Previous 1 89 90 91 92 93 Next 1,534 Replies Latest reply: Jan 31, 2015 11:34 AM by Kurt Weber Go to original post Branched to a new discussion.
  • cosmofromwatertown Level 1 Level 1 (0 points)

    Robo;

     

    Perhaps 'we' just wanted to see if you believed your own schtick...

  • Tom Gewecke Level 9 Level 9 (75,710 points)

    santranyc wrote:

     

    This reminds me...didn't Ordinals (i.e., automatic superscripting of the alpha characters in 1st, 2nd, 3rd, etc.) work in the old Pages? Doesn't seem to work now.

     

    That's part of Pages 4 autocorrect.  Pages 5 now uses the system wide autocorrect, which has never had this feature.

  • robogobo Level 2 Level 2 (290 points)

    Yeah, I still don't get the joke.  I'll go ask my daughter if she gets it.

    cosmofromwatertown wrote:

     

    Robo;

     

    Perhaps 'we' just wanted to see if you believed your own schtick...

  • Tristan Hubsch Level 2 Level 2 (210 points)

    PeterBreis0807 wrote:

     

    Somebody added 40+ 5 star reviews today (almost 10% of the ratings) in the Australian App Store and wiped all the current reviews for Pages 5.

    For obvious reasons, all rating systems ignore by design the users who vote one last time, with their (virtual) feet. Pushing the rating average down by submitting harsh reviews and low rating in the hopes that it will shame Apple to fill in the chasm canyon they dug between Pages09 and Pages13 is a losing proposition for the pro users who seriously need Pages09 functionality. Even if Apple were to recover 95% of the nigh-100 missing features, and at a pace that accelerates from the current/iniital 2 fpm (features per month) "speed," there is absolutely no guarantee that Pages13+ will ever regain the particular features that are crucial to you. Because of this insecurity alone, the number of pro users who leave Pages for another programs will grow, which in turn implies that the average rating will increase: those who stay with the program and continue rating it will be the ones whom the program fits.

     

    "The meek shall inherit Pages13."

  • Tristan Hubsch Level 2 Level 2 (210 points)

    santranyc wrote:

     

    This reminds me...didn't Ordinals (i.e., automatic superscripting of the alpha characters in 1st, 2nd, 3rd, etc.) work in the old Pages? Doesn't seem to work now.

     

    In Pages09, there is an "Auto-Correction" preference pane:

    Pages09Prefs.jpg

    for this functionality. In Pages13, this preference pane is gone:

    Pages13Prefs.jpg

    Short of a system-wide auto-correction in Mavericks (see the System Preferences/Keyboard/Text pane), I cannot seem to find where this feature might possibly be set.

     

    Peter, I believe the absence of an "Auto-Correction" that is program-specific (if not the suffixed ordinals by themselves) should go into the list of missing features; I don't see it in your iWorkTipsnTricks master list.

  • Tristan Hubsch Level 2 Level 2 (210 points)

    Tom Gewecke wrote:

     

    santranyc wrote:

     

    This reminds me...didn't Ordinals (i.e., automatic superscripting of the alpha characters in 1st, 2nd, 3rd, etc.) work in the old Pages? Doesn't seem to work now.

     

    That's part of Pages 4 autocorrect.  Pages 5 now uses the system wide autocorrect, which has never had this feature.

    Sorry for duplicating your explanation.

     

    However—supposing I wanted a system-wide superscripting of ordinals, how would one enter into the System Preferences/Keyboard/Text pane? When I enter a suprscripted "1st" into the "with" column (having copied it from Pages), the "st" shows up un-superscripted, i.e., with the default font pitch and baseline. And, the System Preferences app does not have a "Format" menu to style the "st." Now, it is possible to insert glyphs from various fonts by copying them from the "Characters" special symbols panel, but I cannot seem to find a superscripted "st," "rd" or "th." Does anyone know how to do this, even system-wide?

  • Tom Gewecke Level 9 Level 9 (75,710 points)

    Tristan Hubsch wrote:

     

    I cannot seem to find a superscripted "st," "rd" or "th." Does anyone know how to do this, even system-wide?

     

    If you want to add this manually you have to use Unicode superscript letters:   ᵃ ᵇ ᶜ ᵈ ᵉ ᶠ ᵍ ʰ ⁱ ʲ ᵏ ˡ ᵐ ⁿ ᵒ ᵖ ʳ ˢ ᵗ ᵘ ᵛ ʷ ˣ ʸ ᶻ

    This could be messy, however, for various reasons, and so Apple really should add the option found in Pages 4 to the system wide autocorrect options if they intend to support this kind of typography.

  • santranyc Level 1 Level 1 (10 points)

    If you want to add this manually you have to use Unicode superscript letters:   ᵃ ᵇ ᶜ ᵈ ᵉ ᶠ ᵍ ʰ ⁱ ʲ ᵏ ˡ ᵐ ⁿ ᵒ ᵖ ʳ ˢ ᵗ ᵘ ᵛ ʷ ˣ ʸ ᶻ

    This could be messy, however, for various reasons, and so Apple really should add the option found in Pages 4 to the system wide autocorrect options if they intend to support this kind of typography.

     

    Couldn't agree more. You really don't want to be adding these manually, even if you're automating the auto-addition of same (in superscript) with a script. Tom's right: it's much better if the change is made at the architecture design level of the software by changing the code of the OS. The more of us that submit Feedback, the better.

     

    It's a shame, really, since Word has had this feature (Preferences, AutoCorrect, AutoFormat as You Type, Replace as You Type, Ordinals...) for years.

  • Tristan Hubsch Level 2 Level 2 (210 points)

    Tom Gewecke wrote:

     

    If you want to add this manually you have to use Unicode superscript letters:   ᵃ ᵇ ᶜ ᵈ ᵉ ᶠ ᵍ ʰ ⁱ ʲ ᵏ ˡ ᵐ ⁿ ᵒ ᵖ ʳ ˢ ᵗ ᵘ ᵛ ʷ ˣ ʸ ᶻ

    This could be messy, however, for various reasons, and so Apple really should add the option found in Pages 4 to the system wide autocorrect options if they intend to support this kind of typography.

     

    Wow! "Messy" is an understtement! I had looked through the Unicode table, but did not expect to have to fish for individual characters in wildly non-continuous locations ( = 1D43, ᵇ = 1D47, ᶜ = 1D9C, ... ʰ = 02B0, ...)! Thanks for providing them here, so they can be copied and pasted: 1ˢᵗ, 2, 3ʳᵈ and 4ʰ. (Strangely, "c," "f" and "z" have have a lower baseline.) Some of these glyphs do not exist in every font, and automatic font substitution tends to muck it up:

    Ordinals.jpg

    But, thank you anyway! (No "you're typing it the wrong way" here...)

  • israfelli Level 1 Level 1 (0 points)

    Well in spite of the fact that Pages 5.0.1 was "seeded" with forty 5-star reviews, the ongoing reviews are starting to take their toll on the average. It's down to 2.5 stars at the moment with 1-star reviews almost double in quantity as 5-star reviews.

     

    I believe that the "customizable menu" feature addition was a pre-planned strategy because it is such a simple feature that could have easily been in 5.0 without adding delay. I have concluded that Apple must have known there would be much negative feedback about the release of 5.0. As we have seen, the way to remedy a poor MAS rating is to release a new version. I suspect that there will be a trivial new release everytime the ratings approach 1 star. These releases are probably sitting on a shelf waiting for the required time, while the engineers slowly piece together missing features in Pages.

  • PeterBreis0807 Level 7 Level 7 (33,655 points)

    The way people think (or don't) always amazes me. We already have people gushing over getting back the customisable Toolbar, as if it is new.

     

    By the same token, if I took a hundred dollars off them and gave them back 2 they'd be rushing down to the pub to blow their "winnings"!

     

    Come to think of it, that is exactly how lotteries work! At least Apple has nailed the  pyschology. Not so hot on the software.

     

    Peter

  • robogobo Level 2 Level 2 (290 points)

    You seem to be amazed by anyone who doesn't think exactly the same way you think.  But, wait, why aren't you demanding israfelli produce evidence for his seemingly insider knowledge into Apple's plans? Why don't you make some 10,000% certain joke about his conclusions of what Apple "must" be doing?  hmm.  He seems awfully sure of himself.  As sure as you with your assessment of Apple's motives.

  • israfelli Level 1 Level 1 (0 points)

    Robo you seem have failed to read my post. My post is sprinkled with terms like "I believe", "I conclude", and "I suspect". It does not have any verbage such as "I know", "I have inside knowledge", or "I have secret access to Apple's plans". This is a place to discuss both facts and speculation. I think I was pretty clear in making my post speculation.

     

    -Israfelli

     

    "your mama uses Pages 5"

  • Hermione_granger Level 1 Level 1 (0 points)

    - Can't edit a chart that is at the top of a page in the document because the chart editor is too far up to use, and there is no way of bringing it down

     

    - When you merge cells, you can't adjust the height of the table or the cells

     

    - You can't delete a page unless you unclick the body document

     

    - Can't see where a chart is moving because the exact location is covered up by the chart editor bottons

     

    - Making the lines of a chart thicker or thinner doesn't work unless you change the style of the chart, which isn't always what you want to do

     

    - Can't default to make a "normal" chart, instead of the pre-formatted terrible ones

  • robogobo Level 2 Level 2 (290 points)

    Israfelli, I didn't fail to read your post.  I read it just perfectly fine.  And I'm not doubting your certainty of your own conclusions.  They're yours.  But your degree of "must" hasn't mattered historically to Peter.  As long as you're on his side you can conclude away with 10,000% certainty.  But if you make any hint at being sure that Apple isn't intentionally hurting it's customers, he'll demand proof, call you a stooge and discredit by ad hominem attacks like there's no tomorrow.

Previous 1 89 90 91 92 93 Next