I imagine that, after all this hubbub, at least some of the functionality will be restored eventually. For the time being, I'm sticking with '09.
But another thing I noticed, and have not seen any comments on, is the issue of file size -- both the apps themselves and the files they generate. The new iWork and iLife apps are huge compared to their predecessors -- 2 or 3 times the size, at least. Why? And more importantly, the files that Pages 5.0 (for example) generates are unnecessarily large, wasting disk space and making them harder to share easily. I opened a simple, <20 KB Word doc in Pages 5.0, and when I saved it in Pages format, it was almost 500 KB! What on earth for? Even when I saved it in Pages '09 format, it was still around 200 KB. I realize that disk space is not as much of an issue on PCs nowadays, but it is on phones and tablets, and when sending by email, etc. I think Apple could work a little more on using that space more efficiently.
Apple did this with iMovie a ways back. They had iMovie, they introduced a new version that was WAY different, it was still going through it's ironing out period so they offered the original iMovie which people were used to until the new iMovie was fully updated. NO BIG DEAL.
Same thing, only this is for an app they normally charge for vs the new free version whereas iMovie they didn't charge for. Same thing with FCPX.
Any time there is a new major release of ANY software package, it takes about one or two updates to get things worked out. That's TYPICAL of ANY software.
Heck, I had customers that would wait until SP 2 came out before they would update their employee's computers with the latest version of Windows, because it took Micorosft at least one or two service packs to fix all of the problems. Ummmm. That's 2 years. It typically does not take Apple 2 years to fix any of their software, most of it is fixed (the majority of the problems) within a year. Security updates is just on going. I get updates to Office 2011 every few months, and it's what year now?
as of about an hour ago, App store ratings of the new Pages 5.0 was being rated at over 2/3 of responses with one or two stars. So 2/3 of reviewers think it is a lousy application. Comments are... hot!
as of about an hour ago, App store ratings of the new Pages 5.0 was being rated at over 2/3 of responses with one or two stars. So 2/3 of reviewers think it is a lousy application. Comments are... hot!
And when the update comes out, those stars will become 4 or 5 stars.
This is an utterly abysmal update. Why could Apple engineers not have spent the time between releases improving functionality by adding for example, a drop-dead gorgeous, Apple equation editor, which is desperately, desperately needed (and not the ported-from-windoze, awful MathType), or features to help in specialised fields, such as creating a LaTeX parser and editor, which would have been a killer in sciences? Whilst Keynote is unassailable for quality and functionality, Pages has been dumbed down toward oblivion. Please, please Apple, take Pages where it should be going, toward the unassailable position enjoyed by Keynote. I’ve had to revert to Word, which this morning I could not have imagined needing to do.
Same thing, only this is for an app they normally charge for vs the new free version whereas iMovie they didn't charge for. Same thing with FCPX.
Any time there is a new major release of ANY software package, it takes about one or two updates to get things worked out. That's TYPICAL of ANY software.
Apple is the only software company I ever heard of that is bold enough to publish "upgrades" that can not open previous files. Whatever Microsoft, Adobe and so on are tinkering, at least you can ALWAYS open old documents with a new version of the application.
FCPX still can't open FCP7 documents. Funny enough Premiere can open FCP7 projects. So 1) why should you assume, that FCP11 is going to open FCPX files? Definitely not certain. And 2) why not go Premiere where you can continue your work without the need to start projects from scratch.
This attitude will likely backfire for Apple in the future.
Good point... main reason was that MathType would not produce text in an equation that matched text in the discussion perfectly, which is essential and document could not be opened in old pages (which wasn't perfect either but easier to work with). I have a full Time Machine backup but decided to use Word as more consistent for equations. Apple should have a native equation editor. I can just see it, would be beautiful but obviously not a priority to Apple.
This is an utterly abysmal update. Why could Apple engineers not have spent the time between releases improving functionality by adding for example, a drop-dead gorgeous, Apple equation editor, which is desperately, desperately needed (and not the ported-from-windoze, awful MathType), or features to help in specialised fields, such as creating a LaTeX parser and editor, which would have been a killer in sciences? Whilst Keynote is unassailable for quality and functionality, Pages has been dumbed down toward oblivion. Please, please Apple, take Pages where it should be going, toward the unassailable position enjoyed by Keynote. I’ve had to revert to Word, which this morning I could not have imagined needing to do.
If you have an equation heavy document, why not just LaTeX your whole document using one of the many excellent TeX editors out there, such as Texshop? LaTeX is much better suited for typesetting these documents than any WYSISYG word processor. Once you get the hang of LaTeX you'll appreciate the ability to write equations as effortlessly as you write normal text, without lifting a finger from the keyboard. Plus, a LaTeXed document looks professional whereas one can often tell that a document was composed in MS Word and the equations hacked in using MS Equation Editor.
This is an utterly abysmal update. Why could Apple engineers not have spent the time between releases improving functionality by adding for example, a drop-dead gorgeous, Apple equation editor, which is desperately, desperately needed (and not the ported-from-windoze, awful MathType), or features to help in specialised fields, such as creating a LaTeX parser and editor, which would have been a killer in sciences?
This is really really niche. In any case, what would they be adding that MacTeX + texpad doesn't? The free Daum equation editor in the app store provides both a gif and the tex string.
Also, YES you can set the old versions as the default. Simply choose one of your .pages files in the Finder and right-click, then choose Get Info (or the shortcut, cmd-I) and pick the application you'd like it to open in. Right under that, click the option to open all documents like this one in that same default application. Repeat this for one .numbers file and one .key file and you're done! Simple.
Simple yes, but interestingly doesn't do the trick. Even with the document set to specifically open in Pages version 4.3, a double-click brings up a warning window that it's going to open the file in the new Pages.
Whilst I hope Apple reinstates some of the missing features in Pages and Numbers in the future, overall I am very happy with the new design and the compatibility across OS X, iOS and iCloud.
There are always people who baulk at change: they see the threats, not the opportunities.
The past is littered with folk who didn't want to move on from MS DOS, Win 3.1/95/98/XP, WordPerfect, AmiPro, etc.
The new iWork produces beautiful cross-platform documents, and it fulfils 100% of the needs of 99% of users…and that is a big deal for companies that can now supply their staff with OS and iWork upgrades for free, and without the expense, high-wastage and inefficiency of using MS products.
If it doesn't meet your needs for now, use the old iWork or buy other software; and contact Apple with reasoned suggestions for improvements.
The furore is childish nonsense. I hope Tim Cook tells people to stop whining, to stop hankering for the past, and to wise up to the opportunities of the future.
And remember, employment is just like natural selection: if you can't (or won't) adapt to new ways of working, your company can easily find people who can. There are a ton of young people coming into the marketplace who have grown up with iPods and iPhones and Apple's simple way of doing things. They will embrace the new iWork in an instant, at which point the naysayers will be history only.
There is no glory or future in being a Luddite.
Here we go again, from people who can't stand it when anything Apple does is questioned. Over and over again their message is "It doesn't matter that the new software can't do half the things the old software did, just shut up and be happy." It didn't matter when the new iMovie took away frame-by-frame editing, the ability to burn DVDs, the ability to add chapter markers, audio editing, compatiblility with earlier iMovie projects, etc. Just shut up and be happy (some of the lost functions were added later, but the program became basically a YouTube editor and not much more). It didn't matter when Final Cut Pro screwed its users so much that Apple had to give refunds and start selling the old version again so Video Professionals wouldn't abandon it altogether (many of them did anyway). Just shut up and be happy (it took over 2 years for most of the lost functionality to return). It didn't matter when Apple went exclusively to glossy screens that many people absolutely hated. Just shut up and be happy (of course, now Apple brags about the less-reflective new iMac screens).
It's not just a new, simple way of doing things - it's cutting off peoples' legs at the knees without warning. It's Apple deciding that nobody needs complicated charts or tables anymore, nobody needs to burn DVDs anymore, nobody needs multiple mics in a movie project, and on and on. It's so ironic - the Mac was born so that people could use all their creativity, and now Apple's purpose is to force everybody into a little box. What happened to "Think Different"?
If you have an equation heavy document, why not just LaTeX your whole document using one of the many excellent TeX editors out there, such as Texshop? LaTeX is much better suited for typesetting these documents than any WYSISYG word processor. Once you get the hang of LaTeX you'll appreciate the ability to write equations as effortlessly as you write normal text, without lifting a finger from the keyboard. Plus, a LaTeXed document looks professional whereas one can often tell that a document was composed in MS Word and the equations hacked in using MS Equation Editor.
Thanks for your thoughts. Actually, I wrote my latest paper, resulting from a conference, entirely in LaTeX using LyX, which is quite nice. Then, one week before the submission due date, the organisers sent out a pro forma for tex documents that LyX wouldn't read, requiring me to re-write the whole thing. They would however, accept a Word doc and so I just cut and paste into that. I'll be writing most docs in LaTeX though, I love the utter control and integration.
FCP X is blooming in the right direction. Soon it will surpass FCP 7.x in functionality, never mind already surpassing greatly in workflow.
I couldn't be happier with what Apple's done with FCP. When my capital request said I'd rather spend $1000/seat on Avid than $300 per for FCP, no one batted an eye. Now I get a real editor with real collaboration tools and a full set of codecs and support for facility-wide asset management/sharing.
I hope Tim Cook tells people to stop whining, to stop hankering for the past, and to wise up to the opportunities of the future.
"Stop hankering for the past! We're not ADDING problems, we're REMOVING complication! Fewer features means less confusion!"
"Wise up to the opportunities of the future, such as being able to make a lost cat flyer on your iPad! Stupid old people who don't see the value of dumbing everything down to the lowest common denominator will be forced to surrender all their pay to YOU, superdooper FUTUREMAN!"
I don't know whether to be amused or frightened for the future of the planet.
What do you mean? Apple DID dumb down FCPX, and now HAVE dumbed down iWork. How is he lying?
Some might argue it's a necessary step to make sure people can write blog posts on their iPhone, but no one is disputing the obvious: Apple has made the new versions LESS capable than the ones they replace.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
The fact that software keeps your work from being destroyed is the worst thing since the introduction of USB, forcing people to buy new peripherals, instead of HOW IT SHOULD HAVE ALWAYS BEEN FROM 1976 ON.
It's been my experience that every time a computer tries to "help" by "anticipating" my needs and "preventing" my mistakes, the outcome is bad. Autosaving is "new" but I'm not convinced it's "improved."
There's also an inherent conflict in the reasoning. It's saying I'm too stupid to manage my own file versioning. Assuming that's true, what makes Apple think I'm gonna be smart enough to figure out the MUCH less intuitive system of trying to recover previous versions of a file?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
iWork has always been unable to open newer versions of its files with older versions of the software.
Whoops, you lost the plot there. This is a case of NEW software not being able to open documents created in OLDER versions of the software. So, if you open one of your existing documents with the new software, it might strip out things you created with the older version.
(Wanna insert an "Oh... that's very different..."here?)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Buy a copy of iWork ’09. How is that a difficult idea to formulate?
Easy to formulate as an idea. Impossible to actually DO though, since it's no longer sold.
Is it possible, just POSSIBLE, that Apple is not perfect, and that maybe YOU have misjudged the reaction to this issue?
Do you really think that Apple has no development roadmap for these products? Just like FCP, Apple will continue to add functions and apabilities to their products
Why exactly should I give Shit One about Apple's plan? The product will get better, will it? Call me when it does. Until then, fück the fückers for fücking up the software.
If they want me to suck up feature stripping and evangelize their Grand Vision, maybe they should trying filling me in on what the füch they're doing? As long as they wanna guard every single thought anyone at that campus ever had like it's Knowledge of Creation and demonstrate that they have no problem whatsoever yanking the floorboards out from under me any time they feel like it, more than once even, as in "fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, I must be an Apple customer," you'll forgive me if I have less than zero faith that everything will just work out fine happily ever after nite nite mommy.
I care that they made tools I use less useful. I don't give a shit whether they did it to piss me off, because the guy who knew how to code that feature works at Google now, or just so some hipster with bad pants and how-can-he-not-see-this ridiculously stupid facial hair can pretend he's avant garde because he can check the phone number his girlfriend's brother added to the otherworldly-bad concert poster he made up while riding the bus.
If you care about how it fits into Apple's agenda, you're an idiot. They sure as hell don't care about you beyond just how much they milk you for the latest fadfone (which, BTW, is WAAAAY too much).
Although the 'look' of the latest iWork is good, and universal across multiple Apple products, it's probably only of much use to those who use it at the most basic level.
Assuming Apple knows what they're doing, it seem sto me that they would feel that they can't compete with Office for more advanced users, and have a larger market pick-up opportunity by offering a free simple suite of productivity apps.
Maybe they're thinking of creating an "iWork Pro" app for those of us who use it more in-depth, and charge for that. I'm happy to keep paying for a new-look iWork that actually keeps the functionality of previous versions.
Where are you customisable toolbar, page thumbnail copy-paste, multiple sorting rules for Numbers, mail merge, ... and more for me to discover missing?
I'm fine with trying to learn where functions have moved to (such as re-learning some of iMovie) but to find things completely missing is pretty disappointing. Yes I can (and will) revert to the previous version, but hope that either an update fixing these issues is released soon, or a "Pro" paid-for version becomes available.
I think Apple may have actually underestermated the number of people that use the advanced features of their great software that are now missing OR creating a product to work collaboratively via iCloud/Web Browser (and iOS) has forced them to make some major compromises to a previously great product for OSX.
The problem with free software and services really starts to show. As long as I pay for software it binds the company to a certain commitment. As soon as a tool becomes free (or as in the case of FCPX almost free) all obligations towards the customer vanishes in thin air. "Hey what do you expect! It is free! So stop moaning, go home and shut the fück off" that's what I read a lot on this forum. But hey, what if I really work with a piece of software? What if I have to sustain a workflow over 100s or 1000s of documents? What if I need the possibility to open documents that are maybe a few years old? I very much prefer to pay a decent price for software than ending up in Apple limbo.
May I please IMPLORE you to take 10 minutes of your busy day to see with your own eyes and hear why Final Cut Pro X had to break away from the past to be the future of cinema editing... that is here TODAY?
I mean no disrespect when I say that the video you link struck me as an awful lotta feathers, not much chicken. It's long on HOW a transition to FCPX must be managed but way short on WHY one would bother. It states that FCPX is upside down, putting an asset manager on top of a timeline instead of the other way around, but there's no explanation of how that's supposed to be better than any other approach. It also describes the rather ordinary concept of host editor with plugins as if it were a new and unique development, but since it's obviously not, that's not really a reason to choose FCPX over anything else either.
I understand the importance of being willing to let go in order to move forward. I just don't see FCPX offering any compelling reason to do so, since I don't see how it advances the state of the art or workflow or anything. To me it seems neither better nor worse, just different, but so WAAAY different that it's less hassle to learn something else than to learn the new version. If that something else happens to be Avid, one also opens up a whole new level of capability that FCPX still has not matched.
Comments
I imagine that, after all this hubbub, at least some of the functionality will be restored eventually. For the time being, I'm sticking with '09.
But another thing I noticed, and have not seen any comments on, is the issue of file size -- both the apps themselves and the files they generate. The new iWork and iLife apps are huge compared to their predecessors -- 2 or 3 times the size, at least. Why? And more importantly, the files that Pages 5.0 (for example) generates are unnecessarily large, wasting disk space and making them harder to share easily. I opened a simple, <20 KB Word doc in Pages 5.0, and when I saved it in Pages format, it was almost 500 KB! What on earth for? Even when I saved it in Pages '09 format, it was still around 200 KB. I realize that disk space is not as much of an issue on PCs nowadays, but it is on phones and tablets, and when sending by email, etc. I think Apple could work a little more on using that space more efficiently.
Apple did this with iMovie a ways back. They had iMovie, they introduced a new version that was WAY different, it was still going through it's ironing out period so they offered the original iMovie which people were used to until the new iMovie was fully updated. NO BIG DEAL.
Same thing, only this is for an app they normally charge for vs the new free version whereas iMovie they didn't charge for. Same thing with FCPX.
Any time there is a new major release of ANY software package, it takes about one or two updates to get things worked out. That's TYPICAL of ANY software.
Heck, I had customers that would wait until SP 2 came out before they would update their employee's computers with the latest version of Windows, because it took Micorosft at least one or two service packs to fix all of the problems. Ummmm. That's 2 years. It typically does not take Apple 2 years to fix any of their software, most of it is fixed (the majority of the problems) within a year. Security updates is just on going. I get updates to Office 2011 every few months, and it's what year now?
as of about an hour ago, App store ratings of the new Pages 5.0 was being rated at over 2/3 of responses with one or two stars. So 2/3 of reviewers think it is a lousy application. Comments are... hot!
as of about an hour ago, App store ratings of the new Pages 5.0 was being rated at over 2/3 of responses with one or two stars. So 2/3 of reviewers think it is a lousy application. Comments are... hot!
And when the update comes out, those stars will become 4 or 5 stars.
This is an utterly abysmal update. Why could Apple engineers not have spent the time between releases improving functionality by adding for example, a drop-dead gorgeous, Apple equation editor, which is desperately, desperately needed (and not the ported-from-windoze, awful MathType), or features to help in specialised fields, such as creating a LaTeX parser and editor, which would have been a killer in sciences? Whilst Keynote is unassailable for quality and functionality, Pages has been dumbed down toward oblivion. Please, please Apple, take Pages where it should be going, toward the unassailable position enjoyed by Keynote. I’ve had to revert to Word, which this morning I could not have imagined needing to do.
Same thing, only this is for an app they normally charge for vs the new free version whereas iMovie they didn't charge for. Same thing with FCPX.
Any time there is a new major release of ANY software package, it takes about one or two updates to get things worked out. That's TYPICAL of ANY software.
Apple is the only software company I ever heard of that is bold enough to publish "upgrades" that can not open previous files. Whatever Microsoft, Adobe and so on are tinkering, at least you can ALWAYS open old documents with a new version of the application.
FCPX still can't open FCP7 documents. Funny enough Premiere can open FCP7 projects. So 1) why should you assume, that FCP11 is going to open FCPX files? Definitely not certain. And 2) why not go Premiere where you can continue your work without the need to start projects from scratch.
This attitude will likely backfire for Apple in the future.
Why, when you still have the old pages?
And when the update comes out, those stars will become 4 or 5 stars.
Thank you Mr. Kreskin...
Why, when you still have the old pages?
Good point... main reason was that MathType would not produce text in an equation that matched text in the discussion perfectly, which is essential and document could not be opened in old pages (which wasn't perfect either but easier to work with). I have a full Time Machine backup but decided to use Word as more consistent for equations. Apple should have a native equation editor. I can just see it, would be beautiful but obviously not a priority to Apple.
This is an utterly abysmal update. Why could Apple engineers not have spent the time between releases improving functionality by adding for example, a drop-dead gorgeous, Apple equation editor, which is desperately, desperately needed (and not the ported-from-windoze, awful MathType), or features to help in specialised fields, such as creating a LaTeX parser and editor, which would have been a killer in sciences? Whilst Keynote is unassailable for quality and functionality, Pages has been dumbed down toward oblivion. Please, please Apple, take Pages where it should be going, toward the unassailable position enjoyed by Keynote. I’ve had to revert to Word, which this morning I could not have imagined needing to do.
If you have an equation heavy document, why not just LaTeX your whole document using one of the many excellent TeX editors out there, such as Texshop? LaTeX is much better suited for typesetting these documents than any WYSISYG word processor. Once you get the hang of LaTeX you'll appreciate the ability to write equations as effortlessly as you write normal text, without lifting a finger from the keyboard. Plus, a LaTeXed document looks professional whereas one can often tell that a document was composed in MS Word and the equations hacked in using MS Equation Editor.
This is an utterly abysmal update. Why could Apple engineers not have spent the time between releases improving functionality by adding for example, a drop-dead gorgeous, Apple equation editor, which is desperately, desperately needed (and not the ported-from-windoze, awful MathType), or features to help in specialised fields, such as creating a LaTeX parser and editor, which would have been a killer in sciences?
This is really really niche. In any case, what would they be adding that MacTeX + texpad doesn't? The free Daum equation editor in the app store provides both a gif and the tex string.
Also, YES you can set the old versions as the default. Simply choose one of your .pages files in the Finder and right-click, then choose Get Info (or the shortcut, cmd-I) and pick the application you'd like it to open in. Right under that, click the option to open all documents like this one in that same default application. Repeat this for one .numbers file and one .key file and you're done! Simple.
Simple yes, but interestingly doesn't do the trick. Even with the document set to specifically open in Pages version 4.3, a double-click brings up a warning window that it's going to open the file in the new Pages.
Whilst I hope Apple reinstates some of the missing features in Pages and Numbers in the future, overall I am very happy with the new design and the compatibility across OS X, iOS and iCloud.
There are always people who baulk at change: they see the threats, not the opportunities.
The past is littered with folk who didn't want to move on from MS DOS, Win 3.1/95/98/XP, WordPerfect, AmiPro, etc.
The new iWork produces beautiful cross-platform documents, and it fulfils 100% of the needs of 99% of users…and that is a big deal for companies that can now supply their staff with OS and iWork upgrades for free, and without the expense, high-wastage and inefficiency of using MS products.
If it doesn't meet your needs for now, use the old iWork or buy other software; and contact Apple with reasoned suggestions for improvements.
The furore is childish nonsense. I hope Tim Cook tells people to stop whining, to stop hankering for the past, and to wise up to the opportunities of the future.
And remember, employment is just like natural selection: if you can't (or won't) adapt to new ways of working, your company can easily find people who can. There are a ton of young people coming into the marketplace who have grown up with iPods and iPhones and Apple's simple way of doing things. They will embrace the new iWork in an instant, at which point the naysayers will be history only.
There is no glory or future in being a Luddite.
Here we go again, from people who can't stand it when anything Apple does is questioned. Over and over again their message is "It doesn't matter that the new software can't do half the things the old software did, just shut up and be happy." It didn't matter when the new iMovie took away frame-by-frame editing, the ability to burn DVDs, the ability to add chapter markers, audio editing, compatiblility with earlier iMovie projects, etc. Just shut up and be happy (some of the lost functions were added later, but the program became basically a YouTube editor and not much more). It didn't matter when Final Cut Pro screwed its users so much that Apple had to give refunds and start selling the old version again so Video Professionals wouldn't abandon it altogether (many of them did anyway). Just shut up and be happy (it took over 2 years for most of the lost functionality to return). It didn't matter when Apple went exclusively to glossy screens that many people absolutely hated. Just shut up and be happy (of course, now Apple brags about the less-reflective new iMac screens).
It's not just a new, simple way of doing things - it's cutting off peoples' legs at the knees without warning. It's Apple deciding that nobody needs complicated charts or tables anymore, nobody needs to burn DVDs anymore, nobody needs multiple mics in a movie project, and on and on. It's so ironic - the Mac was born so that people could use all their creativity, and now Apple's purpose is to force everybody into a little box. What happened to "Think Different"?
If you have an equation heavy document, why not just LaTeX your whole document using one of the many excellent TeX editors out there, such as Texshop? LaTeX is much better suited for typesetting these documents than any WYSISYG word processor. Once you get the hang of LaTeX you'll appreciate the ability to write equations as effortlessly as you write normal text, without lifting a finger from the keyboard. Plus, a LaTeXed document looks professional whereas one can often tell that a document was composed in MS Word and the equations hacked in using MS Equation Editor.
Thanks for your thoughts. Actually, I wrote my latest paper, resulting from a conference, entirely in LaTeX using LyX, which is quite nice. Then, one week before the submission due date, the organisers sent out a pro forma for tex documents that LyX wouldn't read, requiring me to re-write the whole thing. They would however, accept a Word doc and so I just cut and paste into that. I'll be writing most docs in LaTeX though, I love the utter control and integration.
All the best.
FCP X is blooming in the right direction. Soon it will surpass FCP 7.x in functionality, never mind already surpassing greatly in workflow.
I couldn't be happier with what Apple's done with FCP. When my capital request said I'd rather spend $1000/seat on Avid than $300 per for FCP, no one batted an eye. Now I get a real editor with real collaboration tools and a full set of codecs and support for facility-wide asset management/sharing.
Thanks Apple!
I hope Tim Cook tells people to stop whining, to stop hankering for the past, and to wise up to the opportunities of the future.
"Stop hankering for the past! We're not ADDING problems, we're REMOVING complication! Fewer features means less confusion!"
"Wise up to the opportunities of the future, such as being able to make a lost cat flyer on your iPad! Stupid old people who don't see the value of dumbing everything down to the lowest common denominator will be forced to surrender all their pay to YOU, superdooper FUTUREMAN!"
I don't know whether to be amused or frightened for the future of the planet.
Stop lying, please.
What do you mean? Apple DID dumb down FCPX, and now HAVE dumbed down iWork. How is he lying?
Some might argue it's a necessary step to make sure people can write blog posts on their iPhone, but no one is disputing the obvious: Apple has made the new versions LESS capable than the ones they replace.
Quote:
The fact that software keeps your work from being destroyed is the worst thing since the introduction of USB, forcing people to buy new peripherals, instead of HOW IT SHOULD HAVE ALWAYS BEEN FROM 1976 ON.
It's been my experience that every time a computer tries to "help" by "anticipating" my needs and "preventing" my mistakes, the outcome is bad. Autosaving is "new" but I'm not convinced it's "improved."
There's also an inherent conflict in the reasoning. It's saying I'm too stupid to manage my own file versioning. Assuming that's true, what makes Apple think I'm gonna be smart enough to figure out the MUCH less intuitive system of trying to recover previous versions of a file?
iWork has always been unable to open newer versions of its files with older versions of the software.
Whoops, you lost the plot there. This is a case of NEW software not being able to open documents created in OLDER versions of the software. So, if you open one of your existing documents with the new software, it might strip out things you created with the older version.
(Wanna insert an "Oh... that's very different..."here?)
Buy a copy of iWork ’09. How is that a difficult idea to formulate?
Easy to formulate as an idea. Impossible to actually DO though, since it's no longer sold.
Is it possible, just POSSIBLE, that Apple is not perfect, and that maybe YOU have misjudged the reaction to this issue?
Do you really think that Apple has no development roadmap for these products? Just like FCP, Apple will continue to add functions and apabilities to their products
Why exactly should I give Shit One about Apple's plan? The product will get better, will it? Call me when it does. Until then, fück the fückers for fücking up the software.
If they want me to suck up feature stripping and evangelize their Grand Vision, maybe they should trying filling me in on what the füch they're doing? As long as they wanna guard every single thought anyone at that campus ever had like it's Knowledge of Creation and demonstrate that they have no problem whatsoever yanking the floorboards out from under me any time they feel like it, more than once even, as in "fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, I must be an Apple customer," you'll forgive me if I have less than zero faith that everything will just work out fine happily ever after nite nite mommy.
I care that they made tools I use less useful. I don't give a shit whether they did it to piss me off, because the guy who knew how to code that feature works at Google now, or just so some hipster with bad pants and how-can-he-not-see-this ridiculously stupid facial hair can pretend he's avant garde because he can check the phone number his girlfriend's brother added to the otherworldly-bad concert poster he made up while riding the bus.
If you care about how it fits into Apple's agenda, you're an idiot. They sure as hell don't care about you beyond just how much they milk you for the latest fadfone (which, BTW, is WAAAAY too much).
Although the 'look' of the latest iWork is good, and universal across multiple Apple products, it's probably only of much use to those who use it at the most basic level.
Assuming Apple knows what they're doing, it seem sto me that they would feel that they can't compete with Office for more advanced users, and have a larger market pick-up opportunity by offering a free simple suite of productivity apps.
Maybe they're thinking of creating an "iWork Pro" app for those of us who use it more in-depth, and charge for that. I'm happy to keep paying for a new-look iWork that actually keeps the functionality of previous versions.
Where are you customisable toolbar, page thumbnail copy-paste, multiple sorting rules for Numbers, mail merge, ... and more for me to discover missing?
I'm fine with trying to learn where functions have moved to (such as re-learning some of iMovie) but to find things completely missing is pretty disappointing. Yes I can (and will) revert to the previous version, but hope that either an update fixing these issues is released soon, or a "Pro" paid-for version becomes available.
I think Apple may have actually underestermated the number of people that use the advanced features of their great software that are now missing OR creating a product to work collaboratively via iCloud/Web Browser (and iOS) has forced them to make some major compromises to a previously great product for OSX.
The problem with free software and services really starts to show. As long as I pay for software it binds the company to a certain commitment. As soon as a tool becomes free (or as in the case of FCPX almost free) all obligations towards the customer vanishes in thin air. "Hey what do you expect! It is free! So stop moaning, go home and shut the fück off" that's what I read a lot on this forum. But hey, what if I really work with a piece of software? What if I have to sustain a workflow over 100s or 1000s of documents? What if I need the possibility to open documents that are maybe a few years old? I very much prefer to pay a decent price for software than ending up in Apple limbo.
May I please IMPLORE you to take 10 minutes of your busy day to see with your own eyes and hear why Final Cut Pro X had to break away from the past to be the future of cinema editing... that is here TODAY?
I mean no disrespect when I say that the video you link struck me as an awful lotta feathers, not much chicken. It's long on HOW a transition to FCPX must be managed but way short on WHY one would bother. It states that FCPX is upside down, putting an asset manager on top of a timeline instead of the other way around, but there's no explanation of how that's supposed to be better than any other approach. It also describes the rather ordinary concept of host editor with plugins as if it were a new and unique development, but since it's obviously not, that's not really a reason to choose FCPX over anything else either.
I understand the importance of being willing to let go in order to move forward. I just don't see FCPX offering any compelling reason to do so, since I don't see how it advances the state of the art or workflow or anything. To me it seems neither better nor worse, just different, but so WAAAY different that it's less hassle to learn something else than to learn the new version. If that something else happens to be Avid, one also opens up a whole new level of capability that FCPX still has not matched.