Spanky Deluxe
Oct 26, 12:22 PM
They've just got the leopard disk cover on the front. I would post photos but I lack teh bluetooth on the iBook. :)
ipoddin
Oct 27, 01:28 PM
I really want .mac, but it's just not compelling enough.
I keep my bookmarks sync'd between my Mac at home and my PC at work in Firefox with Foxmarks. Free extension.
I use gmail and yahoo for webmail. 2+gb of storage each. I'm debating which to stick with for calendar. I can use gmail and sync ical to it right now. However someone is already starting a service (http://groups-beta.google.com/group/spanningsync/browse_thread/thread/33374a59c38cbe15)which will let you completely sync Google cal and ical by being able to make changes to both (effectively duplicating what .mac gives you)
I could convert another gmail account into storage space with a plug in. Right now I use mediamax (http://www.mediamax.com/) for 25gb of FREE storage.
Flickr offers ways to publish right from iphoto for a very easy and free way to share photos online.
So for me to cough up the dough, .mac needs more, much more.
I keep my bookmarks sync'd between my Mac at home and my PC at work in Firefox with Foxmarks. Free extension.
I use gmail and yahoo for webmail. 2+gb of storage each. I'm debating which to stick with for calendar. I can use gmail and sync ical to it right now. However someone is already starting a service (http://groups-beta.google.com/group/spanningsync/browse_thread/thread/33374a59c38cbe15)which will let you completely sync Google cal and ical by being able to make changes to both (effectively duplicating what .mac gives you)
I could convert another gmail account into storage space with a plug in. Right now I use mediamax (http://www.mediamax.com/) for 25gb of FREE storage.
Flickr offers ways to publish right from iphoto for a very easy and free way to share photos online.
So for me to cough up the dough, .mac needs more, much more.
fcortese
Mar 12, 04:31 PM
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5298/5520365719_1c7443dc0a_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/damoncrane/5520365719/in/photostream/)
Uh, I'd call that contrast! I like to placement of the replacement in the frame, it draws my eyes directly to him, and the looks from the players to his immediate left and right. I has me wondering what they are thinking.
Uh, I'd call that contrast! I like to placement of the replacement in the frame, it draws my eyes directly to him, and the looks from the players to his immediate left and right. I has me wondering what they are thinking.
Queso
Dec 20, 11:24 AM
Anyone else out there listening to the Radio 1 chart countdown for the first time in years?
I've heard rumours as to who's won, but those are on the Internet and we all know everything on there is a load of old tosh :D
I've heard rumours as to who's won, but those are on the Internet and we all know everything on there is a load of old tosh :D
more...
2 Replies
Oct 6, 12:51 PM
Why would Apple do what has failed all other manufactures during the time Apple's one model mantra have eaten sales from other manufactures?
:confused:
I'd stop to think about what you're saying before you speak. Maybe check the stats from anytime this year.
The iPhone does not have a majority of the share in the smartphone market.
As of Q1 RIM had a commanding lead over iPhone; http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/10/06/06/apples_iphone_market_share_three_times_greater_than_android_in_us.html
Other more recent reports show'd RIM slipping, but still higher than iOS. This one also show Nokia as having an even greater lead than both.
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/btl/apple-iphone-smartphone-market-share-surges-rim-slips/34181
And the MOST recent data (as of yesterday) has Android beating iOS; http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2010/10/05/android-passes-blackberry-and-iphone-among-recent-smartphone-purchases/
"Fail"? HA, Hardly. :rolleyes:
:confused:
I'd stop to think about what you're saying before you speak. Maybe check the stats from anytime this year.
The iPhone does not have a majority of the share in the smartphone market.
As of Q1 RIM had a commanding lead over iPhone; http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/10/06/06/apples_iphone_market_share_three_times_greater_than_android_in_us.html
Other more recent reports show'd RIM slipping, but still higher than iOS. This one also show Nokia as having an even greater lead than both.
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/btl/apple-iphone-smartphone-market-share-surges-rim-slips/34181
And the MOST recent data (as of yesterday) has Android beating iOS; http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2010/10/05/android-passes-blackberry-and-iphone-among-recent-smartphone-purchases/
"Fail"? HA, Hardly. :rolleyes:
Ish
Mar 12, 10:01 AM
I liked the first one much better. The angle and the background just don't work for me on this one.
I agree. I was trying to show the time on the watch more clearly but it's not right.
Two very different interpretations of apples and oranges. I prefer the second one of yours, JD. The top of the apple is more clear, there's more texture in the front orange and the red apple is clearer and reflects the light nicely and adds a bit of sparkle. I also like the contrast between the fruit and the black background and the subtle reflection in the surface.
OK, my own submission for this challenge. With the utmost apologies to JD, I had to stick with the apples & oranges theme which is what had immediately occurred to me when we set this topic. I've tried to expand on the conceptual interpretation of apples & oranges with some more technical interpretations - a split b & w background, and an over-saturated and high contrast post treatment.
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5019/5517805179_d69cdf5849_b.jpg
I like the idea you have going here. I would like the saturation more realistic, but that's just me. Different framing and cropping come to mind. Maybe play off the differences in the textures and color, putting them closer and cropping or framing in tight. I may play with this idea when I can. I have nice oranges, but I need an apple. And the nice lighting setup you have.
Please excuse the PhotoShop hack of your image...:)
Dale
No apologies necessary. I think it's great when we have similar ideas implemented differently for these challenges. I very much like the color, textures and saturation. It gives it a very modern feel, especially with the very bold black and white. Like others have said, I'm not sold on the placement or the crop. I get what you were going for in emphasizing the contrasts though. Maybe a tighter crop? Maybe playing with where the black/white line falls in the frame? Maybe placing one fruit in the black and one in the white somehow. Not sure, I think a tighter crop would help the most.
Great work.
Another nice interpretation, Axis. Very different and the crisp black and white adds to the contrast. If I may make one or two suggestions, I might choose something like a very green Granny Smith apple and rub it with a soft cloth until it shone. The one in the pic looks a bit blotchy. That might allow you to turn down the intensity on the orange just a tad so it looks a bit more realistic.
Also wondering what it would look like with the orange slightly in front of and overlapping the orange a little, then the view closed in a bit more on them. Just thoughts!
I agree. I was trying to show the time on the watch more clearly but it's not right.
Two very different interpretations of apples and oranges. I prefer the second one of yours, JD. The top of the apple is more clear, there's more texture in the front orange and the red apple is clearer and reflects the light nicely and adds a bit of sparkle. I also like the contrast between the fruit and the black background and the subtle reflection in the surface.
OK, my own submission for this challenge. With the utmost apologies to JD, I had to stick with the apples & oranges theme which is what had immediately occurred to me when we set this topic. I've tried to expand on the conceptual interpretation of apples & oranges with some more technical interpretations - a split b & w background, and an over-saturated and high contrast post treatment.
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5019/5517805179_d69cdf5849_b.jpg
I like the idea you have going here. I would like the saturation more realistic, but that's just me. Different framing and cropping come to mind. Maybe play off the differences in the textures and color, putting them closer and cropping or framing in tight. I may play with this idea when I can. I have nice oranges, but I need an apple. And the nice lighting setup you have.
Please excuse the PhotoShop hack of your image...:)
Dale
No apologies necessary. I think it's great when we have similar ideas implemented differently for these challenges. I very much like the color, textures and saturation. It gives it a very modern feel, especially with the very bold black and white. Like others have said, I'm not sold on the placement or the crop. I get what you were going for in emphasizing the contrasts though. Maybe a tighter crop? Maybe playing with where the black/white line falls in the frame? Maybe placing one fruit in the black and one in the white somehow. Not sure, I think a tighter crop would help the most.
Great work.
Another nice interpretation, Axis. Very different and the crisp black and white adds to the contrast. If I may make one or two suggestions, I might choose something like a very green Granny Smith apple and rub it with a soft cloth until it shone. The one in the pic looks a bit blotchy. That might allow you to turn down the intensity on the orange just a tad so it looks a bit more realistic.
Also wondering what it would look like with the orange slightly in front of and overlapping the orange a little, then the view closed in a bit more on them. Just thoughts!
more...
spicyapple
Aug 14, 09:46 AM
I find it amazing he's never used a computer before doing the Mac ads. But he uses a Mac now, and that's all that counts. :)
mytakeontech
Mar 25, 06:53 PM
mind letting me know which store? I've been trying to get one shipped to me all day!
This in Sherman Oaks, CA on Ventura blvd!
This in Sherman Oaks, CA on Ventura blvd!
more...
wdlove
Sep 13, 10:54 AM
I wish you all the best iGary. Having a good sense of humor is important. Since I'm a nurse and worked on a surgical floor, I've had a lot of experience with patients before and after surgery. You can PM if you would like to ask specific questions via iChat. I personally had general anesthesia three times T&A, wisdom teeth, and bronchoscopy (looked into my lungs with a tube.)
Ryan1524
May 26, 03:53 PM
Originally posted by wsteineker
Ok, here's a nightmare for you just to illustrate the kind of headaches we're talking about. First, let me start by saying that I upgraded my Cube from OS 9.2.2 to OS X 10.1 all the way through 10.2.4 with no problems, and that I recently installed a Pioneer A05 DVD-R/RW in my Quicksilver tower without so much as a hiccup. So on to my Windows XP hell...
<snip>
wow. that sounds pretty bad. but i 'think' your experience is isolated, or at least represents only a small portion of XP users, proper XP users.
let me tell you my story with M$ to give you the idea why i'm quite appreciative of XP.
i started with 3.1, on to 95, 98, 2000, ME (what were they smoking), etc... i've been living on computers all my life and folowed M$'s development (or lack of - for that matter).
my nightmares was very evident on 98. nothing worked and i had to do everything manually. good thing i was quite patient and know what i'm doing. but after 2 years of W98-SE on a P3 750, 40GB hdd and 512MB ram and 32MB Riva TNT2 (i'm always a step behind, i'm not made of money.. :p), it's staring to go bad, like a plate of food that slowly rots away. at the end, my computing experience with 98 is as follows: 1 out of 5 boot tries will succeed (not just stuck on the startup screen). 1 out of 5 of those succesfull boot ups wil allow me to use the computer, instead of crashing as soon as i move the mouse, which brings me back to trying to get the computer to start for me.
i was sick of it and my friend easily talked me into installing XP after i persisted not to for over 3 months since release. i did a clean install after backing up my data and it worked like a charm. it's been two years now and my computer's been doing great, i only have to restart it every month or so, sometimes i can go two months without restarting. but the past couple of months, as the plate's rotting away, i have to restart every 3 days or so. to avoid a system crash. thankfully, it's just a freeze-up and no data is lost during these periodic crashes (knock on wood). other than the 3 day crash thing, it's never given me problems. so i'm quite satisfied. my appreciation might have come from using a better OS after the 98 hell, but i think XP is in itself a good OS, not the best, but good enough. for now at least. :) ;)
Ok, here's a nightmare for you just to illustrate the kind of headaches we're talking about. First, let me start by saying that I upgraded my Cube from OS 9.2.2 to OS X 10.1 all the way through 10.2.4 with no problems, and that I recently installed a Pioneer A05 DVD-R/RW in my Quicksilver tower without so much as a hiccup. So on to my Windows XP hell...
<snip>
wow. that sounds pretty bad. but i 'think' your experience is isolated, or at least represents only a small portion of XP users, proper XP users.
let me tell you my story with M$ to give you the idea why i'm quite appreciative of XP.
i started with 3.1, on to 95, 98, 2000, ME (what were they smoking), etc... i've been living on computers all my life and folowed M$'s development (or lack of - for that matter).
my nightmares was very evident on 98. nothing worked and i had to do everything manually. good thing i was quite patient and know what i'm doing. but after 2 years of W98-SE on a P3 750, 40GB hdd and 512MB ram and 32MB Riva TNT2 (i'm always a step behind, i'm not made of money.. :p), it's staring to go bad, like a plate of food that slowly rots away. at the end, my computing experience with 98 is as follows: 1 out of 5 boot tries will succeed (not just stuck on the startup screen). 1 out of 5 of those succesfull boot ups wil allow me to use the computer, instead of crashing as soon as i move the mouse, which brings me back to trying to get the computer to start for me.
i was sick of it and my friend easily talked me into installing XP after i persisted not to for over 3 months since release. i did a clean install after backing up my data and it worked like a charm. it's been two years now and my computer's been doing great, i only have to restart it every month or so, sometimes i can go two months without restarting. but the past couple of months, as the plate's rotting away, i have to restart every 3 days or so. to avoid a system crash. thankfully, it's just a freeze-up and no data is lost during these periodic crashes (knock on wood). other than the 3 day crash thing, it's never given me problems. so i'm quite satisfied. my appreciation might have come from using a better OS after the 98 hell, but i think XP is in itself a good OS, not the best, but good enough. for now at least. :) ;)
more...
blow45
Apr 14, 07:56 PM
Based on some of the posts in this one forum, it seems that most are coming from loud mouth teens who know nothing, or just want to say something for the hell of it. Geez!
not even teens, preteens, they are all over this place, and the amount they write here is inversely proportional to their knowledge and experience. uggghhh:eek:
not even teens, preteens, they are all over this place, and the amount they write here is inversely proportional to their knowledge and experience. uggghhh:eek:
LimeLite
May 7, 11:46 PM
What I am getting at by this post, is why are Mac people so biggoted against the PC. Another guy made a post somewhere else about how maybe one in fifteen PC users is anti Mac, but more like one in two Mac users is anti PC.
1/15 PC Users X 95% Market Share = 6.3% of total market.
1/2 Mac Users X 5% Market Share = 2.5% of total market.
If your assumption of this is right, then...
Conclusion: There are more bigotted PC Users than there are bigotted Mac Users. :D
1/15 PC Users X 95% Market Share = 6.3% of total market.
1/2 Mac Users X 5% Market Share = 2.5% of total market.
If your assumption of this is right, then...
Conclusion: There are more bigotted PC Users than there are bigotted Mac Users. :D
more...
fahadqureshi
Apr 19, 10:26 AM
anyone have info on that "carbon design decal" case for ipad2 at the end.
iBorg20181
Oct 22, 04:26 AM
Exactly.
Apple using the integrated GMA950 is a bunch of crap... They just went cheap, it has NOTHING to do with power savings. Even an old Radeon Mobility 9700 would be better. I can't understand why Apple chose to do this seeing how they don't support it with some of their own software (FCP, Motion). They should have at least offered an upgrade option or put the GPU option in the blackbook only or something.
Exactly, spot-on correct!
The only reason Apple has graphically crippled the MBs is to force more people to buy the much more expensive, and profitable MBP, on buyers whose only need beyond a stock MB is .... a graphics chip.
Really, how much does Apple "save" by using IG vs. a cheap 64MB graphics chip .... certainly under $50. So offer it on the top-of-the-line BlackBook, and bump the price an extra $100, and it would sell through the roof, even more than it currently does. But Apple wants to squeeze every extra $$ out of its customers, so we aren't given the BTO option of a graphics chip in a MB, forcing us to spend an extra $1k for MBP, when all that many want/need is the chip.
:mad:
iBorg
Apple using the integrated GMA950 is a bunch of crap... They just went cheap, it has NOTHING to do with power savings. Even an old Radeon Mobility 9700 would be better. I can't understand why Apple chose to do this seeing how they don't support it with some of their own software (FCP, Motion). They should have at least offered an upgrade option or put the GPU option in the blackbook only or something.
Exactly, spot-on correct!
The only reason Apple has graphically crippled the MBs is to force more people to buy the much more expensive, and profitable MBP, on buyers whose only need beyond a stock MB is .... a graphics chip.
Really, how much does Apple "save" by using IG vs. a cheap 64MB graphics chip .... certainly under $50. So offer it on the top-of-the-line BlackBook, and bump the price an extra $100, and it would sell through the roof, even more than it currently does. But Apple wants to squeeze every extra $$ out of its customers, so we aren't given the BTO option of a graphics chip in a MB, forcing us to spend an extra $1k for MBP, when all that many want/need is the chip.
:mad:
iBorg
more...
iZaid
Oct 19, 01:11 PM
is anyone going to the mac expo on friday? or just the apple store, i feel like getting an imac but i dont know if i should.:confused::confused::confused:
2IS
Apr 21, 07:53 PM
4S moniker should be reserved for Porsche
more...
MacManiac1224
Sep 13, 04:23 PM
Can the G4 beat the Pentium 5? You are probably scratching your heads on this one. Yep, the Pentium 5 is very real, and it is coming soon. 2nd quarter of the Pentium 5 debuting at 3.2GHZ is going to come out. It will have 100 million transistors on it and it will be manufactured at .09 microns. Also, here is the doozy, it will have 1 mb of L2 on die cache, and it will support 333mhz bus speeds, with the addition of DDR, that is a possible 667mhz bus speeds. By the way, if you were wondering, the Pentium 4 has 42 million transistors.
Now, for the G4: I am not sure how many transistors the G4 has, but I imagine it is way less then 100 million, or even 42 million, considering the P4 came out after the G4. Anyway, the cache on the G4 is higher on the high-end, 2mb of cache. But: the speed: 1.25Ghz? Can that really stand up to a P5 with 333mhz bus, and 3.2Ghz clock speeds? My opinion: most likely not.
Let's be honest, the P4 basically can beat the G4 in most tasks today, so a new faster version of the P4, the P5 can easily beat the G4, most likely in 95-99% of all tasks.
Ok, we have established that the G4 is, well, to slow against the P5, even though we don't know about it yet, I imagine it will be. Well, Apple just pulled the plug on OS 9 for January, what could this mean? I am not sure, only Steve knows. But Apple better come out with something that can at least compete with the Pentium 5, and it better come soon. I would not be surprised if Apple comes out with the G5 in January, just to say they were the first to have a generation 5 possessor, but I could be wrong.
Ok, I made my case, now, what do you guys think? By the way: I got this information about the Pentium 5 from eWeek, so it is reputable.
Now, for the G4: I am not sure how many transistors the G4 has, but I imagine it is way less then 100 million, or even 42 million, considering the P4 came out after the G4. Anyway, the cache on the G4 is higher on the high-end, 2mb of cache. But: the speed: 1.25Ghz? Can that really stand up to a P5 with 333mhz bus, and 3.2Ghz clock speeds? My opinion: most likely not.
Let's be honest, the P4 basically can beat the G4 in most tasks today, so a new faster version of the P4, the P5 can easily beat the G4, most likely in 95-99% of all tasks.
Ok, we have established that the G4 is, well, to slow against the P5, even though we don't know about it yet, I imagine it will be. Well, Apple just pulled the plug on OS 9 for January, what could this mean? I am not sure, only Steve knows. But Apple better come out with something that can at least compete with the Pentium 5, and it better come soon. I would not be surprised if Apple comes out with the G5 in January, just to say they were the first to have a generation 5 possessor, but I could be wrong.
Ok, I made my case, now, what do you guys think? By the way: I got this information about the Pentium 5 from eWeek, so it is reputable.
Skika
Dec 14, 07:54 AM
Anyone thinks thats why they went a little overkill with the current resolution? So they can keep the same resolution on a 4 inch screen and still looks good plus no problems for apps and developers?
Cougarcat
Apr 27, 01:20 PM
At this point price is the only thing that concerns me. Hoping apple keeps the same price point as Snow leopard and the upgrade coming in at $29. or $49 on DVD
$29, Not a chance. Probably at least $79.
$29, Not a chance. Probably at least $79.
Michael73
Apr 12, 01:57 PM
Outlook still lacks CalDav support and relies on Sync Services which Apple is discontinuing May 5th.
Sorry, but FAIL. :(
Sorry, but FAIL. :(
kainjow
Oct 26, 08:15 PM
Can somebody explain to me why anybody would want to pay $100/year for an email account with only 1 GB of storage?
Um, you get more than just an email account. You get an iDisk. You can easy iCal/iPhoto publishing, you get syncing of your data with all of your Macs. Lots of non-Apple apps provide easy publishing of your info to your iDisk.
I'd recommend .Mac to anyone who wants to do this kind of stuff. Can you think of a way to do all of the above for < $100/year without being an uber geek who knows all about FTP and WebDAV and POP/SMTP? :D
Um, you get more than just an email account. You get an iDisk. You can easy iCal/iPhoto publishing, you get syncing of your data with all of your Macs. Lots of non-Apple apps provide easy publishing of your info to your iDisk.
I'd recommend .Mac to anyone who wants to do this kind of stuff. Can you think of a way to do all of the above for < $100/year without being an uber geek who knows all about FTP and WebDAV and POP/SMTP? :D
TyleRomeo
Sep 19, 05:43 PM
Originally posted by iJon
RacerX
Apr 3, 03:00 AM
I think that Apple was probably aiming to make Pages into a desktop publishing program but then found halfway through that most of the features added in were pretty similar to what word has. Maybe that's why Jobs decided to put it head to head with Word?
Pages is a resurrected application from more than 10 years ago. It's feature set and implementation are pretty much the same, just as the reaction of both the media and users.
Pages was never designed to be a page layout replacement. It is designed to be a step above the standard word processor layout aimed squarely at people who know nothing about page layout. This has been (in it's original form) and currently is a template driven application.
What is so amazing is that people are reacting the same way now as they did before. Always thinking that it'll become more than it currently is. This application has had more than 10 years to be rethought out and improved. If it was aiming for page layout, there was plenty of time to move it in that direction.
Pages is to page layout what painting by numbers is to art. Anyone expecting the freedom that a page layout program offers has missed what this is about. It isn't about freedom, it is about empowering people with little or no experience to produce quality documents.
The only reason Pages has been resurrected is that it was an application that Steve Jobs really liked and thought had a place even if it didn't fit into any defined category.
Steve Jobs, 1993: Pages is a stunning product, and I believe it will become a major mainstream product on NEXTSTEP.
Pages could be a good product... as soon as people start taking it for what it is rather than projecting what they want it to be onto it.
Lets look at a 1992 description of Pages from NeXTWorld:The flip side of PasteUp's carte-blanche approach to page design is a layout program from Pages Software, which after several years in the making is close to release under the name Pages by Pages. It guides users to produce well-designed business documents by limiting their choices to a preset range provided in a companion "design model."
Pages by Pages will ship with seven design models, most aimed at corporate design (other models will be available separately from Pages and third parties). A separate program, the Pages Designer Edition, is used to create models.
Each model contains rules for typeface control, column layout, headline styling, and other elements that make up a page design. The idea is that an organization will use the product to standardize on a common look for all its documents. The constrained approach also allows users to create attractive designs easily, with a fairly flat learning curve.
The Pages user interface groups 26 page elements under six basic palettes. All elements are dragged and dropped on the page, and they interact appropriately. For example, a subhead will know that it lives in a column, so it scales to the column width.
Once users are comfortable with a design model, they have several ways to expand or change it. Every element has an inspector with controls to adjust the behavior of the element. Users may also alter a design model by overriding one or more rules, and then saving it as a style sheet. They can also create a design model from scratch with the Designer Edition.
Pages believes it has hit on a fundamentally new ap-proach to page design. It is aimed squarely at business publishing, leaving the graphic-design market to other products.
Does any of this sound familiar?
The first week Pages was out a lot of people were crowing about a new "Word-killer" and I really felt that was offbase because the better comparison really is to Microsoft Publisher. It reminds me of a light version of Pagemaker from 10 years ago.
Pages was compared with PageMaker during it's original run also.
PageMaker was a very powerful application 10 years ago, I should know, I have PageMaker 1.0-6.5 (and still use Aldus PageMaker 5.0a on my PowerBook 2300c today).
Trying to compare Pages to PageMaker does both a disservice. Pages wasn't attempting to be like PageMaker and PageMaker was never as limiting as Pages.
As for the comparison to Publisher... that I don't know about.
I, personally, don't have a need for Pages. TextEdit (with the help of services from other apps) does most of what I need and when I need more than that I have Create. But even though it is not a product I would want, I know people whom this product would be great for.
The best thing to do is to stop comparing it and give it a fair chance based on what it does. If it fills a need for you, great. If it doesn't, then move to what does.
Pages is a resurrected application from more than 10 years ago. It's feature set and implementation are pretty much the same, just as the reaction of both the media and users.
Pages was never designed to be a page layout replacement. It is designed to be a step above the standard word processor layout aimed squarely at people who know nothing about page layout. This has been (in it's original form) and currently is a template driven application.
What is so amazing is that people are reacting the same way now as they did before. Always thinking that it'll become more than it currently is. This application has had more than 10 years to be rethought out and improved. If it was aiming for page layout, there was plenty of time to move it in that direction.
Pages is to page layout what painting by numbers is to art. Anyone expecting the freedom that a page layout program offers has missed what this is about. It isn't about freedom, it is about empowering people with little or no experience to produce quality documents.
The only reason Pages has been resurrected is that it was an application that Steve Jobs really liked and thought had a place even if it didn't fit into any defined category.
Steve Jobs, 1993: Pages is a stunning product, and I believe it will become a major mainstream product on NEXTSTEP.
Pages could be a good product... as soon as people start taking it for what it is rather than projecting what they want it to be onto it.
Lets look at a 1992 description of Pages from NeXTWorld:The flip side of PasteUp's carte-blanche approach to page design is a layout program from Pages Software, which after several years in the making is close to release under the name Pages by Pages. It guides users to produce well-designed business documents by limiting their choices to a preset range provided in a companion "design model."
Pages by Pages will ship with seven design models, most aimed at corporate design (other models will be available separately from Pages and third parties). A separate program, the Pages Designer Edition, is used to create models.
Each model contains rules for typeface control, column layout, headline styling, and other elements that make up a page design. The idea is that an organization will use the product to standardize on a common look for all its documents. The constrained approach also allows users to create attractive designs easily, with a fairly flat learning curve.
The Pages user interface groups 26 page elements under six basic palettes. All elements are dragged and dropped on the page, and they interact appropriately. For example, a subhead will know that it lives in a column, so it scales to the column width.
Once users are comfortable with a design model, they have several ways to expand or change it. Every element has an inspector with controls to adjust the behavior of the element. Users may also alter a design model by overriding one or more rules, and then saving it as a style sheet. They can also create a design model from scratch with the Designer Edition.
Pages believes it has hit on a fundamentally new ap-proach to page design. It is aimed squarely at business publishing, leaving the graphic-design market to other products.
Does any of this sound familiar?
The first week Pages was out a lot of people were crowing about a new "Word-killer" and I really felt that was offbase because the better comparison really is to Microsoft Publisher. It reminds me of a light version of Pagemaker from 10 years ago.
Pages was compared with PageMaker during it's original run also.
PageMaker was a very powerful application 10 years ago, I should know, I have PageMaker 1.0-6.5 (and still use Aldus PageMaker 5.0a on my PowerBook 2300c today).
Trying to compare Pages to PageMaker does both a disservice. Pages wasn't attempting to be like PageMaker and PageMaker was never as limiting as Pages.
As for the comparison to Publisher... that I don't know about.
I, personally, don't have a need for Pages. TextEdit (with the help of services from other apps) does most of what I need and when I need more than that I have Create. But even though it is not a product I would want, I know people whom this product would be great for.
The best thing to do is to stop comparing it and give it a fair chance based on what it does. If it fills a need for you, great. If it doesn't, then move to what does.
andys53
Mar 28, 09:16 AM
I can't upgrade my phone untill sept so if they can hold off the release of the iPhone 5 i'd be super greatful :D
You could always hold off till the iPhone 6 comes out...... :p
You could always hold off till the iPhone 6 comes out...... :p
0 comments:
Post a Comment