A native version of OpenOffice could implement all of the services of OS X....and it's free. Apple could also had any component it chooses on top of OpenOffice, and contribute to the overall development.
A native MacOS X OpenOffice is not free... it doesn't exist. And it would cost money to develop and maintain. In exchange, you would get a product for which you couldn't recoup the costs and would be deleted by any serious office worker and replaced with MSOffice.
Apple's biggest advantage over all other non-Windows competitors in the workplace is that MSOffice runs on it. It's the only UNIX-like OS that also runs MSOffice. Anything that detracts from that message loses sales, not gains them, IMHO.
Apple should devote resources to innovation, not to re-creating already existing functionality in Microsoft office products.
If you get access to Live Directory, the suite of Mail, iCal, and Address Book will do this now--in a fashion. By this, I mean that it works as well as Microsoft's own Entourage 2004.
You're right, but "in a fashion" is unacceptable. Here's an example:
You work in a business that uses Exchange for calendaring via Outlook. Someone you need to meet says "Just schedule some time on my calendar, invite these 4 other people, and get a conference room." On a PC, no problem. On my Mac, well... I can't see their calendars; or they can't see mine. I can't schedule a conference room. I can't pull up 5 people's calendars and have Outlook pick the best time for a meeting. I can't get to the list of who's confirmed attendance at the meeting, who's "tentative," and who hasn't replied at all. Or I can't reply to a meeting invitation sent by someone else.
Bottom line, I have to use a PC for this functionality, which makes putting a Mac into this environment pretty unlikely, unless I have the budget for both a Mac and a PC per employee.
Microsoft Office isn't the monolithic software package in corporations because of Word or Excel, it's because there's no cross-platform substitute for Outlook/Exchange with equivalent functionality.
Apple needs to pick its battles and this is the wrong one. Keynots is cool. and why not sell it since they already made it for Steve.
But spending R&D money on a productivity suite is a waste.
Instead they should use the cash to bundle Office on every Mac. That would be a big incentive for people to Switch. Many I have talked to don't Switch just because they would need to buy a new Office Suite. And as we know Office is pricey.
I bet if Apple agreed to bundle a Lite Office with the consumer products and the full version with Pro products it would help Mac sales. It would also make the beaste happy and keeping M$ happy is something Apple needs to do. Its just not big enought to do without M$.
Oh and M$ would care less if people switch to Macs from Windows if every Mac comes with M$ Office.
I hate metoo-ing, but really, Apple is blowing it (blew it) by not going with OpenOffice.
'Every Mac comes with the OS X native version of OpenOffice, the free cross-platform alternative to MS Office' - that's pretty powerful.
I think Apple is playing it right here. If Apple were to just blatently come out with an OpenOffice clone, they might as well just kiss MS Office good-bye. If it were successful enough (much less free as you suggest), then the official MS office would be history. I don't think that would be in Apple's best interest.
Apple is billing iWork as a replacement for Appleworks. I kind of see this as a sheep in wolf's clothing. At this point, Keynote 2 is considered better by many than Powerpoint, even though Powerpoint has improved significantly with the Office 2004 bundle. It's hard to image Keynote falling behind here. Pages is a work in progress, but it's not just another bland word processor. The whole template and dropzone concept is actually a very good idea. I'd agree that Apple needs to beef up Pages to handle many of the more common features, but still, it's a good start. The original Keyonte was also promising, but not quite up to Powerpoint standards. It didn't take long for Apple to catch up and surpass.
I have no doubt Numbers is a spreadsheet. It's an obvious omission for any productivity suite. If Apple were to go with OpenOffice that would be a nice start, but not what I'd expect from Apple. What are the advantages of OpenOffice? Is it better than MS Office? No. It's not from Microsoft and the price is right. My expectations of an Apple product are different. It should be elegantly designed yet feel like common sense when you use it. Ease of use is important. If Apple can't do something original or push the concepts further than the competition then they shouldn't even bother at all. With Keynote, Apple provided great templates along with really slick transitions. For presentation software, these are big issues. For Pages, Apple included cool templates and drop zones, etc. I expect similar innovations with Numbers, etc. I don't want yet another Office clone, (unless of course, MS drops Mac support).
OK I make my point now - which hasn't been picked up in this thread..
That is Keynote which is currently 2.0.2. is an outstanding application. Takes 1 hour to work out how to make STAND OUT presentations. And gives conference audiences a break from the usual PowerPoint (yawn!) trite.
I haven't used Pages 1.0.2 - But I expect that it should be similarly tuned to making well designed stuff intuitively (or if not will be sorted soon)....
So I would say that these things don't have to compete with M$ Office, or Open Office (native would be nice here sure!).
They could, with Numbers, provide an alternative to liven some up some of those dull buisness days...!..
(note that you simply export what you've created back to the nominal Office app. format.. as conventionality requires...)
p.s. OK this was written during the posting of last message
It's about time. There are a lot of us waiting for the spreadsheet before purchasing iWork.
Hopefully, iWork '06 will debut in the late fall. Why delay till MWSF if we all know it's coming. If it can be ready, announce it now and ship it in October so they can catch a bit of the academic year as well.
Pages sucks, unless you write one page family newsletters once a month.
Keynote is top dawg.
How can the two be so hit and miss? I know how, Apple spent all their time designing templates for mommy and daddy to send to their parents and forgot about what a word processor is supposed to do. Keynote rocks because that is what SJ himself uses in front of business people.
Without a serious MS Word equivalent, I just can't see an "Excel like" product doing well.
Pages sucks, unless you write one page family newsletters once a month.
Keynote is top dawg.
How can the two be so hit and miss?
The original Keynote showed promise, but it wasn't better than Powerpoint. Yes, some of it's key features were great, but it lacked the capability of some of the basics. When you think about it, nearly the same is true with Pages so far. It shows promise, has some innovations, but is missing some of the basics.
How can the two be so hit or miss you ask? If you consider the time in development for both of these applications, that should answer your own question. I think it's important to showcase some breakthrough features first, then add the more mundane features later as the application has time to mature.
I always thought Apple was going to create these applications and make them usable over the internet. Attach it to a .mac account and then for $99 a year you have email, storage, and applications without having to shell out the money. Great for switching between OS types going from your dorm room or work to computer lab or home. Even on the road or an internet cafe.
You then offer a downloadable version that people can use when you are not connected to the internet (or have dial-up) and there you go. I was thinking Apple was going to do this way back when they started to charge for .mac accounts. I do not know if it would be something for everyone, but it would have probably led to me keeping my account.
People, people. Pages? Version 1.0. Keynote? Version 2.0.
Word? Version 2004.00. PowerPoint? Version 2004.00.
I don't doubt Pages or some offspin (Pages Pro?) will gain real corporate office power by version 3.0. (RendezVo...Bonjour collaboration tools similar to SubEthaEdit would make Pages very powerful. Have iChat open videoconferencing with 3 other coworkers simultaneously working on a single document.)
What Apple needs to do is bundle this stuff. If people still want to buy Office or shareware alternatives...let them. But instead of charging for something, let the users get it free.
Macs should be able to handle Word, Excel and PowerPoint files right out of the box. That will make people switch. And bundling Office is not the way...since Apple has no control over what MS will put out or even if they will continue to put out.
I think Apple is playing it right here. If Apple were to just blatently come out with an OpenOffice clone, they might as well just kiss MS Office good-bye.
As opposed to simply allowing Redmond to snicker at their largely futile iWork efforts? If Apple wants to offer an "in-house" office suite that's in any way comparable to MS Office, then their best hope would be to hook up w/ the Open Office community to help create a version that is properly integrated into OS X. If it became ubiquitous (iLifelike) on every new Mac sold they would have an incredibly compelling value package to offer consumers debating the relative merits of Macs and PCs.
I actually bought iWorks when it came out. I don't use it. I even regret buying it. I'm a student and no matter how I like it my school expects assignments in Microsoft Word format. I usually e-mail them in.
Thank God for Microsoft Office 2004 on the Mac. It is a great program. The Mac Business Unit has done a wonderful job.
I think Apple is playing it right here. If Apple were to just blatently come out with an OpenOffice clone, they might as well just kiss MS Office good-bye. If it were successful enough (much less free as you suggest), then the official MS office would be history. I don't think that would be in Apple's best interest.
Exactly... look what happened to Internet Explorer on the Mac once Apple came out with Safari. Microsoft announced tha all future development of Mac IE would cease. Clearly shows that Microsoft is willing to abandon Mac development if Apple gets directly in their way. Pages, however, seems more to me like a replacement for the old Print Shop programs than a full-featured word processing app like Word.
sweet fancy moses, don't you think apple can spare a few software developers to at least give a spreadsheet app a try? yes, i am sure developing numbers will push leopard back to 2008. sheesh...
and i don't know what the heck peopel thought they were GETTING when they bought iWork. i knew exactly what i was getting. i was getting a kick-butt presentation app (and it is... anyone who tells you differently is a liar. yeah, it could still use some work, but damn i can impres folks now), with a word-processing/basic page layout app thrown in for free. i mean, come on, it's $70. $70! $100 for a multi-use family pack. if that's all you can afford, it's pretty damned good. if you think you can do better, then go BUY IT. please, enjoy the cheap family-pack version of office for mac. oh yeah, that's right, there isn't one. i swear, some people act liek they're INSULTED by pages even being in the same box, nay, on the same disc.
give it a rest. pages 1.0 needs work. pages 2.0 will be the quantum leap we saw from keynote 1 to 2. keynote 3 will probably make my head explode (in a good way), and numbers 1.0 will probably disappoint lots of folks. but if apple only charges $80 or $100, i will just not understand the self-righteous anger of some people towards apple over developing software because, well, why SHOULDN'T THEY?!?!?!?
Comments
Originally posted by macslut
A native version of OpenOffice could implement all of the services of OS X....and it's free. Apple could also had any component it chooses on top of OpenOffice, and contribute to the overall development.
A native MacOS X OpenOffice is not free... it doesn't exist. And it would cost money to develop and maintain. In exchange, you would get a product for which you couldn't recoup the costs and would be deleted by any serious office worker and replaced with MSOffice.
Apple's biggest advantage over all other non-Windows competitors in the workplace is that MSOffice runs on it. It's the only UNIX-like OS that also runs MSOffice. Anything that detracts from that message loses sales, not gains them, IMHO.
Apple should devote resources to innovation, not to re-creating already existing functionality in Microsoft office products.
Originally posted by Mr. Me
If you get access to Live Directory, the suite of Mail, iCal, and Address Book will do this now--in a fashion. By this, I mean that it works as well as Microsoft's own Entourage 2004.
You're right, but "in a fashion" is unacceptable. Here's an example:
You work in a business that uses Exchange for calendaring via Outlook. Someone you need to meet says "Just schedule some time on my calendar, invite these 4 other people, and get a conference room." On a PC, no problem. On my Mac, well... I can't see their calendars; or they can't see mine. I can't schedule a conference room. I can't pull up 5 people's calendars and have Outlook pick the best time for a meeting. I can't get to the list of who's confirmed attendance at the meeting, who's "tentative," and who hasn't replied at all. Or I can't reply to a meeting invitation sent by someone else.
Bottom line, I have to use a PC for this functionality, which makes putting a Mac into this environment pretty unlikely, unless I have the budget for both a Mac and a PC per employee.
Microsoft Office isn't the monolithic software package in corporations because of Word or Excel, it's because there's no cross-platform substitute for Outlook/Exchange with equivalent functionality.
But spending R&D money on a productivity suite is a waste.
Instead they should use the cash to bundle Office on every Mac. That would be a big incentive for people to Switch. Many I have talked to don't Switch just because they would need to buy a new Office Suite. And as we know Office is pricey.
I bet if Apple agreed to bundle a Lite Office with the consumer products and the full version with Pro products it would help Mac sales. It would also make the beaste happy and keeping M$ happy is something Apple needs to do. Its just not big enought to do without M$.
Oh and M$ would care less if people switch to Macs from Windows if every Mac comes with M$ Office.
Originally posted by macslut
I hate metoo-ing, but really, Apple is blowing it (blew it) by not going with OpenOffice.
'Every Mac comes with the OS X native version of OpenOffice, the free cross-platform alternative to MS Office' - that's pretty powerful.
I think Apple is playing it right here. If Apple were to just blatently come out with an OpenOffice clone, they might as well just kiss MS Office good-bye. If it were successful enough (much less free as you suggest), then the official MS office would be history. I don't think that would be in Apple's best interest.
Apple is billing iWork as a replacement for Appleworks. I kind of see this as a sheep in wolf's clothing. At this point, Keynote 2 is considered better by many than Powerpoint, even though Powerpoint has improved significantly with the Office 2004 bundle. It's hard to image Keynote falling behind here. Pages is a work in progress, but it's not just another bland word processor. The whole template and dropzone concept is actually a very good idea. I'd agree that Apple needs to beef up Pages to handle many of the more common features, but still, it's a good start. The original Keyonte was also promising, but not quite up to Powerpoint standards. It didn't take long for Apple to catch up and surpass.
I have no doubt Numbers is a spreadsheet. It's an obvious omission for any productivity suite. If Apple were to go with OpenOffice that would be a nice start, but not what I'd expect from Apple. What are the advantages of OpenOffice? Is it better than MS Office? No. It's not from Microsoft and the price is right. My expectations of an Apple product are different. It should be elegantly designed yet feel like common sense when you use it. Ease of use is important. If Apple can't do something original or push the concepts further than the competition then they shouldn't even bother at all. With Keynote, Apple provided great templates along with really slick transitions. For presentation software, these are big issues. For Pages, Apple included cool templates and drop zones, etc. I expect similar innovations with Numbers, etc. I don't want yet another Office clone, (unless of course, MS drops Mac support).
Steve
That is Keynote which is currently 2.0.2. is an outstanding application. Takes 1 hour to work out how to make STAND OUT presentations. And gives conference audiences a break from the usual PowerPoint (yawn!) trite.
I haven't used Pages 1.0.2 - But I expect that it should be similarly tuned to making well designed stuff intuitively (or if not will be sorted soon)....
So I would say that these things don't have to compete with M$ Office, or Open Office (native would be nice here sure!).
They could, with Numbers, provide an alternative to liven some up some of those dull buisness days...!..
(note that you simply export what you've created back to the nominal Office app. format.. as conventionality requires...)
p.s. OK this was written during the posting of last message
Hopefully, iWork '06 will debut in the late fall. Why delay till MWSF if we all know it's coming. If it can be ready, announce it now and ship it in October so they can catch a bit of the academic year as well.
Keynote is top dawg.
How can the two be so hit and miss? I know how, Apple spent all their time designing templates for mommy and daddy to send to their parents and forgot about what a word processor is supposed to do.
Without a serious MS Word equivalent, I just can't see an "Excel like" product doing well.
Originally posted by aplnub
Pages sucks, unless you write one page family newsletters once a month.
Keynote is top dawg.
How can the two be so hit and miss?
The original Keynote showed promise, but it wasn't better than Powerpoint. Yes, some of it's key features were great, but it lacked the capability of some of the basics. When you think about it, nearly the same is true with Pages so far. It shows promise, has some innovations, but is missing some of the basics.
How can the two be so hit or miss you ask? If you consider the time in development for both of these applications, that should answer your own question. I think it's important to showcase some breakthrough features first, then add the more mundane features later as the application has time to mature.
Steve
http://hotjobs.yahoo.com/jobs/PA/Pit...ture/J724217GW
Originally posted by another_steve
I think it's important to showcase some breakthrough features first, then add the more mundane features later as the application has time to mature.
Steve
I would hit the basics and then do the eye candy but that is me.
You then offer a downloadable version that people can use when you are not connected to the internet (or have dial-up) and there you go. I was thinking Apple was going to do this way back when they started to charge for .mac accounts. I do not know if it would be something for everyone, but it would have probably led to me keeping my account.
Just my less then two cents.
Word? Version 2004.00. PowerPoint? Version 2004.00.
I don't doubt Pages or some offspin (Pages Pro?) will gain real corporate office power by version 3.0. (RendezVo...Bonjour collaboration tools similar to SubEthaEdit would make Pages very powerful. Have iChat open videoconferencing with 3 other coworkers simultaneously working on a single document.)
What Apple needs to do is bundle this stuff. If people still want to buy Office or shareware alternatives...let them. But instead of charging for something, let the users get it free.
Macs should be able to handle Word, Excel and PowerPoint files right out of the box. That will make people switch. And bundling Office is not the way...since Apple has no control over what MS will put out or even if they will continue to put out.
Originally posted by another_steve
I think Apple is playing it right here. If Apple were to just blatently come out with an OpenOffice clone, they might as well just kiss MS Office good-bye.
As opposed to simply allowing Redmond to snicker at their largely futile iWork efforts? If Apple wants to offer an "in-house" office suite that's in any way comparable to MS Office, then their best hope would be to hook up w/ the Open Office community to help create a version that is properly integrated into OS X. If it became ubiquitous (iLifelike) on every new Mac sold they would have an incredibly compelling value package to offer consumers debating the relative merits of Macs and PCs.
Thank God for Microsoft Office 2004 on the Mac. It is a great program. The Mac Business Unit has done a wonderful job.
Originally posted by Booga
Ok... I was wrong about Pittsburgh, I guess:
http://hotjobs.yahoo.com/jobs/PA/Pit...ture/J724217GW
It's above the Starbucks.
-K
Originally posted by SorcerersApprentice
Lotus Improv for NeXt best spreadsheet ever. Product was built in Cocoa. Apple should buy/update this from Lotus/IBM.
A small scale hobby project trying to recreate the functionality can be found here:
http://www.materialarts.com/FlexiSheet/Basics.html
While very powerful for certain classic spreadsheet use most of what I do in Excel would not benefit at all from this approach.
Originally posted by another_steve
I think Apple is playing it right here. If Apple were to just blatently come out with an OpenOffice clone, they might as well just kiss MS Office good-bye. If it were successful enough (much less free as you suggest), then the official MS office would be history. I don't think that would be in Apple's best interest.
Exactly... look what happened to Internet Explorer on the Mac once Apple came out with Safari. Microsoft announced tha all future development of Mac IE would cease. Clearly shows that Microsoft is willing to abandon Mac development if Apple gets directly in their way. Pages, however, seems more to me like a replacement for the old Print Shop programs than a full-featured word processing app like Word.
and i don't know what the heck peopel thought they were GETTING when they bought iWork. i knew exactly what i was getting. i was getting a kick-butt presentation app (and it is... anyone who tells you differently is a liar. yeah, it could still use some work, but damn i can impres folks now), with a word-processing/basic page layout app thrown in for free. i mean, come on, it's $70. $70! $100 for a multi-use family pack. if that's all you can afford, it's pretty damned good. if you think you can do better, then go BUY IT. please, enjoy the cheap family-pack version of office for mac. oh yeah, that's right, there isn't one. i swear, some people act liek they're INSULTED by pages even being in the same box, nay, on the same disc.
give it a rest. pages 1.0 needs work. pages 2.0 will be the quantum leap we saw from keynote 1 to 2. keynote 3 will probably make my head explode (in a good way), and numbers 1.0 will probably disappoint lots of folks. but if apple only charges $80 or $100, i will just not understand the self-righteous anger of some people towards apple over developing software because, well, why SHOULDN'T THEY?!?!?!?