Slashdot Mirror
Panther's TextEdit to Open MS Word Files
2muchcoffeeman writes "Further signs that Jobs and Gates probably won't be vacationing together anytime soon: New Damage has what looks to be screenshot proof of Panther's TextEdit.app opening a Microsoft Word .DOC file. Panther beta users who have tried this report at MacSlash that it works, to a point. So what's next? Is Apple now going to bring back the late, great MacWrite Pro?"
sweet. I use text edit to do all my programming and school work already, now I can open word files too? SWEEAHT
Latewire
Why did they use a PDF to display a screenshot, I wonder. Any ideas?
Apple could surely use code from Openoffice.org to create an LGPL component that could do the conversion for them... couldn't they? It would be so much better than firing up Oo.O for a simple Word document.
Apple has been getting bold. And I love it. I still wonder about it all though. Safari rocks. Of course MS gets scared and stops making IE for Mac. FinalCut Pro kicks ass. Now Adobe wants to stop making Premier for the Mac. Apple has Keynote to compete with PowerPoint. And PDF creation with OS X is damn simple.
.doc files made on a PC. Go Apple!
Apple is taking on all the big boys...something you just don't see these days. It's very exciting. And let's all be honest. Why do Mac users buy MS Office? Because it's good? Nope. So they can open up
"He uses statistics as a drunken man uses lampposts...for support rather than illumination." - Andrew Lang
The problem with any application providing support for MS Office formats is that the format changes from version to version, therefore it is difficult to preserve the content and formatting of documents perfectly. Anybody using OpenOffice.org will notice that formatting done on MS Word is modified slightly when opened in OpenOffice.org - for documents where layouts are more complicated and space matters (e.g. CVs), this causes problems.
If Apple can create a filter that preserves complex formatting, it should be on to a winner for home users. However, I somewhat doubt that Apple can do so, when Microsoft's own versions of Office can't even cope with changes in the file format...
Whether Apple will leak down stuff like this to Linux.
After all, when they went to BSD, they inherited most all the apps and filters from Linux too.
Here's a link to a freeware app that already enables Cocoa applications to do a similar thing, but with text only: AntiWord Service. It works on Mac OS X 10.1.5 and higher.
It works, but it's not perfect, in some of my documents there are some minor problems, mostly with escape characters. Though, more importantly the fonts are rendered beautifully, instead of the jagged fonts that one has to deal with when using Office v.X.
Apple should but GoBeProductive and develope it under the GPL. That would be phat!
Welcome to the land of the free...pay toll ahead...no photography...please open your bag...
...because it's true.
I have heard rumors of Apple working on an Office suite which includes a word processor called "Document" and a spreadsheet app cleverly called "Spreadsheet". It seems as though they are going to test and hopefully perfect the most important feature in TextEdit first, reading .doc files.
.doc files perfectly and resave them into Document's native XML format. Document will hopefully be available for Mac OS X and Windows.
.doc format has a death grip on the business world. Unless there is an affordable alternative that can read .doc files it isn't going very far.
Once they have the bugs worked out, they will release Document which will be able to open
Microsoft's
The word processor is the only piece of the office package that most users need. Apple should make just Document for the PC and make it affordable. It will introduce many PC users to how software should be written. Like the iPod it will be a trojan horse that will hopefully cause them to consider a Mac for their next purchase.
Seriously.
This is a great feature, it makes my day (no sarcasm), but when all's said and done, it's just a document format.
So what I don't understand is:
1) Why would MS think this is a *bad* thing?
2) Why is everybody so enthousiastic, besides from the obvious, being that you can browse a Word document without opening Office or OpenOffice?
ps: am not trying to insult developers here, just curious what this means to you enthousiasts out there...
cheers.
I think, therefore I am...I think.
...Apple puts a talking paperclip into TextEdit
I just got Slashdotted.
So far, I'm holding up, thanks to Smallbits, my host. AWESOME host, also host of Bungie.org.
I am going to make a t-shirt that says: "I've been Slashdotted. Have you?"
Mikey-San
Karma: +Eleventy billion (mostly affected by watching Celebrity Jeopardy)
Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Jobs mention this and/or show it (however briefly) during the keynote?
In other news Microsoft has announced they will stop releasing individual Office releases for Windows, and will istead embed Office into Windows itself. They have also announced it will stop development of Office v.X for Mac OS X.
The NeXT inspired Grab application outputs in TIFF format. I, like many people, have never been able to find the key-combos for screen capture in the OS X documentation, so I just use Grab. (But, hey, now I guess I know what the combo is since people have listed it here! Thanks!)
It is also nice to be able to create documents and share them with those less fortunate (Windows people). There is no spreadsheet program that is near what Excel does.
Indeed. Excel vX for Mac is superior in some ways to the Windows version. Where I work at present I do not have access to any serious database and statistical analysis software, so I'm stuck using Excel to manage a list. The Mac version makes it is easy to use Excel like Access, since it includes a feature called "list manager" which allows you to filter data sets with ease. The Windows version lacks this feature completely...
Of course MS gets scared and stops making IE for Mac.
Now come on. Everyone knows Microsoft dropped its support for IE because it wasn't making any money. ;-)
On a more serious note, considering that the browser was a freebie, why didn't Microsoft continue to improve it after its initial release? Does anyone remember the fancy flash animation MS produced starring "Zippy" that showed IE with a built-in media player and other nifty features? WTF?
Your point about MS Office is right on, though. Initially it seemed like a cool offering. But damn is it an annoying set of programs! I actually find it more pleasant to use Dreamweaver to make documents, and then print them into PDF files.
-- thinkyhead software and media
Aren't those the same list of things that if done by Microsoft would have you screaming bloody murder though?
No, absolutely not. The things that have bugged me have been:
All that Apple has done is to push standards, make excellent use of open standards and Open Source APIs, and apply a consistent and elegant design aesthetic to their OS and their applications. In short, they have excelled through integrity and hard work. If Apple has an unfair advantage, it is only that they have applied a greater effort than others seem to have the courage to do.
-- thinkyhead software and media
Of course Panther has built-in X11, but we don't know yet whether it will be any prettier than the X11 beta. My fingers are crossed.
-- thinkyhead software and media
And the MSIE discontinuation was a shot across the bow. If Apple continues this trend, they will convince MS that they are not needed. The rumored Exchange client will die in its infancy and Office will go bye-bye. /panic attack
It might be a good thing...
I had a sucky sig.
pudge, fucking warm us with a [PDF] like google does when linking to shitty PDF files. Thank you.
Jakob Nielsen's Alertbox: PDF: Unfit for Human Consumption
Phillip
When I first heard of Apple using display pdf for the gui and high resolution icons in something named "the dock", I was hoping that they had implemented what SGI did with their OpenGL--vector graphics on the desktop. Now, that was (is still? been 10 years, kinda hazy) an amazing desktop. each window had a thumbwheel that would continuously scale the icons in the window. the icon for the media drive would change to show empty/full/in use by overlayed animation. Eye candy, sure, but informative eye candy. Main things about a vectorized gui--clarity and speed.
Seems to me that apple has everything in place to do this--opengl and display pdf. They can go a step further to my ultimate dream--resolution independent wysiwyg. That is, system-wide, having 12 point type be 12 points high whether the display is 72ppi or 123ppi. Also, having the menu bar stay the same apparent height through resolution changes. (yes, my eyes are getting old.) Win hints at doing this with small/med/large font selections, but Apple has the technology to do it right.
Shoot me if I am being simple minded, but I think this is going to turn into a serious problem.
I think Apple is marginalising itself. The beauty of having Office v.X for the Mac is that I can handle all the files which my PC using friends and collegues send. I can edit them and send them back. (For example using "track changes" in Word.) The question them becomes: Will Apple ever be able to produce its own software which will read MS Word, Excel and Powerpoint files properly (And I mean properly, with no errors - you would be surprised how pissed off people get when there is a slight inconsistency between the platforms), provide the same functionallity as Office and so on and so forth? I somehow doubt it. This is a hard problem. The imperfections of the open source efforts is testimony to this.
I myself use LaTeX when I can since I intend to be able to read my work in 20 years time, but if it turns out that the problems mentioned above start to become real problems, I will probably be forced to switch to a PC and make it dual-boot with Linux. And that really makes me very sad because I like my Mac.
When I read the parent, it occurred to me that this is much more than TextEdit being able to read Word files.
/Developer/Examples/AppKit/TextEdit
TextEdit is a very simple program. Apple even supply the full source for it in the developer tools under
All the real work is done by standard Cocoa classes NSTextView and NSTextStorage. If TextEdit understands Word files, it means that they have added the support to these standard classes. That means that *ALL* cocoa applications will inherit this functionality.
Best thing that could happen to apple. Especially if Apple hasn't already released their office suite.
We need to kill the myth that the Mac needs office to survive right here and now.
Yeah, and you guys panned the ipod too: http://apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=01/10/23
Couldn't this be done 90% accurately with a plugin wrapper around a Abiword/KWord/OOffice.org importer ??
Very funny, Apple Works is like the Ford Taurus of Software. It's as bland as a Camry, but just as dependable. Apple claims it won't read / write Word documents, but I have yet to have a problem with them, and I've used it since it was Claris Woks 2. My friends also all use Apple Works, and version 6 is pretty. I don't know if it will handle every bell or whistle of Word docs, but it will render, and save a basic Word doc just fine. I use OpenOffice on my PC, and that copes too, so I'm sure it's good on OSX. I use Apple Works on my Mac, because I run Classic. I wouldn't worry about the $500 thing, the price is dropping soon, but there are plenty of alternatives.
OK then... Granted, if that's their goal, then Panther reading/writing .doc files is a good start. But it sure doesn't help when I try to take a Mac into work and I can't access the office email system because of Exchange. Sure, POP/IMAP work, but what about all the public folders I need and Calendar stuff? I ran it in Classic for a year or two and it worked great, but it sure was nice hearing how it's supposedly coming for OS X so I might not be the office oddity.
I had a sucky sig.
It will be a bigger problem if apple doesn't begin developing this software because microsoft shows a tendancy to no longer want to develop for macs. Office for mac probably won't be around much longer, with obvious negative ramifications for most mac users. IE is the first example of this tendacy away from mac development, and there is also the recent purchase of Virtual PC by MS. I also have doubts as to whether Apple will be able to, essentially, duplicate the features of office, but I don't see an attempt at this as Apple marginalizing itself, but more as a pre-emptive strike in the spirit of Safari; provide a replacement that mac users will cozy up to before their preferred application is axed. That's my theory, anyway.
Does anyone know what's the status of AppleWorks development and where is it going?
WordPad, bundled with Windows (at least it's in Win2K, I don't have an XP box to check) will open basic Word documents just fine. I'm still waiting for my Panther CD's so I can't check the limits of TextEdit.
So, OS X will now have some basic functionality built into it that Windows does. That's good, but I don't think it's the end of MS Office.
I doubt very much that that would happen. After all, Apple already has the developers. Why would they need the (non portable) program as well?
It sounds like Apple Works will do the job. It does seem a little strange to buy the Porshe of computers with the Mercedes of operating systems to run the Ford Taurus of applications.
Yeah, too bad that Apple doesn't have some technology for managing calendars and synchronizing them with other networked sources that they could build upon...
Oh, wait! ;)
If Apple is pursuing a strategy of replacing Microsoft technology wholesale, then I wouldn't be the least bit surprised to find an update to iSync that knows how to push bits between an Exchange server and iCal.
Seems to me that's a better rationalization for iCal's existence than trying to push Palm out of the Palm Desktop business... even if Palm Desktop for Mac could use the competition.
Sure, but does it support the neato macro virii that help make office life so much of an edge-of-your-seat experience?
You know what?
One of Apple's best kept secrets is that there is a version of AppleWorks for Windows. It is only available to education customers however. You get both the Mac and Windows versions on one CD for $39!
From Apple's site:
System Requirements
AppleWorks 6.2 for Mac OS X
An iMac, iBook, Power Mac G3, Power Mac G4, Power Mac G4 Cube, PowerBook G3, or PowerBook G4
128MB of physical RAM
Mac OS X, v10.0 or later
A CD-ROM drive (for installation)
An Internet connection*
QuickTime 5 or higher (included on CD)
To use Mac OS X, you will need a computer with at least 128MB of physical RAM.
AppleWorks 6.2 for Mac OS 8/9
An Apple computer with a PowerPC processor
24MB of physical RAM with virtual memory set to at least 25MB
Mac OS 8.1 or later
A CD-ROM drive (for installation)
An Internet connection*
QuickTime 4.1.2 or higher (QuickTime 5 included on CD)
AppleWorks 6.2 for Windows
A PC with a Pentium processor
32MB of physical RAM
Windows 95, 98, Me, 2000 and XP
A CD-ROM (for installation)
An Internet connection*
QuickTime 4.1.2 or higher (QuickTime 5 included on CD)
Internet Explorer 5 (included on CD)
If Safari is based on Khtml, it should follow that if apple releases a new Office Suite for OSX, it would be based on KOffice.
Open Office is to Mozilla (ignored by apple) as
KOffice is to Khtml.
What's truly funny is that I remember that TextEdit in the very first public beta of OSX (a few years back) was already able to open Word docs. This feature never made it to any of the current upgrades though. I guess they had planned for this for a while, but MS b*tched at them a little too loud at the time. Now the question is: is this gonna make it in the released version this time around?!?
A Ford Taurus still gets you from point a to point b, just as well as a porshe or mercedes... though the ladder two cars does it with style :)
Not necessarily. That would be very nice of them, but I think we're more likely to see some kind of file translation API before we see esoteric document formats being folded into NS classes.
-- thinkyhead software and media
Quartz is not "Display PDF". Don't know where you saw or why you decided to make up that retarded name. Quartz uses the Generic PDF format as an engine to Quartz. This was chosen over Display Postscript for more reasons than simply licensing costs. Apple had considered using the full PDF format, but the costs were higher--generic PDF is free to implement. They (Apple) did not invent generic PDF, Adobe did.
Go, Apple! I've been kind of lukewarm towards the idea of upgrading to Panther, but this would definitely get me there. Duplicate more functions of Office in OS X, and I'll even shoot my PC.
Any time I receive an Excel spreadsheet I open it in RagTime which can equally export its spreadsheet components so they can be opened in Excel by clients.
.4 release so it is most likely very stable. However I'm still waiting for a response from their nominated Australian distributors so I can acquire my own copy. Meanwhile I've been surviving on the free (for non commercial use) RagTime Solo which was their final version for OS 9.
RagTime isn't only a spreadsheet, but its spreadsheet components allow me to do more than I could ever imagine trying to do in Excel. It is also a layout package and thus provides a one stop tool for data intensive publishing such as price lists and the sports results systems I cut my teeth on.
RagTime was originally developed for the Mac only but the developers got badly burnt after investing heavily in a new version which made ground breaking use of Apple's soon to be abandoned OpenDoc component technology for which it was particularly well suited.
Understandably they were then a bit tardy getting an OS X version out, but that version is now at
-- Our systemic servants do not good masters make.
--
"Until the RIAA realises that the solution is to offer its own affordable, on-line download services, it's doomed to play a futile game of whack-a-mole with ever more sophisticated file trading networks," Julian Midgely, UK Campaign for Digital Rights. perfect...
Seems to me that's a better rationalization for iCal's existence than trying to push Palm out of the Palm Desktop business... even if Palm Desktop for Mac could use the competition.
I always thought iCal existed to provide somewhere to shove Apple programmers who can't come up with a decent interface.
Perhaps I'm just spoiled by the rest of the iApps, but iCal really blows. If Palm Desktop wasn't an even more dreadful piece of shit, I wouldn't use it at all.
Ah, well.
--saint
The point isn't to be John Galt-- the point is to be your own person.
Maybe you need to actually read that book.
Yeah, and you guys panned the ipod too: http://apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=01/10/23
The point isn't to be John Galt-- the point is to be your own person.
Maybe you need to actually read that book.
Assuming that you're responding to my sig, I didn't claim to read the book. I just thought it was a funny post. That's all.
(For some reason I've never been able to actually finish an Ayn Rand book. There's just always too much stuff on my "to read" list that seems a lot more appealing. But that's more a matter of taste than anything else.)
--saint
Well, if you'd read the book you'd realize that the post you're referring to is idiotic-- anti-intellectual.
IF you've only read about a hundred pages of Atlas, then you should try reading it again... it takes awhile to get going and initially you find yourself saying "these characters are unrealistic"... but eventually, you realize they are very realistic-- its preconcieved notions that make them seem unrealistic at first.
Yeah, and you guys panned the ipod too: http://apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=01/10/23
Not hard at all if one has followed the history of all of this and read the .pdf specifications---they're available on-line, in the same places as I have referenced the PostScript and Type 1 font format docs on my web site.
.pdf, but unless you're considering volunteer efforts like xpdf, it costs to pay the people to do the work.
An AC said:
>Quartz is not "Display PDF". Don't know where
>you saw or why you decided to make up that
>retarded name
It's a fairly standard descriptive term among NeXT users.
>Quartz uses the Generic PDF format as an engine
>to Quartz.
What is ``Generic PDF''? There's PDF version 1.0 (Acrobat 1), v1.1 (Acrobat 2), v1.2 (Acrobat 3), v1.3 (Acrobat 4), v1.4 (Acrobat 5), etc. There's also PDF/X, which is being put forth as an ISO standard by an industry consortium.
>This was chosen over Display
>Postscript for more reasons than simply
>licensing costs.
Right, Adobe said that they simply couldn't have it.
>Apple had considered using the full PDF format,
>but the costs were higher--generic PDF is free
>to implement. They (Apple) did not invent generic
>PDF, Adobe did.
Adobe created the PDF format, but there's no ``Generic PDF''. Apple did implement a subset of PDF capabilities initially, but there was no specific term for what they implemented / didn't implement before doing so (unless it was ``tricksy things which take a lot of work). Apple has steadily worked to improve this, and Panther / 1.3's pdf support now includes things like CoolShades which weren't supported before.
Free to implement? Are you saying Mike Paquette and all the other engineers at Apple to create PDF worked for free? (see Mike Paquette's posts to usenet:comp.sys.next.advocacy/hardware on how it felt to spend his first years at Apple after purchasing NeXT ``recreating my previous ten years of work at NeXT on Display PostScript''.
There's no licensing fee in implementing
William
Sphinx of black quartz, judge my vow.