eltoslightfoot
macrumors 68040
As far as I am aware, you still get it and all the new features. Whether it permanently stays that way, I have no idea.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Some Apple Apps Will No Longer Receive Every New Feature Without a Subscription
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
amancalledsun
macrumors 6502
Hilariously, Apple seems to have copied the app icon for the new LG version of Numbers from one of many audio apps that have meter levels in their icon. Focusrite's Control app is just one example.
Numbers (prior to Creative Studio):
LG Numbers:
Focusrite Control:
Numbers (prior to Creative Studio):
LG Numbers:
Focusrite Control:
yes but there's no more features, is like buy dead software.
the new warp tool is only for the subscription.
I hate Apple more than ever, I hate the f*** liquid glass and the f*** subscription,
Very sad, I'm mac user since a iMac G3.
At least the free version of iWorks still has AI writing tools to make documents more concise, friendly, or professional. I find the concise tool particularly helpful 🙂.
Last edited:
I used to love Apple a lot. Now we're just good friends. I do love the M chips and Apples privacy/security efforts. Others? Well I wouldn't want to encounter Microsoft in a dark alley.
rillrill
macrumors 6502a
I just subscribed to 3 months free for the Creative Studio. It is such a waste of money, don't even try it, unless for some reason you never bought the Logic or Final Cut Pro Studio EDU bundle. Honestly, I'm not really sure where Apple's headed in terms of software, but they used to be so good and now they're barely doing anything right. And it's just monthly maintenance to keep the legacy software working right. But again, no place else to go. And for me, I love working with Anthropic's Claude. I could easily just be in that world, but of course, it's a very expensive world to be in right now, and it doesn't make much sense. However, in the future, who knows? We might not need these operating systems.
Agree, one of the big points to buy a Mac is the Apple non subscription apps.
If this really has to be the way the industry is heading - perhaps because of claims that subscription fees are necessary to fund future developments of various apps - then even if I don't necessarily believe that claim (more likely it's to continue to drive revenue growth and profits) I suppose I have to grudgingly accept the reality but what I really resent as someone who pretty much only uses Apple Numbers is the granularity (or maybe I should say lack of it) that Apple is implementing here with its Creator Studio bundle.
I would really like to move all of my Excel spreadsheets across to Numbers and cancel my Microsoft 365 subscription because Apple iCloud+ Mail and the 2TB of cloud storage included with Apple One Premium gives me everything I need and the current Pages non-subscription version is more than sufficient for my very occasional word processing needs. I do however need some serious functionality enhancements in Numbers (e.g. named functions and something like Microsoft's VBA coding capabilities) if I am ever going to be able to move my most complex spreadsheets across to Numbers. (I don't even need VBA compatibility, just some equivalent functionality in Numbers and I'd be willing to re-implement my VBA code using whatever capabilities Apple provided.)
I'd be willing to pay subscription fees if it meant that Apple used some of the revenue to expand its Numbers development team but with Numbers currently just one of 10 apps in the Creator Studio bundle I would really resent paying a full Creator Studio subscription for literally only 1 app that I care about.
I accept that not everyone has the same focus as me but if Apple had split the subscriptions out into separate iWorks (Numbers, Pages and Keynote) and Creator Studio (the current stuff minus the apps that had been put into the iWorks subscription) I would feel a lot more comfortable that of the subscription revenue that I was paying (an iWorks subscription) was actually going to fund development that I cared about. I can imagine that creatives might also feel the same way sort of in reverse. If they mostly spent their time in those other apps and didn't want any of their subscription fees to go to the iWorks apps because the free versions were 100% good enough for their occasional needs or never used at all.
If the iWorks subscription was 50% or perhaps even 75% of the current Creator Studio bundle I would feel less aggrieved and happier with Apple because I suspect that would divert a lot more revenue to future Numbers development compared to the probably paltry slice of the pie that I suspect it is going to get from the current Creator Studio revenue stream. On the other side of the equation I suspect that a big percentage of audio/video content creators would be at least somewhat happier if the Creator Studio bundle price dropped maybe 20%, or even a modest 10%, because of stripping out the iWorks stuff. I presume the only audio/video creators who would feel aggrieved would be the ones who did also want premium versions of the iWorks apps and who under such a new pricing structure would have to buy both subscriptions but perhaps even there Apple could defuse that by offering a reduced bundle price for people who did want both the more focussed Creator Studio bundle plus the new iWorks Pro (or whatever it got called) bundle.
Such a two-bundle scheme might well also give Apple the opportunity to get more total subscription revenue because, while I obviously have no idea how many other people might feel like me, currently there is no chance that I'm going to subscribe to Creator Studio just for a few very minor extra features in Numbers (that don't address my issues anyway) whereas I would subscribe today to a more focussed iWorks subscription (perhaps even at a $99 per year level) in the hope (a leap of faith) that that sort of non-trivial and much more focussed revenue stream would result in much more significantly feature-enhanced Pro versions of the iWorks apps in the not too distant future. That subscription revenue would be 100% upside revenue from Apple that it's not getting from me right now - in fact even worse for Apple it's effectively going to Microsoft as a part of an M365 subscription because unless Numbers gets a lot more feature-rich I still need Excel.
I would really like to move all of my Excel spreadsheets across to Numbers and cancel my Microsoft 365 subscription because Apple iCloud+ Mail and the 2TB of cloud storage included with Apple One Premium gives me everything I need and the current Pages non-subscription version is more than sufficient for my very occasional word processing needs. I do however need some serious functionality enhancements in Numbers (e.g. named functions and something like Microsoft's VBA coding capabilities) if I am ever going to be able to move my most complex spreadsheets across to Numbers. (I don't even need VBA compatibility, just some equivalent functionality in Numbers and I'd be willing to re-implement my VBA code using whatever capabilities Apple provided.)
I'd be willing to pay subscription fees if it meant that Apple used some of the revenue to expand its Numbers development team but with Numbers currently just one of 10 apps in the Creator Studio bundle I would really resent paying a full Creator Studio subscription for literally only 1 app that I care about.
I accept that not everyone has the same focus as me but if Apple had split the subscriptions out into separate iWorks (Numbers, Pages and Keynote) and Creator Studio (the current stuff minus the apps that had been put into the iWorks subscription) I would feel a lot more comfortable that of the subscription revenue that I was paying (an iWorks subscription) was actually going to fund development that I cared about. I can imagine that creatives might also feel the same way sort of in reverse. If they mostly spent their time in those other apps and didn't want any of their subscription fees to go to the iWorks apps because the free versions were 100% good enough for their occasional needs or never used at all.
If the iWorks subscription was 50% or perhaps even 75% of the current Creator Studio bundle I would feel less aggrieved and happier with Apple because I suspect that would divert a lot more revenue to future Numbers development compared to the probably paltry slice of the pie that I suspect it is going to get from the current Creator Studio revenue stream. On the other side of the equation I suspect that a big percentage of audio/video content creators would be at least somewhat happier if the Creator Studio bundle price dropped maybe 20%, or even a modest 10%, because of stripping out the iWorks stuff. I presume the only audio/video creators who would feel aggrieved would be the ones who did also want premium versions of the iWorks apps and who under such a new pricing structure would have to buy both subscriptions but perhaps even there Apple could defuse that by offering a reduced bundle price for people who did want both the more focussed Creator Studio bundle plus the new iWorks Pro (or whatever it got called) bundle.
Such a two-bundle scheme might well also give Apple the opportunity to get more total subscription revenue because, while I obviously have no idea how many other people might feel like me, currently there is no chance that I'm going to subscribe to Creator Studio just for a few very minor extra features in Numbers (that don't address my issues anyway) whereas I would subscribe today to a more focussed iWorks subscription (perhaps even at a $99 per year level) in the hope (a leap of faith) that that sort of non-trivial and much more focussed revenue stream would result in much more significantly feature-enhanced Pro versions of the iWorks apps in the not too distant future. That subscription revenue would be 100% upside revenue from Apple that it's not getting from me right now - in fact even worse for Apple it's effectively going to Microsoft as a part of an M365 subscription because unless Numbers gets a lot more feature-rich I still need Excel.
eltoslightfoot
macrumors 68040
I think you are going to find Numbers unable to accommodate your ideas, unfortunately. It is still pretty basic compared to Microsoft Excel.
jakey rolling
macrumors 65816
This is kind of the crux of the "it does 90% of what most users need" idea espoused from people who advocate for Numbers or Libre or any of the other dozen or so spreadsheet applications out there. Yes, it is true that for most users, 90% of the functionality that they need in a spreadsheet exists in pretty much every GUI spreadsheet application that has ever existed. The problem is that last 10% of functionality is vastly different for different users. For you it may be the ability to program custom functions and macros. For others it may be the ability to securely query external data sources. Or the ability to combine tables from multiple sheets using a query language. Or the ability to add visual filters and slicers to a pivottable.
And this is the reason why people who love Excel love Excel - it is incredibly feature-rich to the point where most people are hard-pressed to even think about what additional functionality could possibly be crammed into a future version. And yet Microsoft still adds arguably useful new functionality with every new version. It is a virtual guarantee that whatever you need a spreadsheet to do at any given time, Excel will do it.
It is also the reason why people who hate Excel hate Excel - it is the most bloated spreadsheet you'll ever encounter. And Microsoft is still adding bloat to it with every new version.
This, unfortunately (or fortunately - for some users), is also why Numbers may never get the functionality enhancements that you want, regardless of whether Apple expands the Numbers development team at all. Numbers is not Excel and was never meant to be Excel. People (possibly even you) prefer to use it because it is not Excel. It is faster and lighter and more responsive and more secure and cheaper than Excel, precisely because it does not try to do that extra 10%. It is an entirely different tool and has a different target audience.
I would too. I think Apple's messaging is a bit muddled with the Creator Studio bundle when it comes to the iWork apps. My take (as a total layperson on the sidelines with no insight whatsoever) is that the Creator Studio bundle was built specifically for creatives, with the small amount of extra iWork stuff added as a small extra bone to throw for those users. It was never meant as a subscription for people who just want to use iWork and have a few extra AI perks and some clipart. If Apple were a bit more clear on that goal, I think it would be less annoying to the other 80% of Apple users who never touch a media editing application.
That's absolutely valid, and I think we will probably eventually see one of two things come from Apple:
- A separate iWork-only bundle for subscribing to extra/new functionality without the inclusion of Final Cut Pro, Logic, etc. If this is the path that Apple takes, I'm guessing it will be when they've already enhanced iWork and the other functionality enough for such a bundle to be worthwhile (because right now, IMHO it really isn't).
- The AI/ClipArt and other iWork enhancements that the bundle does pay for will become bundled in with Apple's other cloud services and iWork itself will remain free.
Maybe. I can't imagine that the subscription price for the bundle would be lower without the extra iWork stuff in it, though. Apple generally starts with a target price and then designs their offerings around it. I think the iWork stuff was just meant to be a free added benefit for creatives.
If your job has "Analyst" in the title, you probably have Excel on your computer. I agree it is bloated, and as a retired guy, I don't use it anymore. Good riddance! But, in the business world, it is very difficult to work around the Excel standard.
eltoslightfoot
macrumors 68040
The problem is that if I only want the iWork stuff, then the sub is way too expensive to justify it. All because of a "free added benefit."
JonYo
macrumors member
After updating my iWork apps to the creative bundle-compatible version and not subscribing to the creative bundle, the iWork apps each only bugged me once to recommend the subscription, and after that, they've stopped. So, so far so good. As long as we keep getting non-AI updates to the iWork apps to keep them compatible and secure without having to subscribe to anything, I'm off or the moment. Yes, there may be no new non-AI features either, but... that's ok for me. I understand others do much more complex things in the iWork apps (especially Numbers) than I do.
Yeah. In the absence of my fantasy world becoming a reality - one where Apple creates a specific iWorks subscription that allows it to significantly boost development resources and hence significantly enhance the feature set in Numbers(*) - then if Apple keeps basic security and compatibility updates going for the free version that at least will be massively better than trying to starve out non-subscribers to force them to upgrade. Like you I also don't care about any AI features that might be locked behind the subscription paywall - or at least any potential AI features that my imagination can conjure up right now.
(*) jokey rolling made some very valid observations a couple of posts up including the comment about significant Numbers feature enhancement potentially being unlikely/unrealistic/troublesome in practice since once one collects together everyone's "if only Numbers had these few extra little features" list that creates a superset that becomes an awful lot of features that could lead one into Excel bloat territory thus alienating other Numbers users (and soaking up a lot of Apple developer resource).
Oh well, maybe I'll be pleasantly surprised regarding future Numbers evolution for non-subscribers but I am realistic and take on board the various points made by others so I think I'll have to accept that Excel is likely to always need to be installed on my MacBook. I am going to adopt a dual-spreadsheet strategy though because Numbers is in one way more revolutionary than I initially thought (I'm a very new Mac user so only started playing with numbers very recently).
My previous less-informed impression of Numbers was that it is just a very simplified albeit lightweight and pretty take on a spreadsheet but it's more than that because it breaks the paradigm of a sheet being one big table but instead being a blank canvass onto which you can place multiple different tables (and other items). That makes some layout stuff so much easier to do in Numbers vs Excel so where I have computationally simple spreadsheets I will probably do them in Numbers and only use Excel for my more complicated stuff. I can effectively do pretty much all of that blank canvass with multiple tables stuff in Excel but it is using some really horrible kludges that make it very difficult to modify the layout so using Numbers for my simpler stuff should still save me a lot of time. (All my spreadsheet work is 100% for my own use so I don't need to worry about exchanging files with other people where some being Numbers and others being Excel would probably be too confusing to be a viable approach.)
I also updated to the latest version of iWork without subscription, and it works much the same as the prior version. Also, the unpaid version still has basic AI writing tools to make text more professional, friendly, or concise. I do use these features occasionally, so I am happy to see they do not require a subscription.
Bottomline: for the time being, there's nothing for me to be concerned about. Down the road, issues might present themselves..... but not at the moment.
Bottomline: for the time being, there's nothing for me to be concerned about. Down the road, issues might present themselves..... but not at the moment.
Slartibart
macrumors 68040
As one of the people with “Analyst” in the title you are right regarding the file format for sure, that is the target audience for what I do wants excel files… but I do not have to use Excel for that, besides checking whether the files written out by R or Python are correct. This holds for my and many other teams I know.
Of course there are people who use Excel exclusively, but these people then are likely dealing with large data sets. 🤓
Totally unrelated to the primary conversation, but I do expect that one of the consequences of AI will be that obsolete file formats are much less of a factor than they are now. The same ability that can refactor and modify a code base can refactor an Excel rats nest, moving the data parts into a database, and cleaning up the logic and presentation to represent modern best practices and company standards.
Of course this will not happen tomorrow, in the same way that today we keep hearing parallel stories of one person who achieved fantastic results refactoring a large, old codebase while another managed to nuke their repository without having a backup in place. While leading edge explorers do their thing, the rest of society will move at the speed of decadal change, not annual change, just like it took us decades to move all of society from the steno pool and typewriters to PCs, then another few decades (and probably only half complete so far) to get people to fully embrace all aspects of cloud computing.
I wouldn't short Microsoft tomorrow. But I also wouldn't assume that in 15 years they have the totally dominant position in business that they have today, based on Office and in particular file formats.
eltoslightfoot
macrumors 68040
We’ll see. I am not as sure that AI will progress at this perfect linear curve. I think we have pretty much maxed it out.