iWork '05 Productivity Suite?

[ChrisH3677]

Did Apple bought any companies that make office-like software since introducing OS X?
Maybe this could be a confirmation of the intentions.

Yeah... there was a rumor last year something like that. It was an all in one suite that worked from a single interface. Can't remember what it was called. Or if they actually only hired its developers.

Anyone else remember that and what the product was?

 

[ChrisWB]

This is a double-edged sword. On one hand, I really want this. On the other, it means I'm going to wait for a few months at least until it comes out before purchasing a new laptop. The wait won't kill me, but I wish it was shorter!

 

[puuukeey]

think about how much of your day to day activities on a mac could be done by a box like a kodak machine or an xbox or a comcast box. why even develope for it at all?

 

[mdriftmeyer]

The frameworks are fully exposed and when Microsoft open sources its low level portions of its OS let me know.

Ummm... How is this different from Windows?

IE is a wrapper that uses the embedded HTML rendering framework, which is also used by many other components (and third parties).

One of the debates during the MS trial was whether removing "iexplore.exe" was sufficient, or whether *all* the pieces of the framework had to be removed.

Remember when the judge deleted the IE icon from his desktop, and declared that he'd removed IE from his system?

 

[Loge]

If iWork is true I would wish that Pages had native support for TeX/LaTeX. That would launch it into the professional technical publishing houses immediately.

Agreed. I hope it's a tool with a proper type-setting engine at its core. And how about a spreadsheet which properly separates formulas from data, so that scalable reusable mathematical models can be built with it? The trouble with Office (and attempts to clone it) is that it's based on paradigms from the 1980s.

 

[shiny]

think about how much of your day to day activities on a mac could be done by a box like a kodak machine or an xbox or a comcast box. why even develope for it at all?

Huh?

 

[animefan_1]

Keep in mind though that once, a long time ago in a galaxy far away, all of the iLife apps were free as well before Apple decided you should have to pay for them (all except iTunes of course.)

Apple won't make Mail.app, Address Book or iCal pay-for apps. It doesn't make any sense. MS includes Outlook Express (Mail+Address Book) for free with Windows. Sunbird (mozilla) can be used in place of iCal. It even includes support for the iCalendar (.ics) format.

 

[animefan_1]

They won't drop Microsoft. Microsoft owns a large stake of Apple. Microsoft has a very good reason to keep Apple alive (if weak): It proves there is viable competition and alternatives on the desktop market.

The only reason Apple survived in the mid 90s was because of Microsoft.

I didn't say that they would drop MS, I only meant that they aren't worried about competing with MS.

IMO, WWDC 2004 was only the tip of the iceberg.
"Redmond, we have a problem"
"Redmond, start your photocopiers"
etc
etc.

 

[ChrisH3677]

Yeah... there was a rumor last year something like that. It was an all in one suite that worked from a single interface. Can't remember what it was called. Or if they actually only hired its developers.

Anyone else remember that and what the product was?

I searched MacRumors and found this from december 2003.

Apple iWrite

to quote it:

Perhaps the most intriguing past information, however was Apple's recruitment of three developers from Gobe Software. Gobe developed an innovative office suite for Windows, Linux and BeOS, and -- after a brief disappearance -- seems to have returned.

So... adds fuel as walkerIV?

 

[aldo]

The frameworks are fully exposed and when Microsoft open sources its low level portions of its OS let me know.

So are Microsoft's. How do you think you get all of the IE-based browsers?

The only reason Apple opensource's the low levels (read: unimportant) portions of its OS is because they would get totally beat on by FreeBSD.

 

[aldo]

I didn't say that they would drop MS, I only meant that they aren't worried about competing with MS.

IMO, WWDC 2004 was only the tip of the iceberg.
"Redmond, we have a problem"
"Redmond, start your photocopiers"
etc
etc.

Well of course, but don't think Apple would be allowed to get anything more than 10% marketshare before Bill rolls in all of his 'favours' over the years and suddenly has 30% stock ownership.

Apple is not going to seriously compete with Microsoft in the desktop computer space. Sure, they may get to 3% (a double over the current dismal 1.5% they have now), but I don't think they'll get much further.

 

[t300]

Redmond, start your crying.

 

[Doctor Q]

The definition of a "productivity suite" has evolved over time. Having a communications module -- terminal emulation over your modem -- is no longer as important. E-mail clients are more important.

Apple may be about to redefine the meaning again.

 

[pourhadi]

So are Microsoft's. How do you think you get all of the IE-based browsers?

The only reason Apple opensource's the low levels (read: unimportant) portions of its OS is because they would get totally beat on by FreeBSD.

Bologna.

Apple is participating in numerous open source projects (Streaming Server, Compiler Tools, Kerberos, Open Directory, OpenPlay, Rendezvous, WebCore, X11, etc.) and is being praised by the open source community for it.

 

[shiny]

Well of course, but don't think Apple would be allowed to get anything more than 10% marketshare before Bill rolls in all of his 'favours' over the years and suddenly has 30% stock ownership.

Apple is not going to seriously compete with Microsoft in the desktop computer space. Sure, they may get to 3% (a double over the current dismal 1.5% they have now), but I don't think they'll get much further.

What are you talking about? What favors are you talking about? Do you realize how much money it would take to get 30% stock ownership in Apple? As one person worked to amass that much of Apple's stock, you can rest assured that the stock price would increase dramatically, thereby increasing the cost of the acquisition dramatically.

I don't mean to insult you, but you sound like a kid that has not learned how the world actually works. Bill Gates is not some God that can just do what he wants anytime he wants.

 

[puuukeey]

he's not?

 

[aldo]

Bologna.

Apple is participating in numerous open source projects (Streaming Server, Compiler Tools, Kerberos, Open Directory, OpenPlay, Rendezvous, WebCore, X11, etc.) and are being praised by the open source community for it.

It's not really like that.

Let's see what Apple are really contributing:

Steaming Server - they have no option. They need to desperately get some users for it apart from their own keynotes - Real and Windows Media own this field.
Compiler Tools - gee, allowing more free apps to be compiled on the OSX platform.
Kerberos - they have to, otherwise they wouldn't be on any university networks.
Open Directory - see above
OpenPlay - noone uses it
Rendezvous - Apple ratified the spec, sure, but their implementation on platforms other than OSX is plain awful. So bad noone uses it. Also helps Apple compete in networking.
Webcore - KHTML was GPL, they had no choice.
X11 - Allowing them to run scientific/educational apps from Unix.

Basically, every single one of those apps they have opensourced is for one single purpose: allow Apple to have more software on it or connect to other platforms. Apart from KHTML/WebCore they haven't really improved anything for other platforms, therfore I fail to see how they are really 'contributing' anything.

 

[aldo]

What are you talking about? What favors are you talking about? Do you realize how much money it would take to get 30% stock ownership in Apple? As one person worked to amass that much of Apple's stock, you can rest assured that the stock price would increase dramatically, thereby increasing the cost of the acquisition dramatically.

I don't mean to insult you, but you sound like a kid that has not learned how the world actually works. Bill Gates is not some God that can just do what he wants anytime he wants.

This is what Microsoft could do.

Pull out of OSX completely. Drop support for VPC, MSN Messenger, Office etc on Mac. Stock price plummets (investors know that Microsoft is big and when big goes away from small, it's not good). Apple's stock is overvalued anyway, and it will fall back to the $50 mark regardless.

Microsoft starts to buy shares out after a week or two, via proxy companies. Soon has 30% ownership after a few months.

Microsoft has a market capitilzation of $300billion. Apple has less than 10% of that. Microsoft's profits for a year are worth more than Apple entirely.

 

[mattmack]

"Skate to where the puck is going, not where it is."

nice illustration

 

[urbangrind]

MS does not, nor have they ever, owned "a large stake of Apple." Where do you guys get this stuff? Microsoft did pay Apple 100m at one time in exchange for Apple bundling IE with all Macs. But let explain something to you...100m does not buy you "a huge stake" in a company with a 25 Billion dollar market cap.

Back to topic:
This makes perfect sense. If Apple is going to try to bite a 10% chunk out of the market, the way to do it is what?

-Compete on price (499 dollar iMac)
-Add in a simple, elegant Office compatible freebie. Appleworks is too lame to even pretend to be a viable alternative even for the casual user at this point.

OK, what is the truth in this MicroSoft owns most of apple thing? I would really like to know, so I can stick it to my PC friends if they bring it up again. I am sick of the "So what, Microsoft owns half of Apple anyway" comments.

If it's not true then Apple can take on Office when ever they want. But I must admit that the last release of Word has been excellent. There are some great features that I have come to love. The pasting feature is awesome and project center was great, but too slow so I gave it up.

Anyway, what is the truth?

 

[Bear]

i'll buy it (if it's under £100 if not i'll pirate it) and use it

And thus they require serial numbers.

 

[Bear]

serial number.....ycuk

The fault of the pirates.

 

[aldo]

OK, what is the truth in this MicroSoft owns most of apple thing? I would really like to know, so I can stick it to my PC friends if they bring it up again. I am sick of the "So what, Microsoft owns half of Apple anyway" comments.

If it's not true then Apple can take on Office when ever they want. But I must admit that the last release of Word has been excellent. There are some great features that I have come to love. The pasting feature is awesome and project center was great, but too slow so I gave it up.

Anyway, what is the truth?

Microsoft effectively did own Apple in the dark, dark days of the mid 90s. If they pulled out their 'investments', they would of gone bankrupt.

BTW: If you categorise your friends on what computer they use, you need serious help.

 

[mattmack]

This is what Microsoft could do.

Pull out of OSX completely. Drop support for VPC, MSN Messenger, Office etc on Mac. Stock price plummets (investors know that Microsoft is big and when big goes away from small, it's not good). Apple's stock is overvalued anyway, and it will fall back to the $50 mark regardless.

Microsoft starts to buy shares out after a week or two, via proxy companies. Soon has 30% ownership after a few months.

Microsoft has a market capitilzation of $300billion. Apple has less than 10% of that. Microsoft's profits for a year are worth more than Apple entirely.

now you are talking corporate takeover not one person buying into a company. If you think there were antitrust lawsuits before wait till they try this

 

[Bear]

a replacement for appleworks. thank god.

serial numbers? apple's moving away from their "trust the user" concept... but then, if the headless iMac rumors are true, they're moving away from a lot of things.

paul

How can they trust the users, when the users openly post that they're going to pirate the software? I suspect the breakpoint on serial numbers for Apple software is the price.