Apple will not release a database program with iWork until it can shake up an MS Access data file. Plain and simple. iWork is trying to leverage MS Office on the Mac side by showing them what Office doesn't to well on a Mac. (Numbers is a great example!)
Being compatible with FileMaker by a company that owns and sells you FileMaker is redundant use of resources.
Seriously, scratch the surface, and you'll find an incredible amount of power buried in there. That's the Apple way... make the initial experience with the app so dead simple as to seem 'too easy'... but provide layers of functionality hidden just under the surface that are hard to beat... but not hard to find.
Appleworks going is a bit sad but I have a feeling that the database functions will be taken up by other programs and we might even get a "Data" for iWork. Outside of business most users don't have need for a database but there's always somebody who might and they need to provide for that.
Actually the AppleWorks that consumers bought had both Windows and Mac versions on the same CD. At least the one I bought in '03 did. I didn't actually know that until I happened to see it in Virtual PC one day, then I took it over to my PC and installed it on there.
Interesting .. What version # is quoted on your copy because I can't find anything pc related on mine.
Funny, I have software from over a decade ago that still runs on my MacBook. Perhaps what you meant was that someday he may want to upgrade the software to do more. Since AW hasn't been significantly upgraded in 8 years, I think that's kind of a moot point, don't you?
Funny, I have software from over a decade ago that still runs on my MacBook. Perhaps what you meant was that someday he may want to upgrade the software to do more. Since AW hasn't been significantly upgraded in 8 years, I think that's kind of a moot point, don't you?
First off, congratulations on having 10 year old software that still works ... I could have said the same until I upgraded to an intel Imac.
Secondly, check out the specs on Imovie 8 ..... a 3 year old ( in some cases ) computor won't run it ....so the possibiity of an obsolete software timeframe is becoming shorter everyday.
But , most importantly, I think, is what the present and past users of Appleworks are trying to say is: yes, you can get recent software to do the job that Appleworks used to do and probably a better job as well ......... only now you need several apps to do so instead of one. I still think that is sad.
But , most importantly, I think, is what the present and past users of Appleworks are trying to say is: yes, you can get recent software to do the job that Appleworks used to do and probably a better job as well ......... only now you need several apps to do so instead of one. I still think that is sad.
Correction: ...you can get recent software to almost do some of the job that Appleworks used to do.
Yes that is extremely sad. Particularly for users like me that feel Apple is pushing us into a more and more invidious position, where it is hard to not just do the work but do it quickly, simply and efficiently at reasonable cost.
Why? You would think it would be to Apple's advantage to have its users be more productive rhan Windows users.
First off, congratulations on having 10 year old software that still works ... I could have said the same until I upgraded to an intel Imac.
You're right, I misspoke. I have >10yr software that I run on my other machines, but not on my MacBook. However, with the exception of some games, there's nothing I really *want* to run - the modern versions are much, much better.
Quote:
Secondly, check out the specs on Imovie 8 ..... a 3 year old ( in some cases ) computor won't run it ....so the possibiity of an obsolete software timeframe is becoming shorter everyday.
You're confusing forward and backwards compatibility. At some point, you have to assume that software or hardware you bought years ago are going to be obsolete. I don't expect my 1989 SyQuest cartridge system to work on my MacBook, after all. It was a fantastic system... for the day. Ditto for AW, IMO. It was a great system... for 1999. Now, there are simply too many new technologies that it can't play with. Updating it to do so would necessitate a ground-up rewrite, a starting over, a re-do, a... hey... kinda like iWork.
Quote:
But , most importantly, I think, is what the present and past users of Appleworks are trying to say is: yes, you can get recent software to do the job that Appleworks used to do and probably a better job as well ......... only now you need several apps to do so instead of one. I still think that is sad.
By that logic, all apps should be merged into one big app. No thanks. Small, dedicated apps that can be easily used with each other will win out over bulky everything-and-the-kitchen-sink monolithic apps any day.
Seriously? Is that what this all boils down to? That you have to click on an icon in the Dock instead of clicking on an icon in a palette?!? That's just... bizarre.
What's bizarre is that these "small, dedicated apps that can be easily used with each other" aren't.
They aren't small, nor easily used, let alone with each other, and when you add up the total cost of all the applications to get a job done they aren't cheap. You are also faced with one or many of the components falling off the twig at any time and starting from scratch again.
One of the nicest things about AppleWorks was the ability to drag one component's file (eg a spreadsheet) into another (say a text layout) and use it there live. I had my invoices set up like that.
Now how do I achieve that in OSX with all its bloatware and high hardware overheads?
Have you tried iWork 08? Make a spreadsheet in Numbers, drag it over to Pages, plop it in, and *use it*. No linkback, which is, IMO annoying, but I'm happy for now to see what they set up as the foundations for the data first. You've gotta have that before you start doing the higher levels, or it gets really messy.
When I wiped and installed Tiger, I was surprised to find my cwk documents would not open. I installed Appleworks from the Panther discs to continue. The whole point of saving data is for viewing it again in the future. Saving files is an act of faith that they will be recoverable. I take this as part of the "Apple experience."
The shift to OSX obviously includes dropping legacy programs.
Reading five year old computer data should not present such a problem.
Interesting .. What version # is quoted on your copy because I can't find anything pc related on mine.
On the proof of purchase sticker it says M9053LL/A. It's AppleWorks 6.2.7 Education Version. In fact although the box is labeled for Mac only (the Requirements don't mention PC), there is a red sticker on the front saying 6.2 Education Version For Mac OS X, Mac OS 8.1-9.2, Windows 95/98/Me/XP, or Windows 2000.
And the CD inside contains both Mac and PC versions in separate sessions.
When I wiped and installed Tiger, I was surprised to find my cwk documents would not open. I installed Appleworks from the Panther discs to continue. The whole point of saving data is for viewing it again in the future. Saving files is an act of faith that they will be recoverable. I take this as part of the "Apple experience."
The shift to OSX obviously includes dropping legacy programs.
Reading five year old computer data should not present such a problem.
Will only the paper printouts survive?
You were surprised that your AppleWorks documents did not open when you didn't have AppleWorks installed? Why should that be surprising?
You can't even open a plain text file if you don't have a text editor application. Why would you expect to be able to open an AppleWorks file without an AppleWorks compatible application?
What's bizarre is that these "small, dedicated apps that can be easily used with each other" aren't.
They aren't small, nor easily used, let alone with each other, and when you add up the total cost of all the applications to get a job done they aren't cheap. You are also faced with one or many of the components falling off the twig at any time and starting from scratch again.
One of the nicest things about AppleWorks was the ability to drag one component's file (eg a spreadsheet) into another (say a text layout) and use it there live. I had my invoices set up like that.
Now how do I achieve that in OSX with all its bloatware and high hardware overheads?
Add up the cost? Ummm... iWork is one bundle which includes all of the current apps. I haven't seen any evidence to suggest that future production apps won't be included as well, or that they are going to split it apart and start selling them separately.
I don't expect my 1989 SyQuest cartridge system to work on my MacBook, after all. It was a fantastic system... for the day.
Funny thing... It probably does work with your MacBook. I had some files backed up on old SyQuest cartridges (40 MB woohooo! or was it 25?) that I wanted to recover and I had given away my IIci ( which only had a floppy drive, anyway so that would have been a pain). Anyway, I bought a Belkin SCSI to firewire adapter on Ebay and plugged everything in, turned it on, and POP! there was my cartridge mounted on the desktop. It's even full plug-and-play! Amazing! I used to have to restart to mount them in System 7.
Cool Stuff
EDIT: Forgot to mention, this is happening on a 12" PB running Tiger. There's no reason why it wouldn't work on Intel, right?
On the proof of purchase sticker it says M9053LL/A. It's AppleWorks 6.2.7 Education Version. In fact although the box is labeled for Mac only (the Requirements don't mention PC), there is a red sticker on the front saying 6.2 Education Version For Mac OS X, Mac OS 8.1-9.2, Windows 95/98/Me/XP, or Windows 2000.
And the CD inside contains both Mac and PC versions in separate sessions.
Thanks for the info ...... mine's not the educational version ....there's the difference.
Correction: ...you can get recent software to almost do some of the job that Appleworks used to do.
Yes that is extremely sad. Particularly for users like me that feel Apple is pushing us into a more and more invidious position, where it is hard to not just do the work but do it quickly, simply and efficiently at reasonable cost.
Why? You would think it would be to Apple's advantage to have its users be more productive rhan Windows users.
They are being blinded by the quest for more market share........ AT ANY COST.
Comments
Being compatible with FileMaker by a company that owns and sells you FileMaker is redundant use of resources.
Bring on the next iWork app in '09... Tables!
Seriously, scratch the surface, and you'll find an incredible amount of power buried in there. That's the Apple way... make the initial experience with the app so dead simple as to seem 'too easy'... but provide layers of functionality hidden just under the surface that are hard to beat... but not hard to find.
Just like iMovie '08?
-Clive
iWork will never be a real replacement for AppleWorks until it comes with a communications module.
Actually the AppleWorks that consumers bought had both Windows and Mac versions on the same CD. At least the one I bought in '03 did. I didn't actually know that until I happened to see it in Virtual PC one day, then I took it over to my PC and installed it on there.
Interesting .. What version # is quoted on your copy because I can't find anything pc related on mine.
It's not like the copy he has is suddenly going to stop working. Yeesh.
That's true, unless of course, he someday wants to upgrade his computor .... what do you think the odds are of that EVER happening ....... yeesh.
Bring on the next iWork app in '09... Tables!
Please No!
I got my post on this deleted from Apple's forum, but using plain English names for applications is a very bad idea.
I can google iLife, iMovie, iDVD and iPhoto but try googling Pages, Keynote, Numbers etc and see what you get.
Funny, I have software from over a decade ago that still runs on my MacBook. Perhaps what you meant was that someday he may want to upgrade the software to do more. Since AW hasn't been significantly upgraded in 8 years, I think that's kind of a moot point, don't you?
First off, congratulations on having 10 year old software that still works ... I could have said the same until I upgraded to an intel Imac.
Secondly, check out the specs on Imovie 8 ..... a 3 year old ( in some cases ) computor won't run it ....so the possibiity of an obsolete software timeframe is becoming shorter everyday.
But , most importantly, I think, is what the present and past users of Appleworks are trying to say is: yes, you can get recent software to do the job that Appleworks used to do and probably a better job as well ......... only now you need several apps to do so instead of one. I still think that is sad.
But , most importantly, I think, is what the present and past users of Appleworks are trying to say is: yes, you can get recent software to do the job that Appleworks used to do and probably a better job as well ......... only now you need several apps to do so instead of one. I still think that is sad.
Correction: ...you can get recent software to almost do some of the job that Appleworks used to do.
Yes that is extremely sad. Particularly for users like me that feel Apple is pushing us into a more and more invidious position, where it is hard to not just do the work but do it quickly, simply and efficiently at reasonable cost.
Why? You would think it would be to Apple's advantage to have its users be more productive rhan Windows users.
First off, congratulations on having 10 year old software that still works ... I could have said the same until I upgraded to an intel Imac.
You're right, I misspoke. I have >10yr software that I run on my other machines, but not on my MacBook. However, with the exception of some games, there's nothing I really *want* to run - the modern versions are much, much better.
Secondly, check out the specs on Imovie 8 ..... a 3 year old ( in some cases ) computor won't run it ....so the possibiity of an obsolete software timeframe is becoming shorter everyday.
You're confusing forward and backwards compatibility. At some point, you have to assume that software or hardware you bought years ago are going to be obsolete. I don't expect my 1989 SyQuest cartridge system to work on my MacBook, after all. It was a fantastic system... for the day. Ditto for AW, IMO. It was a great system... for 1999. Now, there are simply too many new technologies that it can't play with. Updating it to do so would necessitate a ground-up rewrite, a starting over, a re-do, a... hey... kinda like iWork.
But , most importantly, I think, is what the present and past users of Appleworks are trying to say is: yes, you can get recent software to do the job that Appleworks used to do and probably a better job as well ......... only now you need several apps to do so instead of one. I still think that is sad.
By that logic, all apps should be merged into one big app. No thanks. Small, dedicated apps that can be easily used with each other will win out over bulky everything-and-the-kitchen-sink monolithic apps any day.
Seriously? Is that what this all boils down to? That you have to click on an icon in the Dock instead of clicking on an icon in a palette?!? That's just... bizarre.
They aren't small, nor easily used, let alone with each other, and when you add up the total cost of all the applications to get a job done they aren't cheap. You are also faced with one or many of the components falling off the twig at any time and starting from scratch again.
One of the nicest things about AppleWorks was the ability to drag one component's file (eg a spreadsheet) into another (say a text layout) and use it there live. I had my invoices set up like that.
Now how do I achieve that in OSX with all its bloatware and high hardware overheads?
Seriously, worst case is copy, paste.
Bloatware? *shakes head*
Have you tried iWork 08? Make a spreadsheet in Numbers, drag it over to Pages, plop it in, and *use it*. No linkback, which is, IMO annoying, but I'm happy for now to see what they set up as the foundations for the data first. You've gotta have that before you start doing the higher levels, or it gets really messy.
The shift to OSX obviously includes dropping legacy programs.
Reading five year old computer data should not present such a problem.
Will only the paper printouts survive?
Interesting .. What version # is quoted on your copy because I can't find anything pc related on mine.
On the proof of purchase sticker it says M9053LL/A. It's AppleWorks 6.2.7 Education Version. In fact although the box is labeled for Mac only (the Requirements don't mention PC), there is a red sticker on the front saying 6.2 Education Version For Mac OS X, Mac OS 8.1-9.2, Windows 95/98/Me/XP, or Windows 2000.
And the CD inside contains both Mac and PC versions in separate sessions.
When I wiped and installed Tiger, I was surprised to find my cwk documents would not open. I installed Appleworks from the Panther discs to continue. The whole point of saving data is for viewing it again in the future. Saving files is an act of faith that they will be recoverable. I take this as part of the "Apple experience."
The shift to OSX obviously includes dropping legacy programs.
Reading five year old computer data should not present such a problem.
Will only the paper printouts survive?
You were surprised that your AppleWorks documents did not open when you didn't have AppleWorks installed? Why should that be surprising?
You can't even open a plain text file if you don't have a text editor application. Why would you expect to be able to open an AppleWorks file without an AppleWorks compatible application?
What's bizarre is that these "small, dedicated apps that can be easily used with each other" aren't.
They aren't small, nor easily used, let alone with each other, and when you add up the total cost of all the applications to get a job done they aren't cheap. You are also faced with one or many of the components falling off the twig at any time and starting from scratch again.
One of the nicest things about AppleWorks was the ability to drag one component's file (eg a spreadsheet) into another (say a text layout) and use it there live. I had my invoices set up like that.
Now how do I achieve that in OSX with all its bloatware and high hardware overheads?
Add up the cost? Ummm... iWork is one bundle which includes all of the current apps. I haven't seen any evidence to suggest that future production apps won't be included as well, or that they are going to split it apart and start selling them separately.
I don't expect my 1989 SyQuest cartridge system to work on my MacBook, after all. It was a fantastic system... for the day.
Funny thing... It probably does work with your MacBook. I had some files backed up on old SyQuest cartridges (40 MB woohooo! or was it 25?) that I wanted to recover and I had given away my IIci ( which only had a floppy drive, anyway so that would have been a pain). Anyway, I bought a Belkin SCSI to firewire adapter on Ebay and plugged everything in, turned it on, and POP! there was my cartridge mounted on the desktop. It's even full plug-and-play! Amazing! I used to have to restart to mount them in System 7.
EDIT: Forgot to mention, this is happening on a 12" PB running Tiger. There's no reason why it wouldn't work on Intel, right?
Anywho, back on topic...
On the proof of purchase sticker it says M9053LL/A. It's AppleWorks 6.2.7 Education Version. In fact although the box is labeled for Mac only (the Requirements don't mention PC), there is a red sticker on the front saying 6.2 Education Version For Mac OS X, Mac OS 8.1-9.2, Windows 95/98/Me/XP, or Windows 2000.
And the CD inside contains both Mac and PC versions in separate sessions.
Thanks for the info ...... mine's not the educational version ....there's the difference.
Correction: ...you can get recent software to almost do some of the job that Appleworks used to do.
Yes that is extremely sad. Particularly for users like me that feel Apple is pushing us into a more and more invidious position, where it is hard to not just do the work but do it quickly, simply and efficiently at reasonable cost.
Why? You would think it would be to Apple's advantage to have its users be more productive rhan Windows users.
They are being blinded by the quest for more market share........ AT ANY COST.