Pages (as in, WEB pages?)
While eagerly awaiting Pages, looking through Apple's website, I suddenly realized that the design of the templates and the design of the web pages on Apple's site are remarkably similar!
Could they be using proprietary web design software to create their site, as a means for beta testing a consumer level point-and-click web design application? Like the way they beta-tested Keynote? And wouldn't such a consumer level application also be simple enough to be a word processor and page design application for print? And, wouldn't such an application have a name that reflects the simple concept of what is being designed... that is, pages?
Look at this and tell you're not automatically thinking of making a CSS.
Could they be using proprietary web design software to create their site, as a means for beta testing a consumer level point-and-click web design application? Like the way they beta-tested Keynote? And wouldn't such a consumer level application also be simple enough to be a word processor and page design application for print? And, wouldn't such an application have a name that reflects the simple concept of what is being designed... that is, pages?
Look at this and tell you're not automatically thinking of making a CSS.
Comments
I wonder how well Pages' HTML preserves layout, whether you can use style sheets, and whether the HTML it creates is reasonably legible? This could be a really killer "stealth" feature.
Or do you you mean that Pages might have started life as an in-house web-page creator, and they bolted on enough other features to be able to sell it as a word processor? Certainly could be. It might be interesting to see if Pages' generated HTML bears any resemblance to the HTML on Apple's site.
Originally posted by Towel
Or do you you mean that Pages might have started life as an in-house web-page creator, and they bolted on enough other features to be able to sell it as a word processor? Certainly could be. It might be interesting to see if Pages' generated HTML bears any resemblance to the HTML on Apple's site.
Yeah, but maybe they didn't "bolt" on other features as much they wanted to get more customer feedback on the basic usage of the program.
That seems to be their philosophy with Jobs 2.0. Take iTunes, for instance. They released it first as a simple music player, but always had the idea in mind that it would be a portal for the iTunes music store. And, of course, their focus in the end is to always empower the consumer. The web is decidedly the future for information exchange - and right now, no web design application really empowers anyone except a web design specialist.
I'm very interested to see the html that Pages exports. I hope it doesn't remind me of crap from Word.
edited somewhat extensively
To me, Pages would be more important as a PDF (for web/Screen/CD) and Web app, not so much print app. If it does all 3 especially well, I'll be happy.
I code CSS by hand though, so I'll be a tough critic of it's output. Then again, Safari is excellent, and Apple utilizing that knowledge of webkit isn't too hard to imagine.
Originally posted by Towel
According to Apple, you can insert "bookmarks" - i.e. hyperlinks - into Pages documents, and you can export as HTML. Of course, embedding content and page layout are supposed to be a piece of cake. What else do you need to have a full-fledged consumer-level WYSIWYG web page creator? Sounds like Pages is already it.
I wonder how well Pages' HTML preserves layout, whether you can use style sheets, and whether the HTML it creates is reasonably legible? This could be a really killer "stealth" feature.
Or do you you mean that Pages might have started life as an in-house web-page creator, and they bolted on enough other features to be able to sell it as a word processor? Certainly could be. It might be interesting to see if Pages' generated HTML bears any resemblance to the HTML on Apple's site.
I beg to differ. Word can "export to HTML" too, but it sucks rectum. You can't accomplish word-processing-style layouts with HTML; you need a combination of CSS and HTML to do that.
So there are a LOT more things you'd need to have a full-fledged consumer-level WYSIWYG web page creator.
I doubt Apple has any intention of releasing consumer-level HTML editing software; they have a great relationship with Macromedia, and don't have the market, the motive, or the ability to compete there.
Of course, I'm still not sure why they released iWork. But hey... gift horse, mouth, not looking.
It doesn't make any difference, anyways. Pages' html is supposed to really suck, probably worse than Word's.
http://webstandards.org/#a000478
lipsum
btw. it didn't look like that in pages.
Originally posted by jgpippin
You can't accomplish word-processing-style layouts with HTML; you need a combination of CSS and HTML to do that. ... I doubt Apple has any intention of releasing consumer-level HTML editing software; they have a great relationship with Macromedia, and don't have the market, the motive, or the ability to compete there.
IMO there's no such thing as a "consumer-level WYSIWYG web-page creator", certainly not from Macromedia. Dreamweaver is definitely not an iApp, even Freeway is still too complicated; and to make anything look good requires hand-editing the HTML and CSS, which requires knowing HTML and CSS.
So it would have been nice if Apple could have pulled that one out of the bag, but from Phong and r3dx0r, it sounds like they didn't. Oh well. Not like I didn't know better.
Originally posted by r3dx0r
i created an html file from one of the templates. see for yourself:
lipsum
btw. it didn't look like that in pages.
What's most horrendous, is that iWork is exporting "fancy" text as transparent PNGs, which do not show as transparent in Windows Internet Explorer (because of Microsoft's insipid PNG implementation).
Originally posted by r3dx0r
i created an html file from one of the templates. see for yourself:
lipsum
btw. it didn't look like that in pages.
Thanks! But where did this stylesheet come from?
<link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" media="screen" href="test_files/test.css">
<p><a href="/contact/">Contact Us</a> | <a href="/legal/">Terms of Use</a> | <a href="/legal/privacy/">Privacy Policy</a></p>
</div>
<p class="sosumi">Copyright © 2005 Apple Computer, Inc. All rights reserved.</p>
<!-- END INCLUDED FOOTER -->
</body>
</html>
Originally posted by johnq
What's most horrendous, is that iWork is exporting "fancy" text as transparent PNGs, which do not show as transparent in Windows Internet Explorer (because of Microsoft's insipid PNG implementation).
There is a fix for this, but it requires putting a bunch of extra files on the server and inserting a reference CSS tag in the page. The files serve as a behavior filter for IE, causing it to display alpha-transparency correctly.
But then, if you knew enough to properly implement the fix, why would you be trying to design web pages with iWork?
I hate IE. I really do. Even IE for Mac, arguably the worst browser ever vomited forth, supports PNG alpha transparency. What the f*ck is wrong with Trident?
Sorry. Getting off-topic. Just recently designed an entire webpage with transparent PNGs because I forgot about WinIE's lack of proper support. Had to retro-fit a fix on 123 pages...
Originally posted by Towel
IMO there's no such thing as a "consumer-level WYSIWYG web-page creator", certainly not from Macromedia. Dreamweaver is definitely not an iApp, even Freeway is still too complicated; and to make anything look good requires hand-editing the HTML and CSS, which requires knowing HTML and CSS.
So it would have been nice if Apple could have pulled that one out of the bag, but from Phong and r3dx0r, it sounds like they didn't. Oh well. Not like I didn't know better.
Contribute 3 could arguably be considered a consumer-level WYSIWYG editor, though its true skill is in managing idiot-driven maintenance, rather than design.
While I'm sure some would love an iWeb or something like that, Apple doesn't see a percentage in consumer-level web page creation. Most Apple customers who just want to "throw a web page up" will use .Mac's templates. And most folks who want more options... probably wouldn't be satisfied with an iApp.
On a side note, I've heard that Realmac's RapidWeaver is a great consumer WYSIWYG.