Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > News > Mac News > The Feature Thief, part one: Pages

The Feature Thief, part one: Pages
Thread Tools
NewsPoster
MacNN Staff
Join Date: Jul 2012
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 27, 2015, 11:08 AM
 
Welcome to The Feature Thief, a mini-series of columns where we take a look at some of Apple's rollercoaster of change when it comes to software -- from apps that got a makeover to a sex change, or even some that just got tossed out entirely. Each day this week, we'll take a fairly recent example of each of the three types of sometimes-painful change users have been subjected to when Apple gets a new idea, what to do about it, and where to look for alternatives if necessary.

If you haven't already, do go and have a look at the introduction to this mini-series, which will have a new installment each day this week. In it, we talk about the three approaches Apple generally takes when it has decided that a piece of software needs to transition. Sometimes it is because the old codebase will not survive the bolting on of important new technologies, sometimes it is because the purpose of the software has fallen out of mainstream use, and sometimes (it seems) Apple just wants to avoid users getting complacent.

The iWork 09 suite
The iWork 09 suite


Pages, the program we look at today, is also representative of the revamp given to Numbers and Keynote at the same time -- but users reacted most strongly to it when Apple, in the name of trying to unify its word-processing and desktop-layout software across three platforms (Mac, iOS, and a web app available in iCloud), took to stripping the well-liked program down the bare walls. Sure, over time nearly everything is back, and arguably better than ever (apart from the few still-missing features), but where users might have wanted an updating, what they got was plastic surgery it took many months to heal from.

Apple introduced Pages and the rest of the iWork suite as a sort of rewrite of what Microsoft Office might have been like if Apple had created it, and in part in reaction to the incredibly slow pace of new versions of Office (the forthcoming Office 2016, expected later this summer, is the first new version in five years). As with most Apple programs, it centered around a really good idea -- a template-driven app with a distinct set of standard word-processing tools in one mode, and a modest but impressive set of desktop layout (or "desktop publishing" as it used to be called) tools in another mode.

For those of us with experience in DTP tools like Pagemaker, Quark, and InDesign, Pages was a revelation for what used to be called "print shop" type jobs: business cards, brochures, flyers: utterly gorgeous designs, easily-modifiable art (with text wraparound! You kids today know nothing of our struggle!), and all the basics needed to create good-looking if not quite pro-level work. The word processing module was likewise easy, classy, and mostly compatible with Microsoft Word (barring the odd font substitution). It was a great, low-cost, world-class alternative to the 800-pound gorilla of office software.

Then along came the iPhone, and later the iPad, and later still the concept of mobile devices that can be used actively rather than passively, thanks to things like Bluetooth keyboards. Thus, mobile versions of the iWork apps (as they were formerly called) came along, followed eventually by mobile versions of the much-improved Microsoft Office suite, having once again liberally borrowed concepts from Apple on how to improve and expand their own software.

This created an issue: touch-based versions of Pages and the desktop-oriented version of Pages were two quite different beasts. So this time, Apple re-architected the lot: it ditched nearly all but the basic features, and reworked Pages on the Mac in the new 5.0 version, so that the Mac, iOS, and web-based app could work better together, and present a single, unified interface. This is something that, on paper, everyone wants: there are huge advantages to being able to work on one's project on whatever device one has handy, or if no Apple device is within reach, the web app version even works on other platforms -- but most people would have preferred Apple waited until the iOS and web versions were roughly on par with the existing desktop version, rather than rebuilding everything around the iOS style.

That said, Apple made a couple of smart moves even while it surprised and frustrated desktop users who had little interaction with the other versions. The first -- which they've adopted again with other recent app refurbishments -- is that the new version didn't overwrite the old version. This technique was first used with iMovie '07 (oh, and what a story that will be when we get to it), and was used again here.

The old version was preserved and stored safely in its own folder, and still worked fine; however, the new version was also set as the new default, leading to some confusion and ugliness. We can see why Apple did it (to get users to let go of the old version, which will eventually no longer work), but a little more finesse with document-opening choices in that early new version wouldn't have gone amiss.

Users trying the new version got treated to a hugely different interface -- in our judgement better in approach than the "inspector"-based style, but occasionally confusing until you get used to it, rather like when you've moved into a smaller apartment from your former large house -- everything's not where it "should" be, some of the compromises are awkward, and the color's all wrong for a while. On top of this, the early Pages 5.0 release had a lot of missing (largely advanced) features. Users squawked, and Apple promised many of them would return in future updates.

Not really as different as many make it out to be
Not really as different as many make it out to be


Now at version 5.5.3 and 18 months later, for the most part Apple has honored its promise, and older users have largely gotten used to it while newer users, we've noticed, have been delighted with the revamped version from the get-go. Still, some features and templates remain MIA, with the most striking one being the outlining feature.

We could care more about this if we really tried, and if you made a charity song about it, but otherwise we confess to being not fussed about it. Because the old outlining in Pages was fine, but no more than that. There is outlining in Microsoft Word, and it's more powerful, but it still feels like you're juggling one document with lots of bits in it, and that you're keeping track of all this in your head somehow. And, of course, few people actually use outlining much at all compared to the number of overall word-processing app users.

We switched to using OmniOutliner, which is an entirely separate app just dedicated to outlining. There, it feels like outlining makes sense, and is less rigidly formatted. If you have that or any other third-party outlining app, you won't even notice that Pages has lost its. One day it will come back -- maybe -- but by then you won't notice that either, because why would you?

In the course of researching people's opinions on the Apple-slain apps, we enlisted a 100-person strong pool of users. The group contains 11 educators, nine college students, and 10 senior citizens. The average age of the opinion group is 31.4 years old, somewhat skewed by the senior citizens. The majority of the users, 54, entered the OS X world after the iPhone was released, with 22 of them dating back to 1994 or before.

Of the polled users, 74 have used Pages for more than five hours, and 33 continue to use the app on a routine basis. Of the 41 that quit or just tried the application, 34 say that the suite was less useful than some other product -- specifically Microsoft Office. Four lamented the loss of Clarisworks, nee AppleWorks. Some users who bailed on Pages didn't know that features had been added along the way -- 20 claim to have not have revisited the app at all. The other 21 users who left know that features had been added, and simply didn't care.

Of the users that continue to use Pages, all 33 like the iOS integration and call it a key feature. The remaining Pages users are evenly divided amongst our classes of users -- six come from the pre-1994 group, 17 come from the post-iOS world, and the remaining 10 from the "middle ages" of Apple, joining the fray between 1994 and 2008.

Pages isn't so contentious. Most users would switch to "something better" although what that is wasn't made clear by any of those questioned. None of the 26 have any need to use Pages, being previously invested in Adobe or Microsoft software. Five of those questioned use TextEdit for word processing needs, claiming to not need anything more advanced -- none of these five were senior citizens, or old-school pre-1994 users.

The previous version of Pages continues to work for now, even in 10.10.3, so if you want to keep using it, this is a rare case when we say "suit yourself." You can put the old version in the Dock, tuck the new one in the old one's folder (or toss it entirely, though that may be unwise before you've checked that the 5.x version is among your iTunes "purchases"), and you should be back where you were. The files you continue to create with the old version should open in a future newer version when you get around to it.

That said, be sure you do get round to it at some point: one day, the iWork '09 version of Pages (v4.3) will no longer function, and you'll discover this when you've bought a new Mac that runs OS X 10.10.10 or something and have no path back. We took to the new approach (after some initial confusion from all the re-arranging) pretty quickly, and haven't missed the few features still on the MIA list. Picking up a standard interface across the iPad, iPhone, and Mac was, in the end, worth the pain in our opinion.

Admit it: the Inspector never worked well
Admit it: the Inspector never worked well


We suggest giving the 5.x version of Pages (and its iWork siblings) a go when you're not on a tight deadline, and can spare a pair of fresh eyes and an open mind. It's been our experience that most switchers find some aspect of the newer program they like better than the way Pages '09 handled things (like dropping the Inspector palette) and get used to things quickly from there. We would like to see Apple beef up the ePub features in the newer version more, however, for those not using iBooks Author and its iBookstore-only orientation.

Of course, some people depending on features that the old one had, and as mentioned the solution is to keep using the old one, but keep an eye out for alternatives. There is currently a free beta of Microsoft Office 2016, and ironically that's probably the closes substitute to the old Pages, since it has incorporated some of the concepts and methods seen there (while of course adding its own style and features as well). Microsoft too has seen the wisdom of having a similar interface across Apple's platforms, and was into web app versions of Pages long before Apple got around to it.

The downside to Microsoft's approach is that Office 2016 and onwards will require a subscription to Office 365, which some people dislike. When we compare the cost of keeping Office upgraded the old-fashioned way versus the subscription route, things don't really seem too bad -- but of course Office users are notorious for hanging on to older versions till the bitter end. Don't be one of those people -- while you've got your old familiar Pages, give the new kid a periodic workout. You might find yourself switching over in a pleasant, gentle way rather than feeling forced, which could make all the difference.

On Tuesday, we'll have a look at three apps, two of who's revamp sent shockwaves throughout its industry, prompting strong backlash that was only subsided with time and improvements -- but which has gone on to reclaim its former throne: Final Cut Pro and iMovie. We'll also cover the whys and wherefores of the abandonment of iDVD. Each weekday this week, we'll present a new example of a beloved Apple app that has gotten revamped, pushed aside, or shown the door, and what your options are: now, and going forward.

-- William Gallagher (@WGallagher) and Charles Martin (@Editor_MacNN, with polling assistance from Mike Wuerthele)
( Last edited by NewsPoster; Jan 8, 2016 at 12:31 PM. )
     
bobolicious
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Aug 2002
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 27, 2015, 12:06 PM
 
..."the majority of the users, 54, entered the OS X world after the iPhone was released"...

I suspect results might vary dramatically in the 'survey' if users had a 'long' history of mac use...?

Appleworks was bundled with untold Macs for many years world wide. Apple does not even offer the ability in Pages to open their own older files - this is inconceivable to me...

Until the opensource LibreOffice incorporated such just last year, long time mac users were quite literally left up the proverbial creek...

If it is Apple's intent to force users to hang on to their old macs, it is certainly incentive - but does it discourage new hardware sales as well (certainly for me) ?

I still run Snow Leopard (it is rock stable & everything works) and my Yosemite experience is still having critical issues late in the annual developer churn-for-revenue cycle with everything from email to apple remote (my audiophile system is effectively broken by MacOS with 10.10.3) as well as multiple printer & scanner drivers that simply do not work.

I gather from others I talk to I am not alone, speaking of the often touted 'user experience'.

I loaded Mountain Lion on the weekend to try & regain some reliability in MacOS while running software that orphaned Snow Leopard - yet even Disk First Aid is now limiting me to only 2 partitions (?) unless I go back to Snow... How is that reasonable...?

Yosemite remains 'plug & pray', with 'Feature Thieving' both by design, and consistentlly simply by dysfunction - my current Apple 'user experience'...
     
Alarik
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Apr 2015
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 27, 2015, 12:22 PM
 
The difficulty with Pages 5, for me, is that once you open--in 5--a file created in 4, then 5 saves it in its own format, and you cannot then reopen the file in 4. It becomes a one-way street.

One great value 4 has had for me (and this might be the case in 5) is in dealing with corrupt Word files. I have a giant file, which I've created in Word 8. It's very important to me. It became corrupt, and Word could not deal with it, or at least I couldn't. I then opened that file in Pages 4, and in the conversion process whatever was corrupting/handicapping the file in Word was gone. Pages simply weeded out the "problem" that had arisen in the Word file. All was the same otherwise.

As a result I've "stored" all my important files in 4, in the cloud. Just remember, if you open any of those in your phone or online then they'll be converted to 5 and, unless you create duplicates, there'll be no going back. That is irritating. I believe in creating a "master" not in endless duplicates.

I've been word-processing in Macs since System 7. The best word processor was/is WordPerfect for Mac 3.5/4. Before that, on DOS, in Xywrite.

Thanks for the article.
     
Mike Wuerthele
Managing Editor
Join Date: Jul 2012
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 27, 2015, 12:24 PM
 
Originally Posted by bobolicious View Post
..."the majority of the users, 54, entered the OS X world after the iPhone was released"...

I suspect results might vary dramatically in the 'survey' if users had a 'long' history of mac use...?
It might, but that doesn't reflect the reality of the user base percentages. In fact, if anything, we've under-represented new mac users in the total. There have been more macs sold in the last five years than the previous 15, and a great amount of the "old guard" left in the dark ages of the Motorola G4 speed debacle.

If we over-represent any one user segment, we're not serving the user base as a whole. We're very close to the distribution of Mac users as a whole with our polled group.

I'm not trying to minimize the user base, or deride your user experience here. We certainly don't deny that Apple has left users behind, because that is for sure the case. The thing is, though, Apple can't serve the entire user base either, even as big as they are -- they know their base, and it skews iOS-primary, OS X secondary heavily.

I've also left out a key fact -- none of our polled users have had a Mac for less than two years.
     
bobolicious
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Aug 2002
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 27, 2015, 01:40 PM
 
"It might, but that doesn't reflect the reality of the user base percentages. In fact, if anything, we've under-represented new mac users in the total." "I've also left out a key fact -- none of our polled users have had a Mac for less than two years."

Proportional representation is a way of looking at the issue (if underrepresented), however if the subject of the survey is focussed on Apple as 'feature thief' (by design?), would more than a few years of mac use be beneficial for 'features lost' perspective & significant insight...?

Applecare has indicated one can apparently downgrade MacOS using a timecapsule backup to restore user data, presumably with limitations, including using hardware that can support such, precluding shipping (and refurbished?) macs 'thieved' by design...
     
Mike Wuerthele
Managing Editor
Join Date: Jul 2012
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 27, 2015, 01:45 PM
 
Originally Posted by bobolicious View Post
"It might, but that doesn't reflect the reality of the user base percentages. In fact, if anything, we've under-represented new mac users in the total." "I've also left out a key fact -- none of our polled users have had a Mac for less than two years."

Proportional representation is a way of looking at the issue (if underrepresented), however if the subject of the survey is focussed on Apple as 'feature thief' (by design?), would more than a few years of mac use be beneficial for 'features lost' perspective & significant insight...?

Applecare has indicated one can apparently downgrade MacOS using a timecapsule backup to restore user data, presumably with limitations, including using hardware that can support such, precluding shipping (and refurbished?) macs 'thieved' by design...
I think we're covered with you're looking for on the proportional representation - 46 of these users pre-date the iOS. Manpower and workload depending, I'll see if I can generate some sort of pivot table for users to look at data the way they choose, as I've stored responses per user, not in aggregate.
     
aj1245
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Apr 2015
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 27, 2015, 02:46 PM
 
did nobody notice the absence of Textbox Linking? That's the end of page layout with text that flows from column to column. Which is the end of making newspaper or magazine style publications.
     
jpellino
Forum Regular
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: loc
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 27, 2015, 03:58 PM
 
Bring back the floating inspector for the desktop version. It was the one productivity tool interface that got it right. Mostly due to flexibility.

The Playskool version of each app is still lacking important things - full complement of templates for one, and WP vs DTP mode documents for another. There is no comparison of the "old" DTP model and the new kludgy workaround version. And it's a shame Apple didn't call FileMaker and write a check for Bento.
Just sayin'
     
JimfromVenice
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Apr 2015
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 27, 2015, 05:33 PM
 
My main interest in purchasing a MacPlus in 1985 was desktop publishing. It still is one of the main things I do when I sit down at one of my Macs. I started with PageMaker, switched to QuarkXpress, which I used until Pages 4 came out.

Since then we have been using Pages 4 to layout a community newspaper. It can do 95 percent of what Quark did, and has some features not available in Quark. An important reason we switched from QuarkXpress to Pages was that Quark was too expensive (same goes from InDesign). With Pages, anyone on our staff can be a paginator. Money is not an issue.

It is impossible to use Pages 5 for a layout job like this. If Pages 4.3 becomes unuseable, I don't know what we will do. Go back to our lone, musty copy of Quark, I guess.

I can think of no reason why Apple would drop the rich feature set in Pages 4. The page layout features didn't get in the way of the novice user who just wanted to write a letter. Does Apple have an agreement with Quark and Adobe that prevents it from competing with QuarkXpress and InDesign, as long as those corporations continue to spend money on Apple versions? I can't think of any other reason why Apple would intentionally destroy a major part of one of its most popular programs.
     
Charles Martin
Mac Elite
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Maitland, FL
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 27, 2015, 06:52 PM
 
JimfromVenice: as an old layout guy myself, I feel this pain -- but has it occurred to you that this may not be the final version of Pages? As mentioned previously, using the feedback button may help your cause, but I do think we'll eventually see more features in Pages, it's just not the company's focus at the moment.

In the meantime, have you looked at options like Swift Publisher, which is much more DTP-centric for newsletters and such?
Charles Martin
MacNN Editor
     
cvbcvb
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Los Angeles
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 27, 2015, 07:47 PM
 
Two Up View is still not available in v5.5.3. Without that crucial feature, I'll continue to use v4.3!
     
cvbcvb
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Los Angeles
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 27, 2015, 07:55 PM
 
Alarik:
"The difficulty with Pages 5, for me, is that once you open--in 5--a file created in 4, then 5 saves it in its own format, and you cannot then reopen the file in 4. It becomes a one-way street."

Not true for me. I just opened several v4.3 pages files in v5.5.3 and scrolled through all 86 pages. I then closed the file (no editing) and opened the files fine in v4.3.
     
flowney
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Apr 2015
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 27, 2015, 08:42 PM
 
Although Pages retains the ePub export gained in the '09 version, I wonder whether this feature will persist. It's still the best WYSIWYG ePub creation tool due to its ease of use and support for certain ePub 3 features (audio and video primarily) but Apple now has iBooks Author which exports the proprietary *.ibooks format.
Pages added an "optimizer" for video )like iBooks Author) but it hasn't maintained that feature very well.
The video optimizer bloated file size 3X in both Pages and iBooks Author. The iBooks Author app has been fixed but Pages has not. Pages continues to inflate video 3X or more.
This also raises the question of whether Apple intends to continue supporting the *.epub format.
     
panjandrum
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: West Michigan
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 27, 2015, 09:23 PM
 
A pretty nicely done article, thanks. It's nice to see that you guys are interviewing others etc. There are certainly some things the authors consider minor which I don't consider minor (I don't know, for example, where Apple got the idea that removing important features from software during an upgrade should be considered acceptable practice), and I'll never understand why Apple would begin designing software that doesn't support multiple-displays properly (removal of floating windows for "widgets"). That's been a key usability-feature of the Mac since the Mac II, and removing it is simply unacceptable. If they want to make their apps "single window," the least they could do would be make a preference option for reverting to floating tools. In the end, however, I think that a lot of people would be less frustrated if Apple simply didn't issue a major version release until it was a finished product (and an actual upgrade, not a downgrade). That would certainly result in a lot less backlash.
     
Charles Martin
Mac Elite
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Maitland, FL
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 27, 2015, 10:52 PM
 
I can't answer your charges, panjandrum, except for the last one: the competition is too fierce. Look at how much half-baked crap Google, Facebook, Microsoft, and Samsung (to name a few) put that gets unwarranted cache because it has some feature or other that nobody else does -- for a few weeks or months. Apple is guilty of this too, sure, and is part of the problem to a point -- but the copying machines in Redmond and Seoul are constantly nipping on their heels, not to mention pressure from customers and pundits.

I'm pleased to see that the latest OS X and iOS betas seem to be focused on polish and fixes rather than a race to more features ... I've heard that 10.11 and iOS 9 are mostly focused in that direction as well. Let's hope!
( Last edited by Mike Wuerthele; Apr 28, 2015 at 07:18 AM. )
Charles Martin
MacNN Editor
     
drbroom
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: NY
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 28, 2015, 12:58 PM
 
Charles & William:

First... Thank you for the "mini-series", it's about time someone did this. My concern is I doubt it will help since it seems to this old developer that no one at Apple is listening to us who have "bleed in 6 colors" any more.

Now when I say old developer (with a long memory), I do mean old in developer standards. Case in point I and a friend built an Apple 1 kit back in the day (we were in high school) and I put in my papers to become a registered Apple developer in 1985. Went to Apple developer school in '86 and was even at the first DevCon in 1990. My point, I have been around and in Apple over the years, and never once did I think Apple was going anywhere but up. This is the first time I can say I am sorry about that!

Next, let me make some personal observations about your statements on "transitions"; 68k to PPC, 9 to 10 and now 10 to "fugly". True, none of these transitions have been entirely smooth but the difference between the first 2 and the last one were the STANDARDS we lived by.

When we went from 68k to ppc we built everything with the same standards the UI gurus had been working on since day one of the Mac. Sure there were many advancements but many if not most of the tools old timers used and loved were always kept and most often added to. Apple almost always kept the commands and front end processes the way it had been, allowing users to slowly learn the new and usually better way of doing it; The standards were kept and built on.

With the change from a 32 bit OS (10.6) to a hybrid 32/64 bit OS (10.7/10.8) to then to a true 64 bit OS (10.9) Apple began just taking standards away without considering how that would effect workflow for the loyalists. After Steve got sick and gave up control over all that was "The Mac" we saw other people putting their thumbprint on it. In doing so OSX began to look like a big mess culminating in the awful UI of "Yosemite Sam" (IMHO) rather then the "computer for the rest of us".

Even when they went from, a god awful UI, to a smoother and easier to use and understand one, they kept offering the old way of doing something just cause people used it so much. Example: "The Chooser"... I am sure, that anyone who was around for the bad old days of Apple networking, will remember how we would have to select, first the "LaserWriter" then as sharing data and other services came in to play the network(s) we would have to use. The arduous process was long and sometimes even painful but even after Apple added a TCP layer then TCP/IP native protocols to the OS they kept the "Chooser" till it became obvious that NO ONE was using it anymore. Today Apple takes away features and tools. it seems, as a matter of principle. To this observer Apple seems to want to say to "the rest of us" now that we are SO VERY POPULAR, we can be Microsoft; you will do it how WE TELL you to do it or you won't do it at all!

Statement for Apple:
Apple, without Steve Jobs you no longer have a "Reality Distortion Field"! Steve was able to produce that because he really did understand "the rest of us". You have lost that ability... PLEASE STOP!!! and fix the OSes (yes I mean iOS too)

I understand the desire to improve stuff we build, I understand the desire to build the "next great thing". I want to see Apple continue to innovate and create. If for no other reason to keep seeing my stock grow!!! But, if Apple wants to build the next great OS then start from scratch! Like the transition from 9 to 10, we all had to start new (sort of). Give us something that is so new and so cool that we all NEED it like the iPod, or a new take on something old but can be so different it changes things at the core like the iPhone. Don't give us "things" that are retro "bull" like a watch from "Dic Tracy"! (to be honest I'm more pissed about the watch because I want them to fix all the things they have broken before starting a whole new product line; I for one will never purchase.

Anyway this is just my $0.02...and I look forward to reading the next installment.

Let the "flaming" of my opinions begin.
     
Mike Wuerthele
Managing Editor
Join Date: Jul 2012
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 28, 2015, 01:04 PM
 
drbroom, part 2 is up today:

The Feature Thief, part two: Final Cut Pro, iMovie, iDVD | MacNN

I'm just going to toss this here without comment, on why Apple is doing what its doing, and its priorities:

61.7 million iPhones, 13.7 million iPads sold in a quarter.

4.56 million Macs.
     
drbroom
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: NY
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 28, 2015, 05:46 PM
 
ouch Mike! and so I will add a "comment" about what you "toss"; it is sad but true. AND more proof that my generation, the one that helped create this world, no longer seems to have place in it!

hahaha but we still got the cash!
     
Charles Martin
Mac Elite
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Maitland, FL
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 28, 2015, 09:16 PM
 
Mike's stat above doesn't speak to everything you brought up, drbroom, but it does explain a lot of it. The company has evolved -- again -- into a primarily mobile device company, and this is hardly the first time it has transformed itself (heck, I remember when Apple was contractually forbidden from having anything to do with music due to an agreement with Apple Records!). And if you look at that mobile device company (pretending the Mac is made by some other firm, since the iOS platform is significantly different), then you might notice that Apple is pushing out the same level of outstanding performance it always has, but of course it is mostly doing so where the customers are. And they are mostly iPhone people, not "us" -- the six-colour guys.

I am one of those creative pros who championed Apple in the dark years. Macs changed my career trajectory completely, and thus literally changed my entire life, as you can see. But just like a child who suddenly, a few years after being the "apple" of their parents' eye, gets a new baby brother or sister -- we're not so special anymore, the Mac-first audience. We'll always have a special place with at least the current generation of execs and employees because we are the oldest and the first, but we're not the focus anymore the way we once were. That's life. We don't generally get to pout much about it.

We're not abandoned orphans, either. Apple still makes fantastic Mac products for us, and each iteration of OS X brings significant productivity improvements. Despite your disapproval of Yosemite's look, which I don't share (though I once did), you cannot argue that some of the features aren't compelling productivity boosters, from the smarter memory and battery management that complements Intel's power-sipping efforts to the ability to make and receive phone calls while my iPhone is charging away in another room.

These and some of the other features in the recent OS X updates have been major time-savers, and allowed us all to stretch out and do more -- but Apple keeps on having new "kids," so the focus keeps shifting, but I have noticed something: every new thing Apple learns by doing these other products seems to find its way back to the Mac, to our benefit. That crazy battery life in the MacBook line didn't just happen, you know. The Mac Pro didn't lose 2/3rds of its volume by accident -- that was a direct influence of the G4 Cube and the iPhone and the notebooks.

Maybe this is what it felt like to be an Apple II owner in 1984 when the Mac came out, but I think most of us would agree that that ultimately worked out for the best, however awkward/expensive that change was at the time. It may occasionally be painful (you're talking to a guy who used to make the whole of his living working at newspapers before the modern Internet existed -- to say I've had to adapt to a few technology changes would be an understatement), but chasing the better idea is what Apple has been about since Woz started designing circuit boards, and I for one hope they never stop.
Charles Martin
MacNN Editor
     
neutrino23
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: San Francisco Peninsula
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 30, 2015, 02:06 AM
 
The loss of textbook linking is a show stopper for me. I create a lot of scientific/engineering reports. The layout mode is perfect for this. I have lots and lots of figures and tables. I place those the document then put text boxes in between and link them together. I can even do this for a large 4 ft by 8 ft poster. Wonderful.

I also prefer the inspector of Pages 4.3. It was easier to find things with that.

It was frustrating to keep sending in requests for new features that would improve Pages and instead we got a downgrade.

I'm hopeful we'll still get some substantial improvements.

I don't see why Apple would not be more aggressive to support iWorks. It is not like it is that expensive for them. Steve mentioned someplace that it wasn't expensive to support iWorks and that it helped a lot to support the Mac platform.

In addition to recovering textbox linking I'd like to see hyperlinks being able to access text inside text boxes. I'd also like to see a cross referencing feature that would link figure captions to figure references in the text.
Happy owner of a new 15" Al PB.
     
Wisterley
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Dec 2010
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 5, 2015, 09:10 AM
 
Interesting piece. I moved to iWork from WordPerfect which I'd used for years. I loved Pages when it came out and used it constantly. Pages 5 was difficult because it dropped the 2-up page view which was a great boon to me. However, after 5 was installed version four crashed constantly - nothing else about my set-up had changed and though Apple tech support denied that it could be linked it became impossible to rely on. So I gave 5 another go and have come to love working in it. My fave word-processor ever. I still miss the 2-up but love everything else about the app particularly its design and the way my document looks on the screen. The pinch-to-zoom or reduce is alone worth the upgrade and like others I find the ability to open a document anywhere on anything to be enormously useful. For the few files I have that it can't open I use Libre Office.
     
panjandrum
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: West Michigan
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 16, 2015, 10:51 AM
 
@Wisterley: I just discovered that particular omission today (2-up view). Wow, those in-charge at Apple now are clearly clueless. This is simply the last-straw for me. Decades of supporting Apple destroyed by the "new direction" of Apple (feature-depleted crippleware). The last time I felt like I had to "fight" to get my computer to do what I wanted was in the way-back era of Windows 95/98 (which of course, I didn't use anyway because Windows sucked so badly back then). Now it's a constant, constant fight to get Apple's OWN SOFTWARE to function in a way suitable for even a moderate "power-user". I'm tired of searching for alternatives to Apple's new crippleware packages. I'm tired of hearing clients complain to me almost continuously about these same issues and to no-longer be able to tell them, with any honestly, that the situation will get better. I'm tired of being forced to move clients away from Apple software because it no longer functions for them well. And I'm tired of these same issues myself. It's very sad.
     
   
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:41 PM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,