch, and disband the entire iWork development team right then and there, with no future development planned whatsoever. How astute you must be. Any rational individual can see that was announced was obviously on the development timetable.
And Steve Jobs said Apple was a software company.
Please point me to a time where Apple had better/more reliable/more powerful software than they have now? I've been using Apple products for a while, and I certainly can't think of one.
And, by the way.... who's the genius at Apple that is seriously thinking in parity between OSX-iOS versions?. Trying to use old Pages 09 power in the only-one-app little iPad screen is simply ridiculous.
No, you're right, in this day and age, NOBODY wants parity between mobile and desktop platforms, thats just crazy talk. I mean, who owns a table and/or smartphones, and/or a laptop these days, and would benefit from the same software suite behaving nicely between all devices? Such an insane scenario, right? Oh, and you might mock the use of Pages, etc on an iPad, but that doesnt mean millions of people don't use it to create or edit documents. And no, it's nowhere near ridiculous. Not everyone needs multiple windows visible all at once when writing/editing a document. Try to look beyond your own nose. iPad is being billed as a creation device, and I don't know what is more valuable than ensuring compatibility of these creations with other platforms.
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.
Apple never "yanked" anything. It simply prioritized what it wanted to add across all platforms while recreating the apps from scratch. But yeah, returning fucntionality is COMPLETELY new. It didn't happen with the new Final Cut X. Or Logic Pro. Or iMovie. No, that must have been in another, fictional world.
And they removed them in the first place why????
Nothing was "removed" You seem to not comprehend the 1st thing about development, especially developing something completely new. You can't just "copy and paste" all the features back in there. Oh, and iWork09 is still present on your Mac, I assure you. Nothing was retro-actively "removed" from that either.
I'm all for constructive critisism, but seriously some of the things being spouted are just mind-numbing, especially when people try to present a narrative of Apple destroying their livelihoods/etc whatever after every new product. The new iWork doesn't suit your needs yet? Ignore it for now- absolutely nothing will change in your workflow. Meanwhile, millions of other "non-power" users will enjoy the benefits (of which there are many) of this new iWork, especially 100% compatibility, collaboration features, and increased useability in many areas.
When electing to drop Carbon as a programming environment, Apple was forced to rewrite all of its Apps. It gave it the opportunity to rework the foundation of all its apps, but it came at the expense of the new apps not having all the features that took many releases to include.
No features were removed from iWork '09.
This is true and has been said repeatedly. However, for an entire class of users, it does not help.
Today, I can use iWork '09 just like I did yesterday. But, in 3 years time, how much sympathy will you (or anyone) have for me when I say that my 3 years obsolete application no longer works on OS X 10.12? So, if I have documents (or templates or processes) that are long-lived then they have to be migrated to some other application or they will, at some arbitrary point in the future chosen by someone else, stop working. For some users that's just not acceptable. If it's just a letter to send tomorrow then it doesn't matter, if it's long-lived then it does matter (and guess which is likely to be the most complex).
And to repeat, I'm not upset because iWork isn't very good, I'm upset because it used to be so good! For example, I have used MS Word extensively for years and it stinks compared to Pages. But the latest Pages version is hobbled and I hope Apple fix that. Or perhaps it was wrong to assume that Pages could ever compete with Word.
iWorks '09 was an underpowered mini office suite. People complaining it was perfect must have thought AppleWorks was a complete Office Suite.
It was far from professional level outside of Keynote.