From what I can glean reading many threads on this subject, the definition of a "Pages Power User" seems to be someone who wants to link two text boxes or do more than write a letter to someone. Pages seems to be viewed as only slightly more capable than TextEdit with no real insight into what many people actually use it for.
Reading the postings on the Apple discussion forums it's clear that there are many small-scale businesses and self-employed people that have incorporated iWork successfully over years as part of their daily workflow (despite rgh71's view) and are understandably appalled at what has been removed from such vital software. Yes, businesses clearly require features of software that home users do not, but often the difference is just that a business may use Pages to produce 40 letters a day, 10 of them with MailMerge, 7 days a week whereas you would use it twice. Pages is not Word and has never tried to be but from the comments here you'd think that anyone who doesn't automatically use Word to produce important complex (company) documents is a fool. About 80% of Word documents I've ever received at my work, as an attachment from a friend or downloaded from a web site could have been written just as well in TextEdit! Word is a gargantuan program that has had everything but the kitchen sink bolted on to it over the years and it really feels like it and given the documents actually produced with it, it seems that most features that make Word such a "serious" product are never exercised. Pages (prior to V5) is powerful but still clean and elegant in general. Apple knew when to stop complicating it.
The idea that Word is the only software for "serious" users and that Pages is fit for no more than designing a poster for your next party is ludicrous. In my view, Pages does, or did, 90% of what most people need from a word processor and page layout program. And remember, before Pages went free it was only £14 and Word is £35. What features does Word have for you that make it worth shelling out another £20? Next to none I'd say ...
You don't think Apple will add features in three years? You serious? Remember copy/paste, or lack thereof, in the iPhone? Apple never did bring that feature. Oh wait.
That was the question I asked in my original post, yes. I also explained why I was concerned that they might not. Did you have an answer?
From what I can glean reading many threads on this subject, th <snip>
Nothing has been removed from the previous version of Pages that so-called Page Power Users were using until a week or two ago. And if they had any common sense or basic computer literacy whatsoever, before installing a major software upgrade they'd have backed up their previous system, software and data all. It would be negligent of someone running a business (or a business' IT dept) not to take these fundamental precautions.
Power user and iWork in the same sentence? Come on man.
98% of the population is fine with the old or new iWork- but power users? It's laughable to say you were a "power user" who used iWork.
Good point. I sand corrected. How about "advanced users". However, the real source of the problem are the people that say iWork isn't for "power user." The "advanced users" aren't asking for "power user" features. They are asking for very basic features. Like with me, I need paragraph numbering. Pages will do bullets and lists, but not a paragraph number. (paragraph numbering requires the second line to be left justified, which can't be done in Pages). I me seriously, who thinks paragraph numbers are only for "power users".
What is most infuriating is that these features are quite simple to implement and have been around for over 20 years in Word and Word Perfect (i.e., no patent problems). Apple has had billions of excess cash for close to a decade and they can't produce a reasonable word processor? What's wrong with these people? They obviously know that the word processor is hands down the most important productivity tool on a computer. How could they just stick their head in the sand for 20 years.
Yup, first thing that occurred to me when this all blew up.
For years, we've been told that iWorks isn't a professional tool, and that Apple needs to bloat it to make it a replacement for Office. Now, power-users and folk who are using it to run their businesses are popping up all over the place. Most odd.
Actually it isn't odd. Word processing is by its very nature a platform software. I'm forced to use Word because I can't do paragraph numbering in Pages. When my 13 year old writes a school paper, he uses Word because that is what I can help him with. It is infuriating that Apple won't add some very simple features to Word to make it usable. There are tens of millions of people that need paragraph numbering.
Great to discover iWork users are in the same boat as those whingeing whining old school Final Cut Pro editors when version X replaced it with an enhanced version of iMovie. Like what are you complaining about? Has the old version stopped working? Did someone make you upgrade to Mavericks with a gun to your head? You're so old school, iPad is NOW, desktop is dead, be grateful you don't have to buy Office.
Once again Apple shows disdain for its habitual users, in favour of marketing hype/hip "Apps". Play with Apple's apps, just don't build your business on them.
Power user and iWork in the same sentence? Come on man.
98% of the population is fine with the old or new iWork- but power users? It's laughable to say you were a "power user" who used iWork.
And that attitude is one of the problems here. WTF are you to decide who is or is not a power user? iWork '09 is quite capable for many people doing real work, while '13 is a sham. Just because you aren't doing or cannot do real work with iWork '09 doesn't mean you're the standard by which all users should be measured.
The only people who would not be able to re-download iWork 2009 (legitimately) are the people who have never purchased it, don't use it, and don't have it on their Macs. For someone who doesn't use the old version of iWork, I fail to see how it's an inconvenience that its no longer available. That one guy who suddenly decides he needs an old version of a program he's never used? Ok. Keeping it available would confuse more people than not, especially people who complain because they accidentally purchased the old version instead of getting the new version for free.
And if worse comes to worse, you can find iWork09 to download in a million other places y spending 5 seconds on Google. As Apple is now offering iWork for free, there shouldn't be any guilt involved, either.
People are REALLY stretching to find scenarios where someone is negatively affected by the existence of the new iWork. Specifically, fictional scenarios that probably don't exist.
Your ignorance of real users and real problems doesn't make them fictional.
Have to chime in representing power users... I own all Mac hardware, but still boot camp to windows for real Excel work. Even before these "terrible" changes to Numbers, nobody in the business world would use Numbers for anything serious. Just due to the lack of keyboard navigation in a Mac spreadsheet, something that would take me 5 minutes on a PC would take me 20-30 mins in Numbers. So, these apps are nowhere ready for prime time. I've been waiting about 20 years and apple is not much closer to Microsoft. Damn shame. Hate to take up a partition of my Macs for Windows!
"The business"? Which business? You aren't the model norm. We are seeing that there are indeed people using it in their businesses.
Nothing has been removed from the previous version of Pages that so-called Page Power Users were using until a week or two ago. And if they had any common sense or basic computer literacy whatsoever, before installing a major software upgrade they'd have backed up their previous system, software and data all. It would be negligent of someone running a business (or a business' IT dept) not to take these fundamental precautions.
Ah yes, the "blame the victim" mentality. Because it's all about personal accountability... unless that's a corporation or developer, because then screw accountability. Capitalists and companies are exempt from accountability demands because they (and you) push it all on to the consumer.
Buyer beware only goes so far... until you have an unjustifiably abusive industry.
Comments
From what I can glean reading many threads on this subject, the definition of a "Pages Power User" seems to be someone who wants to link two text boxes or do more than write a letter to someone. Pages seems to be viewed as only slightly more capable than TextEdit with no real insight into what many people actually use it for.
Reading the postings on the Apple discussion forums it's clear that there are many small-scale businesses and self-employed people that have incorporated iWork successfully over years as part of their daily workflow (despite rgh71's view) and are understandably appalled at what has been removed from such vital software. Yes, businesses clearly require features of software that home users do not, but often the difference is just that a business may use Pages to produce 40 letters a day, 10 of them with MailMerge, 7 days a week whereas you would use it twice. Pages is not Word and has never tried to be but from the comments here you'd think that anyone who doesn't automatically use Word to produce important complex (company) documents is a fool. About 80% of Word documents I've ever received at my work, as an attachment from a friend or downloaded from a web site could have been written just as well in TextEdit! Word is a gargantuan program that has had everything but the kitchen sink bolted on to it over the years and it really feels like it and given the documents actually produced with it, it seems that most features that make Word such a "serious" product are never exercised. Pages (prior to V5) is powerful but still clean and elegant in general. Apple knew when to stop complicating it.
The idea that Word is the only software for "serious" users and that Pages is fit for no more than designing a poster for your next party is ludicrous. In my view, Pages does, or did, 90% of what most people need from a word processor and page layout program. And remember, before Pages went free it was only £14 and Word is £35. What features does Word have for you that make it worth shelling out another £20? Next to none I'd say ...
You don't think Apple will add features in three years? You serious? Remember copy/paste, or lack thereof, in the iPhone? Apple never did bring that feature. Oh wait.
That was the question I asked in my original post, yes. I also explained why I was concerned that they might not. Did you have an answer?
From what I can glean reading many threads on this subject, th <snip>
Nothing has been removed from the previous version of Pages that so-called Page Power Users were using until a week or two ago. And if they had any common sense or basic computer literacy whatsoever, before installing a major software upgrade they'd have backed up their previous system, software and data all. It would be negligent of someone running a business (or a business' IT dept) not to take these fundamental precautions.
Power user and iWork in the same sentence? Come on man.
98% of the population is fine with the old or new iWork- but power users? It's laughable to say you were a "power user" who used iWork.
Good point. I sand corrected. How about "advanced users". However, the real source of the problem are the people that say iWork isn't for "power user." The "advanced users" aren't asking for "power user" features. They are asking for very basic features. Like with me, I need paragraph numbering. Pages will do bullets and lists, but not a paragraph number. (paragraph numbering requires the second line to be left justified, which can't be done in Pages). I me seriously, who thinks paragraph numbers are only for "power users".
What is most infuriating is that these features are quite simple to implement and have been around for over 20 years in Word and Word Perfect (i.e., no patent problems). Apple has had billions of excess cash for close to a decade and they can't produce a reasonable word processor? What's wrong with these people? They obviously know that the word processor is hands down the most important productivity tool on a computer. How could they just stick their head in the sand for 20 years.
Yup, first thing that occurred to me when this all blew up.
For years, we've been told that iWorks isn't a professional tool, and that Apple needs to bloat it to make it a replacement for Office. Now, power-users and folk who are using it to run their businesses are popping up all over the place. Most odd.
Actually it isn't odd. Word processing is by its very nature a platform software. I'm forced to use Word because I can't do paragraph numbering in Pages. When my 13 year old writes a school paper, he uses Word because that is what I can help him with. It is infuriating that Apple won't add some very simple features to Word to make it usable. There are tens of millions of people that need paragraph numbering.
Once again Apple shows disdain for its habitual users, in favour of marketing hype/hip "Apps". Play with Apple's apps, just don't build your business on them.
No one. Because:
? fact.
And that attitude is one of the problems here. WTF are you to decide who is or is not a power user? iWork '09 is quite capable for many people doing real work, while '13 is a sham. Just because you aren't doing or cannot do real work with iWork '09 doesn't mean you're the standard by which all users should be measured.
Your ignorance of real users and real problems doesn't make them fictional.
"The business"? Which business? You aren't the model norm. We are seeing that there are indeed people using it in their businesses.
Ah yes, the "blame the victim" mentality. Because it's all about personal accountability... unless that's a corporation or developer, because then screw accountability. Capitalists and companies are exempt from accountability demands because they (and you) push it all on to the consumer.
Buyer beware only goes so far... until you have an unjustifiably abusive industry.