Home
About
Apple
Career
Experiences
General
Graphics
Hardware
History
Humor
Interface
Networking
OS
Opinion
Politics
Programming
Quotes
Reviews
Security
Software
Sound
Thought
Web
Cheap International
Airfare Online
Wachovia online banking
Get Free Coupons Online
Finding the perfect
discount hot tub
Payday Loans
Stock Trading Online
Stuffed Animals
Smart Investing Online
|
|
Keynote as a Metaphor
Old Apple, New Apple and Microsoft
By: David K. Every
|
Kind:
Created:
Size: |
Article
2003-03-11
10 KB |
|
|
 |
 've been doing some deeper evaluation of Keynote, Apple's new presentation package, and using it extensively in the past couple weeks. And the more I used it, the more I realized it sums up my feelings about Apple of late. The same with Claris; Apple's old software division, their software reflected the corporate philosophy of the old Apple. And many people have used Microsoft products as a metaphor for Microsoft. So this isn't a review of the product, but my feelings about the products are more a metaphor for how I feel about Apple Computer; the Old Apple, the New Apple and Microsoft.
When I used Claris software, the more I used it, the better it got. Almost everything I tried to do, it did well. As Human Factors person I could explain the logic behind why something was done the way it was, or it did little things or had shortcuts to increase my productivity. They didn't try to do everything; often Microsoft products were more "full featured" and powerful. But the Claris products were easier to learn, and much better to use. And the longer I used them, the more I enjoyed them. Most of the times when I got annoyed at Claris, it was because of what they didn't create - programs they never got around to doing, or that Apple dropped because their interests moved, and their follow through. But for those programs they did create, Claris users were usually Claris enthusiasts.
When Apple was taken over a few years back by the return of Jobs (and NeXT), Claris was one of the casualties. Those people or products that didn't get axed, or left of their own free will, seemed to get trivialized to the point where their existence no longer mattered. They were replaced by a new culture, and new products, and a new "NeXTian" philosophy; with both good and bad points. So now let's look at Keynote. We could be looking at the iApps, or OS X, or just the new corporate culture.
          
Keynote is a great product; it works pretty well, and the old Apple (or Claris) would have never produced it. From a business sense, it is a hard sell; "Why should we compete with Microsoft/PowerPoint?", "Won't it piss-off Microsoft if we make this?", "What if they stop making office?", and so on. There are a bazillion political business reasons not to make this product; and so Claris and the old Apple probably would have never made it because they were inherently political. They were also conservative and unwilling to take risks, because that's political too. However, making Keynote is the exact right thing to do. Creating this product, without fear of retaliation (or caring), has raised the bar on products in this segment, and on the Mac in general. It is an attempt by Apple to take control of their destiny, and not just surrender control to a 3rd party company. So the very act of creating it, is an improvement over the old way. However, there's more to a decision than just creating the product. How you create it and the features you chose to do are also a reflection of a corporation.
 
When you see Keynote work, it is very sexy and sellable software. The smoothed text, the smoothed images, the themes, the transitions, the clean feature set, and so on, all make sense. It raised the bar in looks for the presentation category; and is driving Microsoft to make a much better Office 11 version than they would have without the competition. Again, from a strategic mile high view, this is a very smart thing.
The problem is that beauty is supposed to be more than skin deep. And the more I actually use Keynote, the more I feel like I can get past that facade, and I don't always like what I see behind it.
Again, Claris probably wouldn't have built-in PowerPoint reading and writing of files as one of the options; too confrontational. But again this is the exact feature that makes Keynote much more valuable. It interacts with the rest of the world, which is using PowerPoint. So from the strategic level, and high level, Apple is making better software decisions. But then I do things like try to actually import or export presentations to PowerPoint, and I'm under-whelmed with how it does so. Importing seems to mostly work, but on exporting, things don't translate the way they should or best way possible. So many things going to PowerPoint will require some rework.
If Claris did import/export, they would generally remember and use the native file format of the document, so that if I opened a PowerPoint file it would remember to just save a PowerPoint file, and so on. The new way is that I get it converted into the native (Keynote) format unless I keep exporting and manually selecting "PowerPoint" as the option. So Keynote is usable, but more annoying than it needs to be, if you actually are trying to do work with anyone else using PowerPoint. It's sort of like someone knocking on your door at 7 am on a Saturday, trying to convert you to his or her religion; thanks for trying to save my soul, but I'm doing OK right now, and would rather have slept in or made my own choices.
Quirks are broader than just PowerPoint integration. QuickTime export is interesting, but poorly implemented; it skips and there aren't enough settings (see any) for importing or exporting. So you get it the way Apple thought was good enough; but for me, it often wasn't.
Feature wise, it seems to be the same game. I loved Claris' productivity of their Apps. When I wanted to change a font, I pulled down a menu that showed me the font names in the actual font itself (so I knew what I was picking). With Keynote; I get the corporate NeXT religion, which is the world's lamest font dialog. Not only does it get in my way (and not go away when I'm done with it, like a font menu does), but I have to click on each font to see what things are going to look like, or memorize the name and look of all the fonts.
The quality problems run deeper than just bad "fit and finish" and little quirks. The App seems to crash all too often. Even one of the greatest features is kind of a washout. For 10 years, presenters have been trying to convince Microsoft that PowerPoint should have a split screen feature, where they can display the slides and notes on their screen, while the users only see the presentation on the other screen (and keep them in sync). Keynote finally does this, and makes it worth the price of admission. But it does it poorly; the cursor disappears completely, the modes are limited, you can't seem to adjust things to layout the way you want to, the feature is buried in a preferences dialog, and you can't even see that there is such a feature unless you have a second monitor attached, and so on.
Even simply things like duplicating a slide can be done, though not as a simple command; but as a two step "copy and paste" operation (if you have the right thing selected). Always being a little counter-intuitive or tricky. The end result is a lot more time to actually use the software then I want to spend. Slow and quirky, and hard to figure out, means I'm not as productive as I'd like. I can of course adapt to it; but that's not the hallmark of good software or good interface, but is often the new Apple way.
Even the pricing of Apple's products of late has been curious. It is cheaper than PowerPoint by itself - but most people get PowerPoint for free with Office, so there's some question as to the actual costs. And with Apple of late, there's no simple site license policy, no upgrade or side-grade policies. (Side-grades are upgrades from competing products.) No demos or grace periods. So you can have it anyway that Apple wants you to have it; and there's sort of a mocking of the way software is traditionally bought or sold, along with caveat emptor.
Now some will say, "well it's just 1.0" or use Steve Jobs famous quote, "Real Artists Ship"; implying they had to get it out sometime. The problem is that phrase is a fragment; it should come with my ending, "ready or not". And the balancing quotes would be "Real Customers Walk", "Bad reputations kill products" or "Art critics don't appreciate incomplete works". I don't have a problem with Keynote because it doesn't do everything that PowerPoint does; I have a problem because it does things at a much lower quality threshold than it should.
There are many other cliche's as well; "you never get a second chance to make a first impression", and so on. The point is that Claris and old Apple products were often incredibly well tested; and their customer base appreciated that. The more you used them, the more you liked them; they just did what you want. With Keynote and even OS X or some of the iApps, or Apple's dev tools and so on, the more I use them, the more I want to go work out on my heavy bag. I can make them work, if I adapt to them and their way of thinking - but they no longer try to adapt to mine. And it feels like someone walked into the middle of a product development cycle and said, "OK, that's enough work - just ship it".
  
Apple will improve Keynote over time, and Microsoft will copy/borrow the good features. But I'm left feeling that Keynote was designed by a few people, for only one person, and was done in a back room the way that one person wanted things to work, and not shown to actual users until after it shipped. The results are a product that works just fine (and will be loved or hated) depending on if you are that one person or you happen to work exactly that same way, or not.
There will always be extremists; who either love or hate anything Apple does. But unfortunately, it seems Apple products of late force me to be a little of both, and leaves little room for middle ground. While good software needs a focus, it needs to make sure that focus isn't myopic. With Keynote the whole concept of Quality Assurance or Human Interface, seems to be either discounted or proven, depending on your point of view.
The truly frustrating part for me is this isn't just isolated to this one product; this seems to be systemic in the new Apple. The new Apple is both much better than the old Apple (and Microsoft), and much worse. OS X is great in parts, and just sucks in other areas. iApps can be both clean and cool, and then do some of the stupidest things. Apple's image has gotten a little better, and their licensing and support policies are more anti-customer than ever. Their hardware is elegant and well positioned in the market (mostly); but can be overpriced, underpowered, and have some pretty gaping holes.
If Apple never got close to true quality it probably wouldn't be so bothersome; but of late, I feel like I've gone to a really nice restaurant; and ordered the worst thing on the menu - and am only getting to look and smell what everyone else is enjoying. Then the next time I visit I find out what they had looked and smelled much better than it actually tastes. I feel like I'm doomed to be teased and not satisfied, and that things are so close, and yet so very far away. How long until I give up and just go eat at McDonalds?
 Format for Printing  Mail
|
|
|
|
