Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
As above, in business the cost of software is negligible if it makes you more efficient.

Example:
The cost of office is like $9 a month or so.

My hourly rate, never mind lost productivity if I'm screwing around trying to make some alternative office program do the job is >$90/hr

If running office saves me more than 6 minutes of lost productivity or hassle per month vs. a free alternative, it has well and truly paid for itself.

The flip-side, and why I run Apple Mail and Calendar instead of outlook (yes, I have a peculiar mail workload where outlook just really doesn't work for me at all) - is if it costs me time and energy... it is expensive.
 
As above, in business the cost of software is negligible if it makes you more efficient.

Example:
The cost of office is like $9 a month or so.

My hourly rate, never mind lost productivity if I'm screwing around trying to make some alternative office program do the job is >$90/hr

If running office saves me more than 6 minutes of lost productivity or hassle per month vs. a free alternative, it has well and truly paid for itself.

The flip-side, and why I run Apple Mail and Calendar instead of outlook (yes, I have a peculiar mail workload where outlook just really doesn't work for me at all) - is if it costs me time and energy... it is expensive.

I would pay $9/month to never see Outlook again
 
I would pay $9/month to never see Outlook again
It's actually not bad at all. The Focused Inbox is great once you go through the initial "training" phase.

The sole reason I am not using Outlook on my Apple devices is that there's no easy way to create a Reminder from an email on iPhone / iPad, and I want to have the same mail client on my Mac. Otherwise, I find Outlook on iOS to be a superior app.
 
It's actually not bad at all. The Focused Inbox is great once you go through the initial "training" phase.

The sole reason I am not using Outlook on my Apple devices is that there's no easy way to create a Reminder from an email on iPhone / iPad, and I want to have the same mail client on my Mac. Otherwise, I find Outlook on iOS to be a superior app.

It's been a few years, but I don't have fond memories of it. However, I only used it on Windows (i.e. as part of the cookie cutter office stack of large organizations), and also perhaps projecting onto Outlook my feelings around the e-mails that it delivered to me rather than the software itself...

One Outlook for Windows fail I remember related to copy/paste from Word and Excel into the body of an e-mail. You would think with an all MS stack such a thing would be hi-fidelity but it always came out a mess. Bullets/numbers on outlines created in Word were changed while well-formatted tables from Excel were all over the place once pasted in Outlook. Does that still happen?

In any case, I much prefer Apple's approach of Mail, Calendar, Reminders, and Notes each focused on doing their own thing well and using standard protocols rather than a jumbo app with its own protocol that stores everything in one giant file that hopefully doesn't get corrupted.
 
It's been a few years, but I don't have fond memories of it. However, I only used it on Windows (i.e. as part of the cookie cutter office stack of large organizations), and also perhaps projecting onto Outlook my feelings around the e-mails that it delivered to me rather than the software itself...

One Outlook for Windows fail I remember related to copy/paste from Word and Excel into the body of an e-mail. You would think with an all MS stack such a thing would be hi-fidelity but it always came out a mess. Bullets/numbers on outlines created in Word were changed while well-formatted tables from Excel were all over the place once pasted in Outlook. Does that still happen?
That’s because Outlook email editor is basically a word processor. It has predefined styles, just like Word does. When you paste from another document, it applies the default styles.

If you want to keep the original formatting, right click and select “keep source formatting” paste option.

In any case, I much prefer Apple's approach of Mail, Calendar, Reminders, and Notes each focused on doing their own thing well and using standard protocols rather than a jumbo app with its own protocol that stores everything in one giant file that hopefully doesn't get corrupted.
That’s fine for personal use. But in the workplace, having all emails, contacts, meetings and tasks in one place makes more sense to me. I have enough windows open as it is without having three more app icons on my taskbar.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hobowankenobi
That’s because Outlook email editor is basically a word processor. It has predefined styles, just like Word does. When you paste from another document, it applies the default styles.

If you want to keep the original formatting, right click and select “keep source formatting” paste option.

I am sure I tried that -- and as I mentioned it has been some years and likely the last version of Office/Outlook for Windows I used was 2016 so maybe this works better now -- but I recall that caused some other problems. I recall testing this with every combination of Paste Special every time we got a new version of Office/Outlook with no satisfactory results...

That’s fine for personal use. But in the workplace, having all emails, contacts, meetings and tasks in one place makes more sense to me. I have enough windows open as it is without having three more app icons on my taskbar.

To each his own of course. I actually prefer the separate windows -- it means I can have my calendar up at the same time as my e-mail for example.
 
There's no Linux option. 2.6% of a shrinking desktop market is not an option.

For Linux to become a viable option, it would have to become a whole lot more consumer-oriented, not just as an OS, but as an entire ecosystem. I just don't see that happening anytime soon.

Linux has never been more popular and as privacy invasion continues I see it being more widely adopted. I did some research and the simpler distros like Mint and Zorin are pretty user friendly. It won't take Windows down, but gaining a nice market share of 10-15% is possible. Its about getting ready for the future.

Google Docs existed for 18 years. Its biggest growth was during 11 or so years when it was the only major office suite offering real time collaboration. It still failed to unseat MS Office, although it did carve a chunk of the market. Now that MS Office has its own collaboration tools, it's pushing back.

And Google Docs isn't doing much to promote Linux as a mainstream desktop OS. There's more to having a comprehensive desktop environment than an Office suite, although it's an important piece of the puzzle.

This is not a good comparison. You are mixing up different things. WhatsApp is a cross-platform, consumer-friendly service. Linux is a (rather NOT consumer friendly) OS. Different animals altogether.

And as far as I know, there hasn't been and still isn't an official WhatsApp client for Linux, is there ? Only a web app. Just like with MS Office. As the matter of fact, when it comes to WhatsApp, Facebook is treating Linux the same way Microsoft does when it comes to Office. Your own example is supporting the opposite point of view.

Again, you're mixing things up.

There are already multiple alternatives to Office. This doesn't mean that they pose a threat to the Office, especially on a niche, low market share desktop platform.

Yes, alternatives can live in niche markets. So what ?

Affinity has less than 1% share of its respective market. I myself own Affinity Photo, it's reasonably priced, it's good enough for my needs, and it allows me to have the same workflow between Windows, Mac and iPadOS. But they are not a threat to Adobe. And guess what... they don't have a client for Linux. Funny how this works, eh ?

You seem to think I am implying that Linux will kill Office. I am merely saying if I was MS CEO I will try not to let others even to start thinking of using something else. Ballmer laughed at Apple for releasing $500 cellphone . Yahoo refused to buy Google in 2002 for $5B, its worth $2T today. I learned not to belittle others.
 
Yup, there are legacy applications out there that still use it.

But the bigger one is excel. ODBC import/export into excel is enterprise bread and butter.

Numbers can't do that.

Well, some people in thread are essentially arguing that ms office has no place on the Mac because Numbers and pages exist. :)

TBF I think they meant personal mac users not corporate employees working in data analysis. ODBC is nearly strictly a large business use case and I am not sure if any other office suite that can do that. How many people even know how to set up a database and connect it to excel in the first place?!
 
University, they need to collaborate with colleagues and submit manuscripts and books to publishers. Publishers generally expect documents in Word (perhaps TeX in the math world).

In this thread or another thread someone mentioned publishers accept PDF albeit I am not sure if that is the final document to print or they require a .docx file to do further editing first before sending it to the printers.

I am thinking if its a book it won't be in .docx file, they probably use indesign or similar for layout, images, etc.
 
No, IIRC Google bought a company that created a collaborative online Docs app, and turned it into Google Docs.


I had a very hot, fast paced project with a team of about a dozen or so engineers working on a long list of issues that the customer hired us to fix before a major product launch. The team was not all located in one spot. It was a large, sprawling industrial complex, and they were spread all over.

The initial list was over three hundred problems, and they kept piling up new ones as they discovered them.

The priority for fixing these problems kept changing daily as they were adjusting their plans, finding new issues, and some of the problems getting too much executive attention.

Every issue was accompanied with a long list of notes, changes, and directions.

So, here's the problem. How do you (a) distribute the work between people as soon as they become available, without any delays (b) keep track of progress (c) keep track of notes and changes for each item (that only the engineer currently working on that issue has a comprehensive understanding of, and they don't have any time to sit in meetings with you) and (c) report accurate, real-time project status to the customer every morning and on demand.

So, as a project manager, I would bear the brunt of this work. However, maintaining and updating this list having to chase people around would be a full time job, and I still had my main job responsibilities. So I would have to dedicate an engineer to doing nothing else but chasing people down and updating the master issues log. Even if I used the lowest rate person, it would still be a pretty sizable hit on project funding - 18 weeks x 40 hrs + up to 20 hrs of overtime each week, that's roughly the equivalent of 900-1,100 hours. And engineers, even the lowest paid ones, are expensive. On top of that, I would still, inevitably, have to spend quite a bit of my own time to make sure that this log was correct and up to date.

So, it was obvious that the best solution was to set up a shared spreadsheet that the team could be working on simultaneously in real time without stepping on each other's toes.

At first I was thinking about using Google Sheets, But we did not have a business account with Google, and getting one and having access approved by IT security would be too much hassle and couldn't happen quickly enough.

Then I learned that MS Office 2021 had collaboration features.

So I set up an Excel workbook on Onedrive, put the issues list in it, added a few columns, and granted access to the whole team. Every engineer would "check out" an issue by placing a checkmark, their initials and a date in the right columns, update status and notes as they worked on it, and then move out to the next available issue based on priority. If someone needed to switch to another issue (e.g. the priorities changed, or help was needed elsewhere) they would "check in" the one they were working on so someone else could pick it up in the meantime.

All I had to do with this log was updating priorities as they changed, adding new issues, and getting the latest project status every morning - which was easy to do because the log was being updated real time. All of the issue status tracking was done by the people who worked on them.

It was great - it helped to keep the project costs down, maintain a smooth flow of work assignments, have up to date status of every task and project overall at any point in the project, and (very important for me) kept my stress levels lower. It also worked out great for the team as everyone knew what was going on, where to find information, who was working on what, who would soon become available if help was needed, and so on.

Of course this was possible because it was a team of self-driven, responsible adults who knew what they were doing.

This worked so well that I've been using this approach on every project since then. Now this is all built into Teams and Sharepoint and is a whole lot easier to access.

When you said saved me thousands because I used the collaboration option in my mind I imagined a docx document with 3 people editing it. MS Office was able to handle that many people altering the document together with no issue? thats impressive.

Freelancers have to use whatever tools are the standard in the industry they are working in. Unless their job deliverable is in a final form that is platform independent (e.g. PDF, or painting).

Journalists have to use whatever tools are the standard in the industry they are working in.

Students have to use whatever tools are the standard at their school or university.

Teachers have to use whatever tools are the standard at their school or university.

Single-employee businesses and small shops that have to collaborate with others have to use whatever tools are the standard in the industry they are working in. A residential / small business plumber, electrician, or a home HVAC technician can use whatever they want. A plumber shop, electrical company or HVAC company working on major corporate projects would use whatever the clients use. If you're working on one of my projects, I will provide you with a set of standard documents that you need to fill out and submit electronically. The info from these documents will then be merged into master spreadsheets used for tracking all kinds of project information. The absolutely last thing I need is to be fixing formatting inconsistencies and formula errors an hour before customer's management review, because some small vendor who's a sub of a sub decided to save a few bucks and use Libre Office.

Everybody else can use whatever they want. That's why MS Office and Google Workspace don't own 100% of the market.

I would imagine that they use whatever tools make sense for the task. But, they are really not collaborating with others as vendors - they are OEMs, in a way, so they get to set their own rules.

Well yes, as I stated earlier to ThroAU , for such tasks MS Office is unbeatable but isn't a dedicated "project apps" is better for this task?
 
As above, in business the cost of software is negligible if it makes you more efficient.

Example:
The cost of office is like $9 a month or so.

My hourly rate, never mind lost productivity if I'm screwing around trying to make some alternative office program do the job is >$90/hr

If running office saves me more than 6 minutes of lost productivity or hassle per month vs. a free alternative, it has well and truly paid for itself.

The flip-side, and why I run Apple Mail and Calendar instead of outlook (yes, I have a peculiar mail workload where outlook just really doesn't work for me at all) - is if it costs me time and energy... it is expensive.

You are absolutely correct. The funny part is I find myself fiddling with apps to make them work whenever I am on Windows😂 thats why I love MacOS , "it just works" for me.

I think most people's problem with Office subscription is:

1-Its for personal use, they don't make money off it. One less subscription is better.
2-Monopoly/ privacy conscious people. I lay here.

That being said if you are paying for cloud storage, you are actually better off with OneDrive. Basically its nearly same price as Dropbox and others +MS Office suite.

That’s because Outlook email editor is basically a word processor. It has predefined styles, just like Word does. When you paste from another document, it applies the default styles.

Interesting. This is the opposite of MacOS. Mine will always paste the style of the source. I have to click cmd+alt+shift+v (what a joke 😂) just to get it to be style free.
 
In this thread or another thread someone mentioned publishers accept PDF albeit I am not sure if that is the final document to print or they require a .docx file to do further editing first before sending it to the printers.

I am thinking if its a book it won't be in .docx file, they probably use indesign or similar for layout, images, etc.
There are several situations.

1. You're a writer who has something you're hoping a publisher will take. The publisher will tell you what they want to see. Typically it's a Word doc or a PDF. At this point, the publisher needs something that can be easily read and shared around the office. Sending a Pages doc would be a bad move.

2. The publisher has accepted your work. Now everything's going to switch to Word, where the editor will use Track Changes and Comments. The Word doc will move back and forth between author and editor.

3. Editing is complete and now it's time to move to production. Unless the publisher is extremely small and underfunded, the designer takes over and moves the final Word doc into InDesign. If anything passes back and forth between designer and author, it's going to be a PDF exported from InDesign.

4. Finally, the designer exports a PDF to send to the printer. Most printers who do books require a certain flavor of PDF. The one I work with the most requires PDF/X-1a:2001. I doubt that Pages can output that. Sure, the printer folks can do the conversion if they have to. But -- as everything in this chain -- why make them? Why ask busy people to modify their workflows just because you like Pages?

I've been a part of this sequence dozens of times. Editors and designers don't want to see and be forced to use non-standard documents, and this includes docs that are allegedly in Word format, like Google Docs or Pages output as Word. InDesign is very fussy about inputs. I've had entire books blow up because of something that a Google Doc inserted. Sure, I got it fixed but it was a real headache. And I had an author once that I felt sorry for ("I can't afford Word") so I agreed to try Pages. Never again.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MacBH928
Linux has never been more popular and as privacy invasion continues I see it being more widely adopted. I did some research and the simpler distros like Mint and Zorin are pretty user friendly. It won't take Windows down, but gaining a nice market share of 10-15% is possible. Its about getting ready for the future.



You seem to think I am implying that Linux will kill Office. I am merely saying if I was MS CEO I will try not to let others even to start thinking of using something else. Ballmer laughed at Apple for releasing $500 cellphone . Yahoo refused to buy Google in 2002 for $5B, its worth $2T today. I learned not to belittle others.
You can’t possibly destroy all competition. MS was already in a lot of trouble with regulators over its monopolistic practices over 20 years ago.

The key is identifying the ones that can actually pose a threat.

And the examples you provided are completely different.

MS currently has an industry leading product that no other suite can yet approach in terms of features and market penetration.

They also, essentially, own the standard. Any challenger can only succeed by making their product fully compatible with Office.

In both of your examples, the companies did not own the market, and there was no customer lock-in. MS did not have a good mobile phone until well after both Apple and Android markets exploded. They started early on with Windows Mobile that had a lot of promise and some great features, but then literally strangled it through lack of development because Balmer was an idiot who couldn’t see beyond his own nose. If anything it was BlackBerry not MS who lost the market. MS just never realized their own potential.

In case of Yahoo vs Google - it’s a search engine. There’s no customer lock-in whatsoever. People can change their search engine in 1 minute. Google could literally lose most of their customers overnight if someone comes up with a better search tool. It’s a very unique situation.

Now back to MS vs Linux. Linux indeed grew, looking at the latest numbers its desktop share went from below 3% to 4.5% over the last couple of years. That’s impressive. You know what other OS grew its market share ? Windows. The single loser was MacOS that lost market share.

Even at 4.5% Linux is still not a real competitor to Windows. It’s not enough to have an OS, you must provide an entire ecosystem that is centered on customer experience. Linux ecosystem is a discombobulated collection of programs that don’t share common design and UX, don’t necessarily work well together, and for the most part don’t have a mobile client.

Linux is not a true competitor to MS until it grows a user-friendly ecosystem. If it does, it will be a long process and MS will have enough time to jump in with their Office and OneDrive client. But they would be foolish to do it now and sabotage their own OS by helping Linux with jump starting their ecosystem.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: it wasnt me
Linux is not a true competitor to MS until it grows a user-friendly ecosystem. If it does, it will be a long process and MS will have enough time to jump in with their Office and OneDrive client. But they would be foolish to do it now and sabotage their own OS by helping Linux with jump starting their ecosystem.
Many linux distros are quite user friendly; I like Debian.
Linux distros do not typically have the funding power of Microsoft.
Typically the best jobs are not advertised, works the same with most things in life, software included.

Would you care to discuss your car's extended warranty?
How about a VPN?
 
  • Haha
Reactions: it wasnt me
To add - let’s look at Linux from the perspective of a typical desktop user who is not a FOSS enthusiast.

As far as ease of install and setup, it’s getting there. Stability is also good.

What about overall user experience though?

Can you sync your phone contacts, tasks and calendar with your desktop client ? Not easily, some (often a lot of) hoop jumping is required, and the apps you have to use look like they are from the 90s.

How about syncing photos from your phone? Nope. There’s no direct easy to use solution.

How about a cloud client, that lets you automatically sync and share documents and other files ?

- AFAIK a native Dropbox sync client is available. However Dropbox only offers 2Gb of free storage.

- OneDrive - no native sync client. There are some CLI tools that are too much headache for an average consumer, and some paid 3rd party software like Insync which does work but still needs some user interaction due to the way it handles sync conflicts.

- Google Drive - seems to be in about the same position as OneDrive.

- iCloud Drive - nothing that I know of.

How about an Office ? We already know that.

How about a note taker ? Joplin is probably the only one that is free and can sync with mobile devices, and it’s … not for everyone.

OK what about global search ? Windows has Windows Search. Apple has Spotlight. Google has Google search for desktop (whatever they call it now). Linux only has 3rd party apps that work but are extremely user-unfriendly with horrible interfaces. Recoll is the one that I used and found the best, and it’s one ugly MF.

At the end of the day, there’s no real Linux ecosystem. Even if the OS can be really good (depending on the distro) it’s just one piece of the puzzle.
 
Many linux distros are quite user friendly; I like Debian.
There’s no Linux consumer oriented ecosystem like there are Windows or Apple ones.

Individual distros can be quite nice as OS. But that’s just OS. It needs integrated software and services to become a true ecosystem.
Linux distros do not typically have the funding power of Microsoft.
Right. And in the context of this discussion, it’s pretty clear why Microsoft at this point doesn’t want to lend their funding power to making Linux more appealing to an average consumer.
Typically the best jobs are not advertised, works the same with most things in life, software included.
What’s “best” about Linux from a consumer perspective ?
Would you care to discuss your car's extended warranty?
How about a VPN?
 
  • Like
Reactions: it wasnt me
In this thread or another thread someone mentioned publishers accept PDF albeit I am not sure if that is the final document to print or they require a .docx file to do further editing first before sending it to the printers.

I am thinking if its a book it won't be in .docx file, they probably use indesign or similar for layout, images, etc.

Definitely I am sure all real publishers do real typesetting in a real program before it goes to their press. However, not sure how well publishers can take random PDF files and completely retypeset them, change the page size, font, layout, flow, etc. Sounds messy.

In my experience the publishers expect the text in a word processor format and all the figures, tables, etc in their native formats and then they bring it all together in their typesetting software. They're the ones with graphic designers, artists, and other professionals on staff. From there they generate a PDF for the authors to proof but I don't think those become the masters.

And books are just one task some professors do. Many if not most never publish a book. They will be writing grants, collaborating with other professors, and publishing articles. And across that type of work nobody wants to spend a minute more on formatting/importing/reformatting/etc than they absolutely have to.
 
Definitely I am sure all real publishers do real typesetting in a real program before it goes to their press. However, not sure how well publishers can take random PDF files and completely retypeset them, change the page size, font, layout, flow, etc. Sounds messy.

In my experience the publishers expect the text in a word processor format and all the figures, tables, etc in their native formats and then they bring it all together in their typesetting software. They're the ones with graphic designers, artists, and other professionals on staff. From there they generate a PDF for the authors to proof but I don't think those become the masters.

And books are just one task some professors do. Many if not most never publish a book. They will be writing grants, collaborating with other professors, and publishing articles. And across that type of work nobody wants to spend a minute more on formatting/importing/reformatting/etc than they absolutely have to.
Publishers won't work from a PDF (sent to them) unless there's no alternative. I worked for a small press once who was reprinting a very long book and the only thing available was a PDF that the author had. Nightmarish -- getting that into Word was horrible, but I did get it done, and then that Word doc went into InDesign.

As for the PDF the publishers generate -- yes, the final one's going to be the master. I've never sent out anything but a PDF to a printer. But as I said above, there are PDFs and there are PDFs and the printers know which flavor they want.
 
Publishers won't work from a PDF (sent to them) unless there's no alternative. I worked for a small press once who was reprinting a very long book and the only thing available was a PDF that the author had. Nightmarish -- getting that into Word was horrible, but I did get it done, and then that Word doc went into InDesign.

As for the PDF the publishers generate -- yes, the final one's going to be the master. I've never sent out anything but a PDF to a printer. But as I said above, there are PDFs and there are PDFs and the printers know which flavor they want.
PDF should be at the end of a design process, not the input. Getting text from a PDF into Indesign is a bit of a pain, because of the hard line breaks, dashes and other stuff.

That said, the import from Word to ID still sucks. If you want italics and bold you have to import the whole formatting, font and all, and rework it with Search&Replace. No way to get «clean» pure text to ID and keep only italics and bold in some way. Still no real Markdown in Indesign, which is not MS’s fault.

I like iA Writer (and other plain-text-editors) and, if need be, Pages. I cannot for the life of me understand, why someone would use Word for anything – and I've worked with it since 1993 ;-). It's too complex for simple good writing, it cannot actually use system fonts installed on a Mac so it's utterly useless for Corporate Design and templates and for «layout» it is just effing terrible (which makes it so awful when clients try to pre-design in Word, it just makes everything a bit harder to sort out and get into ID).

Plus, it is about 2,25 GB. For a text-writing-software. Cannot speak for Excel, but PPT and Word are so bad compared to Keynote and Pages that THIS alone should be reason for any company to switch to Macs :-D.
 
I'm transitioning into teaching at a school, and one of my deep-held frustrations is having to adapt to the Institution's methodology.

I was fantasizing about bringing my own (for ex.) Mini to use in the Classroom; but, all 'terminals' are administered via RDP/Exchange, and entirely locked-down (in more ways than one).

So; it's so: I will adapt :)

I just have to sweet-talk IT into letting me use things with larger screens, so these poor eyes don't have to struggle with the teenie-tinys.

MSO has been on my Mac for file compat./interop. ease; but now I might have a real reason to use Outlook (haven't touched it in over twenty years).
 
PDF should be at the end of a design process, not the input. Getting text from a PDF into Indesign is a bit of a pain, because of the hard line breaks, dashes and other stuff.

That said, the import from Word to ID still sucks. If you want italics and bold you have to import the whole formatting, font and all, and rework it with Search&Replace. No way to get «clean» pure text to ID and keep only italics and bold in some way. Still no real Markdown in Indesign, which is not MS’s fault.

I like iA Writer (and other plain-text-editors) and, if need be, Pages. I cannot for the life of me understand, why someone would use Word for anything – and I've worked with it since 1993 ;-). It's too complex for simple good writing, it cannot actually use system fonts installed on a Mac so it's utterly useless for Corporate Design and templates and for «layout» it is just effing terrible (which makes it so awful when clients try to pre-design in Word, it just makes everything a bit harder to sort out and get into ID).

Plus, it is about 2,25 GB. For a text-writing-software. Cannot speak for Excel, but PPT and Word are so bad compared to Keynote and Pages that THIS alone should be reason for any company to switch to Macs :-D.
Excel is in a league of its own. And probably the top reason for MSO dominance.

Numbers is pretty and free form tables are great, but it's nowhere near as powerful. Also even after trying to use it for personal spreadsheets for a whole year, I was still not as fast in it as with Excel. It may be me... but then I got up to speed with LibreOffice Calc in a day.

Keynote very well may be better than Powerpoint. But the corporate world simply doesn't care. Powerpoint is good enough, it's what everybody is using, it's what most new hires already know, there's always a metric crapton of older Powepoint documents and templates that get reused and updated over and over for years, it's just got too well entrenched over the decades.

As to Word vs Pages - I have never used Pages beyond a very simple document writing. But I have used Word all the time over the course of my entire career. Writing engineering specifications, statements of requirements for equipment procurement, reports, standards, etc. Every company I've been to used a large collection of standardized templates in Word. And they didn't just use it in house - they would share them with vendors. Again, regardless of how much better something else may be, that's a huge threshold to cross - converting all of that documentation to another format would be expensive and disruptive, and there's just no business case to do that unless you're in a kind of business for which word processing is the key function.
 
There are several situations.

1. You're a writer who has something you're hoping a publisher will take. The publisher will tell you what they want to see. Typically it's a Word doc or a PDF. At this point, the publisher needs something that can be easily read and shared around the office. Sending a Pages doc would be a bad move.

2. The publisher has accepted your work. Now everything's going to switch to Word, where the editor will use Track Changes and Comments. The Word doc will move back and forth between author and editor.

3. Editing is complete and now it's time to move to production. Unless the publisher is extremely small and underfunded, the designer takes over and moves the final Word doc into InDesign. If anything passes back and forth between designer and author, it's going to be a PDF exported from InDesign.

4. Finally, the designer exports a PDF to send to the printer. Most printers who do books require a certain flavor of PDF. The one I work with the most requires PDF/X-1a:2001. I doubt that Pages can output that. Sure, the printer folks can do the conversion if they have to. But -- as everything in this chain -- why make them? Why ask busy people to modify their workflows just because you like Pages?

I've been a part of this sequence dozens of times. Editors and designers don't want to see and be forced to use non-standard documents, and this includes docs that are allegedly in Word format, like Google Docs or Pages output as Word. InDesign is very fussy about inputs. I've had entire books blow up because of something that a Google Doc inserted. Sure, I got it fixed but it was a real headache. And I had an author once that I felt sorry for ("I can't afford Word") so I agreed to try Pages. Never again.

thanks for sharing.

1-Can you extract text from pdf or alter it? I am little surprised you say they send back and forth in PDF since in my mind PDF means 1 uneditable copy. I know there are PDF editing tools but those kind of like trick it or something.

2-Another thing that surprises me is that PDF was supposed to be a standard format, now I hear there are different variations and flavours and not all PDFs are compatible. I recently learned about PDF/a
 
To add - let’s look at Linux from the perspective of a typical desktop user who is not a FOSS enthusiast.

As far as ease of install and setup, it’s getting there. Stability is also good.

What about overall user experience though?

Can you sync your phone contacts, tasks and calendar with your desktop client ? Not easily, some (often a lot of) hoop jumping is required, and the apps you have to use look like they are from the 90s.

How about syncing photos from your phone? Nope. There’s no direct easy to use solution.

How about a cloud client, that lets you automatically sync and share documents and other files ?

- AFAIK a native Dropbox sync client is available. However Dropbox only offers 2Gb of free storage.

- OneDrive - no native sync client. There are some CLI tools that are too much headache for an average consumer, and some paid 3rd party software like Insync which does work but still needs some user interaction due to the way it handles sync conflicts.

- Google Drive - seems to be in about the same position as OneDrive.

- iCloud Drive - nothing that I know of.

How about an Office ? We already know that.

How about a note taker ? Joplin is probably the only one that is free and can sync with mobile devices, and it’s … not for everyone.

OK what about global search ? Windows has Windows Search. Apple has Spotlight. Google has Google search for desktop (whatever they call it now). Linux only has 3rd party apps that work but are extremely user-unfriendly with horrible interfaces. Recoll is the one that I used and found the best, and it’s one ugly MF.

At the end of the day, there’s no real Linux ecosystem. Even if the OS can be really good (depending on the distro) it’s just one piece of the puzzle.

-Windows is not a nice ecosystem either. I struggle with it. Apple is the only one that is plug+play.

Publishers won't work from a PDF (sent to them) unless there's no alternative. I worked for a small press once who was reprinting a very long book and the only thing available was a PDF that the author had. Nightmarish -- getting that into Word was horrible, but I did get it done, and then that Word doc went into InDesign.

As for the PDF the publishers generate -- yes, the final one's going to be the master. I've never sent out anything but a PDF to a printer. But as I said above, there are PDFs and there are PDFs and the printers know which flavor they want.

Does the pdf contain the color adjustments needed for the printer or it needs to be further processed? I never understood why colors on screen are different from print. I know it has something to do with color profile srbg or whatever.


PDF should be at the end of a design process, not the input. Getting text from a PDF into Indesign is a bit of a pain, because of the hard line breaks, dashes and other stuff.

That said, the import from Word to ID still sucks. If you want italics and bold you have to import the whole formatting, font and all, and rework it with Search&Replace. No way to get «clean» pure text to ID and keep only italics and bold in some way. Still no real Markdown in Indesign, which is not MS’s fault.

I like iA Writer (and other plain-text-editors) and, if need be, Pages. I cannot for the life of me understand, why someone would use Word for anything – and I've worked with it since 1993 ;-). It's too complex for simple good writing, it cannot actually use system fonts installed on a Mac so it's utterly useless for Corporate Design and templates and for «layout» it is just effing terrible (which makes it so awful when clients try to pre-design in Word, it just makes everything a bit harder to sort out and get into ID).

I just learned the hard way not to use LibreOffice writer for layout design. I think Draw is the correct app for that.
Excel is in a league of its own. And probably the top reason for MSO dominance.

Numbers is pretty and free form tables are great, but it's nowhere near as powerful. Also even after trying to use it for personal spreadsheets for a whole year, I was still not as fast in it as with Excel. It may be me... but then I got up to speed with LibreOffice Calc in a day.

Keynote very well may be better than Powerpoint. But the corporate world simply doesn't care. Powerpoint is good enough, it's what everybody is using, it's what most new hires already know, there's always a metric crapton of older Powepoint documents and templates that get reused and updated over and over for years, it's just got too well entrenched over the decades.

As to Word vs Pages - I have never used Pages beyond a very simple document writing. But I have used Word all the time over the course of my entire career. Writing engineering specifications, statements of requirements for equipment procurement, reports, standards, etc. Every company I've been to used a large collection of standardized templates in Word. And they didn't just use it in house - they would share them with vendors. Again, regardless of how much better something else may be, that's a huge threshold to cross - converting all of that documentation to another format would be expensive and disruptive, and there's just no business case to do that unless you're in a kind of business for which word processing is the key function.

I learned myself that the app you know how to use will always better. I nearly had a heart attack when I tried using GIMP when I tried to save money on Photoshop.

That being said, things were much more pleasant with PhotoPea and pixelmator.
 
-Windows is not a nice ecosystem either. I struggle with it. Apple is the only one that is plug+play.



Does the pdf contain the color adjustments needed for the printer or it needs to be further processed? I never understood why colors on screen are different from print. I know it has something to do with color profile srbg or whatever.




I just learned the hard way not to use LibreOffice writer for layout design. I think Draw is the correct app for that.


I learned myself that the app you know how to use will always better. I nearly had a heart attack when I tried using GIMP when I tried to save money on Photoshop.

That being said, things were much more pleasant with PhotoPea and pixelmator.

It very much has to do with the printer. I used to work with printers which could be adjusted to show an image off properly under sunlight (outdoor poster), fluorescent light (house or office), industrial lighting (shopping malls, etc).

Each ink is made from a different batch of dyes. Each dye fluoresces differently under light with different amount of UV (incandescent vs LED vs fluorescent, etc). A green ink made with one blue and one yellow dye will behave differently from an ink made from different blue and yellow dyes. Two inks may look the same under incandescent light and quite different under LED.

You can calibrate your monitor to your printer, so what comes out of your printer will match what is on your screen, but it won't look like what a different printer will produce.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MacBH928
thanks for sharing.

1-Can you extract text from pdf or alter it? I am little surprised you say they send back and forth in PDF since in my mind PDF means 1 uneditable copy. I know there are PDF editing tools but those kind of like trick it or something.

I think something is getting lost without the history as each person replies to a previous person. The original argument was that teachers don't need Word. My point was universities professors need to prepare manuscripts and practically speaking they will do so in Word. Someone else suggested PDF but to your point that is basically a read-only format.

The contents of a PDF can be extracted for input into InDesign, etc but will require a lot of (likely very manual) cleanup. I suspect publishers would much prefer even TeX or Markdown over PDF.

But back to trying to get us out of this detour to a detour down a rabbit hole, I think the conclusion from all this is that PDF is not suitable for submission to publishers and the like and most practically that means Word. Which means university professors are going to want Office both for collaboration with their colleagues and final submission of manuscripts.

I am sure there are exceptions by discipline and/or with a few outlier professors but those are the 5 or likely 1% cases.

2-Another thing that surprises me is that PDF was supposed to be a standard format, now I hear there are different variations and flavours and not all PDFs are compatible. I recently learned about PDF/a

They are all PDF but as a versitible format one can impose more structure around the features that are used and/or how it is organized, etc. As an analogy, every outline is a text document but not every text document is an outline. Knowing that the materials you receive are in outline form let's you read and make assumptions about the document faster. As in math, imposing structure on something may seem limiting but it can also make it more powerful.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.