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.
iLife and iWork '06? Front Row?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
jsalzer said:I'll settle for a "Font" menu. If that's the only change, I'll take it!
Hm.. I must prefer the command-T font popup inspector dealy than a menu. I find most programs have too many/poorly designed menus nowadays, and the column view of that dealy (and the fact that its becoming standard in mac apps) is nice.
The Other One
Uck. I'm OK with the Inspector, but the Font palette is terrible. First, it's too wide to sit next to your window (rather than blocking most of it), even on my large (17 inch) screen. Let alone on my Pismo.
And, most importantly, the inability to see each font name in its own font. There are times when I want to browse for "the right font". Even if that font palette allowed you to use your arrows to scroll down the list and see the sample change, it'd be OK. But, as it is, you have to click on each font with the mouse and use the scroll bar if you want to browse. What a pain. A Font menu item is much more practical. Or at least allow for it in Preferences.
Chobit said:
Uck. I'm OK with the Inspector, but the Font palette is terrible. First, it's too wide to sit next to your window (rather than blocking most of it), even on my large (17 inch) screen. Let alone on my Pismo.
And, most importantly, the inability to see each font name in its own font. There are times when I want to browse for "the right font". Even if that font palette allowed you to use your arrows to scroll down the list and see the sample change, it'd be OK. But, as it is, you have to click on each font with the mouse and use the scroll bar if you want to browse. What a pain. A Font menu item is much more practical. Or at least allow for it in Preferences.
JFreak said:
Spotlight comments applied in the finder don't even work in iPhoto, so when you couple that with the fact that you can't rename files in iPhoto, the whole lot becomes useless. iPhoto is too much of an island.
And since you can't reorganize image hierarchy in the finder of iPhoto images, they had better be tagged and named exactly as I'll forever want them for spotlight usage in the future. iPhoto is really fighting spotlight on this one, not taking advantage of it.
Looking at it now, and this will really anoy me if it's true- iPhoto also appears to STRIP all Spotlight comments when it imports images. Do I have a bug or is this true?
What would be an amazing surprise and would really drop the bomb for iWork '06 is to put in not only a spreadsheet program, but a GOOD word processor. AppleWorks has long been an obvious comparison to MS Works, and NOT MS Word. They could call it Quill or something.
Numbered photos in iPhoto
First, I too would like to see the iPhoto browser change. In fact, I'd like it to be finder based so that you can drag and drop images into folders you create in the iPhoto Library folder and have iPhoto read this structure as well as the structure it imposes. Having said that, the iphoto library structure is first by year, then month, then day. So if you import a photo on December 4, 2005 you'll see a directory like this: username/pictures/iPhoto Library/2005/12/04/picturename.
2005 is the year, 12 is the month, and 04 is the date of import. If the date and time are correct on your computer and camera, and you view this information in list view from the finder, it makes a certain kind of sense.
Also, if you have problems with your iPhoto library, after making a backup, open iPhoto with the opt-cmd keys held down and you can have iPhoto fix a lot of problems. I've used this trick on a couple of occasions and both times it fixed my problems beautifully. I just wish there was a safe way to delete non-essential iPhoto Library files and folders without running the risk of screwing things up.
theappleguy said:
First, I too would like to see the iPhoto browser change. In fact, I'd like it to be finder based so that you can drag and drop images into folders you create in the iPhoto Library folder and have iPhoto read this structure as well as the structure it imposes. Having said that, the iphoto library structure is first by year, then month, then day. So if you import a photo on December 4, 2005 you'll see a directory like this: username/pictures/iPhoto Library/2005/12/04/picturename.
2005 is the year, 12 is the month, and 04 is the date of import. If the date and time are correct on your computer and camera, and you view this information in list view from the finder, it makes a certain kind of sense.
Also, if you have problems with your iPhoto library, after making a backup, open iPhoto with the opt-cmd keys held down and you can have iPhoto fix a lot of problems. I've used this trick on a couple of occasions and both times it fixed my problems beautifully. I just wish there was a safe way to delete non-essential iPhoto Library files and folders without running the risk of screwing things up.
IJ Reilly said:
While I applaud Apple for thinking out of the box (instead of copying MS Word like most other word processors do), it has a long way to go before it can be described as very good. As of now, it's just not much more than a nice basic word processor.
OCOTILLO said:
Then by all means, don't use it. Not that you've explain why you think so... but be assured that for many of us, Pages is working out very well.
nutmac said:
As someone who uses it every single day, I'd say that Pages goes quite a long way beyond basic -- but assuming it was true, is something actually wrong with basic?
It's been said here several times already but I suppose bears repeating that (1) not everybody is looking for a Word clone, and (2) a modest number of features implemented well is a better software design goal than many features implemented poorly.
Like...
I was thinking the same thing. What are the features that people find lacking in Pages that Word has? And, more importantly, it is possible that either:
a) You just haven't figured out how to do it in Pages (there is a learning curve); or
b) That feature shouldn't be in a Word Processor in the first place and is just a matter of Microsoft trying to make Word too many things at once?????
IJ Reilly said:
I was thinking the same thing. What are the features that people find lacking in Pages that Word has? And, more importantly, it is possible that either:
a) You just haven't figured out how to do it in Pages (there is a learning curve); or
b) That feature shouldn't be in a Word Processor in the first place and is just a matter of Microsoft trying to make Word too many things at once?????
In a sense, iPhoto is a secondary file-system just for photos. iTunes also has it's own file system for songs. And Mail.app has it's own file structure for emails. I'd like to see these file systems more seemlesssly combined.mambodancer said:
GregA said:
iTunes only has it's own file system of you CHOOSE to use it, and in any case, it is an obvious organization in the finder that can be easily browsed.
Emails aren't like photos- you don't really use your emails in other ways like you do photos.
Dm84 said:
All right you got me.
But Pages still needs an auto save feature or a recover last unsaved document feature.
jsalzer said:
1. Auto save
2. A font menu that is easier to use one where you can use the up/down buttons and scroll throught the fonts until you find one you like with out having to click on each one.
3. The ability to change some of the defoults within Pages. Ex. Everytime you add a new picture or text box it makes it defaults it to "Object causes wrap" and you have to go and un click each item. (Very annoying)
Also every item is defaulted to "scale to size" when making bigger or smaller. You have to go and uncheck that box for each item. It would be really neat to set the default not to do this.
I use Pages every single day, 7days a week. I have really taken the time to find it's strenghts and the areas that need attention. I have mentioned three.
Overall Pages is a very nice program, but as one poster pointed out there is a learning curve, but remember it's an Apple product..."Think Different".
bbyrdhouse said:
1. Only if it's optional. I prefer to save manually.
2. This is a characteristic of Cocoa applications -- a bug or a feature, depending on how you feel about it. I think the entire font pane needs some improvement, which will help all applications that depend on it.
3. Can these defaults be saved within a custom template? Not sure myself, because I haven't tried.
A few of improvements I hope to see in Pages 2.0:
- Page splitting. I like to be able to look at more than one part of the document at one time.
- The cursor function needs to change (and change visibly) when you're mousing over a graphic. The way it stands now, selecting a graphic requires mousing into the document margins and clicking, otherwise you essentially get a text tool and can't manipulate the graphic object. This is very non-intuitive but should be easy to fix.
- Ability to customize widow and orphan controls (also, a bug in w & o control needs to be fixed).
- Drag and drop page insertions. The ability to add different page layouts to document is great, but how to you get the new page to go in the right place in the document, and how do you reorder it if you don't choose the right place or change your mind? Unless I've missed something, this can't be done now in Pages. Along with this should be page thumbnails, or at a least side-by-side page display.
... so I can think of lots of ways to improve Pages, which doesn't mean Pages is a "lousy word processor." It's very good for a first version and has lots of room to grow into something great -- unlike Word, which has been expanded and revised so many times without a fundamental rethinking of its basic design that (IMO) it's now irretrievable.
JFreak said:
Why does it make more sense? Why not do both -- Have a catalog and store the metadata in the EXIF that is already there?
JFreak said:
Hunh? Are you serious?
I am not saying that Apple should have iPhoto strangled with useless features... BUT, Apple should try to make iPhoto a better photo organizer:
1. Store the photos in the library in a LOGICAL format. iTunes does it, so should iPhoto.
2. If you are not going to do #1, then give the user the option to use their own directory structure.
This is VERY BASIC stuff here. As it is now, iPhoto stores your photos in a dis-organized, MESS of a directory!!! I know you said that you have backups, but heaven forbid you loose your catalog AND your backup fails! It would take an EXPERT months to get their photos out of that directory and back into an organized format!
3. When I change the date of a photo, add a keyword, caption, rating... Store that information in the EXIF of the file. THE FIELDS ARE ALREADY THERE to do this!
Again, if you only store this information in a catalog, you a running a BIG risk. You are also trusting that you will use iPhoto for the rest of your life! If not, again, you have LOST ALL YOUR WORK, and worse, have a HUGE task just to get your photos out of that gosh-darn Catalog!!!!
JFreak said:
I disagree... iDVD is great! iMovie is great! iTunes is great.
iPhoto is dangerous for anyone who is even remotely serious about organizing their photos on a PC!
I would go so far as to say that iPhoto does the EXACT OPPOSITE of its intended purpose!
JFreak said:
I purchased an Apple several years ago soley for 2 applications: iPhoto and iDVD. Before I used iPhoto, the only photo organization I had was the directory structure I created. I wanted more. I imported 4000+ photos into iPhoto. I added several keywords to each photo. I corrected the Date Taken on several of the photos. I gave ratings to several of the photos.
I then realized all of my points above -- about how the catalog is a single point of failure, and if gone, all of my work would be lost... I stopped using iPhoto immediatly and went back to using my own directories for organization. I am STILL TRYING to get those photos out of that darn iPhoto Library.
JFreak said:
On OSX, I have no other good alternatives to iPhoto... iPhoto has the potential to be a REALLY GREAT program. I like the books, the ease of use, the integration with iMovie and iDVD... But man, I will NOT use it for its intended purpose: To organize photos!
JFreak said:
Again, why not do both? Use a catalog and store the metadate in the EXIF?
JFreak said:
iPhoto does NOT store files in a year/month/day directory structure. In fact, the word 'structure' should not even be used in that statement! iPhoto uses what seems to be random, meaningless directories to store and organize your photos!
JFreak said:You can just never satisfy everyone. Power users usually want different things than regular users, and as iPhoto is a part of iLife (made for regular users), I'd say power users should not whine, even if iPhoto currently isn't as good as it can be (for them). It's great in what it has been designed to be, which is making digital photography a piece of cake for my in-laws
If you honestly and in a way that they would understand, explain to your in-laws what iPhoto is doing to their photos, I guarantee they would NOT want to use iPhoto.
Here is how I would explain it to mine:
iPhoto is like hiring a guy to hold all your photos. When you give your files to that guy (import your photos) he will take them and randomly put them in a closet. He will write down where he put them, but he will not tell you. When you want to want to change a date, or add a keyword, he will write them down, but not on the back of the photo like you would. Again, he will not tell you where he stored this information.
Now, you do this for years with the same guy. You have given him thousands of your photos and he has just kept putting them in that closet.
All of a sudden, the guy dies (catalog is corrupted). You open the closet, an see boxes and boxes within boxes. (nested directories). The boxes are only marked with random, meaningless numbers. You start looking through the boxes only to see that even when you gave the guy a group of pictures all at once, say from a 3 day vacation, he decided to split those pictures up and places them in many different boxes....
I hope you get my point... I don't understand your strong stance on thinking iPhoto is so great. iPhoto is the one rotten Apple in the iLife bunch.
jsalzer said:
I like Pages' potential. Working on a clean sheet of paper is what I always imagined in a word processor. But at the same time, I am spoiled by Word's features. Most notables include:
- Grammar checker: although Word's grammar checker isn't anywhere near full proof, it offers enough corrections to be valuable (e.g., misuse of plurals).
- Revision tracking: when you share documents with others, which is quite frequent these days, this is a must have feature.
- Word compatibility: I am not looking for 100% compatibility with Word, but when majority uses and depends on Word format, Pages need better import/export filter than what it has now.
- Highly customizable toolbar: although Pages toolbar is customizable to some extent, the selection is rather sparse. I want all of Pages features (at least most) available as 1-click access on its toolbar.
- Anti alias: for some reason, Pages still insist of soft anti alias setting, ignoring OS's setting.
I realize Pages is much cheaper alternative to Word (or I guess Publisher), so I have kept my wish list to features that I think it must implement.
I gave up on grammar checkers probably 15 years ago after only a brief exposure to what they can do, which isn't much. I decided that I really don't want my word processor telling me how to write.
If something less than 100% Word compatibility is your goal, then Pages has already met it. I open Word docs in Pages with more success than I ever had with AppleWorks. It's never going to be perfect unless/until Microsoft opens their file formats.
I'm not a big fan of revision tracking, but I guess other people find it useful.
My biggest fear is that Pages will succumb to feature bloat.
If something less than 100% Word compatibility is your goal, then Pages has already met it. I open Word docs in Pages with more success than I ever had with AppleWorks. It's never going to be perfect unless/until Microsoft opens their file formats.
I'm not a big fan of revision tracking, but I guess other people find it useful.
My biggest fear is that Pages will succumb to feature bloat.
mdelaney123 said:
I give you the pictures I took on the sixteenth of october, 2005 (2005.10.16) conveniently in a folder labeled ~/Pictures/iPhoto\ Library/2005/10/16.
Now, I can see someone wanting them organized differently, and it would be nice if you could right click an image and do reveal in finder (like I do in itunes to get to a song file) in order to get to an actual picture file. But I usually want to export anyway, because normally I want to scale the photos before use. I'm sure having a different structure would help a lot of people, but I guess just not me.
Chobit said:
iPhoto first tries to find standard EXIF data from the picture file, and if it doesn't find it, iPhoto uses import date.