Apple and OmniWeb are heavy weights? They make software for 2.5% of computers users out there. And they're heavy weights?
Your measuring heavy weights in marketshare? If so Microsofts development team is the size of the US while Apple is some geek working out of their garage. Sorry no.
They are heavyweights because they have teams of people, both have been developing software for decades and are full fledged companies... one of them happens to both make and have millions upon millions of dollars. Compare that to a small group of people starting off making a web browser nowadays or even a single person. Even with WebCore they have a very large task ahead of them.
If people are doing the basics but using (and spending full retail) for Photoshop something is wrong with the image app developers. The only reason I use Microsoft Office (payed for by my work) is to read other peoples data as best I can for formatting and conversion. If all I did was write a 500 word essay or small chart I wouldn't be caught dead spending full retail for Office. There are many alternatives to Office when you only need to do the basics. Words processors, spreadsheets (fewer though).
If these people are buying a $600 app to do $50 things, developers should take advantage of it. How does Photoshop Elements compete in all this? I haven't used it but its closer to consumer-fiendly pricing then Photoshop will ever be. As I said, I don't know anyone that uses Photoshop just for the basics, there are other apps out there (more or less) for that.
funhouse took only 1 guy a few weeks to write, and in the area of filters, it blows photoshop away.
if apple put together a development team to work on a photoshop killer, it would be exactly that. All mac photoshop users would switch immediately, and PC users that rely heavily on photoshop would switch to mac.
funhouse took only 1 guy a few weeks to write, and in the area of filters, it blows photoshop away.
if apple put together a development team to work on a photoshop killer, it would be exactly that. All mac photoshop users would switch immediately, and PC users that rely heavily on photoshop would switch to mac.
Its true, i asked my magic eight ball.
Great prediction I especially like the part about Photoshop using PC users switching to Mac. We've certainly seen that everywhere else.
Photoshop is not known for its filters. You can find filters anywhere. What it is known for is its tools and manipulation of images. I also wouldn't say it's vastly easier to develop than a program like say After Effects. Ohh it's moving it must be more complicated. Last time I checked, most video programs don't offer the level of control of Photoshop. That's why it's still used. I won't make any claim to either program being harder or easier but I'll leave it at the fact they're two completely different beasts.
Anyways, I'm basically arguing against the argument that the existance of CoreImage and Funhouse marks the end of Photoshop, a stake in the coffin. I don't think I've seen an app anywhere that offers the tools and layers (and layer effects) that Photoshop offers. I'm not completely sure on this, but with video cards, isn't there some sort of uncertainty when it comes to rendering effects? Photoshop requires pixel level perfection, regardless of your video card.
That being said, I do think that Apple is working on an application to directly compete with Photoshop, but not just because of CoreImage. One of the most compelling reasons for me personally was watching this tour video of Motion, Effects and behaviors. About half way through the video you'll see that he placed a photoshop file within the document... What struck me as interesting is that he began to modify the Photoshop file natively as he pulled up a layers palette strikingly similar to Photoshop's. From within it he was hiding layers, adjusting opacity and all that. Of course like I said, we haven't seen any tools from Apple, like marquee tools, clone tools etc... It looks like native reading and interpreting of Photoshop files is just another piece of the puzzle.
I'll place my bet on apple adding CI and CV to iPhoto and imovie in the next incarnation of iLife. I don't think Apple will go after Photoshop, i just think they will try to nudge Adobe into not taking the Mac platform for granted or litting it wither at the vine.
Early on when iPhoto first came out there was talk of how this would affect the Apple/Adobe relationship.. I beleive there were rumors that Apple left some photo correction/manipulaion stuff out to keep Adobe happy. I wonder if CI and CV are Apple's way of adding these tools to iLife while "not adding them to iLife." By adding these to the OS and letting everyone at them, they have taken the third path. Smart move, i believe.
I think the closest thing to a photoshop killer may come from Graphics Converter. I don't know anything, but I imagine that app being updated with CI when the time comes. If Apple keeps giving a copy away with each new Mac, then very few non-professionals will need Adobe Photoshop or Elements when they have iPhoto and Graphics Converter.
As for Apple Office. Bring it on already. I keep thinking this will be the year that AppleWorks gets updated. Now it looks like we may have to wait for Tiger first. I hope it is coming and that the time it has taken will be an indiaction of the effort they have made to build something from the ground up that is truely fantastic.
After years of waiting, I'm beginning to think that Apple is truly readying to introduce next-gen productivity software.
Why else haven't they rolled out the usual "Buy a Mac, get Office for less" promotion?
Usually, when MS introduces a new version of Office, they run a joint promotion where Mac buyers can get Office for $150. or so with the purchase of a new Mac. This didn't happen this year. All MS Office got was a few days of web real estate on the Apple.com front page.
After years of waiting, I'm beginning to think that Apple is truly readying to introduce next-gen productivity software.
Why else haven't they rolled out the usual "Buy a Mac, get Office for less" promotion?
Usually, when MS introduces a new version of Office, they run a joint promotion where Mac buyers can get Office for $150. or so with the purchase of a new Mac. This didn't happen this year. All MS Office got was a few days of web real estate on the Apple.com front page.
I agree that Apple almost certainly has (or, at the very least, has the basic components of) a serious Office competitor waiting in the wings, somewhere deep in Infinite Loop's software laboratories. The question is whether it'll ever be released, or emerge, in some super-consumer-friendly version, greatly simplified, as an AppleWorks successor...
The decision is entirely political. Will MS kill Office for the Mac if Apple releases its own suite? (Maybe. Maybe not.) If it does, does the claim of having "Microsoft Office" on the Mac outweigh the profits gained from an Apple-based suite? Right now, Apple sells the only UNIX that can run MS Office... Is that something Apple can risk, in exchange for controlling the Office space on their platform? Most of all, can Apple afford the press that MS will no longer be developing Office for the Mac? Will people understand that Apple's suite is Office compatible? (And will it be, ninety-nine point nine percent?)
These are all notoriously difficult-to-answer questions. Right now, Apple seems to be inclined to think the answer adds up, however uncertainly, to "let's not rock the boat; keep MS developing Office." That could change in an instant, but... Until then, AppleWorks grows creakier and creakier, the .x.x updates add up, and the mysterious silence surrounding this topic grows ever stiller.
I know this sounds crazy but "why not create an Apple Office suite that doesn't implicitly support MS Office"?
My logic(or illogic) is based on MS Office sales. I believe that most current users that need MS Office(MSO) already have it. That leaves the remaing souls that don't need MSO or have it. Apple should be targetting these people. I'm one of those people who feels that there is a rather sizable segment of the population that doesn't prescribe to the "I keed MSO" sheep mentality. I'm merely looking for a better way of writing and utilizing multimedia within my document. MSO has its way of working and I think Apple should craft a suite without subjugating their ideals for MSO compatibilty.
Show me what you can do Apple. Don't become another MSO clone. If people need MSO they should buy it. There are plenty of ways to surviving in business without MSO, If people want to pay the MS tax let'em. I for one want something different.
It will be interesting to see if Adobe does take advantage of Apple only tech' like 'funhouse'/Core image et al.
Because they have long offered PC software features that the Mac doesn't have?
Lemon head I cant believe your saying that. Has everybody forgotten about Adobe optimizing Photoshop for Altivec when the G4 was just starting to look like a flounder. Adobe never adopted, or optimized for Intel's MMX technology when they could have, and probably should have. I'm just saying I totally disagree with this sudden Adobe bash-fest . They backed the Mac for a long time, but when the x86 processors started totally overpowering the Mac they had to say that the PC was giving the best results in Photoshop. Were they supposed to keep saying the Mac was giving better results when it was so far behind. Is that what they should have done?
...Don't become another MSO clone. If people need MSO they should buy it.
I think this is a very important point. Coming at MS Office hea-don doesn't make a whole lot of sense not only because MS could pull Office for Mac but also because it does a pretty good job of being Office for the Mac anyway. Apple, if they do make such a set of tools (I think they're providing capability first to everyone and seeing how the chips fall), would be wise to target some use or some approach to work that this conventional idea of a productivity suite addresses. I think Keynote gives alittle insight into this diferent angle, and Motion may be another example to some extent. Neither really deals with tables (spreadsheets) or database stuff, which is where Office really excels (no pun intended). I think these two things are where Apple needs to add capabilities, but to approach these things in a different way. With BIM modelers getting a foothold in the AEC industry, I think that might be a good general model to follow for how to deal with tying databases and graphics together in particular. BIMs are far from perfect right now, but the concept is provocative and potentially useful to Apple's core users over a traditional DB and Spreadsheet suite.
I don't think the database aspect is all that important...Microsoft has no plans to bring Access to Macs anyways. So creating a database apps for consumers should be low priority.
What Apple needs to release is a good word processor with DTP-like capabilities (some described by hmurchison); moving paragraph objects around via simple dragging, text wrapping around rectangular or irregular-shaped images, Keynote-like guides, Rendezvous collaboration (SubEthaEdit), chapter marking, saving as Word (when possible) and as PDF.
Apple also needs a decent spreadsheet app. I don't have any innovative ideas for that app but I'm sure there's room for innovation.
These apps will have to be bundled with all Macs (like iLife). Double-clicking a Word document or an Excel spreadsheet should open Apple's word processor or spreadsheet app if there are no traces of Office on the Mac.
Apple will need to advertise this.
Office 2004 just came out...MS isn't going to change the file format dramatically for several years. Now is the time to release Apple's apps.
Microsoft might not develop another Office for Mac beyond Office 2004 if Apple releases its own suite. But they won't just pull Office 2004. They'll continue selling it until it brings no more money in.
For the next 3-4 years, people will get to use Office 2004 if they want to...or try Apple's suite (which *should* come bundled anyways). People will then be able to compare and contrast the two. After 4 years when Office 2004 stops selling, Apple will have proven that their apps are worthy...and people will know that it's compatible with Office file formats through word of mouth or through reviews or ads.
I think this is Apple's last chance...they must to release an office suite with Tiger next year or Microsoft will decide Apple's fate in the business world next Office revision.
And fer christsake, GAMES. Apple should put together a small team of game developers and create small but addictive games and using Apple tech. Freeverse-type games should be what the game team produces. Freeverse was the first (and remains the last) to bring a game that uses iSight as user input. Also the only (or one of the few) to integrate directly with iChat.
If Apple created some really cool Rendezvous-enabled games that used iSight or other fun and original input methods.
I agree. Apple has to have their Suite out by end of summer 2005. I hate doom and gloom but if Longhorn hits and Apple doesn't have their own suite they can forget the biz desktop. Longhorn seems to require so much MS technology to function at peak proficiency. They will leverage MSO in any way they can to ensure no one breaks the OS/OS(Operation Sys/Office Suite) duo.
The game idea is great and for the life of me I cannot understand why Apple has been so doggone apathetic towards gaming. Imagine how fun OS upgrades would be if each came with a new game. Apple supports OpenGL but they sure haven't helped fight the onslaught of Directx as much as they could have.
[B]I don't think the database aspect is all that important...Microsoft has no plans to bring Access to Macs anyways. So creating a database apps for consumers should be low priority.[b]
I was thinking that consumers could use a "database" in the sense of what Spotlight uses, so to me, that aspect of a productivity suite is already there. They have Filemaker and its min-apps for more serious DB work.
Quote:
What Apple needs to release is a good word processor with DTP-like capabilities (some described by hmurchison)
I agree that a more graphically-oriented suite or app is the right direction, and I think Apple could lend that to a spreadhseet app even if its calculating functions are what everyone else offers. There's only so much you can do here except to simplify the UI for finding formulas, and of course make the charts kick ass.
The app could use some kind of web page authoring tool as well: blogging, regular html creation, maybe more advanced CSS-oriented web page creation (wouldn't be WYSIWYG for that though), etc.
I feel like there are some apps that are close to what people want as far at a word processor/simple DTP app. Create is my personal fav and it incorporates a lot of Apple technology. If Apple just gave out Keynote's guides so Stone could incorporate them into Create, it would be almost perfect. New text wrapping features will be added to it in a couple of days. Rendezvous support and chapter marking might be good things to add too as you mention. Stone's biggest problem is its limited resources and therefore recognition. It doesn't enjoy the clout of the big software houses, and it's not Apple.
What concerns me is an entire lack of interest on behalf of Apple in regard to it's own "office" suite. Appleworks is, as other users have already stated, rather capable of providing functionality to a majority of users. While that statement is accurate, it doesn't address AW's dated appearance, nor does it provide many of the features sought after by users posting to this board. It has been said that Apple has employees working with Appleworks, yet their efforts have not seen the light of day aside from point releases providing no significant additional functionality. Dan Schimpf, creator of MacJournal (an application providing many word processing features) is also said to be employed by Apple, though his function within the organization is not clear. While Apple has the resources and capital to launch an Office of their own, in the same light as their acclaimed Keynote software, I'd like to know what software is used within the walls of Apple's campus for the purpose of word processing, database, and presentations. If Apple has no faith in it's own software, choosing to use Microsoft products instead, it stands to reason that Apple has ceaded this battle to Microsoft and that third party application providers (e.g. Create, Mariner Write, & Open Office) will struggle to find loyal users willing to be patient as their chosen software matures. In light of the current offerings, I believe that Microsoft needs not concern itself with efforts put forth by other companies for none show the maturity and scope of the Office offering. While that is the case today, I for one, would applaud introduction of competing software by Apple. I would also enjoy seeing current offerings by third party providers mature to a level equal to the Microsoft offering. I know I'm just dreaming, but right now, all we have are dreams.
While I do think Apple is probably keeping an Office
suite under slow development, I don't think it will
see daylight for a long time, if ever. The main reason
being: Apple needs Microsoft, and Microsoft needs Apple.
Apple needs Microsoft/Office to stay on the Mac. We on this board would say "good riddance" and grab Apple's suite and that
would be that. But a MAJORITY of casual computer users
would say, "I use Office at work, and it's what I've always used, and if Office doesn't come on Mac, I'm not buying a Mac.
Microsoft needs Apple. If Microsoft wanted to quash Apple
once and for all, they could have dropped Office 7 years
ago when the Mac was in a very dark time. Although they make reasonable revenue from the Mac Office suite, they don't really care that much about it (eg Xbox). What they do care about is their monopoly, and it's mindshare/marketshare/sustainability. If they put Apple under by killing Office (not saying it WOULD happen, but just IF), they would be destroyed in antitrust suits. There would no longer be competition, and while MS has been able to get off easy on some recent suits (at least in the US), there would be no way around it.
This, in my opinion,
is why we still have Office, and probably will for a long time. I even think that although Apple has put out cool
similar apps like Keynote, I think they intentionally let
AppleWorks go to appease MS, and will continue to.
Sorry so long...
Oh yeah, I think the pro graphics app will be here for sure right
about the same time as Tiger is released (for core graphics, etc).
Garageband -> Logic
Imovie -> Final Cut
Idvd -> DVD Studio Pro
Iphoto -> ???????
I mean come on, seriously, it only makes sense. They aren't putting all that work into coreGraphics just to
see daylight for a long time, if ever. The main reason
being: Apple needs Microsoft, and Microsoft needs Apple.
Microsoft doesn't need Apple at all. They don't even have to worry about DOJ issues because they can point to Linux as another OS that they must compete with. I'm afraid in this case Apple is just a profit center for MS. Bill Gates once said "we make more money than Apple on every Mac sold".
Come on did anyone really believe Steve when he said that Office 2004 was better than the PC version. Maybe if excellent Exchange support isn't on your wishlist. MSO on Mac isn't going to have parity and even if it did why would I base my company around Macs when PC run it?
Notice that Apple's "break" into the Enterprise is centered around Databases and a few programming tools. They have absolutely no strategy for getting on the desktop other than "Hope Extreme" In this light Apple's premium doesn't seem worth paying.
Business and Education are intertwined. So expect Apple to keep losing marketshare in edu as well. All that's going to be left for Apple is multimedia production and consumer electronics which are niche.
I think it is fairly obvious that Apple has the skill and technology to produce a MS competitor. And, as some of mentioned, this might not be the most successful approach. Apple seems to be very disciplined of late, in the following way:
1. They seem to focus on spaces where there is a product need (for a large percentage of their users), but the current offerings are insufficient.
2. They seem to think about how people might actually be using the product and design something accordingly.
They have Addressed 1/4 of AppleWorks with Keynote. I could see them thinking about the DB portion and wondering what they could do. Asking questions...do people need this? What do they typically do with a DB? How do they use it? How can we create something better, different, unique...something compelling. This would be another area where they would be less likely to run afoul of MS. MS isn't addressing this area. What's interesting is that I think they have basically addressed it...with Address Book. My guess...most people use the AW DB functionality to do something akin to Address Book. Done. They need to add envelope printing. Smart Groups are coming. They've probably covered 70% of the uses for the AW DB.
Word processor? Well Edit is getting frighteningly close to a real word processor. It needs more structure...styles...perhaps mail merge (integrated with Address Book, of course)...and it is there.
Spreadsheet? This is where they start getting too close to MS. But again, approaching this from a different angle. Slowly, quietly building something.
Apple has a great deal of talent, skill and technology to bring to bear. I hope they continue to do so.
Word processor? Well Edit is getting frighteningly close to a real word processor. It needs more structure...styles...perhaps mail merge (integrated with Address Book, of course)...and it is there.
I presume you mean TextEdit, a program in which you can't even change the size of the margins.
How is it getting to be "frighteningly close" to a real app?
Comments
Originally posted by kim kap sol
Apple and OmniWeb are heavy weights? They make software for 2.5% of computers users out there. And they're heavy weights?
Your measuring heavy weights in marketshare? If so Microsofts development team is the size of the US while Apple is some geek working out of their garage. Sorry no.
They are heavyweights because they have teams of people, both have been developing software for decades and are full fledged companies... one of them happens to both make and have millions upon millions of dollars. Compare that to a small group of people starting off making a web browser nowadays or even a single person. Even with WebCore they have a very large task ahead of them.
If people are doing the basics but using (and spending full retail) for Photoshop something is wrong with the image app developers. The only reason I use Microsoft Office (payed for by my work) is to read other peoples data as best I can for formatting and conversion. If all I did was write a 500 word essay or small chart I wouldn't be caught dead spending full retail for Office. There are many alternatives to Office when you only need to do the basics. Words processors, spreadsheets (fewer though).
If these people are buying a $600 app to do $50 things, developers should take advantage of it. How does Photoshop Elements compete in all this? I haven't used it but its closer to consumer-fiendly pricing then Photoshop will ever be. As I said, I don't know anyone that uses Photoshop just for the basics, there are other apps out there (more or less) for that.
funhouse took only 1 guy a few weeks to write, and in the area of filters, it blows photoshop away.
if apple put together a development team to work on a photoshop killer, it would be exactly that. All mac photoshop users would switch immediately, and PC users that rely heavily on photoshop would switch to mac.
Its true, i asked my magic eight ball.
Originally posted by Imergingenious
uuuuuummmmm.......
funhouse took only 1 guy a few weeks to write, and in the area of filters, it blows photoshop away.
if apple put together a development team to work on a photoshop killer, it would be exactly that. All mac photoshop users would switch immediately, and PC users that rely heavily on photoshop would switch to mac.
Its true, i asked my magic eight ball.
Great prediction
Photoshop is not known for its filters. You can find filters anywhere. What it is known for is its tools and manipulation of images. I also wouldn't say it's vastly easier to develop than a program like say After Effects. Ohh it's moving it must be more complicated. Last time I checked, most video programs don't offer the level of control of Photoshop. That's why it's still used. I won't make any claim to either program being harder or easier but I'll leave it at the fact they're two completely different beasts.
Anyways, I'm basically arguing against the argument that the existance of CoreImage and Funhouse marks the end of Photoshop, a stake in the coffin. I don't think I've seen an app anywhere that offers the tools and layers (and layer effects) that Photoshop offers. I'm not completely sure on this, but with video cards, isn't there some sort of uncertainty when it comes to rendering effects? Photoshop requires pixel level perfection, regardless of your video card.
That being said, I do think that Apple is working on an application to directly compete with Photoshop, but not just because of CoreImage. One of the most compelling reasons for me personally was watching this tour video of Motion, Effects and behaviors. About half way through the video you'll see that he placed a photoshop file within the document... What struck me as interesting is that he began to modify the Photoshop file natively as he pulled up a layers palette strikingly similar to Photoshop's. From within it he was hiding layers, adjusting opacity and all that. Of course like I said, we haven't seen any tools from Apple, like marquee tools, clone tools etc... It looks like native reading and interpreting of Photoshop files is just another piece of the puzzle.
Early on when iPhoto first came out there was talk of how this would affect the Apple/Adobe relationship.. I beleive there were rumors that Apple left some photo correction/manipulaion stuff out to keep Adobe happy. I wonder if CI and CV are Apple's way of adding these tools to iLife while "not adding them to iLife." By adding these to the OS and letting everyone at them, they have taken the third path. Smart move, i believe.
I think the closest thing to a photoshop killer may come from Graphics Converter. I don't know anything, but I imagine that app being updated with CI when the time comes. If Apple keeps giving a copy away with each new Mac, then very few non-professionals will need Adobe Photoshop or Elements when they have iPhoto and Graphics Converter.
As for Apple Office. Bring it on already. I keep thinking this will be the year that AppleWorks gets updated. Now it looks like we may have to wait for Tiger first. I hope it is coming and that the time it has taken will be an indiaction of the effort they have made to build something from the ground up that is truely fantastic.
Waiting....
Why else haven't they rolled out the usual "Buy a Mac, get Office for less" promotion?
Usually, when MS introduces a new version of Office, they run a joint promotion where Mac buyers can get Office for $150. or so with the purchase of a new Mac. This didn't happen this year. All MS Office got was a few days of web real estate on the Apple.com front page.
Originally posted by Frank777
After years of waiting, I'm beginning to think that Apple is truly readying to introduce next-gen productivity software.
Why else haven't they rolled out the usual "Buy a Mac, get Office for less" promotion?
Usually, when MS introduces a new version of Office, they run a joint promotion where Mac buyers can get Office for $150. or so with the purchase of a new Mac. This didn't happen this year. All MS Office got was a few days of web real estate on the Apple.com front page.
I agree that Apple almost certainly has (or, at the very least, has the basic components of) a serious Office competitor waiting in the wings, somewhere deep in Infinite Loop's software laboratories. The question is whether it'll ever be released, or emerge, in some super-consumer-friendly version, greatly simplified, as an AppleWorks successor...
The decision is entirely political. Will MS kill Office for the Mac if Apple releases its own suite? (Maybe. Maybe not.) If it does, does the claim of having "Microsoft Office" on the Mac outweigh the profits gained from an Apple-based suite? Right now, Apple sells the only UNIX that can run MS Office... Is that something Apple can risk, in exchange for controlling the Office space on their platform? Most of all, can Apple afford the press that MS will no longer be developing Office for the Mac? Will people understand that Apple's suite is Office compatible? (And will it be, ninety-nine point nine percent?)
These are all notoriously difficult-to-answer questions. Right now, Apple seems to be inclined to think the answer adds up, however uncertainly, to "let's not rock the boat; keep MS developing Office." That could change in an instant, but... Until then, AppleWorks grows creakier and creakier, the .x.x updates add up, and the mysterious silence surrounding this topic grows ever stiller.
My logic(or illogic) is based on MS Office sales. I believe that most current users that need MS Office(MSO) already have it. That leaves the remaing souls that don't need MSO or have it. Apple should be targetting these people. I'm one of those people who feels that there is a rather sizable segment of the population that doesn't prescribe to the "I keed MSO" sheep mentality. I'm merely looking for a better way of writing and utilizing multimedia within my document. MSO has its way of working and I think Apple should craft a suite without subjugating their ideals for MSO compatibilty.
Show me what you can do Apple. Don't become another MSO clone. If people need MSO they should buy it. There are plenty of ways to surviving in business without MSO, If people want to pay the MS tax let'em. I for one want something different.
Bon bon said
It will be interesting to see if Adobe does take advantage of Apple only tech' like 'funhouse'/Core image et al.
Because they have long offered PC software features that the Mac doesn't have?
Lemon head I cant believe your saying that. Has everybody forgotten about Adobe optimizing Photoshop for Altivec when the G4 was just starting to look like a flounder. Adobe never adopted, or optimized for Intel's MMX technology when they could have, and probably should have. I'm just saying I totally disagree with this sudden Adobe bash-fest . They backed the Mac for a long time, but when the x86 processors started totally overpowering the Mac they had to say that the PC was giving the best results in Photoshop. Were they supposed to keep saying the Mac was giving better results when it was so far behind. Is that what they should have done?
my 2¢
Originally posted by hmurchison
...Don't become another MSO clone. If people need MSO they should buy it.
I think this is a very important point. Coming at MS Office hea-don doesn't make a whole lot of sense not only because MS could pull Office for Mac but also because it does a pretty good job of being Office for the Mac anyway. Apple, if they do make such a set of tools (I think they're providing capability first to everyone and seeing how the chips fall), would be wise to target some use or some approach to work that this conventional idea of a productivity suite addresses. I think Keynote gives alittle insight into this diferent angle, and Motion may be another example to some extent. Neither really deals with tables (spreadsheets) or database stuff, which is where Office really excels (no pun intended). I think these two things are where Apple needs to add capabilities, but to approach these things in a different way. With BIM modelers getting a foothold in the AEC industry, I think that might be a good general model to follow for how to deal with tying databases and graphics together in particular. BIMs are far from perfect right now, but the concept is provocative and potentially useful to Apple's core users over a traditional DB and Spreadsheet suite.
What Apple needs to release is a good word processor with DTP-like capabilities (some described by hmurchison); moving paragraph objects around via simple dragging, text wrapping around rectangular or irregular-shaped images, Keynote-like guides, Rendezvous collaboration (SubEthaEdit), chapter marking, saving as Word (when possible) and as PDF.
Apple also needs a decent spreadsheet app. I don't have any innovative ideas for that app but I'm sure there's room for innovation.
These apps will have to be bundled with all Macs (like iLife). Double-clicking a Word document or an Excel spreadsheet should open Apple's word processor or spreadsheet app if there are no traces of Office on the Mac.
Apple will need to advertise this.
Office 2004 just came out...MS isn't going to change the file format dramatically for several years. Now is the time to release Apple's apps.
Microsoft might not develop another Office for Mac beyond Office 2004 if Apple releases its own suite. But they won't just pull Office 2004. They'll continue selling it until it brings no more money in.
For the next 3-4 years, people will get to use Office 2004 if they want to...or try Apple's suite (which *should* come bundled anyways). People will then be able to compare and contrast the two. After 4 years when Office 2004 stops selling, Apple will have proven that their apps are worthy...and people will know that it's compatible with Office file formats through word of mouth or through reviews or ads.
I think this is Apple's last chance...they must to release an office suite with Tiger next year or Microsoft will decide Apple's fate in the business world next Office revision.
And fer christsake, GAMES. Apple should put together a small team of game developers and create small but addictive games and using Apple tech. Freeverse-type games should be what the game team produces. Freeverse was the first (and remains the last) to bring a game that uses iSight as user input. Also the only (or one of the few) to integrate directly with iChat.
If Apple created some really cool Rendezvous-enabled games that used iSight or other fun and original input methods.
I agree. Apple has to have their Suite out by end of summer 2005. I hate doom and gloom but if Longhorn hits and Apple doesn't have their own suite they can forget the biz desktop. Longhorn seems to require so much MS technology to function at peak proficiency. They will leverage MSO in any way they can to ensure no one breaks the OS/OS(Operation Sys/Office Suite) duo.
The game idea is great and for the life of me I cannot understand why Apple has been so doggone apathetic towards gaming. Imagine how fun OS upgrades would be if each came with a new game. Apple supports OpenGL but they sure haven't helped fight the onslaught of Directx as much as they could have.
Originally posted by kim kap sol
[B]I don't think the database aspect is all that important...Microsoft has no plans to bring Access to Macs anyways. So creating a database apps for consumers should be low priority.[b]
I was thinking that consumers could use a "database" in the sense of what Spotlight uses, so to me, that aspect of a productivity suite is already there. They have Filemaker and its min-apps for more serious DB work.
What Apple needs to release is a good word processor with DTP-like capabilities (some described by hmurchison)
I agree that a more graphically-oriented suite or app is the right direction, and I think Apple could lend that to a spreadhseet app even if its calculating functions are what everyone else offers. There's only so much you can do here except to simplify the UI for finding formulas, and of course make the charts kick ass.
The app could use some kind of web page authoring tool as well: blogging, regular html creation, maybe more advanced CSS-oriented web page creation (wouldn't be WYSIWYG for that though), etc.
I feel like there are some apps that are close to what people want as far at a word processor/simple DTP app. Create is my personal fav and it incorporates a lot of Apple technology. If Apple just gave out Keynote's guides so Stone could incorporate them into Create, it would be almost perfect.
suite under slow development, I don't think it will
see daylight for a long time, if ever. The main reason
being: Apple needs Microsoft, and Microsoft needs Apple.
Apple needs Microsoft/Office to stay on the Mac. We on this board would say "good riddance" and grab Apple's suite and that
would be that. But a MAJORITY of casual computer users
would say, "I use Office at work, and it's what I've always used, and if Office doesn't come on Mac, I'm not buying a Mac.
Microsoft needs Apple. If Microsoft wanted to quash Apple
once and for all, they could have dropped Office 7 years
ago when the Mac was in a very dark time. Although they make reasonable revenue from the Mac Office suite, they don't really care that much about it (eg Xbox). What they do care about is their monopoly, and it's mindshare/marketshare/sustainability. If they put Apple under by killing Office (not saying it WOULD happen, but just IF), they would be destroyed in antitrust suits. There would no longer be competition, and while MS has been able to get off easy on some recent suits (at least in the US), there would be no way around it.
This, in my opinion,
is why we still have Office, and probably will for a long time. I even think that although Apple has put out cool
similar apps like Keynote, I think they intentionally let
AppleWorks go to appease MS, and will continue to.
Sorry so long...
Oh yeah, I think the pro graphics app will be here for sure right
about the same time as Tiger is released (for core graphics, etc).
Garageband -> Logic
Imovie -> Final Cut
Idvd -> DVD Studio Pro
Iphoto -> ???????
I mean come on, seriously, it only makes sense. They aren't putting all that work into coreGraphics just to
be sweet.
I don't think it will
see daylight for a long time, if ever. The main reason
being: Apple needs Microsoft, and Microsoft needs Apple.
Microsoft doesn't need Apple at all. They don't even have to worry about DOJ issues because they can point to Linux as another OS that they must compete with. I'm afraid in this case Apple is just a profit center for MS. Bill Gates once said "we make more money than Apple on every Mac sold".
Come on did anyone really believe Steve when he said that Office 2004 was better than the PC version. Maybe if excellent Exchange support isn't on your wishlist. MSO on Mac isn't going to have parity and even if it did why would I base my company around Macs when PC run it?
Notice that Apple's "break" into the Enterprise is centered around Databases and a few programming tools. They have absolutely no strategy for getting on the desktop other than "Hope Extreme" In this light Apple's premium doesn't seem worth paying.
Business and Education are intertwined. So expect Apple to keep losing marketshare in edu as well. All that's going to be left for Apple is multimedia production and consumer electronics which are niche.
1. They seem to focus on spaces where there is a product need (for a large percentage of their users), but the current offerings are insufficient.
2. They seem to think about how people might actually be using the product and design something accordingly.
They have Addressed 1/4 of AppleWorks with Keynote. I could see them thinking about the DB portion and wondering what they could do. Asking questions...do people need this? What do they typically do with a DB? How do they use it? How can we create something better, different, unique...something compelling. This would be another area where they would be less likely to run afoul of MS. MS isn't addressing this area. What's interesting is that I think they have basically addressed it...with Address Book. My guess...most people use the AW DB functionality to do something akin to Address Book. Done. They need to add envelope printing. Smart Groups are coming. They've probably covered 70% of the uses for the AW DB.
Word processor? Well Edit is getting frighteningly close to a real word processor. It needs more structure...styles...perhaps mail merge (integrated with Address Book, of course)...and it is there.
Spreadsheet? This is where they start getting too close to MS. But again, approaching this from a different angle. Slowly, quietly building something.
Apple has a great deal of talent, skill and technology to bring to bear. I hope they continue to do so.
Originally posted by hmurchison
All that's going to be left for Apple is multimedia production and consumer electronics which are niche.
Not sure that I'd say consumer electronics is "niche".
Originally posted by Chris Cuilla
Word processor? Well Edit is getting frighteningly close to a real word processor. It needs more structure...styles...perhaps mail merge (integrated with Address Book, of course)...and it is there.
I presume you mean TextEdit, a program in which you can't even change the size of the margins.
How is it getting to be "frighteningly close" to a real app?
Are there big changes in Tiger that I've missed?
Originally posted by Frank777
I presume you mean TextEdit, a program in which you can't even change the size of the margins.
How is it getting to be "frighteningly close" to a real app?
Are there big changes in Tiger that I've missed?
Yes I am. The only reason you don't see this is because Apple hasn't exposed it...not because it isn't there.
Originally posted by Chris Cuilla
Yes I am. The only reason you don't see this is because Apple hasn't exposed it...not because it isn't there.
Good to hear. Wish I was in the know.
I'm trying to decide between Nisus Writer and Mellel at the moment. If I have to switch Word Processor formats within a year again, I'll scream...