With the iMac, Mac Mini, Mac Pro, and Xserve being absent from refreshes they'll need every bit of marketing help.
Apple should really license their OSX in a limited form. Meaning, allow licensees to build desktops and servers with OSX preinstalled but not their bread and butter laptop market. Apple seemingly cannot keep-up the refresh cycle with the industry in those markets.
It is tiresome to keep asking for an xMac, a more powerful yet less expensive Mac Mini, and an iMac that isn't so prone to faulty design and manufacturing. Plus the server and pro workstatoin line really isn't Apple's expertise.
Limited OEM licensing where it doesn't affect Apple's bottomline. That's what Apple needs to do.
I'd normally say "hell no" to Apple licensing clones, but perhaps you're onto something here. Apple is showing less interest in the general computing market, and more interest in consumer electronics. Perhaps the growth of the OS X ecosystem is being limited by the fact that it only comprises of a single computer vendor. Perhaps Apple needs to "outsource" some of its computer making operations.
People who buy laptops aren't likely to buy desktops, and vice-versa. Still, Apple's hardware is a high-margin business. Apple would have to license OS X in a way that's just as lucrative, yet doesn't serve to cripple clones that want to compete with Windows PCs.
Doing battle with Microsoft on their home turf would be awfully risky. Microsoft currently sells MS Office on Mac because it makes them money. However, if Apple starts selling iWork on Windows to undercut office, then they risk aggravating Microsoft, who could discontinue MS Office on Mac, which in turn would kill a lot of the switcher market.
I've been in an Apple store and overheard at least on one occasion a student saying they absolutely needed Microsoft Office if they were going to switch to Mac.
I agree that it would be a risky "ballsy" thing to do, but Apple has done similar in the past. No one is sure on what Microsoft's reaction would be but they would get some really bad press if they did drop Office for Mac at this point. There is no way to interpret such a move as anything but petulant, self-serving, underhanded, etc.
My argument would be that putting iWork on Windows (and assuming it gets some traction) would go a long way towards eliminating that perception that Office is "required" before that kid would switch to a Mac.
As of the iWork '09 version I don't think the old saw about Office on the Mac being a requirement is really true anymore. It might take till iWork 10 for people to realise it though.
I only use iPhoto out of the bundled suite, I often read there are other better alternatives but I can't be bothered to change over. The rest of the bundled software suite I tend to agree with most of the PC crowd who call it "toy" software. In the mid 90's we had Avid software bundled with our computers, far superior to iMovie.
For the casual user, iPhoto and iMovie are great. I used iMovie to do a lot of conversions from VHS to DVD and it was really spiffy. Most users don't want Avid and its costs when iMovie is "free" when purchasing a Macbook, Macbook Pro, iMac, etc.
I hear that MS licenses it's OS for about $40 a computer. That was a few years ago so who knows what Vista brings in and i'm sure it depends on the country.
Apple cannot live on $40 license fees. The increase in market penetration would mean nothing really.
I disagree that Apple doesn't have expertise in workstations. Anyone who's been around Apple for a while fondly remembers the IIFX or the 9100, 9600 series. Apple's always developed nice workstations if you paid the price. Don't try to tell me that a Dell or HP workstation is somehow superior i'd rather buy a Boxx workstation frankly.
The hardware is fine. I'm sick of reading about complaints. What's going to propel future growth and performance is software optimization. Everyone here seems to want to focus on beefing up the engine horsepower without modifying the transmission (sorry ..yet another car analogy)
Apple knows that it is doing folks. Snow Leopard is Apple "getting it" and realizing that they have to cut legacy cruft and move forward quickly.
As of the iWork '09 version I don't think the old saw about Office on the Mac being a requirement is really true anymore. It might take till iWork 10 for people to realise it though.
As long as the corporate world uses Excel, Office for the Mac is a requirement. Name me any major corporation that uses Numbers 09?
They always joke the back of an apple computer is more beautiful than the front of any other brand's.
How long before they say the underside of their desks, with the bags and printers etc. is more beautiful/useful than the top of a counter at any other store?
For the casual user, iPhoto and iMovie are great. I used iMovie to do a lot of conversions from VHS to DVD and it was really spiffy. Most users don't want Avid and its costs when iMovie is "free" when purchasing a Macbook, Macbook Pro, iMac, etc.
Focussing on software and in particular the iLife suite and iWorks is a good move. Apple is targeting switchers in their stores and they need to sell the usefulness and appeal of the Mac in a few minutes. iLife looks appealing and it is also aspirational - iLife and iWork makes digital housekeeping look fun. It is a 'hook', not much more, not designed to appeal to users of Coda, or Avid. So when potential switchers walk through the store, how do you convince them of the benefits of using Macs? Hardware is nice but the fascination soon vanes. The juice is in the software but it is a difficult thing to show. It takes too long. How many times have I gone in to an Apple store, or any hardware related store and poked the hardware, clicked a few icons and left? Focussing on the iLife suite and iWorks is exactly right. Apple should have instructional videos running on screens as well as having mini seminars showing how easy it is to, say, make a book. Like I said - its aspirational.
It won't happen. Apple want switchers on their own terms. Clones don't fit into those terms. SJ has repeatedly stated that numbers per se is of no interest to Apple. What would Apple gain form a licensing deal other than numbers? Money is important but Apple is flush with the stuff and it is not money that drives Apple. Under the present management Apple would rather fold than become another Dell.
A lot depends on the kind of switcher you're after. There's a large market of people who take pictures and have no interest in trying out various third party photo apps. Many have been burnt by the crap that came with their camera.
My guess: Apple is after the millions of people with digital cameras who dread trying to do something with the photos on the computer. Making iPhoto their best bet to sell a Mac. We've all read about how many Macs Photo Booth closed the sale on. iPhoto is a candidate to do the same thing, using the face recognition as a lead-in.
I agree Garage Band is niche, I don't understand why something like that is included. Then again, I'm always shocked at how many people I know who are in a "band" or aspire to be in a band.
We all forget that there's a HUGE target audience outside the kind of people who read AppleInsider. They don't look at a computer the way we do. They don't want to research software. iLife included - that's all they want to hear.
I'm curious. What aspects of the iWork suite make it better than the Office suite? I've read in-depth comparisions of both, and reviews and comments point to the contrary. You can't just cough up a comment like that and not explain what it is about iWork that makes it "just a better product" than Office.
As one who admittedly uses Office, I find this interesting.
This caught my eye. As a Mac user you should know better than to compare products feature and capability to feature and capability. I have been a long-time Office power user and I'm very comfortable working around those programs (well, except in the latest Windows versions, which frustrate the hell out of me). iWork offers up all the regular ease-of-use, wow, and and innovation you might have always expected from Apple with some real capabilities, and that is what I love so much more about iWork than Office.
A while ago I downloaded the trial and forced myself to stop using Office whenever possible to give it a shot, and I was thoroughly impressed. Keynote and Pages are both much much better than Powerpoint and Word (though Word will always have more obscure features). The only one I'm iffy about is Numbers. As an Excel power user there are a number of features Numbers just doesn't have, such as frozen panes and it was also more limited in terms of formulas. They might have addressed the formulas limitation with the latest release but I doubt they've got frozen panes (correct me if I'm wrong on this one, anybody). Apple took a whole new approach to spreadsheets which isn't so compatible with this. But I must say--they have done some incredibly innovative stuff in Numbers, and it has some really awesome features Excel can't even touch. Most of my new spreadsheets have been created in Numbers but sometimes I still use Excel for certain old features that make certain tasks much easier.
Like the iPhone, you have to try it to truly appreciate what it has to offer.
No apology necessary for such a well-written and intelligent post. It is encouraging that these pages still contain such useful contributions, despite the increasing number of OldWhiners and trolls that seem to have discovered AI, and the resultant tedium all round.
No apology necessary for such a well-written and intelligent post. It is encouraging that these pages still contain such useful contributions, despite the increasing number of OldWhiners and trolls that seem to have discovered AI, and the resultant tedium all round.
I concur. Thought it was an excellent post myself. I think it encapsulated what I like about Apple. They appear to design software so that it's functional without succumbing to too much feature bloat. Not everything works great from the get go but the evolution tends to refine rough edges and add new twists rather than dump in a bunch of features that look good for marketing.
This caught my eye. As a Mac user you should know better than to compare products feature and capability to feature and capability. I have been a long-time Office power user and I'm very comfortable working around those programs (well, except in the latest Windows versions, which frustrate the hell out of me). iWork offers up all the regular ease-of-use, wow, and and innovation you might have always expected from Apple with some real capabilities, and that is what I love so much more about iWork than Office.
A while ago I downloaded the trial and forced myself to stop using Office whenever possible to give it a shot, and I was thoroughly impressed. Keynote and Pages are both much much better than Powerpoint and Word (though Word will always have more obscure features). The only one I'm iffy about is Numbers. As an Excel power user there are a number of features Numbers just doesn't have, such as frozen panes and it was also more limited in terms of formulas. They might have addressed the formulas limitation with the latest release but I doubt they've got frozen panes (correct me if I'm wrong on this one, anybody). Apple took a whole new approach to spreadsheets which isn't so compatible with this. But I must say--they have done some incredibly innovative stuff in Numbers, and it has some really awesome features Excel can't even touch. Most of my new spreadsheets have been created in Numbers but sometimes I still use Excel for certain old features that make certain tasks much easier.
Like the iPhone, you have to try it to truly appreciate what it has to offer.
Although I am slightly confused as to the meaning and direction of your first sentence, whoever said I was a Mac user?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Virgil-TB2
Well any review will have it's biases including mine. I spend a good part of the day every day training people how to use software packages in a University environment and troubleshooting their issues however so I think I have some insight into actual use.
I find most reviews of iWork to date have focussed on feature comparison with the classic "check-box" approach that really avoids talking about the average users needs, likes/dislikes etc. so when you read a review of iWork it's usually about how it lacks this obscure arcane feature or that, and how it's "not quite as good as office" as a result. The last version lacked a few fairly basic features like mail-merge etc. but the current version has pretty much patched up these holes IMO.
This kind of criticism gets less and less useful as the product approaches feature parity also. If you envision an exponential curve, you'll get what I mean. Down at the low end of the curve, if one product lacks a really base level feature like printing or scrolling, the difference is crucial. At the top end of the curve (where we are now), the inability to do some smaller feature that only a tiny subset of users need is far less critical and the general criticism of non-parity on features kind of falls apart.
A lot of reviews also focus on the business end of things and how iWork is not ready for business" (I disagree), and then mention obscure features that a fortune 500 company might find essential, but that the average small business user never encounters. They also never talk about the reality that the majority of users of Office, are not even of the level of a small business owner, but really just Joe and Jane consumer, college students, and bloggers. So this is essentially a false requirement placed on the product by the reviewer.
When I talk about a "better" product, what I am talking about is really an ease of use argument and the fact that it is a "new" product designed form the ground up as opposed to the clunky feature-bloated patchwork that is Office and the many Office-clones (free and otherwise) you can find. Office has numerous bugs, gotchas, and workarounds. For instance one that always bugged me is that there are two completely different and completely incompatible ways to do pagination in Word and rather than highlight them as what they are (different), Office hides them under the same interface fooling you into thinking they are the same. When one interferes with the other (say in a compound document), they fail completely but the user is left with no idea *why* the page numbers are not working, let alone a way to fix it. Another Word problem is the way in which it deals with any English language that is not US English (it basically doesn't). As an English speaker, I must have lost thousands of hours over the last ten years just trying to force Word to operate properly in this regard.
Office is literally chock-a-block full of these kinds of glitches and workarounds, whereas iwork is smooth, fast, and logical. Once you get used to the slightly different paradigm (because yes it is slightly different), everything works exactly as it should, is consistent, discoverable etc. iWork is an excellent product that is also an order of magnitude cheaper than Office and completely suitable for the average consumer, and right up to the level of a small business user or web concern. It won't be a choice that makes sense for a large corporation, but it's not intending to be.
Like most Apple products, once people discover it and get over the initial "this is kinda different" situation, I find they generally like it so much it's hard to pry it out of their hands. Which is why I suggested it would be good to port to Windows.
(apologies for the super-long post)
Thank you Virgil for a very insightful reply. I'll agree on the majority of your points, although I'm not entirely sure about the extent to which bugs, gotchas, and workarounds plague the suite, as I have rarely encountered such using Office '07. In fact, I'm one of those rare few who finds that Office version rather enjoyable to use (functionally speaking). I have to disagree, though, on the languages bit. I commonly type using Asian font (I'm a white guy, fyi) and have never run into any formating and display issues. Not sure if you're refering to the Mac verison of Office, to which I can't help you on that one. But any language (provided you've installed the font files to view and use them) from the Window's language toolbar is perfectly compatible within Word, etc.
I would give iWork the old college try, provided Apple were to release it into the wild. Especially Keynote, which I salivate for over Powerpoint.
Although I am slightly confused as to the meaning and direction of your first sentence, whoever said I was a Mac user?
Haha... sorry. It didn't occur to me that you might be a PC user who can't even use iWork, though it should have. And that probably makes the concept of actually using the trial a little less realistic for you.
It won't happen. Apple want switchers on their own terms. Clones don't fit into those terms. SJ has repeatedly stated that numbers per se is of no interest to Apple. What would Apple gain form a licensing deal other than numbers? Money is important but Apple is flush with the stuff and it is not money that drives Apple. Under the present management Apple would rather fold than become another Dell.
SJ has said a lot of things that eventually changed. Remember the infamous "hell has frozen over"? Or infamous iPod HiFi speech :"I'm an audiophile," Jobs said. "I've had stereos costing, well I won't say because you'll think I'm crazy. But, costing a lot more. And, I'm thinking of getting rid of mine for this." And DRM necessary, etc.
Dell is not Microsoft. Switchers will eventually stall unless the OS is sold to non-Apple computers.
I find most reviews of iWork to date have focussed on feature comparison with the classic "check-box" approach that really avoids talking about the average users needs, likes/dislikes etc. so when you read a review of iWork it's usually about how it lacks this...
... whereas iwork is smooth, fast, and logical.
(apologies for the super-long post) [no worries mate!]
Amen, Brother Virgil! You're singing to the choir.
However, I teach chemistry in a university that is almost exclusively Wintel; and it is, in fact, a matter of small but 'mission-critical' differences in document layout, styling etc. that have me locked in to using the patched up, cobbled together, feature bloated, illogical mess that is the MS Office suite. If your job involves swapping and editing heavily styled documents with Windows users, it's just too much fuss and bother (last time I tried it) to use something carefully designed for a real human being.
So on the computer side, Apple is only highlighting two software packages: iLife and iWork (one of which they'll get free if they buy a Mac). Wow, that sounds, well, kind of pathetic. Not even going to attempt to make the Mac look like it has a good selection of 3rd-party apps...
1. why wouldn't they focus on the in house software that they don't have to share profits on
2. ilife is on every computer, free. iwork is the one you have to pay for and it is still half the price of Microsoft Office but can open the files from that package (sans the MS exclusive macros)
also, i have yet to see a store with a front register. which is the point of the handhelds, the printers and the bags which have existed in many stores for a while. a front register that you are going to walk by to leave anyway is not a big deal. it is that the register is back in the back in most stores that is the issue. you have to run a gauntlet to get to the register, stand in line and then run it again to get out.
and the focus on what you can do is definitely a good idea since most folks are not computer geeks and don't really know the difference between hard drives and ram. so what is going to win them over is what you can do with what you are getting rather than tech specs
Quote:
Originally Posted by macFanDave
Now, if the Apple Store would load that software on a machine and maybe demo it, they can successfully sell copies.
the game there is that you can't just pick whatever you want and toss it on a machine. there are licenses to get, monies to pay etc. what's on those machines and even on their walls is carefully plotted out.
Amen, Brother Virgil! You're singing to the choir.
However, I teach chemistry in a university that is almost exclusively Wintel; and it is, in fact, a matter of small but 'mission-critical' differences in document layout, styling etc. that have me locked in to using the patched up, cobbled together, feature bloated, illogical mess that is the MS Office suite. If your job involves swapping and editing heavily styled documents with Windows users, it's just too much fuss and bother (last time I tried it) to use something carefully designed for a real human being.
-Enz
And then there is plain old familiarity. We tend to preach "Macs are so much easier to use than Windows" (or at least that used to be a common refrain). But if you are used to Windows, a Mac is not easier to use. Likewise, if you are used to Excel, why bother switching? I have tried Numbers many times but I always struggle. I am getting better (not a frequent spreadsheet user) and familiarity is beginning to make the experience less frustrating. I have also tried NeoOffice which seems to me extremely able in spite of a somewhat antiquated look. But as soon as I am sent an excel doc which renders differently, or has macros that don't work, I ask myself why I am even bothering? I also have this nagging feeling that Numbers may not last. Then what happens to all my numbers docs? I mean is Apple REALLY committed to iWork?
Comments
...Simply open up Apple's OS to other hardware manufacturers.
With the iMac, Mac Mini, Mac Pro, and Xserve being absent from refreshes they'll need every bit of marketing help.
Apple should really license their OSX in a limited form. Meaning, allow licensees to build desktops and servers with OSX preinstalled but not their bread and butter laptop market. Apple seemingly cannot keep-up the refresh cycle with the industry in those markets.
It is tiresome to keep asking for an xMac, a more powerful yet less expensive Mac Mini, and an iMac that isn't so prone to faulty design and manufacturing. Plus the server and pro workstatoin line really isn't Apple's expertise.
Limited OEM licensing where it doesn't affect Apple's bottomline. That's what Apple needs to do.
I'd normally say "hell no" to Apple licensing clones, but perhaps you're onto something here. Apple is showing less interest in the general computing market, and more interest in consumer electronics. Perhaps the growth of the OS X ecosystem is being limited by the fact that it only comprises of a single computer vendor. Perhaps Apple needs to "outsource" some of its computer making operations.
People who buy laptops aren't likely to buy desktops, and vice-versa. Still, Apple's hardware is a high-margin business. Apple would have to license OS X in a way that's just as lucrative, yet doesn't serve to cripple clones that want to compete with Windows PCs.
Doing battle with Microsoft on their home turf would be awfully risky. Microsoft currently sells MS Office on Mac because it makes them money. However, if Apple starts selling iWork on Windows to undercut office, then they risk aggravating Microsoft, who could discontinue MS Office on Mac, which in turn would kill a lot of the switcher market.
I've been in an Apple store and overheard at least on one occasion a student saying they absolutely needed Microsoft Office if they were going to switch to Mac.
I agree that it would be a risky "ballsy" thing to do, but Apple has done similar in the past. No one is sure on what Microsoft's reaction would be but they would get some really bad press if they did drop Office for Mac at this point. There is no way to interpret such a move as anything but petulant, self-serving, underhanded, etc.
My argument would be that putting iWork on Windows (and assuming it gets some traction) would go a long way towards eliminating that perception that Office is "required" before that kid would switch to a Mac.
As of the iWork '09 version I don't think the old saw about Office on the Mac being a requirement is really true anymore. It might take till iWork 10 for people to realise it though.
I only use iPhoto out of the bundled suite, I often read there are other better alternatives but I can't be bothered to change over. The rest of the bundled software suite I tend to agree with most of the PC crowd who call it "toy" software. In the mid 90's we had Avid software bundled with our computers, far superior to iMovie.
For the casual user, iPhoto and iMovie are great. I used iMovie to do a lot of conversions from VHS to DVD and it was really spiffy. Most users don't want Avid and its costs when iMovie is "free" when purchasing a Macbook, Macbook Pro, iMac, etc.
Apple cannot live on $40 license fees. The increase in market penetration would mean nothing really.
I disagree that Apple doesn't have expertise in workstations. Anyone who's been around Apple for a while fondly remembers the IIFX or the 9100, 9600 series. Apple's always developed nice workstations if you paid the price. Don't try to tell me that a Dell or HP workstation is somehow superior i'd rather buy a Boxx workstation frankly.
The hardware is fine. I'm sick of reading about complaints. What's going to propel future growth and performance is software optimization. Everyone here seems to want to focus on beefing up the engine horsepower without modifying the transmission (sorry ..yet another car analogy)
Apple knows that it is doing folks. Snow Leopard is Apple "getting it" and realizing that they have to cut legacy cruft and move forward quickly.
As of the iWork '09 version I don't think the old saw about Office on the Mac being a requirement is really true anymore. It might take till iWork 10 for people to realise it though.
As long as the corporate world uses Excel, Office for the Mac is a requirement. Name me any major corporation that uses Numbers 09?
How long before they say the underside of their desks, with the bags and printers etc. is more beautiful/useful than the top of a counter at any other store?
For the casual user, iPhoto and iMovie are great. I used iMovie to do a lot of conversions from VHS to DVD and it was really spiffy. Most users don't want Avid and its costs when iMovie is "free" when purchasing a Macbook, Macbook Pro, iMac, etc.
Focussing on software and in particular the iLife suite and iWorks is a good move. Apple is targeting switchers in their stores and they need to sell the usefulness and appeal of the Mac in a few minutes. iLife looks appealing and it is also aspirational - iLife and iWork makes digital housekeeping look fun. It is a 'hook', not much more, not designed to appeal to users of Coda, or Avid. So when potential switchers walk through the store, how do you convince them of the benefits of using Macs? Hardware is nice but the fascination soon vanes. The juice is in the software but it is a difficult thing to show. It takes too long. How many times have I gone in to an Apple store, or any hardware related store and poked the hardware, clicked a few icons and left? Focussing on the iLife suite and iWorks is exactly right. Apple should have instructional videos running on screens as well as having mini seminars showing how easy it is to, say, make a book. Like I said - its aspirational.
will seek to reel in passersby, window shoppers and the curious
Comic Genius
It won't happen. Apple want switchers on their own terms. Clones don't fit into those terms. SJ has repeatedly stated that numbers per se is of no interest to Apple. What would Apple gain form a licensing deal other than numbers? Money is important but Apple is flush with the stuff and it is not money that drives Apple. Under the present management Apple would rather fold than become another Dell.
My guess: Apple is after the millions of people with digital cameras who dread trying to do something with the photos on the computer. Making iPhoto their best bet to sell a Mac. We've all read about how many Macs Photo Booth closed the sale on. iPhoto is a candidate to do the same thing, using the face recognition as a lead-in.
I agree Garage Band is niche, I don't understand why something like that is included. Then again, I'm always shocked at how many people I know who are in a "band" or aspire to be in a band.
We all forget that there's a HUGE target audience outside the kind of people who read AppleInsider. They don't look at a computer the way we do. They don't want to research software. iLife included - that's all they want to hear.
I'm curious. What aspects of the iWork suite make it better than the Office suite? I've read in-depth comparisions of both, and reviews and comments point to the contrary. You can't just cough up a comment like that and not explain what it is about iWork that makes it "just a better product" than Office.
As one who admittedly uses Office, I find this interesting.
This caught my eye. As a Mac user you should know better than to compare products feature and capability to feature and capability. I have been a long-time Office power user and I'm very comfortable working around those programs (well, except in the latest Windows versions, which frustrate the hell out of me). iWork offers up all the regular ease-of-use, wow, and and innovation you might have always expected from Apple with some real capabilities, and that is what I love so much more about iWork than Office.
A while ago I downloaded the trial and forced myself to stop using Office whenever possible to give it a shot, and I was thoroughly impressed. Keynote and Pages are both much much better than Powerpoint and Word (though Word will always have more obscure features). The only one I'm iffy about is Numbers. As an Excel power user there are a number of features Numbers just doesn't have, such as frozen panes and it was also more limited in terms of formulas. They might have addressed the formulas limitation with the latest release but I doubt they've got frozen panes (correct me if I'm wrong on this one, anybody). Apple took a whole new approach to spreadsheets which isn't so compatible with this. But I must say--they have done some incredibly innovative stuff in Numbers, and it has some really awesome features Excel can't even touch. Most of my new spreadsheets have been created in Numbers but sometimes I still use Excel for certain old features that make certain tasks much easier.
Like the iPhone, you have to try it to truly appreciate what it has to offer.
(apologies for the super-long post)
No apology necessary for such a well-written and intelligent post. It is encouraging that these pages still contain such useful contributions, despite the increasing number of OldWhiners
No apology necessary for such a well-written and intelligent post. It is encouraging that these pages still contain such useful contributions, despite the increasing number of OldWhiners
I concur. Thought it was an excellent post myself. I think it encapsulated what I like about Apple. They appear to design software so that it's functional without succumbing to too much feature bloat. Not everything works great from the get go but the evolution tends to refine rough edges and add new twists rather than dump in a bunch of features that look good for marketing.
This caught my eye. As a Mac user you should know better than to compare products feature and capability to feature and capability. I have been a long-time Office power user and I'm very comfortable working around those programs (well, except in the latest Windows versions, which frustrate the hell out of me). iWork offers up all the regular ease-of-use, wow, and and innovation you might have always expected from Apple with some real capabilities, and that is what I love so much more about iWork than Office.
A while ago I downloaded the trial and forced myself to stop using Office whenever possible to give it a shot, and I was thoroughly impressed. Keynote and Pages are both much much better than Powerpoint and Word (though Word will always have more obscure features). The only one I'm iffy about is Numbers. As an Excel power user there are a number of features Numbers just doesn't have, such as frozen panes and it was also more limited in terms of formulas. They might have addressed the formulas limitation with the latest release but I doubt they've got frozen panes (correct me if I'm wrong on this one, anybody). Apple took a whole new approach to spreadsheets which isn't so compatible with this. But I must say--they have done some incredibly innovative stuff in Numbers, and it has some really awesome features Excel can't even touch. Most of my new spreadsheets have been created in Numbers but sometimes I still use Excel for certain old features that make certain tasks much easier.
Like the iPhone, you have to try it to truly appreciate what it has to offer.
Although I am slightly confused as to the meaning and direction of your first sentence, whoever said I was a Mac user?
Well any review will have it's biases including mine. I spend a good part of the day every day training people how to use software packages in a University environment and troubleshooting their issues however so I think I have some insight into actual use.
I find most reviews of iWork to date have focussed on feature comparison with the classic "check-box" approach that really avoids talking about the average users needs, likes/dislikes etc. so when you read a review of iWork it's usually about how it lacks this obscure arcane feature or that, and how it's "not quite as good as office" as a result. The last version lacked a few fairly basic features like mail-merge etc. but the current version has pretty much patched up these holes IMO.
This kind of criticism gets less and less useful as the product approaches feature parity also. If you envision an exponential curve, you'll get what I mean. Down at the low end of the curve, if one product lacks a really base level feature like printing or scrolling, the difference is crucial. At the top end of the curve (where we are now), the inability to do some smaller feature that only a tiny subset of users need is far less critical and the general criticism of non-parity on features kind of falls apart.
A lot of reviews also focus on the business end of things and how iWork is not ready for business" (I disagree), and then mention obscure features that a fortune 500 company might find essential, but that the average small business user never encounters. They also never talk about the reality that the majority of users of Office, are not even of the level of a small business owner, but really just Joe and Jane consumer, college students, and bloggers. So this is essentially a false requirement placed on the product by the reviewer.
When I talk about a "better" product, what I am talking about is really an ease of use argument and the fact that it is a "new" product designed form the ground up as opposed to the clunky feature-bloated patchwork that is Office and the many Office-clones (free and otherwise) you can find. Office has numerous bugs, gotchas, and workarounds. For instance one that always bugged me is that there are two completely different and completely incompatible ways to do pagination in Word and rather than highlight them as what they are (different), Office hides them under the same interface fooling you into thinking they are the same. When one interferes with the other (say in a compound document), they fail completely but the user is left with no idea *why* the page numbers are not working, let alone a way to fix it. Another Word problem is the way in which it deals with any English language that is not US English (it basically doesn't). As an English speaker, I must have lost thousands of hours over the last ten years just trying to force Word to operate properly in this regard.
Office is literally chock-a-block full of these kinds of glitches and workarounds, whereas iwork is smooth, fast, and logical. Once you get used to the slightly different paradigm (because yes it is slightly different), everything works exactly as it should, is consistent, discoverable etc. iWork is an excellent product that is also an order of magnitude cheaper than Office and completely suitable for the average consumer, and right up to the level of a small business user or web concern. It won't be a choice that makes sense for a large corporation, but it's not intending to be.
Like most Apple products, once people discover it and get over the initial "this is kinda different" situation, I find they generally like it so much it's hard to pry it out of their hands. Which is why I suggested it would be good to port to Windows.
(apologies for the super-long post)
Thank you Virgil for a very insightful reply. I'll agree on the majority of your points, although I'm not entirely sure about the extent to which bugs, gotchas, and workarounds plague the suite, as I have rarely encountered such using Office '07. In fact, I'm one of those rare few who finds that Office version rather enjoyable to use (functionally speaking). I have to disagree, though, on the languages bit. I commonly type using Asian font (I'm a white guy, fyi) and have never run into any formating and display issues. Not sure if you're refering to the Mac verison of Office, to which I can't help you on that one. But any language (provided you've installed the font files to view and use them) from the Window's language toolbar is perfectly compatible within Word, etc.
I would give iWork the old college try, provided Apple were to release it into the wild. Especially Keynote, which I salivate for over Powerpoint.
Although I am slightly confused as to the meaning and direction of your first sentence, whoever said I was a Mac user?
Haha... sorry. It didn't occur to me that you might be a PC user who can't even use iWork, though it should have. And that probably makes the concept of actually using the trial a little less realistic for you.
It won't happen. Apple want switchers on their own terms. Clones don't fit into those terms. SJ has repeatedly stated that numbers per se is of no interest to Apple. What would Apple gain form a licensing deal other than numbers? Money is important but Apple is flush with the stuff and it is not money that drives Apple. Under the present management Apple would rather fold than become another Dell.
SJ has said a lot of things that eventually changed. Remember the infamous "hell has frozen over"? Or infamous iPod HiFi speech :"I'm an audiophile," Jobs said. "I've had stereos costing, well I won't say because you'll think I'm crazy. But, costing a lot more. And, I'm thinking of getting rid of mine for this."
Dell is not Microsoft. Switchers will eventually stall unless the OS is sold to non-Apple computers.
...
I find most reviews of iWork to date have focussed on feature comparison with the classic "check-box" approach that really avoids talking about the average users needs, likes/dislikes etc. so when you read a review of iWork it's usually about how it lacks this...
... whereas iwork is smooth, fast, and logical.
(apologies for the super-long post) [no worries mate!]
Amen, Brother Virgil! You're singing to the choir.
However, I teach chemistry in a university that is almost exclusively Wintel; and it is, in fact, a matter of small but 'mission-critical' differences in document layout, styling etc. that have me locked in to using the patched up, cobbled together, feature bloated, illogical mess that is the MS Office suite. If your job involves swapping and editing heavily styled documents with Windows users, it's just too much fuss and bother (last time I tried it) to use something carefully designed for a real human being.
-Enz
So on the computer side, Apple is only highlighting two software packages: iLife and iWork (one of which they'll get free if they buy a Mac). Wow, that sounds, well, kind of pathetic. Not even going to attempt to make the Mac look like it has a good selection of 3rd-party apps...
1. why wouldn't they focus on the in house software that they don't have to share profits on
2. ilife is on every computer, free. iwork is the one you have to pay for and it is still half the price of Microsoft Office but can open the files from that package (sans the MS exclusive macros)
also, i have yet to see a store with a front register. which is the point of the handhelds, the printers and the bags which have existed in many stores for a while. a front register that you are going to walk by to leave anyway is not a big deal. it is that the register is back in the back in most stores that is the issue. you have to run a gauntlet to get to the register, stand in line and then run it again to get out.
and the focus on what you can do is definitely a good idea since most folks are not computer geeks and don't really know the difference between hard drives and ram. so what is going to win them over is what you can do with what you are getting rather than tech specs
Now, if the Apple Store would load that software on a machine and maybe demo it, they can successfully sell copies.
the game there is that you can't just pick whatever you want and toss it on a machine. there are licenses to get, monies to pay etc. what's on those machines and even on their walls is carefully plotted out.
Amen, Brother Virgil! You're singing to the choir.
However, I teach chemistry in a university that is almost exclusively Wintel; and it is, in fact, a matter of small but 'mission-critical' differences in document layout, styling etc. that have me locked in to using the patched up, cobbled together, feature bloated, illogical mess that is the MS Office suite. If your job involves swapping and editing heavily styled documents with Windows users, it's just too much fuss and bother (last time I tried it) to use something carefully designed for a real human being.
-Enz
And then there is plain old familiarity. We tend to preach "Macs are so much easier to use than Windows" (or at least that used to be a common refrain). But if you are used to Windows, a Mac is not easier to use. Likewise, if you are used to Excel, why bother switching? I have tried Numbers many times but I always struggle. I am getting better (not a frequent spreadsheet user) and familiarity is beginning to make the experience less frustrating. I have also tried NeoOffice which seems to me extremely able in spite of a somewhat antiquated look. But as soon as I am sent an excel doc which renders differently, or has macros that don't work, I ask myself why I am even bothering? I also have this nagging feeling that Numbers may not last. Then what happens to all my numbers docs? I mean is Apple REALLY committed to iWork?