Q: Pages 5 features checklist

Joey, your stand simply doesn't hold a candle to the reviews the software is getting from those who actually use it: https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/pages/id409201541?l=es&mt=12

The fact that engineers work hard for something doesn't mean anyone has to like it. Otherwise we would be having this conversation in the Hi5 social network or any other hard worked but failed startup.

Engineers execute a strategy. And the new iWork strategy made the software clearly dumber, meaning it is being very much limited in comparisson to its 4 year old ancester. The fact that has been rewritten or that it has improved shareability doesn't mean what you shared isn't limited as well.

The debate it's not about if the new iWork has a winning strategy for the occasional user. It might very well have one. The debate is the strategy has changed and it is irreversibly unprofessional and without any previous notice. Make no mistake, like I have said before: if the rule for making any Mac software is full iOS editability, there's no professional Mac software that can continue to be so. The Mac and OS X as a platform, in terms of usability, connectivity and power is and it can always be inherently superior.

<Link Edited By Host>

I just tested something that may be useful to people who think they've lost their only copy of a document to the new, cut-down version of iWork.

If you've mistakenly saved over an existing file in Pages 5 and can no longer open it in Pages '09, and you don't want to export it back out to '09 with missing features, try the following...

Open it in Pages 5  and go to File > Revert to > Browse all versions...

Use the time machine interface to restore the version before you opened in Pages 5. You'll get the warning about how your document is going to be messed up, but you can confirm that.

Close the document.

Open the same document in Pages '09.

Perhaps people who have lost documents can try this method and confirm whether it works. Good luck, everyone.

I'd like to add the missing/altered feature of navigating inside the document with those little contols at the bottom of the window.

I use it mostly to proceed to the next comment (now built in at the comments directly), the next section and the next paragraph style (e.g. go to the next level 2 headline) (both missing).

If you are trying to do layout work, I would recommend giving Lucidpress a shot: www.lucidpress.com

Cloud-based, but seems to have a lot of the features we had in the previous Pages. They seem to be fairly responsive to feature requests too (added a feature I requested within three weeks!):

http://support.lucidpress.com/forums/22422518-Current-Feature-Requests

I already took this one earlier in the thread.  I suggested browsing versions and restoring, but I'm sure you were too busy contacting the mods to have my posts removed to notice.  Peter, you seem to be having trouble accepting change.  Peter, you seem to be having trouble giving new things a chance.  Peter, you seem to be having trouble trying to see any viewpoint other than your own.  That post you had removed earlier was not the least bit offensive, broke no rules and was the plain and simple truth.  You need to be a little more level headed here.

PeterBreis0807 wrote:

 

Hey Joey,

 

Can you take this one?

 

https://discussions.apple.com/thread/5491243?tstart=0

 

Peter

just want to point out that iom also greatly affected by the missing features... specifically related to images. hundreds of documents with images in tables and header/footer issues, so im forced to stay in iWork '09 and unable to use any of the iOS apps.

Missing search function for Line breaks/paragraph breaks

Also it's much harder to create a list, because the toolbar is gone

Peter, you seem to be having trouble accepting change.  Peter, you seem to be having trouble giving new things a chance.

I think that entire post was belittling and insulting and the sort of ad hominem thing that doesn't belong here. No one here is upset about changes. They are upset about wholesale butchery, the removal of essential features that we use every day. We don't have to get used to a new way of doing mail merge, we have to get used to not doing it at all. Faux Pages is more characterized by deleted features than added features.

Hear, hear. For my own 2¢, I am not bemoaning the change in the software, but the way in which it was released, which (inadvertently or not) caused users to lose their work. For my own part, I did manage to restore all my files affected by the upgrade, but not all are so lucky—and not entirely through their own fault or negligence. The cold, painful fact is that the upgraded software did not copy old documents into upgraded versions, as is the industry standard when the upgrade is not a full 100% backward compatible. That completely preventable but considerable grief, loss of time and even money/business for some is the PR debacle that riles me: I used to trust Apple and I used to advocate for using Apple products, but things have changed.

FWIW, Apple is a corporation; it neither cares nor is malicious, it has no emotions. Nor do I believe that individuals in the chain of command within Apple have implemented this upgrade maliciously targeting some of the users.

Finally, PeterBreis0807 stated his intention: to collate the reported shortcomings and file the feedback with Apple. Many of us have done also done this to some degree.

Ad hominem tu quoque to be exact.

And yes, this is complaining about change.  The majority of the complaints are about alterations, not exclusions, and there's very little recognition of the improvements.  And little to no acknowledgement that this is an x.0 release which is always dangerous for a workflow, and nobody was forced to upgrade.  4.3 still works fine.  Most importantly, my point is that it's critical to give mature feedback to Apple and not to jump to conclusions about Apple's motivation here.  That's what I see happening in this thread and it isn't constructive.

Kenneth Collins1 wrote:

 

Peter, you seem to be having trouble accepting change.  Peter, you seem to be having trouble giving new things a chance.

I think that entire post was belittling and insulting and the sort of ad hominem thing that doesn't belong here. No one here is upset about changes. They are upset about wholesale butchery, the removal of essential features that we use every day. We don't have to get used to a new way of doing mail merge, we have to get used to not doing it at all. Faux Pages is more characterized by deleted features than added features.

Well, he later stated his intention was not to share it with Apple, so I'm confused about that.  My main gripe was that his intention seems to have changed, and it then simply was fanning the flames.  But I digress.  It seems those with lower point levels aren't allowed to criticize.

Tristan Hubsch wrote:

 

 

Finally, PeterBreis0807 stated his intention: to collate the reported shortcomings and file the feedback with Apple. Many of us have done also done this to some degree.

Here is one of the most amazing things: you cannot share a pages document created with Pages 5.0 via email, at least not through Google.  Here is the message I got:

Reason: SMTP transmission failure has occurred

Diagnostic code: smtp;552-5.7.0 This message was blocked because its content presents a potential issue. Please visit http://support.google.com/mail/bin/answe to review our message content and attachment content guidelines. ll9si10920277pab.240 - gsmtp

Remote system: dns;aspmx.l.google.com (TCP|17.172.204.239|34075|74.125.129.26|25) (mx.google.com ESMTP ll9si10920277pab.240 - gsmtp)

Documents created with the previous version go through fine,

I think you have too use the application Mail when sharing a copy of a pages document or converted document (PDF, Word etc)

Hello Peter, your list is very interesting and I'm writing to Apple asking them to bring all the old functions back!

One question: you wrote "Accented characters in Footer" is not available anymore, how is that possible? Have you tried yo change your system language? just to be sure if it's a bug or a "feature"...

thanx

Gabriele