I think you're right about the revenue but there is a part of me that feels like Apple could easily bundle the two programs with Leopard for a nice price and find success.
I'd gladly pay $199 for Leopard/iWork 07/iLife07.
Perhaps there needs to be two SKU.
Base 10.5 for $129 and the Leopard/07 bundle for $199.
Two SKU keep it simply for consumers.
I think multiple SKU's introduces confusion; instead I expect we'll see the following:
Leopard (including iLife/iWork) $199.
Leopard Family Pack (including iLife/iWork) $259
No option to get the apps without Leopard or vice-versa. Leopard has enough value, and with the year off (from the traditional upgrade schedule) Apple has the room in the customer's wallet to get a little more than $129.
Your predictions. Do you think iLife and iWork would come as a bundle with Mac OS X Leopard or separately.
I do not see iLife and iWork being bundled with Leopard, but I do see iWork being like iLife where both are included on new Macs, and also sold separately for those that want to use the newest versions. I can not see either being Leopard only, but I can see 10.4.x as the minimum because of Spotlight.
I do think that when the iLife and iWork apps are installed they will "know" which OS is being used and their preference panes will reflect this. For instance, if Keynote is installed on Leopard then when a new presentation is created you will be able to designate it to run on Leopard only (uses core-animation) or can be run on either Tiger or Leopard (uses whatever is used now). I can see this same happening with slideshows in iPhoto, and charts/reports created by the spreadsheet/database application(s). iWeb, GarageBand, iMovie, and iDVD seem to be "neutral" apps in that they are intended to be viewed/heard independently of the Mac (i.e. web browsers, CD/DVD players). Pages is rumored to be getting two modes, one for word processing and the other for page layout, so the only thing I can see Pages taking advantage of in Leopard is core-animation. In addition to getting the "One Up" and "Two Up" views you will get a "Book" view which will be like what you see in the beginning of the (fairy tale) movies where the book opens up and the narrator reads what is written.
It sounds scary that Apple's applications would be Leopard only. That would mean the OS has changed a lot and most of my current applications might break. I would definitely wait a lot longer before upgrading.
i was sceptical that apple would release ilife/iwork complete with leopard, but then some one bought up wwdc, and how steve talked about delivering the 'complete package'. this kind of swayed me. i would truely love it if this happened, as would many people...
Lets face is: iWork has been a fiasco for Apple. Do not misread me: I love it myself and use it on a daily basis. Especially Keynote is a very able presentation application and beats the #%#% out of Powerpoint. But given that Pages only has a tiny market share (around 2%) in the word processor market and most people don't do presentations, hence don't need Keynote, then Apples money were probably better spent on marketing Macs as having a bundled Office replacement than marketing iWork as a separate entity.
Including iWork with new Macs will generate millions of new iWork users. Most of those switchers need an Office (or Works) replacement. If you then combine that with more advanced .Mac integration than today, Apple may make up for any lost revenue with a lot of new .Mac subscriptions.
I think it is highly likely that new Macs will include iWork: the question is if it will also be included in and dependent on features in the Leopard package. One thing that makes this a possibility, is the apparent delay in the release of iWork '07. It is usually released in early January.
i was sceptical that apple would release ilife/iwork complete with leopard, but then some one bought up wwdc, and how steve talked about delivering the 'complete package'. this kind of swayed me. i would truely love it if this happened, as would many people...
I'm one of those Assholes who said it positively wouldn't happen, but now the Upgrade money is starting to dawn on me...
Lets face is: iWork has been a fiasco for Apple. Do not misread me: I love it myself and use it on a daily basis. Especially Keynote is a very able presentation application and beats the #%#% out of Powerpoint. But given that Pages only has a tiny market share (around 2%) in the word processor market and most people don't do presentations, hence don't need Keynote, then Apples money were probably better spent on marketing Macs as having a bundled Office replacement than marketing iWork as a separate entity.
Including iWork with new Macs will generate millions of new iWork users. Most of those switchers need an Office (or Works) replacement. If you then combine that with more advanced .Mac integration than today, Apple may make up for any lost revenue with a lot of new .Mac subscriptions.
I think it is highly likely that new Macs will include iWork: the question is if it will also be included in and dependent on features in the Leopard package. One thing that makes this a possibility, is the apparent delay in the release of iWork '07. It is usually released in early January.
To be honest, iWork as a suite is incomplete and pages is a much better page layout application than a word processor. To be perfectly honest, I find pages to be quite foreign and unintuitive if used for traditional consumer level word processing tasks. I use those reasons to explain why a consumer level suite isn't included with Macs anymore as opposed to some misguided ideal that traditional productive suites are obsolete or pure greed on Apple's part..
Pure greed, or 'making money' is the ultimate explanation behind any *commercial* enterprise such as Apple. But, we are of course talking about proximate reasons here.
One could rephrase your reason in the reverse: would a more complete iWork package, streamlined for "traditional consumer level word processing tasks", and perhaps including a spreadsheet, be an argument in itself for including it in Leopard or bundling it with new Macs? My answer is no.
It sounds scary that Apple's applications would be Leopard only. That would mean the OS has changed a lot and most of my current applications might break. I would definitely wait a lot longer before upgrading.
No it doesn't. All it means is they introduced new features in the new OS that developers want to use, because it makes their lives easier (such as Core Animation). It does not say anything about the compatibility of existing apps!
No it doesn't. All it means is they introduced new features in the new OS that developers want to use, because it makes their lives easier (such as Core Animation). It does not say anything about the compatibility of existing apps!
I suppose things are a bit easier for me. The only software that I need to work out of the box in Leopard:
TextMate
Yojimbo
Adium
Camino
Mactracker
Linotype FontXplorer
Google Earth
Quicksilver
and Vienna
I suppose I might have to worry about Linotype, but the rest come from developers I have confidence will have their Apps ready.
No it doesn't. All it means is they introduced new features in the new OS that developers want to use, because it makes their lives easier (such as Core Animation). It does not say anything about the compatibility of existing apps!
I installed Quicktime 7.1.3 update and it broke my Casion EXLIM component. Installed Airport update and computer doesn't find wireless connection waking from sleep. If Apple's own apps won't work on a OS one major version prior to leopard, I would be pleasantly surprised if my apps continue to work on the OS with such a big change. I definitely wouldn't rush to upgrade because everything works for me with OS 10.4 now.
You're still confusing backwards compatibility with forwards compatibility.
The OS should always be backwards compatible. Sometimes bits are not, as you mentioned, but that's usually either a bug or a feature considered non-major. For example, there are several changes in the Cocoa runtime between the 32-bit version and the 64-bit version. The reason they haven't implemented those changes before is to maintain backwards compatibility... but they can implement them now since there are no existing 64-bit cocoa apps.
But an OS such as Tiger will not have forwards compatibility with Leopard's features. That's obvious, otherwise who would buy leopard? So if an application designer (such as the team writing iLife) decides they want to use Leopard-only features, they have three options:
Use them, and require Leopard
Do not use them, in order to run on Tiger
Write a custom version of the feature for Tiger users, and swap them at runtime
The first is easiest. The latter is really hard, and requires duplicating a lot of work done by the Leopard engineers. If Apple fancy using such features, I doubt they'd take that path... since they want everyone to upgrade to Leopard anyway.
Can you see now why the fact that an application (be it an Apple one or otherwise) requiring Leopard does not have any bearing on whether another, separate app that is written for Tiger will run on Leopard? The former is a forwards-compatibility issue with Tiger, and the latter is a backwards-compatibility issue with Leopard. Totally unrelated.
The lesson in compatibility is wonderful, but unfortunately my experience with a couple of updates (Airport and Quicktime) just doesn't make me very optimistic that everything will continue to work. I'll hold off for a while, thank you.
It would be cool if it had some kind of basic DB function that I could use to manage citations in Pages. It drives me nuts that nobody so far has created a word processor that handles citations/bibliographies easily and efficiently. I've tried EndNote, but it's so loaded down with superfluous features (from my perspective) that it has become too cumbersome to use.
EndNote used to be great then it was bought out and went to the dark side in my opinion. I use Sente now. Others like Bookends. Problem is your still stuck with MS word or Mellel. Apple needs to give the deelpers for these type of appsthe necessary tools they need to get their programs to wrok with Pages. If that happens, then Word will begin to gather dust on my desktop.
EndNote used to be great then it was bought out and went to the dark side in my opinion. I use Sente now. Others like Bookends. Problem is your still stuck with MS word or Mellel. Apple needs to give the deelpers for these type of appsthe necessary tools they need to get their programs to wrok with Pages. If that happens, then Word will begin to gather dust on my desktop.
Yes!
Apple need to support a plugin API for the iWork apps and/or an officially endorsed mechanism that could replace LinkBack.
I'm not usually one to dig up old threads, but I thought this was better than starting yet another new one on the same topic.
ThinkSecret reports:
Quote:
Updates to iLife and iWork are also expected alongside Mac OS X 10.5 (Leopard) but that they may be rebranded as "iLife Leopard" and "iWork Leopard", dropping the calendar-year naming convention of the previous versions.
If this were true, this would concur with my original thoughts. Many of you were able to persuade me that Apple would never do this and leave legacy 10.x editions unable to run the new software. Perhaps they will offer iLife 07 and iLife Leopard separately, or even bundle the Leopard specific version with Leopard as a few of you have already speculated.
Although practically everyone here will care to disagree with me, I have no doubt in my mind that iLife '07 and iWork '07 will come as part of Leopard. Not only that but they wont be available separately to Leopard, ever. I firmly believe this is the way things will pan out with Leopard because of a number of factors, and I also think Leopard will retail for more than the usual $129, I think it will sell for about $179. I also think the OS will be more radical than most Mac users generally are expecting. I think the Finder will undergo a change of the highest order, incorporating Core Aniamtion in a big way.
Won't it be sweet irony when Microsoft will take Apple to court for bundling it's products with the OS and obstructing the market for MS Office for Mac? *grins wickedly*
No bundling, but iWork and iLife's feature set will be enhanced by Leopard. Sure, they'll run under 10.4.x and earlier, but the cool, need to have it new feature 'X' will only work with Leopard.
Microsoft has gotten away with this sort of thing in the past and it makes sense for Apple to push its user base to upgrade OS ? especially since it seems to have some interesting, cool secret features.
Comments
I think you're right about the revenue but there is a part of me that feels like Apple could easily bundle the two programs with Leopard for a nice price and find success.
I'd gladly pay $199 for Leopard/iWork 07/iLife07.
Perhaps there needs to be two SKU.
Base 10.5 for $129 and the Leopard/07 bundle for $199.
Two SKU keep it simply for consumers.
I think multiple SKU's introduces confusion; instead I expect we'll see the following:
Leopard (including iLife/iWork) $199.
Leopard Family Pack (including iLife/iWork) $259
No option to get the apps without Leopard or vice-versa. Leopard has enough value, and with the year off (from the traditional upgrade schedule) Apple has the room in the customer's wallet to get a little more than $129.
Your predictions. Do you think iLife and iWork would come as a bundle with Mac OS X Leopard or separately.
I do not see iLife and iWork being bundled with Leopard, but I do see iWork being like iLife where both are included on new Macs, and also sold separately for those that want to use the newest versions. I can not see either being Leopard only, but I can see 10.4.x as the minimum because of Spotlight.
I do think that when the iLife and iWork apps are installed they will "know" which OS is being used and their preference panes will reflect this. For instance, if Keynote is installed on Leopard then when a new presentation is created you will be able to designate it to run on Leopard only (uses core-animation) or can be run on either Tiger or Leopard (uses whatever is used now). I can see this same happening with slideshows in iPhoto, and charts/reports created by the spreadsheet/database application(s). iWeb, GarageBand, iMovie, and iDVD seem to be "neutral" apps in that they are intended to be viewed/heard independently of the Mac (i.e. web browsers, CD/DVD players). Pages is rumored to be getting two modes, one for word processing and the other for page layout, so the only thing I can see Pages taking advantage of in Leopard is core-animation. In addition to getting the "One Up" and "Two Up" views you will get a "Book" view which will be like what you see in the beginning of the (fairy tale) movies where the book opens up and the narrator reads what is written.
Including iWork with new Macs will generate millions of new iWork users. Most of those switchers need an Office (or Works) replacement. If you then combine that with more advanced .Mac integration than today, Apple may make up for any lost revenue with a lot of new .Mac subscriptions.
I think it is highly likely that new Macs will include iWork: the question is if it will also be included in and dependent on features in the Leopard package. One thing that makes this a possibility, is the apparent delay in the release of iWork '07. It is usually released in early January.
i was sceptical that apple would release ilife/iwork complete with leopard, but then some one bought up wwdc, and how steve talked about delivering the 'complete package'. this kind of swayed me. i would truely love it if this happened, as would many people...
I'm one of those Assholes who said it positively wouldn't happen, but now the Upgrade money is starting to dawn on me...
Sebastian
Lets face is: iWork has been a fiasco for Apple. Do not misread me: I love it myself and use it on a daily basis. Especially Keynote is a very able presentation application and beats the #%#% out of Powerpoint. But given that Pages only has a tiny market share (around 2%) in the word processor market and most people don't do presentations, hence don't need Keynote, then Apples money were probably better spent on marketing Macs as having a bundled Office replacement than marketing iWork as a separate entity.
Including iWork with new Macs will generate millions of new iWork users. Most of those switchers need an Office (or Works) replacement. If you then combine that with more advanced .Mac integration than today, Apple may make up for any lost revenue with a lot of new .Mac subscriptions.
I think it is highly likely that new Macs will include iWork: the question is if it will also be included in and dependent on features in the Leopard package. One thing that makes this a possibility, is the apparent delay in the release of iWork '07. It is usually released in early January.
To be honest, iWork as a suite is incomplete and pages is a much better page layout application than a word processor. To be perfectly honest, I find pages to be quite foreign and unintuitive if used for traditional consumer level word processing tasks. I use those reasons to explain why a consumer level suite isn't included with Macs anymore as opposed to some misguided ideal that traditional productive suites are obsolete or pure greed on Apple's part..
One could rephrase your reason in the reverse: would a more complete iWork package, streamlined for "traditional consumer level word processing tasks", and perhaps including a spreadsheet, be an argument in itself for including it in Leopard or bundling it with new Macs? My answer is no.
It sounds scary that Apple's applications would be Leopard only. That would mean the OS has changed a lot and most of my current applications might break. I would definitely wait a lot longer before upgrading.
No it doesn't. All it means is they introduced new features in the new OS that developers want to use, because it makes their lives easier (such as Core Animation). It does not say anything about the compatibility of existing apps!
No it doesn't. All it means is they introduced new features in the new OS that developers want to use, because it makes their lives easier (such as Core Animation). It does not say anything about the compatibility of existing apps!
I suppose things are a bit easier for me. The only software that I need to work out of the box in Leopard:
TextMate
Yojimbo
Adium
Camino
Mactracker
Linotype FontXplorer
Google Earth
Quicksilver
and Vienna
I suppose I might have to worry about Linotype, but the rest come from developers I have confidence will have their Apps ready.
Sebastian
No it doesn't. All it means is they introduced new features in the new OS that developers want to use, because it makes their lives easier (such as Core Animation). It does not say anything about the compatibility of existing apps!
I installed Quicktime 7.1.3 update and it broke my Casion EXLIM component. Installed Airport update and computer doesn't find wireless connection waking from sleep. If Apple's own apps won't work on a OS one major version prior to leopard, I would be pleasantly surprised if my apps continue to work on the OS with such a big change. I definitely wouldn't rush to upgrade because everything works for me with OS 10.4 now.
The OS should always be backwards compatible. Sometimes bits are not, as you mentioned, but that's usually either a bug or a feature considered non-major. For example, there are several changes in the Cocoa runtime between the 32-bit version and the 64-bit version. The reason they haven't implemented those changes before is to maintain backwards compatibility... but they can implement them now since there are no existing 64-bit cocoa apps.
But an OS such as Tiger will not have forwards compatibility with Leopard's features. That's obvious, otherwise who would buy leopard? So if an application designer (such as the team writing iLife) decides they want to use Leopard-only features, they have three options:
- Use them, and require Leopard
- Do not use them, in order to run on Tiger
- Write a custom version of the feature for Tiger users, and swap them at runtime
The first is easiest. The latter is really hard, and requires duplicating a lot of work done by the Leopard engineers. If Apple fancy using such features, I doubt they'd take that path... since they want everyone to upgrade to Leopard anyway.Can you see now why the fact that an application (be it an Apple one or otherwise) requiring Leopard does not have any bearing on whether another, separate app that is written for Tiger will run on Leopard? The former is a forwards-compatibility issue with Tiger, and the latter is a backwards-compatibility issue with Leopard. Totally unrelated.
Amorya
It would be cool if it had some kind of basic DB function that I could use to manage citations in Pages. It drives me nuts that nobody so far has created a word processor that handles citations/bibliographies easily and efficiently. I've tried EndNote, but it's so loaded down with superfluous features (from my perspective) that it has become too cumbersome to use.
EndNote used to be great then it was bought out and went to the dark side in my opinion. I use Sente now. Others like Bookends. Problem is your still stuck with MS word or Mellel. Apple needs to give the deelpers for these type of appsthe necessary tools they need to get their programs to wrok with Pages. If that happens, then Word will begin to gather dust on my desktop.
EndNote used to be great then it was bought out and went to the dark side in my opinion. I use Sente now. Others like Bookends. Problem is your still stuck with MS word or Mellel. Apple needs to give the deelpers for these type of appsthe necessary tools they need to get their programs to wrok with Pages. If that happens, then Word will begin to gather dust on my desktop.
Yes!
Apple need to support a plugin API for the iWork apps and/or an officially endorsed mechanism that could replace LinkBack.
ThinkSecret reports:
Updates to iLife and iWork are also expected alongside Mac OS X 10.5 (Leopard) but that they may be rebranded as "iLife Leopard" and "iWork Leopard", dropping the calendar-year naming convention of the previous versions.
If this were true, this would concur with my original thoughts. Many of you were able to persuade me that Apple would never do this and leave legacy 10.x editions unable to run the new software. Perhaps they will offer iLife 07 and iLife Leopard separately, or even bundle the Leopard specific version with Leopard as a few of you have already speculated.
Although practically everyone here will care to disagree with me, I have no doubt in my mind that iLife '07 and iWork '07 will come as part of Leopard. Not only that but they wont be available separately to Leopard, ever. I firmly believe this is the way things will pan out with Leopard because of a number of factors, and I also think Leopard will retail for more than the usual $129, I think it will sell for about $179. I also think the OS will be more radical than most Mac users generally are expecting. I think the Finder will undergo a change of the highest order, incorporating Core Aniamtion in a big way.
Won't it be sweet irony when Microsoft will take Apple to court for bundling it's products with the OS and obstructing the market for MS Office for Mac? *grins wickedly*
In other words: not bloody likely
No bundling, but iWork and iLife's feature set will be enhanced by Leopard. Sure, they'll run under 10.4.x and earlier, but the cool, need to have it new feature 'X' will only work with Leopard.
Microsoft has gotten away with this sort of thing in the past and it makes sense for Apple to push its user base to upgrade OS ? especially since it seems to have some interesting, cool secret features.
Sure, they'll run under 10.4.x and earlier, but the cool, need to have it new feature 'X' will only work with Leopard.
That's pretty much a given, it's the bundling part that would be new and worth writing home about.