Pages 5 features checklist

Does anyone know how to permanently set Pages 4.3 to open Pages-documents?

The ordinaty metod (cmd+i -> open with ...) does not work. It just chances back to Pages 5 😐

macca7174 wrote:

I want to go back to my old version - can I just do this through Time Machine? Will I have to go back to OS X 10.7 as well? The first time I actually used Time Machine was prior to installing 10.9 (I was under the impression I had to have a Time Capsule to use it).

Upgrading to the new versions should have left the old version of the iWorks app on your system. You can still use the old versions if you wish. You shouldn't have to go back or restore anything.

The only problem with the old versions is that they are not compatible with the iCloud apps or the new iOS apps. So if you create a document with the old version, save it on iCloud, and then open it online, you will no longer be able to open the same document with the old version of Pages as it's automatically converted to the new format.

There is an option in the new version of Pages to export to version 4.3, but I don't know how well it maintains the document formating or whether you'll be abel to get back to the way your document looked like when you first created it in the old version.

I have found out that if Pages '09 is running already, doubleclicking a file will open it directly in it. So as a workaround, first open the app and then the document.

I am sure most of the features will come back over time. This is how it happened with iMovie and Final Cut Pro. The UI won't change back to older one, that direction is set. The feature parity with iOS and iCloud is set and will be retained from now on.

In the mean time, just pretend that Pages 4.x is a 'Pages Pro' that has all the features you like but is not fully compatible with the iOS and iCloud versions. And that Pages 5.x is a Pages Lite that has feature parity with the iOS and iCloud versions. The best of both worlds, those that want a simpler UI and feature parity can get it, those that want the existing feature set (and maybe UI) can have it too.

And consider those two points:

1. Apple wanted to create and had ideas for how to create an even easier to use Pages. Should they have released a second application called Pages lite? Sounds confusing and messy (how do the two versions of Pages share files if they don't have feature parity?). Or should they have a completely different application (eg, called Letters)? Would be a bit less confusing, interactivity between the two applications would have the same problems. And with Letters having a UI that still has a lot of the Pages one and a lot of feature overlap, confusion would still exist. In particular if some the welcome UI changes would also have been added to Pages as well as to Letters.
2. Apple wanted to have complete feature parity between Mac, iOS and iCloud, it wanted to have robust synching. Apple wanted to make Pages a multi-user application (synching a document between different locations and having multiple people working on it has quite a few similarities on the implementation side). Apple also wanted a fully touch optimised UI for Pages (on iOS). And it wanted a high-quality in-browser version.

Is it too far-fetched to assume that implementing all this while retaining all features is quite a complex task? Are any of Apple's goals here not something that has a lot of merit? Yes, ideally all the above would have been achieved with full feature set retainment. But making an intermediate step, ie, releasing a 'Papers lite' application while explicitly not overwriting the existing version, does not have a lot of benefits for the user as all advances (UI, feature parity, collaborate editing) can be had for those that are happy with the feature set of Papers 5.0? The only real complaint against this strategy is that it was not communicated at all (plus things like making it impossible for new users to still get the old version, something that was taken care of with iMovie and to some degree also with FCP) and making the interoperability between the two versions of Pages not as good as it should have been.

But I challenge you to tell me why the goals set out in point (1) and (2) are not worthy goals or why a different strategy to achieve them would have be undeniable better.

You need to delete Pages 5 first. Pages 5 also ruins Quicklook of documents created in Pages 4.3. Deleting Pages 5 solves quite a few problems and restores one's blood pressure to near normal.

enteecee wrote:

I'm on the line now about a refund, and trying to confirm FROM APPLE that the features most important to me are inded dead, and not just hiding undocumented somewhere.

Deleted.

Thanks,

I'm happy to use the iCloud version for documents I want to share, but I just discovered some great features of Numbers 09, like Address Book importing, categorising tables, (literally yesterday), and now they've been stripped.

I'll just edit them in the old version.

In order to get my docs to open in Pages '09 here is what I did. I do not plan on using Pages 5 unitl or unless they change some things, but I didn't want to get rid of it either. So I did a right click on Pages 5 and compressed it into a zip file. I then deleted the remaining Pages 5 app. Now I can resurrect it when I want and it is out of the way for now.

Gregory Lawhorn wrote:

I was really looking forward to using Pages on my Mac and iPad both, and really like the full compatibility, so I'll have to give some thought to my workflow. But, I'm very close to going back to Word

Interesting, keep using Pages 4.x is suddenly a worse option than using Word? What part of Pages 4.x or Word changed with the release of Pages 5?

To those of you waiting for Apple to restore stripped out features: Don't stand on one foot or hold your breath until it happens. There is a relentless tide within the company to dumb down everything they shp. Compare the new Quicktime Player X to QuickTime Player 7. When it was introduced 3 (?) years ago Apple promised the missing featrues would be restored in short order. We're still waiting.

The trend s very much against those of us who use Apple products to do real work. The coup de grace will be when they eliminate the Mac's file system. You will no longer have direct access to files, but will have to go thru some Apple app to access them (as wth iCloud).

And just don't, DON'T!, get me started on the new Mac "Pro"!

The slogan needs to changed from: "Think Different," to "What Were They Thinking."

Kenneth Collins1 wrote:

They improved iOS Pages (Pages Jr.) and ported it to the Mac. That's great, and there is a need for that. However, there is still a huge need for the features in Pages '09, which they have been neglecting, apparently because they didn't realize we were using it.

If Apple had any sense, they'd keep the new degraded version of Pages, then rename Pages 09 and continue it as a separate, professional-level product.

Some people need one, some people need the other, and some people need both.

You really think that having two quite similar 'word-processing' applications available would be a good strategy? Such things rarely work out. In particular if the Pages lite would over time get closer in terms of features to the Pages Pro?

Sekoya wrote:

But I challenge you to tell me why the goals set out in point (1) and (2) are not worthy goals or why a different strategy to achieve them would have be undeniable better.

Hi Sekoya.

As goals they are just fine (just one app, cross platform feature set). But for an existing product it is not OK to do this in a way that disorients and disengages the people who use / rely upon it. Maybe it is a calculated decision by Apple - but that doesn't make it an OK decision for those adversely affected by it.

It is quite probable that hardly anyone used Pages and even fewer used it as a pro-tool. But for those that did, a change that appears to 'break' large collections of documents and undermine substantial investments without any warning, and no clear migration path seems a harsh outcome - and one that is unwarranted.

Perhaps Apple reasoned that since they got away with it (just) with FCP X, they would try again. But as I hear (I'm not a user of FCP), they partly got away with it because FCP X was / is a substantially improved app compared to what went before. Difference is that so far early reports are that iWork updates are largely feature removing: hard to see how this will win people over to the cause.

I guess what will happen will be pro users will move off to other solutions - which would be a shame. There is much to like for pro-users in the iWork 09 apps, and they had some interesting advantages over other apps. It is currently not at all clear that the same will be true of the latest crop of iWork apps.

Sekoya, some of us have been holding on to see what the new Pages would be like.

Hi,

I have had a look into new Keynote app and it is bad. So many things are missing. Apple: Please give us those great features back!!!

Gavin Lawrie wrote:

As goals they are just fine (just one app, cross platform feature set). But for an existing product it is not OK to do this in a way that disorients and disengages the people who use / rely upon it. Maybe it is a calculated decision by Apple - but that doesn't make it an OK decision for those adversely affected by it.

It is quite probable that hardly anyone used Pages and even fewer used it as a pro-tool. But for those that did, a change that appears to 'break' large collections of documents and undermine substantial investments without any warning, and no clear migration path seems a harsh outcome - and one that is unwarranted.

I totally get where everyone who relied on Pages is coming from on this -- my needs were simple compared to most power users, and there are a few things I'm disappointed are gone, so I'm sure it's much worse for others.

But it does seem to me that Apple made an effort to limit disruption -- specifically by NOT upgrading the iWork apps in place, the way most apps update. If installing Pages 5 erased Pages 4.3 with no hope of recovery, that would be a huge deal. As it is, though, they left us copies of all the existing iWork apps. So there's no real disruption, only a lack of an upgrade.

And yes, users who stick with Pages 4.3 won't get iCloud support moving forward, but I'm assuming power users weren't making massive use of the iOS apps anyway since opening Pages files in iOS permanently broke most things in the file that weren't supported by the iOS app. (And I'd argue that having both apps do less is in many ways preferable to having a sync system that could strip a synced file of elements.)

I guess what I'm saying is that as long as Pages 4.3 remains a viable option, maybe the biggest issue here on Apple's part isn't the features themselves as much as it is communication.