Quicklook in Leopard can already show the full contents of an ODT file, while TextEdit shows only text, and Pages is still unable to handle OpenDocument files at all. Hopefully we don't have to wait endlessly...
still on status "not answered" 😟 Hello Apple, wake up
No one is going to answer you. These forums are for user-to-user tech help only. If you want to tell Apple something, use the feedback channel. (But they never provide info on whether or when new features will be added to apps via any channel.)
Just for interest Quicklook simply opens a thumbnail image stored in the odt file (odt is pretty much a zip file) and doesn't actually 'render' the document 🙂
Oh yes, I also would like to see Pages (and the whole iWork package) supports OpenDocument (as it is ISO certified it is a major format)
The ISO Ballot Resolution Meeting on standardisation of OOXML has a two month pending period before acceptance. Prior to the ISO BRM the Editor of the standardisation of ODF published a plea that OOXML not be rebuffed since a rebuff would impact important parts of ODF. In other words, there is no finished framework to implement at this point.
The hatter wrote:
Just found that TextEdit can open and save as .odt though, and save as well.
TextEdit was revised since the adoption of the ODT format, Pages wasn't on this feature.
I wanted to use Pages '08, but have to upgrade again?
It's the same thing for those which bought a HD_DVD reader some days before the format was dropped.
_I have absolutely no info_ but my guess is that the next iWork version will use a modified file format matching the ODT standards with the enhancements allowing it to keep all the already available features.
It would be better, for users and for the engineers than trying to maintain two different codes, one for iWork only documents and one for ODT only ones.
Building this mix of format would need some efforts which would justify the cost of a major revision.
Yvan KOENIG (from FRANCE jeudi 15 mai 2008 15:49:17)
I agree. ODF is gaining traction in the US and even more so abroad. Microsoft's announcement that it will support ODF in its upcoming Service Pack means a number of positive winds are blowing in favor of Apple supporting it. Thinking through some of them:
1) Apple has a history of supporting open standards where it bolsters its business and reduces the complexity on its own developers,
2) it would be FAR easier for Apple to implement than native support for OOXML (heck, it’s even easier for Microsoft to implement in their OWN product than OOXML),
3) no more dialogs asking, “Do you want to save this in iWork ‘06 format, iWork ‘08 format, iWork.... ” What’s good for one is good for everyone.
4) OpenDocument is extensible so they could implement such features as Numbers’ multi-table-on-a-single-sheet feature (not sure about the viability of this one),
5) it will make Apple not look like they’re drinking Microsoft’s Kool-Aid, while, when native ODF support is added to MS Office next year, Apple will be totally compatible and competitive with not just most Windows users but Linux/open source advocates too, and
6) Apple obviously has expressed interest in heating up competition with Microsoft on the desktop since the disaster called Vista. If Apple ever hopes to bring iWork to Windows, joining iTunes and Safari, they’ll need to have a document format that’s not based on bundles. A .pages file is just a folder as far as Windows is concerned.
iWork has evolved a LOT in its short life. We probably haven't seen native open/save in other formats because of this. It truly does seem like just a matter of time before all the additional holes are plugged and we'll see native Save and Save As in other formats. It would have been a mistake for Apple to have anything like this before now for the public backlash when it screwed up companies' documents. But, ODF is a 800 page spec with several different validation suites to test against, which is much simpler than a 6000+ page spec that hasn't even been published in final form nor implemented, which is much simpler than a proprietary binary spec that's mostly guesswork to figure out (and God knows how many pages it would be if it WERE published).
Personally, I work for a company that maintains a number of training manuals in MS Word binary format. I've convinced the powers-that-be that ODF is a good idea to implement and have been working to convert them. But OOo 3.0 beta is slow and dogged even on my Mac Pro, not to touch on its dated and Windows 2000-like interface. It's hard to make fonts look bad in Pages... if Pages would support format perfect rendering of ODF files (there are many ODF validations out there for this purpose) then I could fluidly work in the cross-platform environment in which I work. True, native ODF support in iWork is the golden calf of Apple for me. I know. I need a life.
3) no more dialogs asking, “Do you want to save this in iWork ‘06 format, iWork ‘08 format, iWork.... ” What’s good for one is good for everyone.
4) OpenDocument is extensible so they could implement such features as Numbers’ multi-table-on-a-single-sheet feature (not sure about the viability of this one),
Given the ability to implement enhancements to the bare standard, we will not be free of dialog to select a format.
• iwork'06 and iwork'08 compatibility would require them.
• it would be really surprising if enhancements added by µSoft and those added by Apple are compatible each other.
The Babel Tower will not fail so quickly than the Twin Towers.
Yvan KOENIG (from FRANCE vendredi 20 juin 2008 17:55:07)
