iWork 2005

Captain Code said:
The formatting in Pages looks great. No more fighting with Word's auto formatting and having Word argue with you about where you want things to go on the page.

I also struggle with Word's format layout. If Pages really formats like it did on stage, it will be Heaven sent.::angel::
 
The only thing Office switchers are really going to miss is those wonderful little talking paperclips and puppies that are so helpful.
 
Has anybody noticed the Apple Store online is selling iWork '05 and AppleWorks 6.2.9 side by side and at the same price? I don't see iWork even as competition for AppleWorks. More like competition for MS Publisher.

While I haven't seen the internals I would be very surprised if Pages and Keynote don't share a substantial amount, perhaps even a substantial majority, of the code. That is straightforward and very easy to do with an Object Oriented (Cocoa) environment and would enable the developers to create two applications with an absolute minimum of unique code for each. In other words Pages can springboard off of the graphics capabilities of Keynote without having to write any new code at all. My supposition is strengthened by the fact that iWork is selling for the same price as Keynote did last year. So there can't be all that much unique code in Pages or the price would have to be higher.
 
I think Pages is more TextEdit meets Publisher and then polished like a Ferrari..

i would have thought that a lot of the graphics stuff was already in shared libraries?
 
Pengu said:
i would have thought that a lot of the graphics stuff was already in shared libraries?
Yes, but much, even most, of the graphics stuff in the Cocoa frameworks is relatively low level. Those objects from the Cocoa framework have been used in Keynote to create new objects with some very impressive additional behaviors. So rather than Pages going back to the more basic objects in the Cocoa frameworks why not use the far more advanced objects from the Keynote framework? That also saves thousands, if not tens of thousands of lines of duplicated or nearly duplicated code and more thousands of hours testing the code.
 
I am suprised nobody has noted the compatibility with the Adobe products. iWork has on one of it’s main pages the fact that is can work with EPS and PSD files directly out of PS and ILLY. Also I just want to note that I am kind of put off that Apple used the name iWork seeing as it is also the name of a great time management software for many designers.
 
I watched one of the extended demos for iWork at the expo yesterday, and it was simply phenomenal. Keynote 2 can do things I would rather kill myself over than try with Powerpoint, and Pages has absolutely stunning layout. You can move an image, and the text will re-flow, in realtime, around it. If you do any sort of presentations, or make any kind of printed material, you should definitely get iWork.

And no, Apple's not paying me to say this. How I wish...
 
IGG Software changed the name of their program to iBiz (no doubt apple offered them $$ for the name)
 
It'll be interesting to see just how well Pages deals with type and art. That's stil Quark's biggest limitation (well, among the limitations) is that it's always been lousy at handling text and art (with runarounds).
 
Randman said:
It'll be interesting to see just how well Pages deals with type and art. That's stil Quark's biggest limitation (well, among the limitations) is that it's always been lousy at handling text and art (with runarounds).
How meanst you? I haven't used the program extensively, but I can certainly describe what I've seen people do with it.
 
Have you seen Quark on the professional level? Justified text has always been a problem, basically because Quark was never designed to handle text elements, even if it's usually used for that purpose.
If you can, look at a Quark document vs InDesign (or a really champ layout program such as CCI), you can see that Quark does a very, very poor job of handling text justification.
 
Back
Top