I think this is a waste of time, money, and resources for Apple for a product that has a very limited scope of users. This needs to be integrated into Mac OS X Server or another server application (like Microsoft's Share Point).
People are not going to keep handing money over to Apple for these "services".
That's interesting that you mention Sharepoint. Since when is Sharepoint free? The Sharepoint services that ship with Windows 2003 and 2008 have the cost of the OS license and server hardware. Sharepoint Server is a $10,000+ software solution itself. iWork.com is a bargain especially for SOHOs that don't have the dough or knowledge to set up Sharepoint. Not to mention that the backend of Sharepoint is SQL Server so the complexity has its costs too.
When I heard of iWork.com I immediately thought of Sharepoint as you did. My problem with iWork.com is that it should be integrated in with MobileMe so you could make Sharepoint-like web portals. Maybe they already allow that and I just missed the details. This is a good step for Apple to make in taking on MS and Google.
This move helps Apple side step creating their own RDBMS as with Sharepoint's dependency on SQL Server. I'm interested in what RDBMS Apple uses for the backend of iWork.com. Most likely not MySQL or PostgreSQL. Oracle?
2. one subscription address for all your online apps.
On a side note:
I was well impressed by the new iPhoto. I can see places and faces being part of the next generation address book! The facebook and flickr integration is very impressive and a way better alternative than sharing your pictures on the mobile me web gallery.
Could it be that the new iPhoto is a small teaser of things to come in Snowleopard? Imagine your address book being updated by your friends on Facebook?! That is, whenever a friend changes his address and contact details on facebook.
I used iWork.com today for the first time, and I must say it is very impressive.
It's not trying to do too much, and what it does, it does very well. I was able to get feedback from various people on a 100mb file which is too big to email and few people were interesting in downloading.
iWork.com was a great solution.
As for paying for it, I normally roll my eyes at people who want everything to be free and awesome. I don't mind paying for it.
But for this service, I must admit I don't think I would pay very much. The thing is I don't share docs that much to warrant much of a fee. I think it should be included with mobileme or a fee for people who don't have mobileme.
Finally, there should be corporate bundles. e.g. 20 users for $200 per year, etc.
Tested with one of my staunch 'PC' big pharma client and they were amazed. Sent over a Pages document to comment on and allowed them to downloaded the Word format. They couldn't tell the difference between Pages on screen and the Word file.
Their comment. How the hell did you do it so fast?
Best thing about it, any documents that I am generating are being commented without them getting and messing with the original which can be a dog's breakfast to track. Since there is a perception that everything must be done in Word, so far I have been posting documents in Pages and nobody has noticed any difference. Except, they look better and more professional.
I've been playing with it, too - and I'm liking it. iWork.com is a treat.
Why is Flickr better than a Mobile Me gallery for you?
Well, both Facebook & Flickr are part of a context, community if you like. A place where people can discover, tag, share and comment. Mobile lonely me is more like an isle.
However, Facebook is alotmore personal than Flickr! And you can fiddle with the privacy settings to share your really personal pictures. Facebook is a great place to share your pictures because it is perfectly integrated with the lives of my friends and beloved ones. And you have the added bonus to find out more about the people tagging your pictures
To summarise. Facebook = friends and beloved ones. Flickr = for those without a facebook account.
Maybe the mobile me picture gallery is a great way to give people access to your hi-res pictures. But first, they have to get to know you. It could work as a link in your ? facebook profile
Well, both Facebook & Flickr are part of a context, community if you like. A place where people can discover, tag, share and comment. Mobile lonely me is more like an isle.
However, Facebook is alotmore personal than Flickr! And you can fiddle with the privacy settings to share your really personal pictures. Facebook is a great place to share your pictures because it is perfectly integrated with the lives of my friends and beloved ones. And you have the added bonus to find out more about the people tagging your pictures
To summarise. Facebook = friends and beloved ones. Flickr = for those without a facebook account.
Maybe the mobile me picture gallery is a great way to give people access to your hi-res pictures. But first, they have to get to know you. It could work as a link in your ? facebook profile
It will be interesting to see how many responses you get here. Afterall, you need iWorks 09, a .Mac account and the necessary Mac which most of the posters don't even have.
That's interesting that you mention Sharepoint. Since when is Sharepoint free? The Sharepoint services that ship with Windows 2003 and 2008 have the cost of the OS license and server hardware. Sharepoint Server is a $10,000+ software solution itself. iWork.com is a bargain especially for SOHOs that don't have the dough or knowledge to set up Sharepoint. Not to mention that the backend of Sharepoint is SQL Server so the complexity has its costs too.
When I heard of iWork.com I immediately thought of Sharepoint as you did. My problem with iWork.com is that it should be integrated in with MobileMe so you could make Sharepoint-like web portals. Maybe they already allow that and I just missed the details. This is a good step for Apple to make in taking on MS and Google.
This move helps Apple side step creating their own RDBMS as with Sharepoint's dependency on SQL Server. I'm interested in what RDBMS Apple uses for the backend of iWork.com. Most likely not MySQL or PostgreSQL. Oracle?
I didn't say Share Point was free. You are right. It is very costly. But it's also significantly more powerful than what iWork.com offers. Microsoft offers Share Point online for about $7 per user.
My point is that I feel Apple is wasting its time and money developing a separate solution. I agree with you and that is at a minimum, it should be included with a MobileMe subscription (I don't think they stated that the price of this service will be on top of fees for a MobileMe subscription -- the impression is that it will be a another fee-based service though). Or as I suggested, bundle this document collaboration functionality into Mac OS X Server so that a small business would have an easier time choosing an Apple-based solutions for their businesses.
Tested with one of my staunch 'PC' big pharma client and they were amazed. Sent over a Pages document to comment on and allowed them to downloaded the Word format. They couldn't tell the difference between Pages on screen and the Word file.
Their comment. How the hell did you do it so fast?
Best thing about it, any documents that I am generating are being commented without them getting and messing with the original which can be a dog's breakfast to track. Since there is a perception that everything must be done in Word, so far I have been posting documents in Pages and nobody has noticed any difference. Except, they look better and more professional.
That's pretty cool.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich
I guess Apple can count on you to pay for the service!
If it helps to get and keep clients, I don't see the problem. Though it's not totally certain that it's a separate fee. I don't need to do collaboration like that yet, though I am looking for better alignment features than the old version has. Next time I go near an Apple store I'll have to check in and try it out.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mr O
To summarise. Facebook = friends and beloved ones. Flickr = for those without a facebook account.
Depending on the settings, you can use Facebook to show pictures to people without a facebook account. They even provide you with a link to send.
This is a cool idea, but I just don't see how Apple imagines it to be competitive.
Google offers a full web based text editor for free.
Apple offers a web based way to view documents and make notes, with a usage fee (in addition to already buying the full app).
It just doesn't add up to me.
iWork.com is a testing ground so when Mac OS X 10.7 Server is released, businesses will have an iWork server component at their disposal. I am not saying Apple will be making a play for the corporate world, but due to the success of the iPhone, they really can't ignore it.
I hate this all or nothing. In my case there have been many times I bough a track or album which I found I loved and then bought the real physical CD for perfect sound and package. I'd hate to have to upgrade those. Although I assume I could delete the old downloaded versions from my iTunes. If I did that would they still show up as purchased so I'd have to upgrade? But there are songs I have dowloaded and do want to keep but don't want to have to upgrade. A couple guilty pleasures.
I'm with the majority here, who would pay for this? Any group of people that would need to collaborate on a document isn't using iWork. Sounds like the only organization that uses iWork to collaborate is Apple Inc, and I'm sure they get to use the service for free.
I'm with the majority here, who would pay for this? Any group of people that would need to collaborate on a document isn't using iWork. Sounds like the only organization that uses iWork to collaborate is Apple Inc, and I'm sure they get to use the service for free.
That why they are doing the beta so they can find what demand there is. There may not be the demand Apple see with their sales numbers so it may eventually get wrapped into MobileMe (which it should at some level regardless).
Comments
I think this is a waste of time, money, and resources for Apple for a product that has a very limited scope of users. This needs to be integrated into Mac OS X Server or another server application (like Microsoft's Share Point).
People are not going to keep handing money over to Apple for these "services".
That's interesting that you mention Sharepoint. Since when is Sharepoint free? The Sharepoint services that ship with Windows 2003 and 2008 have the cost of the OS license and server hardware. Sharepoint Server is a $10,000+ software solution itself. iWork.com is a bargain especially for SOHOs that don't have the dough or knowledge to set up Sharepoint. Not to mention that the backend of Sharepoint is SQL Server so the complexity has its costs too.
When I heard of iWork.com I immediately thought of Sharepoint as you did. My problem with iWork.com is that it should be integrated in with MobileMe so you could make Sharepoint-like web portals. Maybe they already allow that and I just missed the details. This is a good step for Apple to make in taking on MS and Google.
This move helps Apple side step creating their own RDBMS as with Sharepoint's dependency on SQL Server. I'm interested in what RDBMS Apple uses for the backend of iWork.com. Most likely not MySQL or PostgreSQL. Oracle?
2. one subscription address for all your online apps.
On a side note:
I was well impressed by the new iPhoto. I can see places and faces being part of the next generation address book! The facebook and flickr integration is very impressive and a way better alternative than sharing your pictures on the mobile me web gallery.
Could it be that the new iPhoto is a small teaser of things to come in Snowleopard? Imagine your address book being updated by your friends on Facebook?! That is, whenever a friend changes his address and contact details on facebook.
It's not trying to do too much, and what it does, it does very well. I was able to get feedback from various people on a 100mb file which is too big to email and few people were interesting in downloading.
iWork.com was a great solution.
As for paying for it, I normally roll my eyes at people who want everything to be free and awesome. I don't mind paying for it.
But for this service, I must admit I don't think I would pay very much. The thing is I don't share docs that much to warrant much of a fee. I think it should be included with mobileme or a fee for people who don't have mobileme.
Finally, there should be corporate bundles. e.g. 20 users for $200 per year, etc.
..... The facebook and flickr integration is very impressive and a way better alternative than sharing your pictures on the mobile me web gallery.
...
Why is Flickr better than a Mobile Me gallery for you?
Has anybody tried it yet?
I have been using it since yesterday.
First impression. Absolutely beautiful.
Fast. Simple. Fast. Simple.
Tested with one of my staunch 'PC' big pharma client and they were amazed. Sent over a Pages document to comment on and allowed them to downloaded the Word format. They couldn't tell the difference between Pages on screen and the Word file.
Their comment. How the hell did you do it so fast?
Best thing about it, any documents that I am generating are being commented without them getting and messing with the original which can be a dog's breakfast to track. Since there is a perception that everything must be done in Word, so far I have been posting documents in Pages and nobody has noticed any difference. Except, they look better and more professional.
I've been playing with it, too - and I'm liking it. iWork.com is a treat.
Why is Flickr better than a Mobile Me gallery for you?
Well, both Facebook & Flickr are part of a context, community if you like. A place where people can discover, tag, share and comment. Mobile lonely me is more like an isle.
However, Facebook is alotmore personal than Flickr! And you can fiddle with the privacy settings to share your really personal pictures. Facebook is a great place to share your pictures because it is perfectly integrated with the lives of my friends and beloved ones. And you have the added bonus to find out more about the people tagging your pictures
To summarise. Facebook = friends and beloved ones. Flickr = for those without a facebook account.
Maybe the mobile me picture gallery is a great way to give people access to your hi-res pictures. But first, they have to get to know you. It could work as a link in your ? facebook profile
Well, both Facebook & Flickr are part of a context, community if you like. A place where people can discover, tag, share and comment. Mobile lonely me is more like an isle.
However, Facebook is alotmore personal than Flickr! And you can fiddle with the privacy settings to share your really personal pictures. Facebook is a great place to share your pictures because it is perfectly integrated with the lives of my friends and beloved ones. And you have the added bonus to find out more about the people tagging your pictures
To summarise. Facebook = friends and beloved ones. Flickr = for those without a facebook account.
Maybe the mobile me picture gallery is a great way to give people access to your hi-res pictures. But first, they have to get to know you. It could work as a link in your ? facebook profile
Interesting, thanks
I couldn't log into the service with my @mac.com address that I still use, I had to change it to @me.com. Anyone else?
My @mac.com works fine.
It will be interesting to see how many responses you get here. Afterall, you need iWorks 09, a .Mac account and the necessary Mac which most of the posters don't even have.
I guess Apple can count on you to pay for the service!
Apple can count on him to pay for anything they slap an Apple logo onto.
That's interesting that you mention Sharepoint. Since when is Sharepoint free? The Sharepoint services that ship with Windows 2003 and 2008 have the cost of the OS license and server hardware. Sharepoint Server is a $10,000+ software solution itself. iWork.com is a bargain especially for SOHOs that don't have the dough or knowledge to set up Sharepoint. Not to mention that the backend of Sharepoint is SQL Server so the complexity has its costs too.
When I heard of iWork.com I immediately thought of Sharepoint as you did. My problem with iWork.com is that it should be integrated in with MobileMe so you could make Sharepoint-like web portals. Maybe they already allow that and I just missed the details. This is a good step for Apple to make in taking on MS and Google.
This move helps Apple side step creating their own RDBMS as with Sharepoint's dependency on SQL Server. I'm interested in what RDBMS Apple uses for the backend of iWork.com. Most likely not MySQL or PostgreSQL. Oracle?
I didn't say Share Point was free. You are right. It is very costly. But it's also significantly more powerful than what iWork.com offers. Microsoft offers Share Point online for about $7 per user.
My point is that I feel Apple is wasting its time and money developing a separate solution. I agree with you and that is at a minimum, it should be included with a MobileMe subscription (I don't think they stated that the price of this service will be on top of fees for a MobileMe subscription -- the impression is that it will be a another fee-based service though). Or as I suggested, bundle this document collaboration functionality into Mac OS X Server so that a small business would have an easier time choosing an Apple-based solutions for their businesses.
Has anybody tried it yet?
I have been using it since yesterday.
First impression. Absolutely beautiful.
Fast. Simple. Fast. Simple.
Tested with one of my staunch 'PC' big pharma client and they were amazed. Sent over a Pages document to comment on and allowed them to downloaded the Word format. They couldn't tell the difference between Pages on screen and the Word file.
Their comment. How the hell did you do it so fast?
Best thing about it, any documents that I am generating are being commented without them getting and messing with the original which can be a dog's breakfast to track. Since there is a perception that everything must be done in Word, so far I have been posting documents in Pages and nobody has noticed any difference. Except, they look better and more professional.
That's pretty cool.
I guess Apple can count on you to pay for the service!
If it helps to get and keep clients, I don't see the problem. Though it's not totally certain that it's a separate fee. I don't need to do collaboration like that yet, though I am looking for better alignment features than the old version has. Next time I go near an Apple store I'll have to check in and try it out.
To summarise. Facebook = friends and beloved ones. Flickr = for those without a facebook account.
Depending on the settings, you can use Facebook to show pictures to people without a facebook account. They even provide you with a link to send.
This is a cool idea, but I just don't see how Apple imagines it to be competitive.
Google offers a full web based text editor for free.
Apple offers a web based way to view documents and make notes, with a usage fee (in addition to already buying the full app).
It just doesn't add up to me.
iWork.com is a testing ground so when Mac OS X 10.7 Server is released, businesses will have an iWork server component at their disposal. I am not saying Apple will be making a play for the corporate world, but due to the success of the iPhone, they really can't ignore it.
Plus, I can't find Bollox in the dictionary. I can find a word with a different spelling. Are you sure that you have the spelling right, Ireland?
Plus, I can't find Bollox in the dictionary. I can find a word with a different spelling. Are you sure that you have the spelling right, Ireland?
It's 'bollocks', as in balls, as in testicles
1. change the silly "mobileme.com" name!
2. one subscription address for all your online apps.
1. Gotta say I agree
2. Hopefully there will be some integration in the future. Seems silly to have to deal with two separate subscription services.
http://www.getbackboard.com/
It's 'bollocks', as in balls, as in testicles
in my dictionary "Bollox" is defined as a cross between Bull "Shat" and Botox... which I find to be an odd combination.
I'm with the majority here, who would pay for this? Any group of people that would need to collaborate on a document isn't using iWork. Sounds like the only organization that uses iWork to collaborate is Apple Inc, and I'm sure they get to use the service for free.
That why they are doing the beta so they can find what demand there is. There may not be the demand Apple see with their sales numbers so it may eventually get wrapped into MobileMe (which it should at some level regardless).