AppleWorks/ClarisWorks Dies Quietly 220
Several readers noted that Apple has quietly discontinued AppleWorks, in the week that the company's spreadsheet solution, Numbers, debuted in its iWork suite. The AppleWorks website now directs users to the iWork section of the Apple site. AppleWorks was introduced — before the Macintosh — in 1984 and began its long twilight as abandonware in 1999.
Re:hypercard (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Good thing they kept it around. (Score:4, Informative)
No Database App (Score:1, Informative)
Until they come up with a way to replace access, I cannot gain traction to even attempt to replace office.
Re:Finally. (Score:4, Informative)
I bought AppleWorks, knowing full well that it was "abandonware," and that I will never see an upgrade. I bought it because it is native OS X, it is very easy to use, it is very well integrated, it does its job and does it very well, and it opens old AppleWorks and ClarisWorks files. It is a very good piece of software.
iWorks has some very nice programs. I use Pages -- for page layout it is nicer than AppleWorks. But iWorks still doesn't offer everything that AppleWorks did -- no paint tool, no draw tool, no database tool -- so even if (or when) I upgrade my iWorks to iWorks '08 I will still find uses for AppleWorks.
NeoOffice? (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Good thing they kept it around. (Score:4, Informative)
Well, for Numbers, it's a "Yes, but...". There's a number of things which don't work.
hlookup and vlookup don't import, formulas using those will be replaced with the last calculated value. Anchors and bookmarks don't import.
There's some UI commands missing, too, like "Fill Down" or "Fill Right", which I used frequently.
It was interesting just how close ClarisWorks spreadsheets were to MaxiPlan; all I had to do to move over from the Amiga was re-bias dates to the different epoch. All the formulas worked.
Re:memories (Score:3, Informative)
Re:No Database App (Score:3, Informative)
Re:memories (Score:5, Informative)
AppleWorks for Mac IS NOT AppleWorks for Apple IIc (Score:4, Informative)
AppleWorks was introduced -- before the Macintosh -- in 1984
This is completely wrong. The programs each called AppleWorks, one running on the Apple IIc and the other on the Macintosh, were completely different programs with nothing in common but their names. The Macintosh AppleWorks was originally called ClarisWorks after the application-software company that Apple spun off. When Claris was later subsumed by Apple, the name of ClarisWorks was changed to AppleWorks--you all were supposed to have long ago forgotten about the Apple IIc program of the same name 8^).
The AppleWorks of TFA, i.e., for the Macintosh, was introduced in 1990 or 1991. Its level of integration between the components was simply jaw-dropping and as far as I know has never been approached by any other product. AppleWorks was a precursor to a revolutionary technology that was being developed at Apple that would eliminate the concept of "application-centric" workflows and replace it with "document-centric" workflows using a newly developed component technology whose name I can't remember right now (OpenDoc???). A few programs that fully practiced the new technology were developed by third parties as Apple made the APIs available; Apple themselves made the highly vaunted Cyberdog program. However, Apple's woes of the mid-1990s forced them to drop many of the cool technologies that they were working on, including this component technology. It is a little hard to explain (if you've never used AppleWorks) but the idea was that a document lived in a window and whatever software you needed to work on the document would be available without switching programs--some programs could be containers and others would be components, like plug-ins. You would just work in a container program (sometimes it didn't even matter what the program was, as long as it had the right components available). The third party action was really starting to heat up when Apple pulled the plug on the whole deal, apparently in an attempt to stay alive by cutting costs.
Re:AppleWorks for Mac IS NOT AppleWorks for Apple (Score:4, Informative)
Yes, it was called OpenDoc, and I really thought that document-centric computing was the way to go. Well, I still do, I've just given up hope.
The idea is simple: we want context-rich documents, with different kinds of information and presentation as necessary. So, work on the document until it's done, by opening a different software component for each kind of content. The document's always there, the software comes and goes. Compare that to how I work now, with production suites of huge complexity and vast feature sets, but awkward interoperability. In this software utopia, we would have only bought the features we would actually use, and it was all about integration, and not being distracted from the main thing: the document.
Unfortunately, it died before the bugs could be worked out (the few available components were nowhere near optimized yet, buggy and slow).
AppleWorks was a transition example of this: a monolithic program that was document-centric, so that you could kind of 'have it all' if your needs weren't too extreme. I suspect that in the big plan it might have had a place weaning us off of the application-centric software economy.
I wonder about that... [tinfoilhat mode] I'm sure some big money would have been lost if this paradigm had caught on... a blossoming of garage businesses to compete with, it would have been a major shift. I wonder if some horse trading went on to encourage them to "knife the baby" [sfgate.com]. [/tinfoilhat]
Re:Finally. (Score:3, Informative)
Re:It ruled (Score:3, Informative)