Despite the lack of a spreadsheet application, Pages does have rudimentary support for charts - including a small spreadsheet-like tool that lets you input data for your charts.  The charts themselves look great and the default color schemes are worlds better than those produced in Excel, but if Apple expects iWork to succeed, they need a fully functional spreadsheet application out soon. 

As you can expect, Pages has the ability to import Microsoft Word documents, and so far, it's actually done a pretty impressive job of importing Word documents without any issues.  When I say that Pages supports importing of Microsoft Word documents, I mean just that. Even if you open a Word document with Pages, the application will simply import the document into a blank Pages document, instead of opening the Word document that you clicked on.

Much like Keynote, Pages can export to a variety of formats - PDF, Word Document, HTML, RTF and plain text.  Pages relies heavily on CSS for its HTML output, but it would be nice for Apple to include a simplified HTML export for people like me who just need something to produce clean, simple code without any need to preserve font styles.  To Apple's credit, Pages does an excellent job of making sure whatever it exports looks just like what you've typed in Pages. 

As a Microsoft Word competitor, Pages is unfortunately lacking in a number of areas - not because Word does things better, but because Word still has a number of features that weren't implemented in Pages 1.0.  There are no document tracking options in Pages to track changes by multiple authors to a document, there's no support for mail merge, no grammar check (which may be a blessing in disguise as I've personally never appreciated Word's grammar check), and as I mentioned before, no spreadsheet complement with which to interface.

The one thing that Pages does an extremely good job of is not thinking that it knows what you want to do.  Pages will not look at something that you're typing and suggest a different or better way of doing it. Personally, that's one of the biggest issues that I've had with Word since it started gaining in "intelligence".

As a publishing application, Pages does make creating flashy documents extremely easy.  Much like many of Apple's other applications, Pages accomplishes this simplicity by including a number of well designed templates that are quite modifiable. 


An example of a Pages template

Using Microsoft Word templates is taboo, since pretty much everyone has Word and can spot a Word template from a mile away (e.g. the resume templates), but one of the benefits of Pages is the templates that are unique enough that you do avoid that embarrassing problem.  Granted, if Pages catches on, the novelty and exclusivity will fade, but the one thing about Pages is that modifying, customizing and personalizing the templates is extremely easy.  Much like OS X, everything in Pages templates is drag-able, but unlike other applications, you can pretty much drag or resize anything without screwing up the pagination of your document or the layout of the template. 

Performance-wise, Pages does extremely well - it's just as fast and as snappy as you would expect an application to be.  The one exception seems to be when manipulating images in templates. Even on a G5, things aren't as smooth as they should be.  Hopefully, it's something that Apple will address in future updates to Pages. 

Right now, Pages has a great deal of potential, but it's not there quite yet as the clear (preferred) alternative to other applications.  Apple also seems to know this as they have built-in a comment submission system into Pages for suggestions and improvements directly to Apple. 

For what it does, it does very well, but it is the missing features and supplementary applications that hurt Pages the most.  It's an application to keep an eye on, but right now, Pages and the iWork suite just aren't at the same level of quality and superiority as the OS on which they run.

A First Look at Pages Final Words
Comments Locked

198 Comments

View All Comments

  • Ecgtheow - Tuesday, January 25, 2005 - link

    #56: Probably not.
  • sluramod - Tuesday, January 25, 2005 - link

    Probably stupid question, but I'll ask anyway...

    Is Tiger upgrade going to be free for Panther users?

    Alex
  • HardwareD00d - Tuesday, January 25, 2005 - link

    the Mac Mini sounds like it would be a fun toy to play around with, but it's a bit too expensive for what you get. If you don't mind paying close to $600 for a screenless laptop, go for it. I personally hate laptops cause they have such crappy performance. They're only useful if your always on the go.
  • msva124 - Tuesday, January 25, 2005 - link

    Exactly #53. I can't see the word of mouth from all of the 256MB mini owners being too great, which is a shame because at 512MB it would have had a much better reputation.
  • bob661 - Tuesday, January 25, 2005 - link

    #35
    Unless the buyer is an AT reader or the salesman is an AT reader or the Best Buy ad says buy the extra 256MB of ram, they'll buy the unit at $499 without upgrades. Unless they specify the extras or a salesman suggests getting some extras, they'll get the unit as is. If it gets too much over $499, they'll choke and go get a Dell with the "free" flat panel. Like #32 said, cost and name. I guess it really is hard for some of you to imagine yourselves as a typical computer buyer.
  • downtowncb - Tuesday, January 25, 2005 - link

    Anand concedes:
    "Working as a simple file, ftp or web server with no end user interaction in the OS, you can get by with a 256MB configuration, and the same goes for a single user, single application usage environment..."

    I know that most of the people here would never dream of using a machine with only 256 MB of RAM, but for a few people 256 MB is enough, especially those who just need a cheap, reliable web server that they can stick in the basement and administer with VNC or even ssh.
  • MIDIman - Tuesday, January 25, 2005 - link

    I'm not sure if this has been mentioned above, but I think a smaller system, along the lines of something at mini-itx.com's store front would be a more useful comparison than the stock Dell. It would allow a better representation when you take size into the comparison.

    IMHO - when these two are put side-by-side, you'll find similar performance issues as well - i.e. needs for 512mb, a faster HD, etc.
  • elvisizer - Tuesday, January 25, 2005 - link

    48, that might be it- i always keep my pictures huge, since I don't have a webpage of my own like anand :)
  • sprockkets - Tuesday, January 25, 2005 - link

    Perhaps the applications alone are worth me trying a Mac Mini. BUT, more ram, and use Hitachi's 7200RPM hdd and that will make it MUCH better.

    Then again, I rather just use apps on a completely GPL system rather than a proprietary system. If only it was easier to find more PM itx systems, a PM system in a cubit case would appeeal more to me.
  • jasonsRX7 - Tuesday, January 25, 2005 - link

    I get the feeling that he's using export to resize the pictures for the web. Just dragging them out of iPhoto will retain their original size.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now