No, you're right, in this day and age, NOBODY wants parity between mobile and desktop platforms, thats just crazy talk. I mean, who owns a table and/or smartphones, and/or a laptop these days, and would benefit from the same software suite behaving nicely between all devices? Such an insane scenario, right? Oh, and you might mock the use of Pages, etc on an iPad, but that doesnt mean millions of people don't use it to create or edit documents. And no, it's nowhere near ridiculous. Not everyone needs multiple windows visible all at once when writing/editing a document.
I agree with your comments on iPad, in particular, as well as Mac as a creation and editing platform. My worry (explained elsewhere) is that Apple's promised enhancements are all about improving the creation process (the user interface) on the Mac and not about the attributes of the created product (the document).
The model I hoped (and still hope) to see is that all platforms can display and edit common documents but that some features that are complex in their interface and less often used (perhaps only at template creation time) are available only on the Mac. That way, what "not everyone needs" does not impede those people but is available to the rest of the users (for example, odd/even page set up might be only available to set up in a document template on a Mac but, once done - and usually only done once - is available to all).
I also agree, though perhaps for different reasons, that this should not be compared to the issues with Apple maps. This is a problem with 3 application programs in a couple of formats; the maps issues are about a global database.
I don't understand why they didn't clearly communicate this when they released the new version. They should have given power user's the heads up and/or had a beta phase. Duh. It isn't as if they haven't been through this before.
Perhaps, Apple thought people would exercise a bit of common sense. It gave all the obviously reworked software away for free, and left the old software intact on people's machines.
If any other company released "updated" versions of their applications with so many missing features, everyone here would ridicule them for rushing premature software out the door. Why is Apple treated differently in this case?
I forget the last time Microsoft gave away Office for free.
And just as with Final Cut Pro X, the defense "it's a brand-new version" is Apple being treated differently. Yes, it was receiving lots of complaints. But the complaints were generally dismissed and are still being dismissed by the Apple defenders. Would this happen for any other company?
The complaints with FInal Cut Pro X and iWorks were hardly dismissed at least by Apple. After Apple released Final Cut Pro X, and there was an outcry, it evaluated the criticism and issued a statement saying it 1) would refund money to unhappy people, 2) would provide a free demo version of the software, and 3) quickly implement features commonly requested and removed in the rewrite.
There is a big difference between Apple's release of Final Cut Pro X, and iWork Apps. With Final Cut Pro X, Apple hired industry insiders to evaluate the software before release, and the people gave the software thumbs up. I think Apple was genuinely shocked people were so upset because the new software although lacking a lot of features, contained many cool new features. However, in that case, Apple actually changed $299 for software that many people earned their living with, and took away the old version. Professionals who paid money for the App were crazed that many features they needed were removed and there was no backwards compatibility.
Here, Apple gave the iWork apps away including many cool new features. It also left the old versions intact on people's machines. In people's complaints they are overlooking the fact Apple that Apple has one provided Mac Maverick for free (just hold your breath for Microsoft to do that), and all the iWork Apps for free. I think Apple deserves a little slack.
I can tell you first hand, doing any kind of editing of text, especially Rich Text, is not an easy thing to do on the web.
It would be piece of cake in Flash or Java. That is the problem with Javascript. It is really difficult to make it act like a desktop app. I've been really srtuggling with a jQuery/ajax/php/Mysql based web app for a couple weeks now. Once it reaches a certain level of complexity you start getting all kinds of errors on things that were working before, mostly due to timing issues. Like when you have a lot of things on a page, it can really slow down the execution of functions running in the background. Simple things start to break because they are dependent on other complex database interactions. One thing I had to implement is for every single javascript call it needs to make sure the previous one is done. $.when(this).done(function...
Maybe they should have called it "iWork Essentials for Mac". I hope they add back all the features faster than Intuit has added back Quicken for Mac features.
This is true and has been said repeatedly. However, for an entire class of users, it does not help.
Today, I can use iWork '09 just like I did yesterday. But, in 3 years time, how much sympathy will you (or anyone) have for me when I say that my 3 years obsolete application no longer works on OS X 10.12? So, if I have documents (or templates or processes) that are long-lived then they have to be migrated to some other application or they will, at some arbitrary point in the future chosen by someone else, stop working. For some users that's just not acceptable. If it's just a letter to send tomorrow then it doesn't matter, if it's long-lived then it does matter (and guess which is likely to be the most complex).
And to repeat, I'm not upset because iWork isn't very good, I'm upset because it used to be so good! For example, I have used MS Word extensively for years and it stinks compared to Pages. But the latest Pages version is hobbled and I hope Apple fix that. Or perhaps it was wrong to assume that Pages could ever compete with Word.
You don't think Apple will add features in three years? You serious? Remember copy/paste, or lack thereof, in the iPhone? Apple never did bring that feature. Oh wait.
What's the issue here? Apple did not overwrite the old versions. They created a "new" iWork and set it alongside the old one. If the new one didn't do the trick for you, no problem; use the old one.
Possible courses of action for Apple are to:
1. Delay the launch so that you have have a feature-complete app with feature parity to meet the needs of 10% of the market.
2. During the announcements state that it's not as feature-complete as '09.
3. Just let it roll and deal with the 10%.
#3 is the only right answer. They could probably have helped a bit by having a "migrating from iWork '09" message when you start iWork or when you import an older document. Surely there could have been a way to phrase it such that it would not freak out the 90% for the benefit of the 10%.
What about:
4. Launch the new iWork but keep the old iWork available for purchase until the new iWork restores feature parity? Back when Vista was released you still had the option of buying Windows XP until Windows 7 addressed Vista's flaws. Similarly you can still buy Windows 7 if Windows 8 is not your cup of tea.
4. Launch the new iWork but keep the old iWork available for purchase until the new iWork restores feature parity? Back when Vista was released you still had the option of buying Windows XP until Windows 7 addressed Vista's flaws. Similarly you can still buy Windows 7 if Windows 8 is not your cup of tea.
The only people who would not be able to re-download iWork 2009 (legitimately) are the people who have never purchased it, don't use it, and don't have it on their Macs. For someone who doesn't use the old version of iWork, I fail to see how it's an inconvenience that its no longer available. That one guy who suddenly decides he needs an old version of a program he's never used? Ok. Keeping it available would confuse more people than not, especially people who complain because they accidentally purchased the old version instead of getting the new version for free.
And if worse comes to worse, you can find iWork09 to download in a million other places y spending 5 seconds on Google. As Apple is now offering iWork for free, there shouldn't be any guilt involved, either.
People are REALLY stretching to find scenarios where someone is negatively affected by the existence of the new iWork. Specifically, fictional scenarios that probably don't exist.
I don't understand why they didn't clearly communicate this when they released the new version. They should have given power user's the heads up and/or had a beta phase. Duh. It isn't as if they haven't been through this before.
Probably because the number of Mac users is much smaller than the number of iOS users. Therefore, iOS users don't know what was missing. Mac users who need the features will continue to use iWork 09 until the features are added in. The rest of us will use the iWork applications as they exist right now.
They could have avoided the backlash if they'd just announced that features were missing and were going to be added back in shortly.
This whole wall of silence maybe no one will notice bull shit does them no good!
Well, they could have done this, but it would have made little difference: people would still complain about the missing features. What's worse is that new customers and people for whom the missing stuff would make little difference would see this as Apple telling them that they are releasing incomplete software. Who would use it?
Releasing it without saying anything means that people have tried it and given feedback. Apple now knows what needs to be sided back as a priority, and what they can leave out.
Same thing they did with Final Cut Pro. It's a very effective way of prioritising development, though I think few other companies would get away with it.
Power user and iWork in the same sentence? Come on man.
98% of the population is fine with the old or new iWork- but power users? It's laughable to say you were a "power user" who used iWork.
Yup, first thing that occurred to me when this all blew up.
For years, we've been told that iWorks isn't a professional tool, and that Apple needs to bloat it to make it a replacement for Office. Now, power-users and folk who are using it to run their businesses are popping up all over the place. Most odd.
I suspect a fair bit of denial was at play, however. I think Apple is prone to that. It would have been easy to circumvent the wave of frustration and disappointment that has followed the release with a little bit of humility and most of all, communication.
The interesting thing about the support note is that it doesn't contain even a hint of an apology. Apple pretty much expected this reaction from a fairly vocal minority living inside the internet echo chamber and decided to weather it until they get the package up to snuff. Contrast this with the original Maps release; the backlash took them completely by surprise, though I was suspicious when Apple started buying back stock the day after Cook issued the apology.
Have to chime in representing power users... I own all Mac hardware, but still boot camp to windows for real Excel work. Even before these "terrible" changes to Numbers, nobody in the business world would use Numbers for anything serious. Just due to the lack of keyboard navigation in a Mac spreadsheet, something that would take me 5 minutes on a PC would take me 20-30 mins in Numbers. So, these apps are nowhere ready for prime time. I've been waiting about 20 years and apple is not much closer to Microsoft. Damn shame. Hate to take up a partition of my Macs for Windows!
You mean Apple is not going to leave iWork '13 at version 1 forever????!!! Shocker. /s
Reading some of the posts, you'd think that Apple was never going to improve it, that they'd wiped the old version from the machine, and that folk don't take backu… Hang on; scratch that last one.
You don't think Apple will add features in three years? You serious? Remember copy/paste, or lack thereof, in the iPhone? Apple never did bring that feature. Oh wait.
I'm still using iMovie HD on an older computer with Snow Leopard, because the newer iMovie still cannot handle my iMovie HD projects. I would have to start over totally from the beginning, and would not be able to set up chapters for DVDs like I want to (along with many other functions still lacking from the new iMovie). So yes, they added several missing functions back to the new iMovie, but not nearly enough to replace iMovie HD. And it's been more than 3 years. There are parts of my old projects that I need to incorporate in newer projects, and the new iMovie will never be able to do that.
So yes, he's serious about the time in the future when Pages 09 will stop working on newer Macs, and the newest Pages still won't be able to handle Pages 09 documents without trashing them because it still won't have many of the 09 features.
Personally, I want a sophisticated computer software program, not one that's compromised just so it can run on an iPad (for me, Pages 09 wasn't good enough anyway, because my not-that-complicated Word documents could not be imported without ruining them. As annoying as Word is, it does what I need, whereas Pages doesn't).
bravo. i was a sceptic when fcpx came out, even wrote steve, only to find that they did listen. i trust they will bring back what for me is the primary static creation tool with a difference - pages is absolutely amazing and needs to keep growing.. it is a blessing to hear this is the way apple realised it wants to go too! great news
Comments
No, you're right, in this day and age, NOBODY wants parity between mobile and desktop platforms, thats just crazy talk. I mean, who owns a table and/or smartphones, and/or a laptop these days, and would benefit from the same software suite behaving nicely between all devices? Such an insane scenario, right? Oh, and you might mock the use of Pages, etc on an iPad, but that doesnt mean millions of people don't use it to create or edit documents. And no, it's nowhere near ridiculous. Not everyone needs multiple windows visible all at once when writing/editing a document.
I agree with your comments on iPad, in particular, as well as Mac as a creation and editing platform. My worry (explained elsewhere) is that Apple's promised enhancements are all about improving the creation process (the user interface) on the Mac and not about the attributes of the created product (the document).
The model I hoped (and still hope) to see is that all platforms can display and edit common documents but that some features that are complex in their interface and less often used (perhaps only at template creation time) are available only on the Mac. That way, what "not everyone needs" does not impede those people but is available to the rest of the users (for example, odd/even page set up might be only available to set up in a document template on a Mac but, once done - and usually only done once - is available to all).
I also agree, though perhaps for different reasons, that this should not be compared to the issues with Apple maps. This is a problem with 3 application programs in a couple of formats; the maps issues are about a global database.
I don't understand why they didn't clearly communicate this when they released the new version. They should have given power user's the heads up and/or had a beta phase. Duh. It isn't as if they haven't been through this before.
Perhaps, Apple thought people would exercise a bit of common sense. It gave all the obviously reworked software away for free, and left the old software intact on people's machines.
If any other company released "updated" versions of their applications with so many missing features, everyone here would ridicule them for rushing premature software out the door. Why is Apple treated differently in this case?
I forget the last time Microsoft gave away Office for free.
And just as with Final Cut Pro X, the defense "it's a brand-new version" is Apple being treated differently. Yes, it was receiving lots of complaints. But the complaints were generally dismissed and are still being dismissed by the Apple defenders. Would this happen for any other company?
The complaints with FInal Cut Pro X and iWorks were hardly dismissed at least by Apple. After Apple released Final Cut Pro X, and there was an outcry, it evaluated the criticism and issued a statement saying it 1) would refund money to unhappy people, 2) would provide a free demo version of the software, and 3) quickly implement features commonly requested and removed in the rewrite.
There is a big difference between Apple's release of Final Cut Pro X, and iWork Apps. With Final Cut Pro X, Apple hired industry insiders to evaluate the software before release, and the people gave the software thumbs up. I think Apple was genuinely shocked people were so upset because the new software although lacking a lot of features, contained many cool new features. However, in that case, Apple actually changed $299 for software that many people earned their living with, and took away the old version. Professionals who paid money for the App were crazed that many features they needed were removed and there was no backwards compatibility.
Here, Apple gave the iWork apps away including many cool new features. It also left the old versions intact on people's machines. In people's complaints they are overlooking the fact Apple that Apple has one provided Mac Maverick for free (just hold your breath for Microsoft to do that), and all the iWork Apps for free. I think Apple deserves a little slack.
I can tell you first hand, doing any kind of editing of text, especially Rich Text, is not an easy thing to do on the web.
It would be piece of cake in Flash or Java. That is the problem with Javascript. It is really difficult to make it act like a desktop app. I've been really srtuggling with a jQuery/ajax/php/Mysql based web app for a couple weeks now. Once it reaches a certain level of complexity you start getting all kinds of errors on things that were working before, mostly due to timing issues. Like when you have a lot of things on a page, it can really slow down the execution of functions running in the background. Simple things start to break because they are dependent on other complex database interactions. One thing I had to implement is for every single javascript call it needs to make sure the previous one is done. $.when(this).done(function...
I guess that's why he's gone.
You don't think Apple will add features in three years? You serious? Remember copy/paste, or lack thereof, in the iPhone? Apple never did bring that feature. Oh wait.
If you just bought a new Mac grab a copy of iWork off of eBay or amazon. Simple
As eBay and Amazon would only sell DVDs of iWork '09, you would most likely also need to buy an optical drive for your new Mac.
What's the issue here? Apple did not overwrite the old versions. They created a "new" iWork and set it alongside the old one. If the new one didn't do the trick for you, no problem; use the old one.
Possible courses of action for Apple are to:
1. Delay the launch so that you have have a feature-complete app with feature parity to meet the needs of 10% of the market.
2. During the announcements state that it's not as feature-complete as '09.
3. Just let it roll and deal with the 10%.
#3 is the only right answer. They could probably have helped a bit by having a "migrating from iWork '09" message when you start iWork or when you import an older document. Surely there could have been a way to phrase it such that it would not freak out the 90% for the benefit of the 10%.
What about:
4. Launch the new iWork but keep the old iWork available for purchase until the new iWork restores feature parity? Back when Vista was released you still had the option of buying Windows XP until Windows 7 addressed Vista's flaws. Similarly you can still buy Windows 7 if Windows 8 is not your cup of tea.
What about:
4. Launch the new iWork but keep the old iWork available for purchase until the new iWork restores feature parity? Back when Vista was released you still had the option of buying Windows XP until Windows 7 addressed Vista's flaws. Similarly you can still buy Windows 7 if Windows 8 is not your cup of tea.
The only people who would not be able to re-download iWork 2009 (legitimately) are the people who have never purchased it, don't use it, and don't have it on their Macs. For someone who doesn't use the old version of iWork, I fail to see how it's an inconvenience that its no longer available. That one guy who suddenly decides he needs an old version of a program he's never used? Ok. Keeping it available would confuse more people than not, especially people who complain because they accidentally purchased the old version instead of getting the new version for free.
And if worse comes to worse, you can find iWork09 to download in a million other places y spending 5 seconds on Google. As Apple is now offering iWork for free, there shouldn't be any guilt involved, either.
People are REALLY stretching to find scenarios where someone is negatively affected by the existence of the new iWork. Specifically, fictional scenarios that probably don't exist.
I don't understand why they didn't clearly communicate this when they released the new version. They should have given power user's the heads up and/or had a beta phase. Duh. It isn't as if they haven't been through this before.
Probably because the number of Mac users is much smaller than the number of iOS users. Therefore, iOS users don't know what was missing. Mac users who need the features will continue to use iWork 09 until the features are added in. The rest of us will use the iWork applications as they exist right now.
Well, they could have done this, but it would have made little difference: people would still complain about the missing features. What's worse is that new customers and people for whom the missing stuff would make little difference would see this as Apple telling them that they are releasing incomplete software. Who would use it?
Releasing it without saying anything means that people have tried it and given feedback. Apple now knows what needs to be sided back as a priority, and what they can leave out.
Same thing they did with Final Cut Pro. It's a very effective way of prioritising development, though I think few other companies would get away with it.
Yup, first thing that occurred to me when this all blew up.
For years, we've been told that iWorks isn't a professional tool, and that Apple needs to bloat it to make it a replacement for Office. Now, power-users and folk who are using it to run their businesses are popping up all over the place. Most odd.
The interesting thing about the support note is that it doesn't contain even a hint of an apology. Apple pretty much expected this reaction from a fairly vocal minority living inside the internet echo chamber and decided to weather it until they get the package up to snuff. Contrast this with the original Maps release; the backlash took them completely by surprise, though I was suspicious when Apple started buying back stock the day after Cook issued the apology.
Reading some of the posts, you'd think that Apple was never going to improve it, that they'd wiped the old version from the machine, and that folk don't take backu… Hang on; scratch that last one.
You don't think Apple will add features in three years? You serious? Remember copy/paste, or lack thereof, in the iPhone? Apple never did bring that feature. Oh wait.
I'm still using iMovie HD on an older computer with Snow Leopard, because the newer iMovie still cannot handle my iMovie HD projects. I would have to start over totally from the beginning, and would not be able to set up chapters for DVDs like I want to (along with many other functions still lacking from the new iMovie). So yes, they added several missing functions back to the new iMovie, but not nearly enough to replace iMovie HD. And it's been more than 3 years. There are parts of my old projects that I need to incorporate in newer projects, and the new iMovie will never be able to do that.
So yes, he's serious about the time in the future when Pages 09 will stop working on newer Macs, and the newest Pages still won't be able to handle Pages 09 documents without trashing them because it still won't have many of the 09 features.
Personally, I want a sophisticated computer software program, not one that's compromised just so it can run on an iPad (for me, Pages 09 wasn't good enough anyway, because my not-that-complicated Word documents could not be imported without ruining them. As annoying as Word is, it does what I need, whereas Pages doesn't).