Where is the update to iWork? [Merged]

[skaertus]

Originally Posted by BigRedOne

Does anybody know what software Apple Corporate employees use to keep the business running?

This, my friend, is a very good question.

[Suraj R.]

What's good everybody,
Its been over 4 years since Apple released a new version of iWork (it was January 2009 I believe when iWork '09 came out). I still use iWork '08 as it came free bundled with my Mac at the time, and that at the time there was no real reason for me to upgrade (I was only 10 or so). But now that I have Pages and Keynote on my iPad, there are some features I really want for the Mac (Magic Move, iCloud integration). I don't want to spend $20 for each of the three apps in the App Store right now on software that's years old. Do you think an updated version of the suite is coming soon? I hope so.

[vistadude]

It seems like they gave up on iWork. It hasn't been updated in over 4 years other than minor updates. I'd expect to see a minor update to retina, but that's about it.

Office has moved leaps and beyonds iWork a long time ago and it seems there's no catching up. I would suggest you save as PDF and use dropbox or box to view your documents rather then buy iWork for your ipad.

[keaide]

Originally Posted by vistadude

Office has moved leaps and beyonds iWork a long time ago and it seems there's no catching up.

I wonder if iWork has to "catch up".
It's for a different target group. MS Office has to be suitable for big companies, iWork wouldn't stand a chance there. The iWork target group are mostly small, Mac-centered businesses and private individuals.

I'm using iWork on my Mac and iOS devices on a daily basis and am very happy with it. There's no other Office suite that can match it on the iPad/iPhone. But I wouldn't use it at work.

So iWork is pretty much a niche product (like all of Apple's products) and I hope that Apple keeps serving that niche still for a long time.

[skaertus]

Originally Posted by keaide

I wonder if iWork has to "catch up".
It's for a different target group. MS Office has to be suitable for big companies, iWork wouldn't stand a chance there. The iWork target group are mostly small, Mac-centered businesses and private individuals.

I'm using iWork on my Mac and iOS devices on a daily basis and am very happy with it. There's no other Office suite that can match it on the iPad/iPhone. But I wouldn't use it at work.

So iWork is pretty much a niche product (like all of Apple's products) and I hope that Apple keeps serving that niche still for a long time.

Yes, you are right. iWork is not supposed to have enterprise-class support. It is not meant for collaboration, for full compatibility with everybody, for setting standards, or for storing documents for long periods of time.

iWork is just a suite for creating beautiful pages or presentations for a school work, or a pamphlet for small businesses. It is not meant to take over the world. It aimed at consumers, not really at professionals. This is a market that Apple doesn't want to compete in. Microsoft invests hundreds of millions of dollars per year in Microsoft Office, and Apple is not willing to invest that much. As Apple won't compete with a remarkable inferior product, it markets it at a different niche.

But it should at least receive some upgrades...

[Suraj R.]

I love iWork. The ease of use with Pages allows me to use it as not only a word processor but a graphic design canvas. I love making work look great, and its because of Pages when I hand stuff in people ask how to make it look so good.

That was really cocky, but if I had Word I really wouldn't be motivated to make anything look nice. Pages just has a lot more for me, I don't really need collaboration features or anything. So does Keynote.

[skaertus]

Originally Posted by Suraj R.

I love iWork. The ease of use with Pages allows me to use it as not only a word processor but a graphic design canvas. I love making work look great, and its because of Pages when I hand stuff in people ask how to make it look so good.

That was really cocky, but if I had Word I really wouldn't be motivated to make anything look nice. Pages just has a lot more for me, I don't really need collaboration features or anything. So does Keynote.

Yes, that's what Pages is for. It allows the users to create beautiful pages. It has desktop publishing features that are nice to use. If you are writing a short document with several graphic elements, it may be one of your best options.

However, as a word processor, it is lacking. If you are writing a long technical document, it is not for you. I could not have written my PhD thesis on Pages, as it does not have features such as cross-references. Cross-references are key to any advanced word processor. Word, OpenOffice.org / LibreOffice Writer, Nisus Writer Pro, Mellel... they all have it. Pages do not.

[skaertus]

Interesting... Apple is currently hiring people to work on development of software for the iWork suite. Look at this job posted yesterday:

Job Description

The Numbers team is hiring a dynamic software engineer with the drive and desire to deliver beautiful and engaging applications on the Mac and iPad platforms. Apple's Productivity Applications team has delivered ground-breaking applications on both the Mac and iPad platforms, including Numbers, Keynote and Pages for the iPad, as well as iWork and iWeb for the Mac.
Key Qualifications:
•Preferred Qualifications:
•• 5+ years experience in designing, building and delivering software applications
•• Proficient in C programming
•• Proficient in object oriented analysis and development (Objective-C, C++ or Java)
•• Understanding of current standalone and distributed application architectures and design patterns
•• Excellent problem solving skills
•• Solid design and usability sense
•• Excellent communication and collaboration skills
•• Mac OS X and/or iOS development experience a plus
Description:
As a member of the Numbers team, you'll be able to shape the future direction of spreadsheets by working closely with our software engineers and designers. Your responsibilities will range from helping to define and implement new features, to refining our intuitive user interface, to building highly scalable and memory efficient data structures and algorithms to manage our complex application document model. You will be expected to employ solid engineering practices, including building and presenting engineering specifications, accurately estimating the implementation effort while identifying risks, working with the team to implement and integrate new features, and polishing, demoing and delivering your work on time.
Education:
• BS CS/CE or equivalent

[onirocdarb]

I hope this means an update.
A google doc like collaboration feature would be killer

[skaertus]

Originally Posted by onirocdarb

I hope this means an update.
A google doc like collaboration feature would be killer

I hope Apple brings at least cross-references to Pages. Pages is nearly useless as a word processor for complex documents without this feature.

[kdum8]

Originally Posted by skaertus

I hope Apple brings at least cross-references to Pages. Pages is nearly useless as a word processor for complex documents without this feature.

How is cross referencing different than just adding footnotes?

[skaertus]

Originally Posted by kdum8

How is cross referencing different than just adding footnotes?

Wow, that's totally different. Cross-references have nothing to do with adding footnotes.

Cross-referencing creates a reference with another part of the document. For instance, if I have a reference to chapter 2, the reference will be automatically updated when I add another chapter and chapter 2 turns into chapter 3. Or if you make a reference to footnote 332, and the footnote becomes 350 after you add some other footnotes in-between, the reference is updated automatically.

How is it similar to just adding footnotes?

[Anonemouse]

Originally Posted by ixodes

Are you kidding? iWork?

Apples got high priority lawsuits & bullying to do.

Heehee! They need to make their priorities as such:
1)Innovate
2)Update
3)Litigate

Right now, number 3 is definitely more important than number 2. Stop worrying about copyrighting rounded corners. How 'bout you update iwork, Final Cut Pro (one of the updates seemed like a downgrade - everybody's clinging to an old version) and the Mac Pro.

[stueee123]

In my use of iWork and Office, I vastly prefer Keynote and Pages to PowerPoint and Word. It seems the philosophy behind iWork is less controlling - Word always tries to format my documents, adding spaces between paragraphs or not letting me indent the second line of a footnote (infuriating). Pages gets out of the way and assumes I have some competence, letting me do my thing. That being said, updates I would like to see are:

-improved typesetting (it's already better than Word, but can't compete with LaTeX)
-option to automatically indent 2nd line of footnotes
-organizational structure (iBooks Author has a decent one)
-when you copy/paste an object with specific blending attributes, KEEP THE ATTRIBUTES. this is very annoying, as I generally like objects to be floating, with the "through" setting so they don't mess up text.
-better marketing: very few students I know use Pages, yet the ones that do prefer it

[MrNomNoms]

Originally Posted by skaertus

Wow, that's totally different. Cross-references have nothing to do with adding footnotes.

Cross-referencing creates a reference with another part of the document. For instance, if I have a reference to chapter 2, the reference will be automatically updated when I add another chapter and chapter 2 turns into chapter 3. Or if you make a reference to footnote 332, and the footnote becomes 350 after you add some other footnotes in-between, the reference is updated automatically.

How is it similar to just adding footnotes?

I'm surprised Apple haven't jumped on such features given how there is a push for Mac's into the education sphere, especially in universities these days. With that being said I have to ask whether Apple never had any intentions with iWork other than to provide something that is bare basic functionality with higher end features better suited for dedicated companies like Microsoft to deliver in their own products. For me, as much as I love using iWork I had to use Office through university for the exact reason you noted as well as lacking even basic bibliographical functionality.

[skaertus]

Originally Posted by MrNomNoms

I'm surprised Apple haven't jumped on such features given how there is a push for Mac's into the education sphere, especially in universities these days. With that being said I have to ask whether Apple never had any intentions with iWork other than to provide something that is bare basic functionality with higher end features better suited for dedicated companies like Microsoft to deliver in their own products. For me, as much as I love using iWork I had to use Office through university for the exact reason you noted as well as lacking even basic bibliographical functionality.

I guess iWork was an attempt to bring some kind of Apple uniqueness to office suites. It is simple and somewhat minimalistic. But it lacks features which are useful for several users. Some people call Microsoft Office bloated, but those are the ones who don't need its features, or don't even know such features exist. The "bloat" is, in fact, a set of features that brings a lot of power to the software, and lets users save time and do a better job. iWork is beautiful and all, but it isn't on par with Microsoft Office due to this lack of features.

[MrNomNoms]

Originally Posted by skaertus

I guess iWork was an attempt to bring some kind of Apple uniqueness to office suites. It is simple and somewhat minimalistic. But it lacks features which are useful for several users. Some people call Microsoft Office bloated, but those are the ones who don't need its features, or don't even know such features exist. The "bloat" is, in fact, a set of features that brings a lot of power to the software, and lets users save time and do a better job. iWork is beautiful and all, but it isn't on par with Microsoft Office due to this lack of features.

I have to laugh when I hear people call Microsoft Office bloated when one considers that for a full install of Microsoft Office 2011 Home and Business edition it take up slightly less space than Pages + Numbers + Keynote (1.93GB on disk according to finder) - not including Mail/Contacts/Calendar that when used together deliver Outlook like functionality. As for the term bloat - I love how many throw around the term without knowing what it means; bloat is the disproportionate relationship between size and functionality; Microsoft Officer certainly doesn't fit that category.

[jacg]

Originally Posted by MrNomNoms

I have to laugh when I hear people call Microsoft Office bloated when one considers that for a full install of Microsoft Office 2011 Home and Business edition it take up slightly less space than Pages + Numbers + Keynote (1.93GB on disk according to finder) - not including Mail/Contacts/Calendar that when used together deliver Outlook like functionality. As for the term bloat - I love how many throw around the term without knowing what it means; bloat is the disproportionate relationship between size and functionality; Microsoft Officer certainly doesn't fit that category.

I guess the key difference is between software that feels bloated with features and software that feels sleek, modern and fast. What's a few GB of decent quality themes between friends?

Office 2011 was "built from the ground up" yet I still encounter buggy dialogues that annoyed me in 2004, when I first reported the bug. That is bloated, inefficient code, and this is why I only use Office apps if I have to. iWork FTW!

[MrNomNoms]

Originally Posted by jacg

I guess the key difference is between software that feels bloated with features and software that feels sleek, modern and fast. What's a few GB of decent quality themes between friends?

Office 2011 was "built from the ground up" yet I still encounter buggy dialogues that annoyed me in 2004, when I first reported the bug. That is bloated, inefficient code, and this is why I only use Office apps if I have to. iWork FTW!

I wouldn't call it bloated since I've shown already the size is smaller than the combined iWork but as for inefficient - you're getting no protest from me since I know once you start pushing Office 2011 with large documents the experience is less than pleasant. IMHO I wish Microsoft would just work with Mainsoft and get Microsoft Office Windows version running on Mac OS X through the win32 abstraction layer (you compile against it and it runs natively on the platform) than having to deal with an office suite that seems to haul crap around from way back when it was a Mac OS 9 application.

[cflem]

Safari 7 and 10.9 will be something very different.

iWork and iLife living in safari 7... maybe even the next version of Aperture...

I just get this feeling the web app world is upon us... Obviously the technology will be there to work offline as well - but these new apps will live in safari... much like Google Docs and Chrome.

The next question is - how does all this play into iOS7....

CF

[skaertus]

Originally Posted by cflem

Safari 7 and 10.9 will be something very different.

iWork and iLife living in safari 7... maybe even the next version of Aperture...

I just get this feeling the web app world is upon us... Obviously the technology will be there to work offline as well - but these new apps will live in safari... much like Google Docs and Chrome.

The next question is - how does all this play into iOS7....

CF

You mean... iWork will be a cloud-based app then? That's make a lot of sense for Google, but maybe not to Apple. And it doesn't work pretty well for those who don't have 24-hour access to the Internet.

[derbladerunner]

In the iOS app store, the iWork apps are in the top 10 downloads (gross revenue) in most countries.

So there is clearly demand, why doesn't Apple show some love for the desktop versions? It's not like other Apple products or services (Ping in iTunes...) where there was no demand and EOLing the offering a natural choice.

I don't get it, they have about 150 billion in the bank, adding a few engineers for iWork (and Mac Pros, but that's another topic) would solve a lot of problems for business and edu users.

As for people saying the current iWork version is "good enough", maybe Keynote is (it always was the most polished app in iWork in my view).

But Numbers and Pages are in dire need of updates. Just one example, MS is working on an Excel entension code-named Geoflow:

http://blogs.office.com/b/microsoft-...powerview.aspx

Have a look at the screenshots. I rarely get a "wow" effect from MS software, but this looks really interesting. Visualizing data in 3D in novel ways, this is a direction Numbers could have taken had Apple invested in it.

Oh well, at least the job ads posted above seem to indicate they haven't shelved iWork completely.

[kdum8]

Originally Posted by skaertus

Wow, that's totally different. Cross-references have nothing to do with adding footnotes.

Cross-referencing creates a reference with another part of the document. For instance, if I have a reference to chapter 2, the reference will be automatically updated when I add another chapter and chapter 2 turns into chapter 3. Or if you make a reference to footnote 332, and the footnote becomes 350 after you add some other footnotes in-between, the reference is updated automatically.

How is it similar to just adding footnotes?

You are right, it isn't similar to adding footnotes - I didn't understand what cross referencing was.

It sounds like a very useful feature for long documents. However I used LaTeX for this when I wrote my university thesis. Pages, as much as I love it for personal docs, just didn't cut it for writing a dissertation.

[skaertus]

Originally Posted by derbladerunner

In the iOS app store, the iWork apps are in the top 10 downloads (gross revenue) in most countries.

So there is clearly demand, why doesn't Apple show some love for the desktop versions? It's not like other Apple products or services (Ping in iTunes...) where there was no demand and EOLing the offering a natural choice.

I don't get it, they have about 150 billion in the bank, adding a few engineers for iWork (and Mac Pros, but that's another topic) would solve a lot of problems for business and edu users.

As for people saying the current iWork version is "good enough", maybe Keynote is (it always was the most polished app in iWork in my view).

But Numbers and Pages are in dire need of updates. Just one example, MS is working on an Excel entension code-named Geoflow:

http://blogs.office.com/b/microsoft-...powerview.aspx

Have a look at the screenshots. I rarely get a "wow" effect from MS software, but this looks really interesting. Visualizing data in 3D in novel ways, this is a direction Numbers could have taken had Apple invested in it.

Oh well, at least the job ads posted above seem to indicate they haven't shelved iWork completely.

I agree with you. No software is just "good enough". Especially iWork. They lack features and, as much as Apple may think that simplicity is king, it just doesn't work this way with office suites. People need features to do their work or whatever they are doing.

And, despite a clear demand, Apple doesn't release an upgrade to iWork in years. That's very disappointing.

Even Keynote, which is the most polished of all iWork apps, is in need of a serious update. After all these years, PowerPoint 2013 has left it behind. And you can't even compare Word and Excel to Pages and Numbers.

The thing is, if Microsoft ever made something right, this thing is Office. You may not like Microsoft, or even hate it. You may think that Microsoft used its power to destroy WordPerfect, Lotus 1-2-3 and other software so its inferior Office could dominate the world. But the fact is that Microsoft Office evolved during all these years, Microsoft invested billion dolllars in development and it eventually became a killer app. And you may like or even love Apple, but the fact is that it simply abandoned iWork for the last four years, and even before that there was just not enough investment in the suite.

----------

Originally Posted by kdum8

You are right, it isn't similar to adding footnotes - I didn't understand what cross referencing was.

It sounds like a very useful feature for long documents. However I used LaTeX for this when I handed in my thesis. Pages, as much as I love it for personal docs, just didn't cut it for writing a dissertation.

Yes, LaTeX is able to do this sort of stuff. I don't use LaTeX, and I found it just too complicated for someone who is in the humanities field. I just used Microsoft Word (for Windows) to write my dissertation. Word is a great piece of software, but, above all, my supervisor only used Microsoft Word and likes to make her own comments on the text with the track changes feature enabled. And she would never know how to work with any other document, especially LaTeX.

[derbladerunner]

Originally Posted by skaertus

The thing is, if Microsoft ever made something right, this thing is Office. You may not like Microsoft, or even hate it. You may think that Microsoft used its power to destroy WordPerfect, Lotus 1-2-3 and other software so its inferior Office could dominate the world. But the fact is that Microsoft Office evolved during all these years, Microsoft invested billion dolllars in development and it eventually became a killer app. And you may like or even love Apple, but the fact is that it simply abandoned iWork for the last four years, and even before that there was just not enough investment in the suite.

I agree to a large extent. MS is maybe the other extreme, Office unfortunately has "feature creep" in my view and once people finally "got" Office, MS redesigned the UI in Office 2007. Most users only use a fraction of its features.

Apple on other hand with no updates for four years and no roadmap is much worse in the Office space.

There is need for "middle ground", especially in education: A simpler and cheaper Office than MS Office, maybe extensible with plug-ins and web access/online collaboration. iWork could have been this solution.

One example for lack of strategy (or interest ?) is the discontinued iwork.com (for people who don't remember the online portions: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IWork.com ). Although the Beta had many flaws, more and more people work in teams in separate locations, better collaboration features are needed for iWork in the future.

How come the OS (OS X 10.9 probably out this year) is updated much more frequently than Mac HW and SW: Mac Pros and software like iWork not updated for four years ?!