Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Apple Converting Trial and Pirated iWork, iLife and Aperture To Full Versions

Soulskill posted about 10 months ago | from the defensive-indifference dept.

Piracy 134

tlhIngan writes "One aspect about the new OS X Mavericks release was that all Apple produced software was to be downloadable and updatable through the Mac App Store. However, this raises the obvious question: what happens to users who bought the software beforehand? Initial reports showed that the Mac App Store scanned your hard drive for software and offered to associate it with your Apple ID. The scans even found trial and pirated versions and upgraded those to fully-licensed versions. Even more interestingly, this is not a bug, and it appears Apple is turning a blind eye to the practice, giving away copies of iLife, iWork and Aperture to users who own trial or even pirated versions of the apps. Apple has also recently stopped providing downloadable trial versions of iLife, iWork and Aperture from their web site."

cancel ×

134 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Identity Play (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45237923)

its associated with your corporate ID - apparently more valuable that the person-years it takes to write the software. Why is your identity so valuable ?

Re:Identity Play (0)

brxndxn (461473) | about 10 months ago | (#45238123)

They can sell that information to the government that will pay for it with our tax dollars!

maybe

Re:Identity Play (1)

Holladon (1620389) | about 10 months ago | (#45238391)

Since when does the government ask nicely and offer to pay for people's information?

Re:Identity Play (4, Interesting)

jythie (914043) | about 10 months ago | (#45238691)

It could be less about the value of your ID, and more about trying to get people into the fold. Not only would this likely simplify the development and testing (thus decrease the cost of deployment) but it could generate some good will and keep people using the Apple stack. And since Apple is more a hardware and media company then a software one, getting people to pay for their software is probably a relatively low priority, esp when it might be in conflict with the other two major ones.

Ok then (0)

eclectro (227083) | about 10 months ago | (#45237937)

When can I buy an OS for a future "hackintosh" that I might build?

Re:Ok then (1)

kthreadd (1558445) | about 10 months ago | (#45238087)

Probably never.

Same Train (2)

SuperKendall (25149) | about 10 months ago | (#45238265)

Apple is now providing it for free. Do the people who bought it get refunds?

You can't, it's free also. Why would you want to pay more than nothing?

Re:Ok then (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45238315)

I have an MSI Wind running OSX right now. You might want to be more specific with your request...

Re:Ok then (1)

gl4ss (559668) | about 10 months ago | (#45238339)

you can't so you can't argue that you paid for it.

Re: Ok then (4, Insightful)

thetoadwarrior (1268702) | about 10 months ago | (#45238623)

Apple is a hardware company and now don't make money on OSes not sold with the hardware so what makes you think they'd want to shoot themselves in the foot? You can install what you want on a mac but osx is mac simply because they just want to sell hardware. If you want freely installable unix software use Linux. There's nothing wrong with it.

Re:Ok then (0, Offtopic)

MisterSquid (231834) | about 10 months ago | (#45239239)

PayPal $299.99 to apple.com@mistersquid.com making sure to include your

  • Name
  • Shipping Address
  • Social Security or Tax Identification #
  • Mother's maiden name
  • Date of Birth
  • City of Birth

and I... I mean APPLE (ahem) will mail you a Blu-Ray version of Mavericks for VIPs.*

*caveat emptor. Offer subject to limitations and conditions which I will not reveal to you unless, well, yeah never.

Not a Dick Move (5, Interesting)

DexterIsADog (2954149) | about 10 months ago | (#45237943)

Good job, Apple. This will likely increase revenue from some of those whom you make legit, and will warm the hearts of some who, like me, despise all things Apple. Well, a little less today.

Re:Not a Dick Move (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45238113)

It's only a dick move to the people who actually bought copies of that software.

Apple is now providing it for free. Do the people who bought it get refunds?

Spot the Real Dick (5, Insightful)

SuperKendall (25149) | about 10 months ago | (#45238189)

Apple is now providing it for free. Do the people who bought it get refunds?

I don't know. Is Apple able to go back in time and prevent you from deriving any use of the products until today?

For anyone that bought anything fairly recently, Apple does provide refunds...

Re:Not a Dick Move (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45238259)

They are not. It still costs money.

Re:Not a Dick Move (0)

gl4ss (559668) | about 10 months ago | (#45238455)

apple might also put bsa on them.

probably not though. but scanning like that is kind of a dick move too.

Re:Not a Dick Move (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45238481)

the only dick moving is the big black on in your ass.

Re:Not a Dick Move (1)

newcastlejon (1483695) | about 10 months ago | (#45239747)

BSA: This person stole our client's software! We demand justice!
Judge: Interesting... now, tell me why your client then gave the defendant a free legitimate copy of said software.
*silence*
I would truly enjoy seeing the BSA try to swing that one.

Re:Not a Dick Move (2)

flimflammer (956759) | about 10 months ago | (#45238601)

Do hardware manufacturers provide refunds to people who paid full price for hardware when it came out, as the price gradually goes lower and lower?

Should they?

Re:Not a Dick Move (1)

jythie (914043) | about 10 months ago | (#45238713)

Eh, people tend to get pissy when they think someone else might have gotten a better deal then them, esp when concepts like amnesty come up.

One finds a happier life when they look at if they are getting a good value for their money, not what risks others took and got a better one.

Re:Not a Dick Move (1)

whoop (194) | about 10 months ago | (#45240619)

Yes, they should! And investments need to demand more money/refund you money if they go up/down on their markets. Oh, you bought Google stock when it was $5/share? Well, it's $1015 today, so pay up, buddy!

Then there won't be any more Wall Street crises and everyone will be happy.

Re:Not a Dick Move (0)

Lumpy (12016) | about 10 months ago | (#45240823)

Yes they do, the holy google sends out refund checks all the time for Android devices...

Oh wait.....

Re:Not a Dick Move (5, Insightful)

Anubis IV (1279820) | about 10 months ago | (#45239299)

It's only a dick move to the people who actually bought copies of that software.

So, if I understand you correctly, I'm supposed to get worked up into a tizzy because I paid $10 for Keynote, got years of use out of it, and am now getting a free upgrade to the next version, simply because software pirates and people who are shelling out hundreds of dollars for new machines are also getting that free upgrade?

To put it bluntly, I have better things to do with my life than worry about such things (e.g. responding to Anonymous Cowards on /,), and, honestly, I won't begrudge someone else a good turn of events if I feel like I was treated fairly, which I was. But if you are worked up over something like this, then yes, to answer your question, Apple does offer refunds, so go and get your refund and be happy with everyone else this affects. I know I am, since I'll be getting years more of use out of a great piece of software, all for $10 spent years ago.

That was money well spent.

Re:Not a Dick Move (1)

Lumpy (12016) | about 10 months ago | (#45240839)

It's not even software pirates. if you had the trial version installed, you know the 10% legal trial version... It upgraded to full legit for you. That is not Pirating, That is called a gift.

Re:Not a Dick Move (1)

sl4shd0rk (755837) | about 10 months ago | (#45238395)

Good job, Apple.

So... rewarding piracy is what makes a good company? Not sure I agree with that. The loss in sales is most likely offset in product pricing (you're paying more because of those who leech).

Re:Not a Dick Move (1)

amazeofdeath (1102843) | about 10 months ago | (#45238631)

Read the relevant article. Also, if they are already giving away the latest iWork and iLife suites, what's the point of having some of your users with older and possibly vulnerable versions?

Re:Not a Dick Move (1)

Timothy Hartman (2905293) | about 10 months ago | (#45238775)

You don't have to worry about Aperature trial being venerable in Mavericks. The trial flat out won't even launch. That's the ultimate form of security there.

Re:Not a Dick Move (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45239087)

Venerable one: I think your skills as a computer user needs serious upgrading. Unless you really meant Aperature which would be a new product.

Re:Not a Dick Move (1)

DexterIsADog (2954149) | about 10 months ago | (#45238707)

No - like I said in my very brief post, converting people into legitimate customers, who are more likely to start, or keep buying is what makes a good company.

Reading comprehension!

Re:Not a Dick Move (2)

axis_omega (771398) | about 10 months ago | (#45238807)

What lost sales? they wouldn't got that money in the first place ! I applaud the move. You got a pirated application that you really use. Now you are bind to them. And for every update that cost a little you will have to pay. So they could in theory get some money (back) from a non (and never would) paying pirate^^^^^^ person.
In the process they get to know how much of their applications gets pirated versus legitimate copies. They probably get stats from the hardware used other related stuff like software, age gender, etc. So it can be cross analyze to target the right group of customer.

It is the most evil scheme ever imagined !

Re:Not a Dick Move (1)

BasilBrush (643681) | about 10 months ago | (#45239955)

And for every update that cost a little you will have to pay.

There are no updates that cost a little. All App Store updates are free. By giving people who have trial or pirated versions of iWork a registered App Store version, they have ensured that those people will never pay for those applications.

Here's the real reason for pirates getting the update: Apple used to ship iWork in a shrink wrap on optical media. And it had no DRM. Pirate versions are therefore identical to purchased versions. It would be impossible to let legitimate customers have updates and yet keep them from pirates.

Not sure why they aren't denying updates to trial users. But perhaps they just didn't think it was worth checking. By bundling iWork with new machines, they've almost made is a no cost app suite anyway.

Re:Not a Dick Move (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45240689)

What lost sales? they wouldn't got that money in the first place

Although it's popular around here to parrot that line, it's bogus. That's not what lost sales/lost profits are about. Because it's an issue of damages and not about what the five-finger discounter would have done if he couldn't have found it for free, it's about what the seller *didn't* get that she was entitled to.

The nature of the bargain is that if I'm selling something for $10, and you get the use of that something but I don't get my $10, then I have lost sales of $10, because there are n copies out there that I should have been paid for, but only got paid for n-1 of them.

It may be true that if you weren't able to get your hands on it for free, you would have simply not used it and I wouldn't get that $10. But you did benefit from using it without my benefiting from the $10, and that's what the award of "lost sales" makes whole. Even if you do me the "favor" of making a one without using my resources, it's still diminishing my investment in the product by narrowing the base of cost recovery.

You can't go after every lost sale, and even if you could, the legal and PR cost of doing so would dwarf what you could collect, but that doesn't mean it's not a lost (i.e., unaccounted for) sale.

Re:Not a Dick Move (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45238709)

With Apple now seemingly turning away from being the platform for "premium" users who prefer their consumption to be conspicuous, I wonder who might step in to take their place?

Re:Not a Dick Move (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45239123)

With Apple now seemingly turning away from being the platform for "premium" users

Whoa, that's quite a leap there buddy.

Re:Not a Dick Move (1)

Lumpy (12016) | about 10 months ago | (#45240863)

"With Apple now seemingly turning away from being the platform for "premium" users...."
were you hit in the head? you cant get any more premium than the pricing and design of the frigging Mac Pro.

Re:Not a Dick Move (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45238755)

Yes. good move. Apple finally realized that you can't sell crappy software. Open Source folks found this out long ago. You can, however, sell good software.

Re:Not a Dick Move (-1, Troll)

Darinbob (1142669) | about 10 months ago | (#45239363)

This implies that they're forcing the use of the store though! Thus, you MUST have an Apple ID to buy Apple software, no more just buying it from a third party, or buying it online, or installing from a DVD, etc. They're using this to track you and you approve of this?

Re:Not a Dick Move (2)

DexterIsADog (2954149) | about 10 months ago | (#45239709)

I'm not sure you're correct about the implication, but even if you are, the store offers to associate the software with the Apple ID, it doesn't force one to do it. And if that lets Apple track users, well, that's part of their walled garden ecosystem, I imagine most Apple customers are used to it.

But as for tracking *me*, no, they're not, because I do not buy Apple products.

My comment was about the smart move to bring wayward users into the fold, instead of shunning them or going after them with lawsuits. Surely you think a voluntary non-lawsuit option is better than a lawsuit, no?

Re:Not a Dick Move (1)

Lumpy (12016) | about 10 months ago | (#45240879)

No they are not, you still can easily install 3rd party software, Stop spreading lies.

Shame about intel mac pros (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45237947)

Apple have cut off OS updates to two generations now. Yes, these glorious quad xeon 64 bit machines are now unsupported, despite the fact there little more than generic intel PCs running Apple's OS.

Re:Shame about intel mac pros (3, Informative)

RyuuzakiTetsuya (195424) | about 10 months ago | (#45238001)

two generations of Mac pros is kind of vague. :) Last gen mac pro came out in 2010.

mac pros as of early 2008 are supported by Mavericks.

Re:Shame about intel mac pros (1)

Anubis IV (1279820) | about 10 months ago | (#45239027)

<pedant>They released an updated Mac Pro just last year, though most people considered it barely worth mention, since it was a minor update after a long wait. Even so, that would be the last-gen Mac Pro, and it was in 2012.</pedant>

Re:Shame about intel mac pros (4, Informative)

Rosyna (80334) | about 10 months ago | (#45238023)

Current versions of Mac OS X require 64-bit EFI. The original Mac Pros only had 32-bit EFI. Mountain Lion does not have a 32-bit kernel and will not load 32-bit drivers in kernel space (kexts). If you replace the graphics card in the original Mac Pro with one that has a 64-bit driver, you can install Mountain Lion on the original MacPro1,1.

See http://www.jabbawok.net/?p=47 [jabbawok.net] for instructions.

Re:Shame about intel mac pros (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45239467)

It seems that you can also install Mountain Lion on the original MacPro1,1 by using the patches provided here:
http://www.osxhackers.com/Installation.html
Apparently no need for a 32bit graphics card and it seems to work with 32-bit EFI, I haven't tried it tho.

Re:Shame about intel mac pros (1)

kthreadd (1558445) | about 10 months ago | (#45238117)

There's a lot of other operating systems to chose from. Linux, various *BSDs or even Windows.

Re:Shame about intel mac pros (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45239191)

3 is not a lot and if you want a modern GUI, which is a GUI allowing you to control 100% of the computer through it, then *BSD and even most Linux distros are not real contenders. So that only leaves you only with Windows.

Re:Shame about intel mac pros (1)

Lumpy (12016) | about 10 months ago | (#45240895)

Please go ahead and install Windows 64 bit on any of those 32 bit only processors. Oh wait, you cant. How about 64 bit linux.... wait that doesnt work either....

ZOMG FOAM AT THE MOUTH ZOMG!

Maybe if you had a clue as to how computers even worked you would understand why they stopped supporting 7 year old computer hardware that were made with the craptastic Core 2 duo processor platform.

Brilliant (4, Interesting)

deathcloset (626704) | about 10 months ago | (#45238145)

Embrace, Extend, Extinguish: Piracy Edition (Piracy being assumed as the natural, efficient and convenient way to get software over the internet). It's working for Adobe, despite glacial user acceptance and strong vociferous opposition.

Step 1) entering product categories involving widely used standards: In this case we look at the "product category" as "minimal effort and cost software downloads" - what everyone lovingly calls digital piracy.

Step 2) extending those standards with proprietary capabilities: Beat-out the pirates on even the 'minimal effort' part by not requiring a crack, key or navigation of noisy comments for affirmation of operation/safety and worry of nested nasty bits in your bytes. Also the cost is actually less, since it's free of money and of questionable legitimacy.

Step 3) using those differences to disadvantage its competitors: No more trial downloads to easily crack, deeper mechanisms for software updates coupled with the ability to release consitent and constant updates which actually contain scoped functionality thereby daunting the crackers and hackers with new security mechanisms and version hell which results in a saturation of the pirate space with even more questionable softwares with varying levels of functionality/stability thus severly diminishing the causual pirate's desire and ability to identify and use the software they wish.

Brilliant. It works. Now I have to pay ;) (I, personally, have a personal moral stance which makes me inevitably wind up paying for, conservatively, %50 of the software I download - because it is the software I actually like or use and YES, believe it or not I actually want to pay programmers to write stuff!).

Still, it seems like there is another shoe to drop here. Now to read everyone else's comments for that shoe.

Re:Brilliant (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45238247)

Go over it again. Pick up some additional data.

Re:Brilliant (1, Interesting)

ColdWetDog (752185) | about 10 months ago | (#45238393)

The weird bit is Aperture. And not Final Cut X (apparently, FTFA). Aperture has been billed as the 'pro' photography app although it's a bit of a lightweight compared with Adobe (may their souls rot in a maggot infested camel turd) offerings. Likewise Final Cut X - although it acts more like a prosumer app than the previous versions of Final Cut and doesn't do half what Premiere Pro / After Effects does (nor does it cost as much).

If Apple opens up Final Cut to this system, then it's pretty clear that Apple is dropping the high end photography / graphics professionals (all two dozen left) for the much larger, potentially more lucrative 'prosumer' market. Which makes me wonder who, if anyone, is planning on buying the Darth Trashcan when it is available.

Call me confused. Personally, I've never liked any of the Apple apps. iWork was limited and buggy when I tried it a couple of years ago. Aperture is just.... weird. I can't wrap my brains around the work flow and Apple has been rather slow at upgrading it (while Abode Lightroom has actually morphed into a good product). Final Cut X is another program that just doesn't work for me - tries to do automatic things when I don't want it do, doesn't do automatic things that I think it should. IMHO Apple should stick to hardware and OS software, although their attempts to at least try to compete with Adobe (AKA 'slimeballs from Hell') is certainly appreciated.

It was simpler in the thrilling days of yesteryear.

Re:Brilliant (1)

omnichad (1198475) | about 10 months ago | (#45238463)

I've never liked any of the Apple apps.

I'm guessing you never used Final Cut Pro before X. I will be sticking with that until it's long past obsolete.

Re:Brilliant (1)

ColdWetDog (752185) | about 10 months ago | (#45241483)

Yep. Been there and done that. I know some people like it but I'll be damned if I can figure out why. When you want it to automate something, you can't. When you want to do something manually, you can't.

Different strokes, I suppose.

Re:Brilliant (2)

tlhIngan (30335) | about 10 months ago | (#45239235)

The weird bit is Aperture. And not Final Cut X (apparently, FTFA). Aperture has been billed as the 'pro' photography app although it's a bit of a lightweight compared with Adobe (may their souls rot in a maggot infested camel turd) offerings. Likewise Final Cut X - although it acts more like a prosumer app than the previous versions of Final Cut and doesn't do half what Premiere Pro / After Effects does (nor does it cost as much).

If Apple opens up Final Cut to this system, then it's pretty clear that Apple is dropping the high end photography / graphics professionals (all two dozen left) for the much larger, potentially more lucrative 'prosumer' market. Which makes me wonder who, if anyone, is planning on buying the Darth Trashcan when it is available.

That's because Apple is upgrading those apps that came out on CD. Aperture was, at one point distributed on CD. As was iWork and iLife. The products contained in them are continuations.

Final Cut Pro X is a complete rewrite of Final Cut Pro, and depending on who you ask, better and worse. But as it's a new product, it doesn't get the "upgrade" treatment. Ditto Logic.

Anyhow, you'd get a bunch of angry people if their Final Cut Pro got upgraded to FCP X. (And the old FCP is still available from Apple, because there's still lots of people using them and they need additional licenses)

Re:Brilliant (2)

Lumpy (12016) | about 10 months ago | (#45240951)

"although it acts more like a prosumer app than the previous versions of Final Cut and doesn't do half what Premiere Pro / After Effects does"

Oh god that is funny. Premier pro is a JOKE in the pro video world, the only people that use it are wedding videographers and kiddies on youtube. The current Final Cut is back to what Final cut 8/9 was like but with a lot of good stuff added.

a LOT of TV shows are edited in Avid, Vegas, and Final Cut, ZERO are edited on Premiere Pro. Premiere Pros Color corrector is horrible at best, etc...

Win8 upgrade did the same. (5, Interesting)

Holammer (1217422) | about 10 months ago | (#45238157)

I bought Win8 using a pirated Win7. I suspect MS turned a blind eye as well, as my poorly cracked copy constantly nagged about being counterfeit software etc.

Re:Win8 upgrade did the same. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45238311)

running a win8 upgrade-only single machine license on 3 freshly installed win8 machines. they really dont care much

Re:Win8 upgrade did the same. (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45238627)

Microsoft has never really cared about pirated software. They seem to be one of the only companies that actually gets that it's impossible to stop piracy, so you shouldn't waste time bothering. The worst they do is to display a little nagware notice on a black desktop to say that the software isn't "genuine". They don't prevent you from accessing your files or running things. Prior to Windows 95, MS-DOS didn't even have any copy protection checks or license keys. Considering how many PCs run their products, it's clearly not an entirely bad thing.

I'm running a single $15 copy of Windows 8 Pro "upgrade" (it's actually the full version) on two laptops right now. Updates and everything work fine on both.

Re:Win8 upgrade did the same. (4, Interesting)

CitizenCain (1209428) | about 10 months ago | (#45238917)

You don't have that quite right.

Microsoft's licensing model is such that they make vastly more from OEM and corporate sales than from end-consumer OS purchases. It's not that they don't care about piracy, (remember all that shit around activating Vista and 7, and WGA causing problems for legit users?) it's more that the sliver of income they get from consumer OS purchases isn't worth devoting resources to protect from piracy.

Re:Win8 upgrade did the same. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45239399)

Yeah, they definitely did care. I had a legit copy of Windows 7 which I ditched because every time I installed in a different VM (I was mostly experimenting with it) I'd have to call the number to get my activation code.

Re:Win8 upgrade did the same. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45240353)

That does without saying. They wouldn't stand for an OEM pirating, because they'd be doing it by the thousands or millions in one pop. That isn't what we're talking about here.

Re:Win8 upgrade did the same. (1)

mrchaotica (681592) | about 10 months ago | (#45241039)

(remember all that shit around activating Vista and 7, and WGA causing problems for legit users?)

What, isn't it the same for 8 (I haven't used 8 yet, so I haven't had a chance to notice)?

Re:Win8 upgrade did the same. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45240815)

Microsoft has never really cared about pirated software. They seem to be one of the only companies that actually gets that it's impossible to stop piracy, so you shouldn't waste time bothering. The worst they do is to display a little nagware notice on a black desktop to say that the software isn't "genuine". They don't prevent you from accessing your files or running things. Prior to Windows 95, MS-DOS didn't even have any copy protection checks or license keys. Considering how many PCs run their products, it's clearly not an entirely bad thing.

If what you say was actually true, Microsoft would be like Apple and sell/give you software sans license keys. The fact that Windows activation exists indicates they do in fact care about piracy, no matter how toothless you may think it is. It costs Microsoft real money to run activation servers, staff phonebanks to help people (re)activate Windows when Windows activation acts up, write all the code that makes it work, and so on. If they truly did not care, all of this would be considered a needless expense and it would disappear overnight.

MS and Apple are different on this issue due to how each company makes money. Most of Microsoft's profit comes from software sales. And, in spite of popular pundit opinion, most of Apple's comes from hardware sales. Today's Apple can (and does) treat software development as a loss leader which sells their hardware. For that matter, even back when Apple was trying to make real money off MacOS X upgrades (the standard price for a release was $129 for five or six years before they began experimenting with charging less), they didn't have license keys.

Now Costs what its Worth (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45238275)

When I first read the news, I was excited. All of their basic software was finally being revamped, moved to 64-bit, with improved collaboration and online integration.

Then I find out that Pages and Numbers '13 are both absolute crap. Bereft of features, stripped of functionality, completely dumbed down.

Turns out they've simply repriced their software to reflect what it is worth.

Keynote remains the only element of iWork worth talking about.

Apple has MSFT running scared with this. (2, Interesting)

mosb1000 (710161) | about 10 months ago | (#45238603)

You wouldn't happen to work for Microsoft [cnn.com] would you? It seems like I've heard this before. . .

I've been using the new versions since they came out. They have more features than the previous versions, not fewer. As far as I can tell, there's no reason to use Office anymore, and I doubt I will. And from the sounds of it, the decision makers at Microsoft are very scared of this update. They are doing everything they can to devalue it.

Re:Apple has MSFT running scared with this. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45239423)

Wake me when I can have my enterprise-level software dynamically generate iWork documents via something similar to System.IO.Packaging [microsoft.com] without invoking external application executables or command-line utilities via system commands.

Until then, iWork (and OO.org and LibreOffice) are quaint toys.

Funny thing is, the last time I had to extract content from an iWork (Pages, specifically) file, it was structured eerily similar to a Microsoft-Not-So-OpenXML document (which is itself a ripoff of the OO.org format). It was even in a zip archive, just like a docx/xlsx/pptx/whatever-x file is. Which means that System.IO.Packaging isn't too far off from being able to work with iWork documents and OO.org/LibreOffice documents with the addition of some object models. And there's nothing really holding anyone back from building those API's for other platforms or frameworks, either. It's not like they're terribly complicated or difficult. They're a zip archiver and an XML manipulator rolled into a special-purpose API. It's not rocket science.

I doubt Microsoft is scared of this in any substantial way. They trademarked the word "office" for crying out loud. When you talk about so-called productivity software, there's always this nagging trademark in the back of your mind. When Apple distributes iWork, is it an office suite, or is it an Office(tm) suite? Believe me, Microsoft is not quaking in their boots over this insignificant event.

(And, since you seem to enjoy casting aspersions: I do not work for Microsoft. But I do use their software development products at my day job.)

iTunes Match (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45238293)

Same sort of thing happened with iTunes match. It scans your whole music library (legal or otherwise) and gives you high bit rate versions of all your tracks in the cloud (and available to download permanently, even if you don't renew).

iWork isn't bad for home use... (3, Interesting)

ducomputergeek (595742) | about 10 months ago | (#45238307)

I sold my last company in 2010. I bought a new MacBook Pro and decided to get iWork as it was far cheaper than Office. I needed to write a formal letter here and there, keep track of Farm expenses on a spreadsheet, and create presentations for start ups I was mentoring at a local technology incubator. Only thing that annoyed me slightly was having to buy the programs again for iOS. I felt if I bought them for mac they should have offered the iOS versions as part of the price.

Well then one of the companies I was mentoring started to take off and it went from mentoring to consulting to now being offered an executive position with the company. They were all Mac users as well, but that's when we found the problem with iWork. While documents synced between our own devices, Apple doesn't offer iCloud for small businesses where we could all sync to a company drive. Ironically to solve this we went to Microsoft SkyDrive and then eventually to Office365.

I still use iWork, especially Keynote for developing internal reports & presentations. As bad as this may sound, it's because I have a water proof case for my iPad and it's in my shower. That's where I often have my best ideas and it's handy to write them down, or go threw a presentation or write a todo list.

Where this is nice is for my Dad who now gets an office suite free with the latest version of the OS that will do everything he needs.

Re:iWork isn't bad for home use... (4, Interesting)

jbolden (176878) | about 10 months ago | (#45238403)

Apple does offer syncing for small businesses: http://www.apple.com/osx/server/ [apple.com]

Not only that they offer an almost no setup hardware bundle: http://www.apple.com/mac-mini/server/ [apple.com]

Re:iWork isn't bad for home use... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45238921)

That's not "syncing with cloud", that's a local server. Whoops.

Re:iWork isn't bad for home use... (1)

Lumpy (12016) | about 10 months ago | (#45240993)

no sane business will have it's documents synced with the cloud.

Re:iWork isn't bad for home use... (1)

NatasRevol (731260) | about 10 months ago | (#45239361)

You just always have to remember that Apple is a hardware company and uses their software to sell the hardware.

Meh, Office 2011 for Mac (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45239025)

iWork still seems thrown together to me

What is the problem here, exactly? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45238351)

From their POV, the pirated versions have cost them nothing. The worst that turning them to legit versions is going to do is increase their support costs. And if they were to pursue the case,

a) it wouldn't make them look good
b) show up how spyware their stuff looks
c) they'd still have to prove a loss
d) they'd still not have a sale.

Some people "pirate" because it's just damn well easier. If the full paid app is just as easy, then when they find out how easy it is, they may well take it.

Sale.

If only I were less organized! (2)

Holladon (1620389) | about 10 months ago | (#45238427)

Dammit -- now I regret deleting the trial version after my trial period expired. Why oh why did I care about the disk space?

Re:If only I were less organized! (1)

jmauro (32523) | about 10 months ago | (#45238513)

You can just download them for free now from the App Store.

Re:If only I were less organized! (1)

BasilBrush (643681) | about 10 months ago | (#45240049)

No, they still cost as new installs from the App Store. They are only free with new machines, or as updates from older versions.

Re:If only I were less organized! (2)

amazeofdeath (1102843) | about 10 months ago | (#45238597)

What's the problem? iWork and iLife suites are free now. Or do you mean Aperture?

Re:If only I were less organized! (1)

Predius (560344) | about 10 months ago | (#45239435)

Not according to the Apple App Store as of this moment. Pages, Keynote and Numbers are all $19.95.

Re:If only I were less organized! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45240591)

This is the reason why Jesus invented Bittorrent.

great (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45238435)

Now I can upgrade my pirated version of Lightroom to a legit copy of Aperture.

This was a pleasant surprise (2, Interesting)

sjgman9 (456705) | about 10 months ago | (#45238477)

I bought iWork 09 several years ago (before the app store existed) and was surprised to see it upgraded on one of my laptops!
Thanks Apple!

Re:This was a pleasant surprise (-1, Flamebait)

Darinbob (1142669) | about 10 months ago | (#45239405)

Did it ask you first? I find it terribly annoying and unfriendly to have it silently upgrade your software. Bugs get introduced this way some times, or you get highly undesirable features (I've stopped the firefox update, and just click cancel every single day, because the next release has a do-not-want feature).

What about the fact that you're now required to use the Apple store, which means you're required to register an account with them? This is snooping, which all the itunes slaves may not care about but it's highly intrusive. Luckily you can still get third party software from outside their garden.

Re:This was a pleasant surprise (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45240871)

Low effort troll is low effort.

Of course (3, Interesting)

mosb1000 (710161) | about 10 months ago | (#45238533)

If you have it, then you're using a mac one way or another. They want you using the latest software. The more people who use it the more benefit they get in terms mac or iDevice sales. They've already spent the money writing the software so they can sell more hardware. There is practically no marginal cost for distributing it.

Excellent! (2)

Denis Lemire (27713) | about 10 months ago | (#45238537)

I originally purchased iWork '09 via boxed media... When the App Store started distributing the individual apps, I preferred this for the convenience of downloading vs inserting a disc like a caveman.

Eventually I ended up re-purchasing Pages and Numbers for this convenience but have not forked over the dollars for Keynote as of yet... With this recent change, I dusted off my iWork disc and made the leap to the App Store version of Keynote for free.

It's always refreshing when paying customers aren't assumed to be thieves.

My God!!! (4, Funny)

Identita (1256932) | about 10 months ago | (#45238541)

One company finally gets it!!!

Not that new (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45238661)

I was running a pirated copy of iWork on one of my machines a few years ago when I noticed Apple software update recognized it as genuine, leading me to believe Apple has actually been doing this for some time.

Playing devil's advocate (0)

fluke11 (1160111) | about 10 months ago | (#45238933)

The article states: "... it is a feature, and a lingering sign that Apple continues to trust their customers not to steal software – and that, my friends, is a beautiful thing indeed."

The question I have is why does a company that has trust in it's customers need to be a member of anti-piracy groups like the Business Software Alliance [1]?

There are two things that has bothered me about people claiming Apple should be praised for allowing people to choose if they want to buy iWorks/iLife or just continue using the trial version:

(1) Steve Jobs had once claimed that with the upgrades of Mac OS X that "And everyone gets the ‘Ultimate’ version."[2] He was referring to Windows providing some features only if you upgrade to the highest priced flavor of the OS. But the truth is that Mac OS X by itself doesn't have all of the features of Windows Ultimate. It didn't have it back in 2007 when Steve Jobs made the statement and still doesn't now. For everyone to get a Mac OS X that has feature for feature what Windows Ultimate provides, Apple should have just bundled iLife and iWorks with Mac OS X.

(2) The true cost of using iLife and iWorks is not the initial purchase price but rather the vendor lock-in. Once someone becomes used to using iLife/iWorks as part of their daily routine, it is somewhat jarring to switch to another application. There are other alternatives that do similar things but they are not the same. While Apple has a set of libraries to makes it possible to port their application to Windows (as they have done with iTunes), iLife/iWorks mostly is only available on Mac OS X. The iCloud flavor of some of the apps is very much beta and incomplete. So, the bottom line is once you become accustom to iLife/iWorks, regardless of how you got hold of the applications, you are much more likely to continue using Mac OS X since those applications lock you into OS X to continue to use them.

Worst of all, Apple has a history of distrusting their users to let them know what products which where marketed as having a "flawless design" clearly have serious design flaws (overheating, not being able to power on after a shorter than expected life, not able to make phone calls when held a common way, etc). To claim Apple trust of it's customers is a beautiful thing is just failing to look at the big picture when it comes to Apple.

[1] http://www.bsa.org/about-bsa/bsa-membership [bsa.org]
[2] http://macdailynews.com/2007/10/16/apple_mac_os_x_leopard_leaps_october_26/ [macdailynews.com]

Re:Playing devil's advocate (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45241223)

The question I have is why does a company that has trust in it's customers need to be a member of anti-piracy groups like the Business Software Alliance [1]?

The question I have is why do you think this red herring means jack shit? Has Apple been siccing the BSA on its customers? Nope. Is Apple taking steps which implicitly trust their users to do the right thing? Yup. Let's see if you have anything better than guilt-by-association, though...

There are two things that has bothered me about people claiming Apple should be praised for allowing people to choose if they want to buy iWorks/iLife or just continue using the trial version:

(1) Steve Jobs had once claimed that with the upgrades of Mac OS X that "And everyone gets the ‘Ultimate’ version."[2] He was referring to Windows providing some features only if you upgrade to the highest priced flavor of the OS. But the truth is that Mac OS X by itself doesn't have all of the features of Windows Ultimate. It didn't have it back in 2007 when Steve Jobs made the statement and still doesn't now. For everyone to get a Mac OS X that has feature for feature what Windows Ultimate provides, Apple should have just bundled iLife and iWorks with Mac OS X.

... Nah, it just gets worse. Dear god you're a moron. What on earth does this have to do with the question of whether Apple has done a good thing by implicitly trusting their customers to not pirate iWork? It is a completely separate issue.

But hey, let's examine it for a bit since you went there. Does your complaint even make sense? No, it does not. Jobs did not claim OS X had exactly the same feature set as Windows. He mocked Microsoft's practice of selling a confusing array of Windows versions with varying feature sets, and charging absurd amounts for the "Ultimate" version.

Also, I bet you can't even name these features you claim OS X lacks, because you're exactly the sort of fuckwit who flaps his jaws without actually having any real criticisms to make. Let's look at Microsoft's own marketing on what Win 7 Ultimate was supposed to give you over more pedestrian Windows 7 versions:

http://windows.microsoft.com/en-us/windows7/products/compare#T1=tab01

Compared to Home, you get:
* Windows XP Mode
* Domain Join -- equivalent feature included in OS X
* Backup to network servers -- included in OS X
* BitLocker -- equivalent feature included in OS X
* Work in any of 35 different languages -- included in OS X, and frankly it's shameful that Microsoft restricts this to "Ultimate"

So the only one you have to hang your hat on is XP Mode. A very Windows-specific feature which isn't even needed on OS X.

And that last bit about Apple needing to bundle iLife and iWork to match Windows Ultimate -- what in the fuck are you wibbling about, you buffoon? iLife and iWork are application software, not operating system features, and Windows Ultimate doesn't bundle any applications matching those in iLife and iWork.

(2) The true cost of using iLife and iWorks is not the initial purchase price but rather the vendor lock-in. Once someone becomes used to using iLife/iWorks as part of their daily routine, it is somewhat jarring to switch to another application. There are other alternatives that do similar things but they are not the same. While Apple has a set of libraries to makes it possible to port their application to Windows (as they have done with iTunes), iLife/iWorks mostly is only available on Mac OS X. The iCloud flavor of some of the apps is very much beta and incomplete. So, the bottom line is once you become accustom to iLife/iWorks, regardless of how you got hold of the applications, you are much more likely to continue using Mac OS X since those applications lock you into OS X to continue to use them.

Moron confirmed. I mean, duh, native apps encourage you to stay within the ecosystem. You might as well complain that native Linux apps encourage you to stay on Linux, because they do, or that Office encourages you to stay on Windows, because it does. What an insight!! What's Apple supposed to do to satisfy you, make iWork apps artificially annoying on OS X so you aren't tempted to, you know, actually use them?

Worst of all, Apple has a history of distrusting their users to let them know what products which where marketed as having a "flawless design" clearly have serious design flaws (overheating, not being able to power on after a shorter than expected life, not able to make phone calls when held a common way, etc). To claim Apple trust of it's customers is a beautiful thing is just failing to look at the big picture when it comes to Apple.

What Apple product in recent memory has problems with overheating? not being able to power on after a short life? not making phone calls when held a common way? (note: to make the Antennagate phone actually fail to make calls, you actually had to hold it tight in a fairly unnatural grip which covered the antennas, a "flaw" shared by literally all cellphones since guess what, human flesh absorbs RF energy in the relevant bands, holy shit OMG applefail)

You're not a devil's advocate, you're not looking at the big picture, you're just a bad troll.

This is not what the FSF meant (2, Funny)

pouar (2629833) | about 10 months ago | (#45239005)

This is not what the FSF meant when they said free software

Steve Ballmer comments leaked from MS (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45239019)

Fucking Tim Cook is a fucking pussy. I'm going to fucking bury that guy, I have done it before, and I will do it again. I'm going to fucking kill Apple.

iWork '13 is crippled (5, Informative)

GrahamCox (741991) | about 10 months ago | (#45239073)

Beware about jumping on this too soon. iWork '13 on the Mac has many features *FEWER* than the previous version, to bring it more in line with the iOS version. A lot of people seem pretty annoyed by this, and who can blame them? I guess the good news is that the older version is moved aside, not deleted by the upgrade.

Re:iWork '13 is crippled (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45239343)

Care to list or link *which* features were removed. This is the first I'm hearing of this...

Re:iWork '13 is crippled (1)

Munchr (786041) | about 10 months ago | (#45239515)

This is the first I've heard of it as well. The only things I've been able to find are anecdotal comments on other blogs about this new upgrade policy from Apple. One commenter went as far as to say that he refuses to open his documents in the new version because they would be destroyed. I have not been able to find any factual source or review confirming problems with the new iWork applications, so if gp has sources, it would be nice to see them.

Re:iWork '13 is crippled (1)

Munchr (786041) | about 10 months ago | (#45239631)

So, I'll take a moment to answer myself :P. There is a growing discussion thread on Apple's support community regarding reduced capabilities in Pages 5. That discussion can be found at https://discussions.apple.com/thread/5468056 [apple.com] .

Free updates... (1)

mspohr (589790) | about 10 months ago | (#45239203)

Nice!
I upgraded to Mavericks the day it came out (I know, risky move but so far, very impressed... especially memory management and battery life).
I just checked the App store for iMovie on my older MacBook Air and it offered me a free update of the "09" version which came with my machine.
iMovie is just about the only Apple software which I really like and use a lot so I'm happy to have the update.

It seems that Apple learned from Microsoft (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45240493)

Do you ever wonder how Microsoft products (Office, Windows, etc) killed the competency in the past?
Yes at some point Excel was better than Lotus 1-2-3 and Quattro Pro; but there is another business strategy used by Microsoft outside the States: They were extremely tolerant to piracy in order to spread their products.

I live in Argentina, and here software piracy is more common than in the States.
Microsoft made some lobby to prevent piracy at work (there is an institution called "Software Legal" that was backed mainly by MS), but in other hand they ignored piracy when is convenient.

For example when Microsoft released C# they gave Visual Studio for free each time that they can. At that time Visual Studio Express didn't existed... but instead of giving a trial they gave the full version on different presentations/conferences that they did. The same happened with Office, they don't care too much if you have a pirate copy at home (most of the piracy prevention that they put in place is easy to turn off); but they put more pressure to companies in order to get money from license packages.

It's smart (1)

kbg (241421) | about 10 months ago | (#45241415)

It's a smart move because you don't want to alienate your possible customers. Either the pirates will buy your stuff in the future or they won't ever. Giving them a copy of the software that they already pirated doesn't cost Apple anything.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>