Q: AppleWorks and Lion

You're very welcome.

Have you used it, Roger? Can you give us a review?

I have the older version from the app store, but I haven't used it seriously. A few experiments show that you should be able to do anything in it you can do in AppleWorks draw, and a good deal more, but there is quite a steep learning curve if you want to go beyond the basic facilities. I shan't be upgrading to the new version: as far as I can see it provides no upgrade path, you have to buy it afresh, and it's quite expensive.

I don't relish any steep learning curves. Thanks for relating your experience with it.

I virtualized AppleWorks in VirtualBox on a standard Lion Client.

I transferred all my AW draw documents in Pages or Numbers.

My best choice is Numbers which offer the same huge work area than AppleWorks but some features of Numbers '09 are annoying for this use.

I hope that they will be dropped by the next version.

To import these docs, I used scripts which I delivered months ago.

They are available on :

http://www.box.net/shared/xppaki015asuuzbb34i7

Download :

AWdraw2iWork.zip

and

Batch_WPSS2iWork.app

Yvan KOENIG (VALLAURIS, France) mercredi 26 octobre 2011 11:43:31

iMac 21”5, i7, 2.8 GHz, 4 Gbytes, 1 Tbytes, mac OS X 10.6.8 and 10.7.2

My iDisk is : <http://public.me.com/koenigyvan>

Please : Search for questions similar to your own before submitting them to the community

I just joined and don't even know if you are there, but I have done everything in Draw for ten years------any thoughts as to how to get it to LION???????????

Thanks

Virginia Gordon-Chicago

notvg wrote:

 

I just joined and don't even know if you are there, but I have done everything in Draw for ten years------any thoughts as to how to get it to LION???????????

You cannot run Appleworks on Lion - it's quite simply not possible. Yvan's post above indicates that he's managed to run it in VirtualBox - I don't know whether this is still possible.

It's possible to open Appleworks drawings in Pages if you copy them into a Word Processing document first. This article looks in detail about replacements for AppleWorks:

http://rfwilmut.net/aw

I tried the EazyDraw 4.0 program, and it works very well to open up things created in Appleworks Draw.  I haven't found the EazyDraw program (even the most current version) as simple to create things with as it was with Draw, however, although that may be due to my resistance to learning something different.  We were SO spoiled.  I've actually held on to an old computer with the previous OS on it so I can still keep using Appleworks Draw to make greeting cards of my sketches.  I mean, it's so simple and clean!  OK, it doesn't print a small font clearly, but still...

The suggestions about using an older computer is a good one - late G4 PowerBooks can be picked up on eBay for around £150 and are very capable machines.

Other possibilities :

1. if you own the right Mac (e.g. the current iMac range) it is possible to install Snow Leopard (as long as it's 10.6.6 or later) on a separate partition and run AW Draw in Rosetta.

2. Quite a lot of people forget that Photoshop supports creating Vector Graphics in separate layers, to give similar effects as AW Draw - the drawback being that if you have a lot of different shapes, the file size will be large when you come to save, unless you flatten the image.

3. If you use Draw as much as that, you may find it worth investing in a vector graphics program that will run in Lion. EasyDraw has been mentioned, but it can't be the only one.

This gives me hope-thank you

I too have saved an old Mac-----I will try this and thanks

So much to figure aout and try and I will share my success when I do. Thanks you so much for your expertise and time.

BTW-I am neaw to this-does one reply to each or does it take up too much of others time?

notvg wrote:

 

BTW-I am neaw to this-does one reply to each or does it take up too much of others time?

You need only reply once - everyone will see it.

Roger Wilmut1 wrote:

 

notvg wrote:

 

BTW-I am neaw to this-does one reply to each or does it take up too much of others time?

You need only reply once - everyone will see it.

The confusion is caused by the poor design of forum software - you and everyone else will see this reply (and the quoted text), but it will also carry the message (in response to Roger Wilmut); it is not possible to vary this message when you use a single reply to reply to more than one user. Twitter has the same problem.

There is a different kind of forum software that gets round this problem - it has both "Reply" and "Multiquote" buttons next to each post. By clicking Multiquote for each post you want to reply to, it builds a single reply box quoting all the posts you're replying to. You can then edit each quote, and add your reply to it, all within a single post. Unfortunately, Apple don't use that design.

"The confusion is caused by the poor design of forum software - you and everyone else will see this reply (and the quoted text), but it will also carry the message (in response to Roger Wilmut); it is not possible to vary this message when you use a single reply to reply to more than one user. Twitter has the same problem."

@Christopher: Hardly an insurmountable obstacle.

It's pretty easy to include replies to several authors in a single post, and to direct each reply to an individual—just put that author's name (in bold if you feel it will get lost in the mass of text) at the beginning of the part addressed to her.

@notvg: Roger's right. A single reply will be read by everyone in the thread. No need to clog the arteries with multiple replies.

Regards,

Barry

Barry wrote:

 

It's pretty easy to include replies to several authors in a single post, and to direct each reply to an individual—just put that author's name (in bold if you feel it will get lost in the mass of text) at the beginning of the part addressed to her.

 

Unfortunately, you can only "quote" a single post in any reply, unless you do a lot of time-consuming copying and pasting and 'boxing'. So my remark stands, unless you know of a way around this limitation?