“‘Free’ seems like a good thing, right?” Dan Moren writes for Macworld. “After all, who doesn’t like not paying for things? This week’s announcement that Apple’s productivity and creative software—namely Pages, Numbers, Keynote, GarageBand, and iMovie—is now free to all users was mainly greeted with a positive reaction from pundits and consumers alike.”
“I’ll agree that making these apps (which were already provided no charge to people who bought new Macs, iPhone, and iPads) free across the board is largely a positive move,” Moren writes. “But that decision does have some consequences that could be a downside for end users, developers, and even Apple.”
Read more in the full article here.
MacDailyNews Take: Hopefully, as the years go by and Apple’s management changes, the beancounters won’t look at these apps as a non-revenue-generating expense and cease to allocate resources.
In fact, given the current Apple management’s treatment of the Mac, a large revenue-generating business, hopefully the beancounters won’t look at these apps as a non-revenue-generating expense and cease to allocate resources.
SEE ALSO:
Apple makes iMovie, GarageBand, and iWork apps for Mac and iOS devices free for all users – April 18, 2017
My biggest frustration with Pages and Numbers is when I try to sent copies from my iPad to a friend who uses an older version. When he tries to open my files, he can’t because they are incompatible with the older version that he runs, but his Mac can’t run the newest OS and therefore he can’t run the newest version of Numbers either.
There doesn’t seem to be a way of sending a version compatible with older copies of Numbers, so the current workaround is to export it as an Excel spreadsheet and then he can open it and convert it to Numbers, but of course it loses features that are unique to Numbers.
Apple seems to imagine that all users are using the newest version of everything, but we sometimes need to co-operate with Mac users who are using somewhat older hardware and doing so can be very difficult.
The same applies to users who are using an older version because they still need one of the features that was deleted when Desktop iWorks was “simplified” to allow interoperability with the iDevice and iCloud versions.
The older Pages was the best software for rapidly producing newsletters that I have encountered in 30 years of desktop publishing. The current Pages is worthless for that purpose, and there is no other program that will read the old files.
I agree. I have said the same thing every chance I get that the older Pages was a fantastic desktop publishing software for its price. Even basic things like two page views and linked text boxes have yet to make their return.
I wonder what Apple uses internally because I can’t imagine accounting looking at massive spreadsheets with Numbers.
They can use the web version for now. I have a white iMac, and an Ubuntu machine.
Agreed. Apple’s interversion compatibility is an impediment to adoption of several of their apps.
If up-to-date machines aren’t available, free apps “hurt,” yes, or at least is befuddling.
Macworld’s article is stupid. This isn’t the early 90’s anymore and trying to pretend that it is, is just a foolish exercise on Dan Moren’s part. For starters, these apps have been free for Apple users’s for years. If you haven’t bought a piece of Apple hardware in the past 4 years or so, then perhaps this is something new. For the rest of us, this is nothing new.
The days of expecting to pay for Office like applications are over. Between the various open source applications and things like Google’s suite of apps, the days of charging premiums for these apps are gone. Microsoft is still trying to hold on to this revenue source, but even they know that business model is failing.
Apple will likely continue to walk the line between being better than Google’s offering and being slightly less professional than Microsoft’s offering so that there is still a market for both.
As for Garageband and iMovie, these are the drugs to get you addicted and Logic and Final Cut are the sources of revenue. That revenue in turn goes back into making better versions of Garage Band and iMovie, etc.
“The days of expecting to pay for Office like applications are over.”
Wrong. Insert any product in that line and you are still wrong. You can pay in currency for applications, you can sign your life away to the subscription mob (which Adobe and Microsoft and Apple have all pushed, relatively successfully), or you can adopt freeware that comes with strings attached — usually giving away your data, succombing to an ad bombardment, or subscribing to some cloud service. But in the end, you always pay with your time or money, which in the end is the same thing.
Apple’s decision to go the freebie route is just another step in Cook’s plan to force everyone to use iCloud. The apps are just the teasers that are supposed to hook people into the cloud. Problem is, if iWork apps remain so basic and underperforming, with all kinds of compatibility problems and missing features, then they won’t be effective.
I would rather pay real money for a quality product.
I agree with the notion that people are paying one way or the other. With Google, you’re paying with privacy currency through Google’s advertising model. With Apple, you’re paying through the purchase of hardware, etc. My point is that the days of individuals forking over hundreds of dollars for an Office Suite are gone. Yes, many corporations are still in bed with Microsoft’s model, but consumers mostly are not. While there will always be a few that are willing to pay for a premium office suite, you are clearly in the minority. Even kids these days are being trained on Chromebooks using garbage like Google Docs. Yet, guess what…. it’s good enough. That’s the point. As for iWork, while it lost a few features a few years back, it’s gained most of them back and remains a nice platform that works well on the web, iOS and Mac OS platforms. Though I use Office at work, I find that I’m fine with iWork at home.
Ok, if that’s good enough for you.
I am not satisfied with Apple being another “it’s good enough” kind of company. Apple once had higher goals than that — they wanted to empower and delight the user. Now that the anorexic fashionista designers and the stingy beancounters have taken over, Apple’s productivity and “Pro” products have truly stagnated if not gone off the rails. iWork remains an amateur hour suite that, you are probably correct, few people would be willing to pay for.
Nevertheless people can, and do, pay full retail price for standalone versions of Microsoft Office, which remains the most capable office suite on the market after all this time. And you know what? It’s worth every penny.
By the way, I recall paying for Apple’s Aperture only to see Apple just completely abandon the excellent software. I am not complaining about paying money for a great product, but I am extremely bitter at the idiots at Apple who refuse to continue to improve and grow important software titles. Cook’s decision to use software as a carrot to make people sign up for iCloud is pathetic and has not resulted in any new class-leading Mac software whatsoever from Apple in the last 6 years.
Yeah, I basically agree with your post. I’m not suggesting that there isn’t a need for higher level tools. iWork was never targeted to be a high end office suite. There are some parts like Keynote that just happened to be better than PowerPoint, but for the most part, iWork was an Appleworks replacement. The vast majority of people don’t need or ever use even a fraction of the features in MS Office. iWork meets those needs quite well. The same with Google’s apps.
I also agree that I’d like to see Apple do more, especially with their high end pro software. I too was an Aperture user. I’ve had to adapt my workflow and make use of other third party tools. To that end, I’ve found the combination of Apple’s Photos in conjunction with other third party tools (like those from Macphun, etc.) actually work quite well.
Uh . . . how exactly is the subscription model ‘not paying’ ? Also, do you honestly believe that any of the open source alternatives to Google or Office are good for anything but personal use, and in some cases, largely only by the technologically inclined? Not to mention the fact that Google’s stuff comes with too many security and privacy compromises, neither of which particularly thrill businesses. The era of boxed software is certainly a memory at this point, but that is a seriously insular argument you’ve made, there.
Who said the subscription model is “not paying”? It is, but it’s largely the domain of the enterprise market. That’s not popular with the consumer market. Are open source alternatives as good? Yes, from all practical and functional matters, they are. Have you tried them?
Yes, I agree with the security issues with Google’s stuff, etc. I’m not arguing that Googles apps are a better choice. What I’m saying is that most people just don’t care about that. Again, Google’s apps have become the standard in the education market. That’s what kids are being trained on now.
Regardless, it’s not just about boxed software. Even for subscriptions, the notion of actually paying for an Office suite is becoming like the notion of paying for an e-mail client or a browser. There was a time people payed for those as well. Having free default apps for your platform like e-mail, browsers, are table stakes for platforms. The same is basically now true for office productivity as well. That doesn’t mean you can’t pay for a more premium offering, it’s just that the expectation for having to pay for the basics is long gone.
The Mac is dead anyway so what does it matter?
My assorted Macs are very much alive and kicking.
I’ve been hearing some variation of that for 30 years. If anything is dead, it’s that argument.
Just read a Credit Suisse report that Services could account for 30% of Apple’s rev by ’20. That’s amazing and pretty good news for Apple aficionados/stock holders…even if the % is high. Devices drive services, in fact Apple services are nil w/o devices. Couple this to the catastrophe that is TC’s hardware nap and this report could be seen with some objections…esp if the new Mac Pro sees light in ’19. Maybe coma fits better than nap.
Be careful of what you wish for. If Apple’s total revenue doesn’t rise much or plateaus for some reason having such a high percentage represented by services also means that new devices sales have simultaneously dropped significantly.
Sometimes I truly wonder if Cook and Apple management use iWorks apps. My IWorks concerns are:
(1) UI inconsistency – Why doesn’t Numbers format headers/footers like Pages?
(2) Pages Find/Replace – Why can’t Pages find/replace non-printing characters such as tabs and carriage returns. They treat them as spaces. Pages used to be able to do this.
(3) Numbers Find/Replace – Find/Replace will not work in selected rows/columns. It replaces everything everywhere.
(4) Numbers Subtotals/Grand Totals – Numbers used to support Subtotals and Grand Totals. It was clumsy but better than nothing. And now it has nothing.
(5) No iWorks Database – Surely Apple can introduce a database like the old AppleWorks DB. Bento was a joke. Limited formatting and reporting. Limited fields and calculations. No Subtotals and Grand Totals. Apple owns FileMaker. Just transfer the responsibility/code from FM to iWorks.
In itself, they work very well, but the problem comes with compatibility with other (office) and office is not exception to compatibility with iLife.
The key is using it between all your Apple devices and it works well. If you need office compatibility, just pony up the monthly fee and move on with your life.
Microsoft even has compatibility issues between their Mac and PC products. I’ve created presentations on my Mac only to have them messed up when bringing them into my PC. If output is all you’re concerned about, then export to PDF.
Apple should have continued to charge a placeholder price $10 for each one.
I’d like to see Apple updating these apps with the same TLC that Google does with its excellent IOS photo-app Snapseed.
This is specious. It’s often said you can’t compete with free, but Apple proved that wrong years ago by selling music via iTunes when nearly every potential buyer was downloading it for free.
Besides, there are free and paid Mac apps that compete with Apple’s and have been for years.
This is the cue to buy Office.
I designed a folio using Pages ’06 back when I was finishing school. The tools were excellent and I worked out how to get it to look the way I wanted.
In the end, my folio was graded one of the highest in the state which, for someone who is pretty challenged at the skills traditionally needed to build a folio, was a genuine shock.
Pages was so incredibly robust and powerful but also easy enough to pick up without needing formal instruction on how to use it.
My workflows depend on Word documents now. Word is more polished than it’s ever been, but somehow the advanced tools are still more difficult and convoluted to use compared to the original Pages.
My wife edited professional-quality newsletters for several nonprofits using the old Pages. Then we downloaded the new program. Fortunately, we had backups, since opening existing files in the new version removed all the page layout information without any means to revert the files.
Since the file format is proprietary, no other program can read old Pages layout documents, either. We can’t just continue to use the old version because it has increasing incompatibilities with current versions of MacOS.
Basically, all we could do is convert all the existing files to PDFs for archival purposes and kiss off the business. We had already taken a hit when iWeb was cancelled. The nonprofits now rely on Facebook for external communication.
nice blog and article !
When was the last time Apple did much of an update to these programs? The only free program that gets a regular update beside the OS is iTunes and that gets worse with each update.