Whether or not the package will be distributed as "iWorks" is unknown, but both AppleWorks and Keynote will be included at a discounted price.
Is it just me (?), or doesn't this sound strange to you people?
Is Apple making a new version of AppleWorks that is goning to be bundled with other applications like Keynote and iAccount in a package called iWorks or whatever? I don't think apple should make another integrated program suit like AppleWorks, but rather keep the programs separated from each other but with similar interface and some sort of opendoc-like funtionality that let the programs work together to create complex documents with text, spreadsheats, illustration aso. Other advantages is that they could split the package and sell the programs individually. If you just want iWrite-app, you just have to pay for that one.
Well - as I said before - we'll just have to wait and see what Apple has in store for us
I don't think it's a matter of whether Filemaker will be used or not - of course it will. Apple owns Filemaker and won't spend valuable development dollars re-inventing the wheel.
There are a variety of robust open source databases. It would not exactly be "re-inventing the wheel" to use one of these (maybe PostgreSQL or SQLite, both of which offer unicode support) and add a Cocoa interface.
There are a variety of robust open source databases. It would not exactly be "re-inventing the wheel" to use one of these (maybe PostgreSQL or SQLite, both of which offer unicode support) and add a Cocoa interface.
Absolutely. And there is a good open source productivity suite in the making called OpenOffice. If Aquafied (and optimised by Apple), it would make a formidable offering, not unlike what has been achieved with Safari.
With MS-Office now costing $499.95, hopefully, Apple picks up the baton.
Is the gentleman from Intuit still on the executive board of Apple?
Whether he is or he isn't I wonder what the Quicken fellows think about this.
Intuit has been a half-assed, on-again-off-again supporter of the Mac for so long that I don't know how much Apple cares. At one point Apple was flogging MYOB, and the publisher got a lot of support from Apple engineers to spiff the product up.
Last I heard, Intuit has two different file formats for Mac and Windows, and two different licenses for the server software they offer to banks. The Mac license is much more expensive than the Windows software, in addition to serving an incompatible format. So Intuit is basically screwing Mac users gratuitously. (If your bank is supporting Quicken for Mac, be vocally greatful; they're paying for the privilege!)
If this is still the way of things, not even to speak of the fewer features and the wavering support for the Mac, I'm not in the least surprised that Apple is looking at their options. MYOB apparently didn't pan out. I never looked at the software, but it received mixed reviews. Considering that this is a very important niche, Steve probably invoked the "if you need something done, do it yourself" clause that he invoked when 3rd parties were taking the OS X browser market nowhere fast.
This, of course, assumes that the rumor is true. One of the nice things about Cocoa is that Apple can have very small teams of engineers working on applications, so we might be surprised at the level of diversification coming out of Cupertino.
Point #3: The only problem with this plan is that it still leaves a huge gap in the Mac consumer software line: iPublish. For a platform known for graphics, there remains no consumer software to put together a brochure, business card or newsletter. Ideally, Adobe would release a trimmed-down OSX version of Pagemaker for this purpose, but since they refuse to Apple should build a competitor for MS Publisher as part of the new suite.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Is there any particular reason AppleWorks wasn't up to the job? Of course it's not an InDesign replacement, but it's widely used precisely for brochures and newsletters and what-not, blending the WP and illustrator and paint (and spreadsheet, for graphs) frames as necessary. I don't see how a revamped replacement for AW wouldn't continue to offer that capability.
Does something really have to be narrowly and explicitly targeted at publication design in order to be useful in publication design?
ObThirdParty: Stone Design's Create. Deneba's Canvas.
Besides Stone Studio and Canvas there is MacPublisher (new to me and cheap). Nisus Writer for OS 9 could prepare documents that didn't require fancy graphic creation. The beta for OS X doesn't give any indication of what they will do for drawing graphics.
i want you to tell it what the source is (book, webpage, newpaper ect.) and it ask u for the information...its impossible to remember, u need to constantly look in a packet for it.
YES! YES! YES!! That would totally be worth whatever its price tag is. I swear I've spent more time making sure the MLA is right than I have actually writing the stupid paper.
Comments
Whether or not the package will be distributed as "iWorks" is unknown, but both AppleWorks and Keynote will be included at a discounted price.
Is it just me (?), or doesn't this sound strange to you people?
Is Apple making a new version of AppleWorks that is goning to be bundled with other applications like Keynote and iAccount in a package called iWorks or whatever? I don't think apple should make another integrated program suit like AppleWorks, but rather keep the programs separated from each other but with similar interface and some sort of opendoc-like funtionality that let the programs work together to create complex documents with text, spreadsheats, illustration aso. Other advantages is that they could split the package and sell the programs individually. If you just want iWrite-app, you just have to pay for that one.
Well - as I said before - we'll just have to wait and see what Apple has in store for us
Originally posted by ShawnPatrickJoyce
This is great news.
As a college student and an English major in the Honors Program
full of ourselves much
Whether he is or he isn't I wonder what the Quicken fellows think about this.
Screed
Originally posted by Frank777
I don't think it's a matter of whether Filemaker will be used or not - of course it will. Apple owns Filemaker and won't spend valuable development dollars re-inventing the wheel.
There are a variety of robust open source databases. It would not exactly be "re-inventing the wheel" to use one of these (maybe PostgreSQL or SQLite, both of which offer unicode support) and add a Cocoa interface.
Originally posted by BHD2
There are a variety of robust open source databases. It would not exactly be "re-inventing the wheel" to use one of these (maybe PostgreSQL or SQLite, both of which offer unicode support) and add a Cocoa interface.
Absolutely. And there is a good open source productivity suite in the making called OpenOffice. If Aquafied (and optimised by Apple), it would make a formidable offering, not unlike what has been achieved with Safari.
With MS-Office now costing $499.95, hopefully, Apple picks up the baton.
Originally posted by sCreeD
Is the gentleman from Intuit still on the executive board of Apple?
Whether he is or he isn't I wonder what the Quicken fellows think about this.
Intuit has been a half-assed, on-again-off-again supporter of the Mac for so long that I don't know how much Apple cares. At one point Apple was flogging MYOB, and the publisher got a lot of support from Apple engineers to spiff the product up.
Last I heard, Intuit has two different file formats for Mac and Windows, and two different licenses for the server software they offer to banks. The Mac license is much more expensive than the Windows software, in addition to serving an incompatible format. So Intuit is basically screwing Mac users gratuitously. (If your bank is supporting Quicken for Mac, be vocally greatful; they're paying for the privilege!)
If this is still the way of things, not even to speak of the fewer features and the wavering support for the Mac, I'm not in the least surprised that Apple is looking at their options. MYOB apparently didn't pan out. I never looked at the software, but it received mixed reviews. Considering that this is a very important niche, Steve probably invoked the "if you need something done, do it yourself" clause that he invoked when 3rd parties were taking the OS X browser market nowhere fast.
This, of course, assumes that the rumor is true. One of the nice things about Cocoa is that Apple can have very small teams of engineers working on applications, so we might be surprised at the level of diversification coming out of Cupertino.
Quote:
Originally posted by Frank777:
<strong>
Point #3: The only problem with this plan is that it still leaves a huge gap in the Mac consumer software line: iPublish. For a platform known for graphics, there remains no consumer software to put together a brochure, business card or newsletter. Ideally, Adobe would release a trimmed-down OSX version of Pagemaker for this purpose, but since they refuse to Apple should build a competitor for MS Publisher as part of the new suite.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Is there any particular reason AppleWorks wasn't up to the job? Of course it's not an InDesign replacement, but it's widely used precisely for brochures and newsletters and what-not, blending the WP and illustrator and paint (and spreadsheet, for graphs) frames as necessary. I don't see how a revamped replacement for AW wouldn't continue to offer that capability.
Does something really have to be narrowly and explicitly targeted at publication design in order to be useful in publication design?
ObThirdParty: Stone Design's Create. Deneba's Canvas.
Besides Stone Studio and Canvas there is MacPublisher (new to me and cheap). Nisus Writer for OS 9 could prepare documents that didn't require fancy graphic creation. The beta for OS X doesn't give any indication of what they will do for drawing graphics.
Originally posted by ast3r3x
what i want...
automatic MLA formating for bibliographies!
i want you to tell it what the source is (book, webpage, newpaper ect.) and it ask u for the information...its impossible to remember, u need to constantly look in a packet for it.
YES! YES! YES!! That would totally be worth whatever its price tag is. I swear I've spent more time making sure the MLA is right than I have actually writing the stupid paper.