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.
iJohnHenry
Apr 9, 08:58 PM
Are you suggesting it is harder to abort than to raise a child?
Oh no, you cant get away with logic like that here, especially as you are male.
Men should just butt-out of this discussion altogether, IMNSHO.
Oh no, you cant get away with logic like that here, especially as you are male.
Men should just butt-out of this discussion altogether, IMNSHO.
caspersoong
Apr 7, 07:09 AM
True. If only it supported reading usb flash drives, I could abandon my laptop except for syncing. So instead, I got an iPod.
Winni
Mar 18, 03:45 PM
In response to all the "Recommend Me a Camera/Lens/Editor etc" threads, I offer this. Comments or additions?
Never Show Your Work To Anyone
I somehow agree, at least as long as those others have nothing to show that they did that you clearly find impressive. The comments of others rarely help you improve your own work.
Read Only "Expert Photographer" Blogs, Articles, and Books
That certainly is better than reading Macrumors or other non-photographer blogs when photography is what you're interested in.
Leave Your Camera On Auto...:eek:...
Actually, you should buy a camera that does not even have an "auto" switch. I strongly recommend something like an old (analog!) Pentax K-1000 as the first camera. There was a time when photography schools did not accept cameras with automatic features. With K-1000, you have to do EVERYTHING manually - and that is the best way to actually learn how to take photos.
Buy A New and More Expensive Camera Because It'll Make Better Pictures
Better gear does not make anyone a better photographer. HOWEVER, it can drastically improve the TECHNICAL aspects/results. If you want to make large posters of your pictures, then there are natural limits to what you can do with, let's say, a 6 MP camera.
Spend Too Much Time Mastering Photoshop
Photoshop is a tool for graphics designers and the print business. For almost all photography needs, Aperture or Lightroom provide as much features as one will probably ever need. But none of those digital toys make you a better photographer.
Mine is this: Fixate on one style of photography or subject.
I agree. And you probably shouldn't start with taking photos of models/people -- it's demanding and can easily become frustrating. Try mastering your camera and training your eye(!) first. Get a feel for what a photo will look like before you even begin processing/developing it. There's usually a big difference between what you see and what your camera sees; try to get your tool in sync with your eye and imagination. It requires a lot of practice, so shoot a lot. The beauty of digital photography is that you can shoot as much as like without depleting your bank account - analog photography was more expensive to learn.
Never Show Your Work To Anyone
I somehow agree, at least as long as those others have nothing to show that they did that you clearly find impressive. The comments of others rarely help you improve your own work.
Read Only "Expert Photographer" Blogs, Articles, and Books
That certainly is better than reading Macrumors or other non-photographer blogs when photography is what you're interested in.
Leave Your Camera On Auto...:eek:...
Actually, you should buy a camera that does not even have an "auto" switch. I strongly recommend something like an old (analog!) Pentax K-1000 as the first camera. There was a time when photography schools did not accept cameras with automatic features. With K-1000, you have to do EVERYTHING manually - and that is the best way to actually learn how to take photos.
Buy A New and More Expensive Camera Because It'll Make Better Pictures
Better gear does not make anyone a better photographer. HOWEVER, it can drastically improve the TECHNICAL aspects/results. If you want to make large posters of your pictures, then there are natural limits to what you can do with, let's say, a 6 MP camera.
Spend Too Much Time Mastering Photoshop
Photoshop is a tool for graphics designers and the print business. For almost all photography needs, Aperture or Lightroom provide as much features as one will probably ever need. But none of those digital toys make you a better photographer.
Mine is this: Fixate on one style of photography or subject.
I agree. And you probably shouldn't start with taking photos of models/people -- it's demanding and can easily become frustrating. Try mastering your camera and training your eye(!) first. Get a feel for what a photo will look like before you even begin processing/developing it. There's usually a big difference between what you see and what your camera sees; try to get your tool in sync with your eye and imagination. It requires a lot of practice, so shoot a lot. The beauty of digital photography is that you can shoot as much as like without depleting your bank account - analog photography was more expensive to learn.
more...
scottsjack
Apr 26, 01:34 PM
I'd stay with DVD. A DVD is cheaper and more reliable than a thumb drive. I am aware that DVDs are not as cool as thumb drives, SSDs and liquid metal and therefore the gimme-new-stuff fan boys are in fact cool by rejecting them.
However DVDs work really great and are easy to store. Uncool, simple, cheap and reliable equals really cool from my point of view.
However DVDs work really great and are easy to store. Uncool, simple, cheap and reliable equals really cool from my point of view.
Thomas Veil
Apr 25, 06:57 PM
Even better.
He's been put-down, for a while.That was fast. :p
As for Trump, I have to agree with mrkramer that he's the male version of Palin.
And, uh...you know he's got a penchant for naming everything after himself, right? How does The United States of Trump grab you?
He's been put-down, for a while.That was fast. :p
As for Trump, I have to agree with mrkramer that he's the male version of Palin.
And, uh...you know he's got a penchant for naming everything after himself, right? How does The United States of Trump grab you?
more...
twoodcc
May 14, 06:22 PM
Very much agree, we have had great new participation for new users, even 100-200 ppd from a user is great and still will help the team out.
Since begining again and having lower points, I have now 2 dangerous enemies that are trying to take me out, stay away daygokid619 and Oculus, I have to admit it really is fun and I will make sure that none of you overtake me so I have recruited my iBook and old P4 to give me an extra 200ppd :eek::p
I might build a system soon as well as my main is getting really old, should be able to afford it in 3-6 months, what do you guys recommend, I am on a thight budget. Thinking an AMD Phenom with 4gb of ram and a Nvidea gtx260?
agreed. and i've seen other very active forums where they have give-aways and stuff for the "folder of the month" and such. i've even seen some members give other members video cards or computers, as long as they agree to use it for folding.
as far as a new system on a budget - what is your budget, and when do you plan on buying? both of those factors play a part
Since begining again and having lower points, I have now 2 dangerous enemies that are trying to take me out, stay away daygokid619 and Oculus, I have to admit it really is fun and I will make sure that none of you overtake me so I have recruited my iBook and old P4 to give me an extra 200ppd :eek::p
I might build a system soon as well as my main is getting really old, should be able to afford it in 3-6 months, what do you guys recommend, I am on a thight budget. Thinking an AMD Phenom with 4gb of ram and a Nvidea gtx260?
agreed. and i've seen other very active forums where they have give-aways and stuff for the "folder of the month" and such. i've even seen some members give other members video cards or computers, as long as they agree to use it for folding.
as far as a new system on a budget - what is your budget, and when do you plan on buying? both of those factors play a part
nixd2001
Sep 22, 02:42 PM
Originally posted by P-Worm
Isn't it amazing that no matter what the topic of a thread is about it always seems to degrade into people getting mad at how expensive a Macintosh is? Not to change the subjedt or anything...Carry on.
P-Worm
Continuing this brief diversion...
I've seen no attempt to quantitively factor quality into all these price comparisions that get thrown around. The build quality on my shiny doors is better than the build quality on any PC I've personally seen since a really nice Intel (yes, Intel) built PC from about '93.
If there's a desire to compare simply on price, then you might as well use a random number generator - it's too much Apple and Oranges.
I remember the storm caused a few years ago when a number of the UK PC manufacturers admitted that a 5% - 10% failure rate was the rates they operated on. I've just witnessed 3 motherboards out of about 15 go "phut" at work - due to design defects rather than going out of warranty as well. So should I conclude that they're good value for money because they are cheaper?
Isn't it amazing that no matter what the topic of a thread is about it always seems to degrade into people getting mad at how expensive a Macintosh is? Not to change the subjedt or anything...Carry on.
P-Worm
Continuing this brief diversion...
I've seen no attempt to quantitively factor quality into all these price comparisions that get thrown around. The build quality on my shiny doors is better than the build quality on any PC I've personally seen since a really nice Intel (yes, Intel) built PC from about '93.
If there's a desire to compare simply on price, then you might as well use a random number generator - it's too much Apple and Oranges.
I remember the storm caused a few years ago when a number of the UK PC manufacturers admitted that a 5% - 10% failure rate was the rates they operated on. I've just witnessed 3 motherboards out of about 15 go "phut" at work - due to design defects rather than going out of warranty as well. So should I conclude that they're good value for money because they are cheaper?
more...
Poff
Nov 14, 02:48 PM
I allready posted that, but everyone seems to be overlooking this fact (including you :P)
So, this time in bold:
People, one of the airlines mentoined has denied the deal, so it's not sure if it is true!
I think we might just be surpressing this..
..this is veeery un-apple. Last time I remember something like this was Steve announcing the G5 would reach 3GHz within a year, upon which IBM said they would try to get it to 3GHz within a year.
..I'm guessing someone got fired at Apples today..
So, this time in bold:
People, one of the airlines mentoined has denied the deal, so it's not sure if it is true!
I think we might just be surpressing this..
..this is veeery un-apple. Last time I remember something like this was Steve announcing the G5 would reach 3GHz within a year, upon which IBM said they would try to get it to 3GHz within a year.
..I'm guessing someone got fired at Apples today..
Brien
Oct 6, 11:45 AM
There is a chance that we could still see a 3.5" screen, but with less features and a smaller case (less bezel/thinner). However that would make the 3GS (since they keep last years model as the low-end) somewhat pointless.
more...
dricci
Sep 20, 03:45 PM
Originally posted by ColdZero
Oh yea, nice and fast :rolleyes:. A Dual 1.25Ghz G4 vs a single 2.8ghz P4, uhhh isn't that a little unfair. Where is the dual 2.4ghz P4 vs dual 1.25ghz G4 comparison?
P4s can't go Dual. It's sorta like the G3, it's just not designed to do that. It wouldn't work.
Oh yea, nice and fast :rolleyes:. A Dual 1.25Ghz G4 vs a single 2.8ghz P4, uhhh isn't that a little unfair. Where is the dual 2.4ghz P4 vs dual 1.25ghz G4 comparison?
P4s can't go Dual. It's sorta like the G3, it's just not designed to do that. It wouldn't work.
jeffreyropp
Oct 6, 11:56 AM
I don't find 3.5" too big.
That's what she said.
That's what she said.
more...
scem0
May 30, 03:12 AM
Originally posted by iJon
yeah i think so. i am 17 and i buy my own computers. its called a job and i have one. luckily, i have a job that is easy, fun, and pays well. i find most of my friends who dont have jobs are just lazy.
iJon
What I am saying is - if SJ wants to sell his computer to the sub 20-year-old community, he better get his prices down. Because even though I could work my tail off at work, and earn enough money to buy a mac, a mac still might not be worth it. For example, if apple sold a dual 1.5 GHz 970 in addition to the current line-up for $10,000, it still wouldn't be worth $10,000 for me because that equates to ~1,170 hours of work for me. If I was a extremely well off person, and money wasn't an issue, the computer would be worth the money.
So, basically what I am saying is Apple needs to get down their prices in order to sell their high end systems to people who want them but don't have the highest paycheck.
yeah i think so. i am 17 and i buy my own computers. its called a job and i have one. luckily, i have a job that is easy, fun, and pays well. i find most of my friends who dont have jobs are just lazy.
iJon
What I am saying is - if SJ wants to sell his computer to the sub 20-year-old community, he better get his prices down. Because even though I could work my tail off at work, and earn enough money to buy a mac, a mac still might not be worth it. For example, if apple sold a dual 1.5 GHz 970 in addition to the current line-up for $10,000, it still wouldn't be worth $10,000 for me because that equates to ~1,170 hours of work for me. If I was a extremely well off person, and money wasn't an issue, the computer would be worth the money.
So, basically what I am saying is Apple needs to get down their prices in order to sell their high end systems to people who want them but don't have the highest paycheck.
oliversl
Mar 28, 09:04 AM
ok, that confirm no iOS5 in June. The iPhone 5 is re-scheduled for september? Could it be?
more...
Peace
Mar 26, 03:09 PM
""They're going to see it all eventually so who cares how they get it." Which seemed to be about web content, said the tipster."
How can that be interpreted about web content ? :confused:
How can that be interpreted about web content ? :confused:
Gibson424
Apr 5, 03:36 PM
Check it out, somebody snapped a photo of their iPhone 3G in an old clear plastic case. That's fun. :p
more...
kingdonk
Feb 28, 07:03 PM
more of the same plus work group manager
KingYaba
Nov 11, 12:25 PM
I find it sad that some people know the freakin actor's names of the Apple ads.......
pyramid6
Oct 9, 04:15 PM
I bought a season of a TV show on iTunes for $25 or so. I saw the same season at Walmart for $45 or so. I'm just sayin'.
JAT
Sep 25, 10:58 AM
I'm not a photographer, so I don't understand the significance of this update, but I was surprised to see all of these integration improvements. Is integrating with Flickr or your iPod or keynote that useful to a pro? I'd have though these were things more of interest to an average Mac user trying to show off his vacation/baby photos.
Are you pros interested in these things? Or maybe Apple is trying to get the serious amateur interested in Aperture?
There are tons of serious amateurs using or interested in Aperture. Or Lightroom. This would be an excellent feature for me. (if I could use the program, see above)
The worst "feature" of Aperture is the high computer requirements. It really is a resource hog for not much reason. LR is becoming very similar with far less system specs.
Are you pros interested in these things? Or maybe Apple is trying to get the serious amateur interested in Aperture?
There are tons of serious amateurs using or interested in Aperture. Or Lightroom. This would be an excellent feature for me. (if I could use the program, see above)
The worst "feature" of Aperture is the high computer requirements. It really is a resource hog for not much reason. LR is becoming very similar with far less system specs.
MattSepeta
Apr 12, 02:21 PM
By the end of this year I will have paid the final payment on my loans... I can't believe it's been 15 years! Worst investment I ever made.
Seriously, one of the most eye-opening things when I entered college was learning that I did *not* possess a liberal, open-minded view of race relations. I grew up in a white neighborhood, with nice liberal white teachers, always telling us how we are all equal. I always admired Martin Luther King, Jr.'s speeches when I heard them.
I thought that was the prevailing view until I got to college. I was so naive I wanted to run up to the first black guy I saw, give him a hug, and tell him I understand. Ha, not really, but you know what I mean. Guilty white liberal kid. I was stunned by the violent reaction I got before I'd ever opened my mouth.
Wow. The whole thing was just turned on its head. Nobody talked about true equality as a goal - it was all about power, grievance, reparations... and everything I learned just sounded shockingly racist. I was told that was just how whites see things. Rookie mistake!
After I had to write a paper on "Myth America- How The American Dream has been and always will be a Myth" I conveniently forgot to sign up for the next semester's classes.
Seriously, one of the most eye-opening things when I entered college was learning that I did *not* possess a liberal, open-minded view of race relations. I grew up in a white neighborhood, with nice liberal white teachers, always telling us how we are all equal. I always admired Martin Luther King, Jr.'s speeches when I heard them.
I thought that was the prevailing view until I got to college. I was so naive I wanted to run up to the first black guy I saw, give him a hug, and tell him I understand. Ha, not really, but you know what I mean. Guilty white liberal kid. I was stunned by the violent reaction I got before I'd ever opened my mouth.
Wow. The whole thing was just turned on its head. Nobody talked about true equality as a goal - it was all about power, grievance, reparations... and everything I learned just sounded shockingly racist. I was told that was just how whites see things. Rookie mistake!
After I had to write a paper on "Myth America- How The American Dream has been and always will be a Myth" I conveniently forgot to sign up for the next semester's classes.
DakotaGuy
Aug 1, 07:32 PM
With but $1,500 worth of equipment and some ingenuity, security researcher Chris Paget can create his own cell phone tower.
Here's the catch, however: The tower itself isn't real. It's a fake recreation of a GSM base station that allows Paget to overpower the actual signals from real-life base stations. The end result? Cell phones connect to PagetNet�or whatever name he's assigned his creation�thinking that they're accessing an actual cell phone tower.
When that happens, Paget can listen in to the conversations and/or record them at his leisure. His device�an International Mobile Identity Subscriber catcher�bounces the call to an actual cell phone tower and the user is none the wiser, save for the fact that all inbound calls now go directly to said user's voicemail as the carrier considers the actual phone off-network.
Read Entire Article
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2367247,00.asp
Here's the catch, however: The tower itself isn't real. It's a fake recreation of a GSM base station that allows Paget to overpower the actual signals from real-life base stations. The end result? Cell phones connect to PagetNet�or whatever name he's assigned his creation�thinking that they're accessing an actual cell phone tower.
When that happens, Paget can listen in to the conversations and/or record them at his leisure. His device�an International Mobile Identity Subscriber catcher�bounces the call to an actual cell phone tower and the user is none the wiser, save for the fact that all inbound calls now go directly to said user's voicemail as the carrier considers the actual phone off-network.
Read Entire Article
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2367247,00.asp
kingdonk
Mar 1, 10:33 PM
same.
thatisme
Mar 29, 08:20 AM
Yup. So the EF-s lens is providing a field of view of 16-35.2mm in full-frame, 35mm equivalent. So is effected by the 1.6 crop. Which is what I've been saying all along.
Yep. so you are now using the term Equivalent, not actual, which is not what you have been arguing, but I have.... Actual focal length is 10-22 in EFS. Effective in 35mm terms is 16-32mm.
OK. So, with your logic, take that Equivalent in Full Frame EF 16-35.2mm lens and put it back on your 7D, and your FOV changes again, and your Image changes. It will be using the center of the lens's elements, in effect "cropping" your image tighter, which now gives you an effective focal length of 56.32 mm on the long end, not the 22mm as your argument would dictate.
As stated before, you are comparing Apples to Oranges. You have to have a standard frame of reference which is a 35mm sensor size.
Yep. so you are now using the term Equivalent, not actual, which is not what you have been arguing, but I have.... Actual focal length is 10-22 in EFS. Effective in 35mm terms is 16-32mm.
OK. So, with your logic, take that Equivalent in Full Frame EF 16-35.2mm lens and put it back on your 7D, and your FOV changes again, and your Image changes. It will be using the center of the lens's elements, in effect "cropping" your image tighter, which now gives you an effective focal length of 56.32 mm on the long end, not the 22mm as your argument would dictate.
As stated before, you are comparing Apples to Oranges. You have to have a standard frame of reference which is a 35mm sensor size.