Ticket Options
Question Details
TICKET ARCHIVE -> Pages Version 2 questions
RobinS - Jun 23, 2006 - 11:47 am
I'm used to Word 2004 but I'd like to try Pages as its highly recommended. There are a few questions though as things are not clear now. This is the first time using it.
I always work in full screen. Is it possible to have that by default? I work with large fonts so I need the maximum size of the page - to fill the width always, otherwise I only see a fraction of the page at a time.
When I zoom a document the text is supposed to zoom. At least that's the way every other zoom function works in all my other programs like Acrobat, Reader, Word, internet browers........but no.......Apple has to surprise us with non-standard functions. When I zoom a Pages document entire page shrinks and expands! How is that supposed to help someone reading something when either its too big and they can't see enough detail per page or its not big enough and they can't focus clearly?
I want the page size to obviously be the same size - full screen. This seems utterly bizarre. I must think in a different relm than these designers. For the life of me, I can't understand why they do what they do. Its like they have departments in the far reaches of the world with no communication between them. Its unfathomable - once again Apple amazes........negatively.
On the bright side, the layout seems clear and if I could solve this one quirk, it might be a better solution for word processing for me as I find Word very complex and far more sophisticated than I need.
I always work in full screen. Is it possible to have that by default? I work with large fonts so I need the maximum size of the page - to fill the width always, otherwise I only see a fraction of the page at a time.
When I zoom a document the text is supposed to zoom. At least that's the way every other zoom function works in all my other programs like Acrobat, Reader, Word, internet browers........but no.......Apple has to surprise us with non-standard functions. When I zoom a Pages document entire page shrinks and expands! How is that supposed to help someone reading something when either its too big and they can't see enough detail per page or its not big enough and they can't focus clearly?
I want the page size to obviously be the same size - full screen. This seems utterly bizarre. I must think in a different relm than these designers. For the life of me, I can't understand why they do what they do. Its like they have departments in the far reaches of the world with no communication between them. Its unfathomable - once again Apple amazes........negatively.
On the bright side, the layout seems clear and if I could solve this one quirk, it might be a better solution for word processing for me as I find Word very complex and far more sophisticated than I need.
earthsaver - Jun 23, 2006 - 1:21 pm
When I zoom in to 200% in Pages, everything gets bigger. The ultimate for you is to resize your window to the desired size and then choose Fit Width from the View>Zoom menu. If you associate a keyboard shortcut with the command, then you won't have to take the time to mouse through the menu and select it every time.
Of behavioral note: when the window is maximized and you Zoom the window, it zooms out to fit the new window width. I think that's sensible given the nature of the word "zoom," though it may not be the same behavior as other applications. In this case, one is forced to manually resize the window (which you would never do) if one wants to see only part of the page at zoomed in size.
- Ben
Of behavioral note: when the window is maximized and you Zoom the window, it zooms out to fit the new window width. I think that's sensible given the nature of the word "zoom," though it may not be the same behavior as other applications. In this case, one is forced to manually resize the window (which you would never do) if one wants to see only part of the page at zoomed in size.
- Ben
RobinS - Jun 23, 2006 - 3:32 pm
I can't understand why every Apple program (besides Mail which is great) seems to be so illogical. Maybe I'm weird.
So I right click my document (made in Word) and open in Pages. Its untitled. Why would Pages not recognize the title? I just opened it. Bizarre.
Then I resize the window and close it. Even though it knows where I opened it from it still forgets (more OS X amnesia) and tries to put it in User/Documents.....how retarded is that? Do OS X users really only have a few documents that are going to be unsorted and fill up just one column? Truly Apple must be designed by children for children. I'm truly astonished. NOt your fault. I'm raggin' on the manufacturer, not the helper.
So I title it the same, but it doesn't ask to replace it - it just adds the same title with a different icon. What happens if I don't have icons showing? MOre stupidity.
OK - I"m not giving up yet. So I open it up again to see if it remembered the window size. It didn't. MOre amnesia.
OS X is a tyrant which just couldn't care less about the user's wishes.
Is there any way of getting a Pages window to open in FULL SCREEN with no borders or other decorative garbage wasting screen space? I want my text to spread from edge to edge (maybe 1/4" of border will be ok on the top, bottom and sides. It looks like Inspector might be able to do this but of course they use non-default terms. More ego on Apple's part. I need a default setting that never tries to foist its wishes and settings on me.
Should I give up on Pages and go back to Word? At least Word is obedient.
As a new Apple user I am amazed. It has so much potential and so flagarently flawed. It wouldn't take much to make it superlative. It must be management. Something's not right with this picture, that's for sure. And I can't understand how Apple users put up with this stuff? The complacency is mindblowing.
So I right click my document (made in Word) and open in Pages. Its untitled. Why would Pages not recognize the title? I just opened it. Bizarre.
Then I resize the window and close it. Even though it knows where I opened it from it still forgets (more OS X amnesia) and tries to put it in User/Documents.....how retarded is that? Do OS X users really only have a few documents that are going to be unsorted and fill up just one column? Truly Apple must be designed by children for children. I'm truly astonished. NOt your fault. I'm raggin' on the manufacturer, not the helper.
So I title it the same, but it doesn't ask to replace it - it just adds the same title with a different icon. What happens if I don't have icons showing? MOre stupidity.
OK - I"m not giving up yet. So I open it up again to see if it remembered the window size. It didn't. MOre amnesia.
OS X is a tyrant which just couldn't care less about the user's wishes.
Is there any way of getting a Pages window to open in FULL SCREEN with no borders or other decorative garbage wasting screen space? I want my text to spread from edge to edge (maybe 1/4" of border will be ok on the top, bottom and sides. It looks like Inspector might be able to do this but of course they use non-default terms. More ego on Apple's part. I need a default setting that never tries to foist its wishes and settings on me.
Should I give up on Pages and go back to Word? At least Word is obedient.
As a new Apple user I am amazed. It has so much potential and so flagarently flawed. It wouldn't take much to make it superlative. It must be management. Something's not right with this picture, that's for sure. And I can't understand how Apple users put up with this stuff? The complacency is mindblowing.
earthsaver - Jun 23, 2006 - 4:22 pm
You may be weird, but that's beside the point. Pages does not interact with Word files the same way as TextEdit. We have all been perplexed at this since the beginning, but is clearly Apple's egotistic way of saying, "Use Pages, not Word." TextEdit opens and saves Word files without issue. Pages opens them as imported files, not originals. So, you get an untitled, unsaved file.
Save location is not controlled by where you opened from. (Is it ever?) Nor does Pages care where you opened from; you opened a non-Pages file, so you might not save it to the same place. If it was me, I'd have received the Word file from someone, downloaded it to my Downloads folder on the Desktop, opened it, fixed it, and saved it somewhere else in my order of folders at Home.
The file name might visibly be the same but the extension is different, because the original was Word (.doc) and the new is Pages (.pages). So, if you're not showing icons, you should definitely be showing extensions, so you can differentiate file types. Otherwise, how are *you* going to tell?
Can't help you on window size. Mac OS, as long as I've used it full time, has been a multitasking operating system, and I've prided my ability to use and/or have a view of a variety of applications at the same time. Especially in Mac OS X, where I can have 15 or 20 applications open and not bog down the system.
Windows and its crazy maximize window widget make multitasking especially frustrating because I'm not working in full screen applications (like Vectorworks) or playing full screen games. (Full screen occasions for me are usually passive perspectives, like watching TV and movies.)
Save location is not controlled by where you opened from. (Is it ever?) Nor does Pages care where you opened from; you opened a non-Pages file, so you might not save it to the same place. If it was me, I'd have received the Word file from someone, downloaded it to my Downloads folder on the Desktop, opened it, fixed it, and saved it somewhere else in my order of folders at Home.
The file name might visibly be the same but the extension is different, because the original was Word (.doc) and the new is Pages (.pages). So, if you're not showing icons, you should definitely be showing extensions, so you can differentiate file types. Otherwise, how are *you* going to tell?
Can't help you on window size. Mac OS, as long as I've used it full time, has been a multitasking operating system, and I've prided my ability to use and/or have a view of a variety of applications at the same time. Especially in Mac OS X, where I can have 15 or 20 applications open and not bog down the system.
Windows and its crazy maximize window widget make multitasking especially frustrating because I'm not working in full screen applications (like Vectorworks) or playing full screen games. (Full screen occasions for me are usually passive perspectives, like watching TV and movies.)
RobinS - Jun 23, 2006 - 10:21 pm
I most definitely maybe be weird.......lol....
Your explanation makes perfect sense. They wanted to approach word processing differently and so they did.
> Save location is not controlled by where you opened from. (Is it ever?)
Well I thought that if I opened a file from A folder it would know that and save it in A folder. Kind of makes sense. But I see your point. They are really trying to distance themselves from all things Microsoft.
re icons - I find it necessary unfortunately. They do take up some line width but its a necessary evil. You're right - if it doesn't have an icon, it better have an extension.
re full screen - I find it necessary because my eyes are not perfect, and I don't like to wear myopia (close range is fine, distance is blurred) correcting glasses when on the computer (usually 10 hours a day. So I need a large font to work comfortably on a 1280 x 1024 screen. (Native resolution for a 19" LCD monitor which I can't change). You probably have near perfect vision so small fonts are more efficient.
I just lament that if only they had a maximize keyboard shortcut or mouse button for the rodent inclined, all of us would be happy.
Your explanation makes perfect sense. They wanted to approach word processing differently and so they did.
> Save location is not controlled by where you opened from. (Is it ever?)
Well I thought that if I opened a file from A folder it would know that and save it in A folder. Kind of makes sense. But I see your point. They are really trying to distance themselves from all things Microsoft.
re icons - I find it necessary unfortunately. They do take up some line width but its a necessary evil. You're right - if it doesn't have an icon, it better have an extension.
re full screen - I find it necessary because my eyes are not perfect, and I don't like to wear myopia (close range is fine, distance is blurred) correcting glasses when on the computer (usually 10 hours a day. So I need a large font to work comfortably on a 1280 x 1024 screen. (Native resolution for a 19" LCD monitor which I can't change). You probably have near perfect vision so small fonts are more efficient.
I just lament that if only they had a maximize keyboard shortcut or mouse button for the rodent inclined, all of us would be happy.
earthsaver - Jun 24, 2006 - 4:31 am
I realize what you mean about opening and saving files. If you open a native file format in an application, you save to that file. It has little to do in the user's experience where that file is located. Just that one is saving back to the original.
But, when you import a file into an application that can read it but requires an export command to save back to the same type of file, then you're going to have to choose the save location, just as if you had chosen Save As, or had you created a new file in the app. I think Pages respects the last users open/save location.
It's not about Apple distancing itself from Microsoft. Nor is it about doing Word Processing differently, so much as doing simple page layout easier. Pages is more a page layout application than a word processing app.
If you wanted word processing, you'd use TextEdit, which is free, built-in, and reads and writes RTF, Text, and Word files natively. TextEdit handles all basic word processing functions, including lists and tables. If you're using columns or embedded images, then you've jumped to page layout and that's a reason to use Pages. Hence all the cool templates there.
Now, how did you end up not being able to change the resolution on a 19" LCD? That just doesn't make sense. Oh, and about that shortcut. You can probably construct an applescript that sets the width and height of the current window, effectively maximizing it. Ask about that in your next request, because I can't help.
But, when you import a file into an application that can read it but requires an export command to save back to the same type of file, then you're going to have to choose the save location, just as if you had chosen Save As, or had you created a new file in the app. I think Pages respects the last users open/save location.
It's not about Apple distancing itself from Microsoft. Nor is it about doing Word Processing differently, so much as doing simple page layout easier. Pages is more a page layout application than a word processing app.
If you wanted word processing, you'd use TextEdit, which is free, built-in, and reads and writes RTF, Text, and Word files natively. TextEdit handles all basic word processing functions, including lists and tables. If you're using columns or embedded images, then you've jumped to page layout and that's a reason to use Pages. Hence all the cool templates there.
Now, how did you end up not being able to change the resolution on a 19" LCD? That just doesn't make sense. Oh, and about that shortcut. You can probably construct an applescript that sets the width and height of the current window, effectively maximizing it. Ask about that in your next request, because I can't help.
RobinS - Jun 25, 2006 - 9:17 pm
I forgot to ask if Pages can save as a webpage so I can use an FTP client to send it up to my website? Can Textedit save to a webpage?
Re resolution of LCD: its fixed. I can change it but then its not very sharp. Its best at 1280 x 1024. 60 hz seems to be its most comfortable frequency though 75 hz is very close. If I change it to 1024 x 768 it looks like a CRT used to look a few years ago. (Not so great!) I went with LCD because I love the sharp, crisp text and details. Color rendition is secondary. If I get into photography more, maybe I'll get a CRT as a second or third monitor. Or maybe LCD's will get better in that area by then so I won't have to. I tried rotation, and reading in portrait mode is so much better than landscape mode that it convinced me an ideal layout would be one landscape mode monitor for most webpages and programs and a portrait mode monitor for reading long documents. Getting them close together with high performance speakers with the tweeters at ear level has so far proved probematic!
The Applescript idea of yours is brilliant. I know nothing about Applescript but your idea seems to fit the bill.
Re resolution of LCD: its fixed. I can change it but then its not very sharp. Its best at 1280 x 1024. 60 hz seems to be its most comfortable frequency though 75 hz is very close. If I change it to 1024 x 768 it looks like a CRT used to look a few years ago. (Not so great!) I went with LCD because I love the sharp, crisp text and details. Color rendition is secondary. If I get into photography more, maybe I'll get a CRT as a second or third monitor. Or maybe LCD's will get better in that area by then so I won't have to. I tried rotation, and reading in portrait mode is so much better than landscape mode that it convinced me an ideal layout would be one landscape mode monitor for most webpages and programs and a portrait mode monitor for reading long documents. Getting them close together with high performance speakers with the tweeters at ear level has so far proved probematic!
The Applescript idea of yours is brilliant. I know nothing about Applescript but your idea seems to fit the bill.
earthsaver - Jun 25, 2006 - 9:37 pm
TextEdit can save a file in HTML format. It can't convert formatted rich text to HTML, but you can type the code yourself and save the file that way. HTML, of course, is just plan text with a different file extension. Pages can export to HTML which includes conversion. Open Pages Help for more info.
So, you just contradicted yourself after saying that resolution is fixed because you described the ability to increase it to 1280x1024. At the high resolution of current widescreen LCDs, though, I think portrait is better for Web sites, particularly those with a lot of scrolling down; landscape would be best for work in Pages, iWeb, etc.
So, you just contradicted yourself after saying that resolution is fixed because you described the ability to increase it to 1280x1024. At the high resolution of current widescreen LCDs, though, I think portrait is better for Web sites, particularly those with a lot of scrolling down; landscape would be best for work in Pages, iWeb, etc.
RobinS - Jun 27, 2006 - 1:37 am
I want to type something, and see the layout on the website basically as I typed it. I can do this with Word if I "Save it as a web page". I have a million things to learn before HTML. Can I type in Pages or TextEdit and just save it somehow and send it to my website like I'm doing with Word now?
Sorry you misunderstood me.......The native resolution of my 19" (and probably 99% of other 19" LCD's) is 1280 x 1024. If I change it, it looks like I'm wearing reading glasses.......i.e. lousy. So I can't change it and retain the quality I aimed for when I bought it. So I'm stuck at 1280 x 1024. No contradiciton.
Portrait WOULD be better for websites.....that is a definite YES. But since the average Joe who browses the web looking for porn and happens to actually read something occasionally doesn't demand it, it will never happen. In fact as widescreen becomes more common it will get even worse. Web writers will feel compelled to say anything on the first page that will draw the public into the website. Short attention span? Yes!
I've never used iWEb.......what's it for? If its for making webpages and 99% of the world uses landscape for that, you'd better use landscape too!
But for any reading at all, portrait indeed rocks. I find most PDF readers (Preview, Acrobat 7, Reader 7) allow good manipulation of the text thereby allowing it to be read in almost any configuration. This is great.
One definitely needs 2 monitors - one landscape and one portrait.
Sorry you misunderstood me.......The native resolution of my 19" (and probably 99% of other 19" LCD's) is 1280 x 1024. If I change it, it looks like I'm wearing reading glasses.......i.e. lousy. So I can't change it and retain the quality I aimed for when I bought it. So I'm stuck at 1280 x 1024. No contradiciton.
Portrait WOULD be better for websites.....that is a definite YES. But since the average Joe who browses the web looking for porn and happens to actually read something occasionally doesn't demand it, it will never happen. In fact as widescreen becomes more common it will get even worse. Web writers will feel compelled to say anything on the first page that will draw the public into the website. Short attention span? Yes!
I've never used iWEb.......what's it for? If its for making webpages and 99% of the world uses landscape for that, you'd better use landscape too!
But for any reading at all, portrait indeed rocks. I find most PDF readers (Preview, Acrobat 7, Reader 7) allow good manipulation of the text thereby allowing it to be read in almost any configuration. This is great.
One definitely needs 2 monitors - one landscape and one portrait.
earthsaver - Jun 27, 2006 - 6:28 am
As I said before, "Pages can export to HTML which includes conversion." That's what you're doing with Word.
RobinS - Jun 27, 2006 - 3:37 pm
Well I tried to export to HTML and when I opened it in Safari it was like this:
---------------------------------------
.Normal_1 {
color: #000000;
font-family: 'TimesNewRomanPSMT', 'Times New Roman', 'serif';
font-size: 12pt;
font-style: normal;
font-variant: normal;
font-weight: normal;
letter-spacing: 0;
line-height: 15pt;
margin-bottom: 0pt;
margin-left: 0pt;
margin-right: 0pt;
margin-top: 0pt;
opacity: 1.00;
padding-bottom: 0pt;
padding-top: 0pt;
text-align: left;
text-decoration: none;
text-indent: 0pt;
text-transform: none;
}
.Normal, .layout_style_1 {
width: 612pt;
}
.layout_style_1 {
width: 612pt;
}
div {
overflow: visible;
}
img {
border: none;
}
.searchtext {
}
----------------------------------
That sure isn't what I wrote!
---------------------------------------
.Normal_1 {
color: #000000;
font-family: 'TimesNewRomanPSMT', 'Times New Roman', 'serif';
font-size: 12pt;
font-style: normal;
font-variant: normal;
font-weight: normal;
letter-spacing: 0;
line-height: 15pt;
margin-bottom: 0pt;
margin-left: 0pt;
margin-right: 0pt;
margin-top: 0pt;
opacity: 1.00;
padding-bottom: 0pt;
padding-top: 0pt;
text-align: left;
text-decoration: none;
text-indent: 0pt;
text-transform: none;
}
.Normal, .layout_style_1 {
width: 612pt;
}
.layout_style_1 {
width: 612pt;
}
div {
overflow: visible;
}
img {
border: none;
}
.searchtext {
}
----------------------------------
That sure isn't what I wrote!
RobinS - Jun 27, 2006 - 3:40 pm
Actually it did work. But oddly enough, it also created a folder with a .css file which was the above. What's that for? Can I make it invisible? And why did it do that?
earthsaver - Jun 27, 2006 - 5:21 pm
Pages, like iWeb, uses the Web page creation code known as Cascading Style Sheets, to produce pages that are far more WYSIWYG than plain HTML would allow you to code. A CSS file is just one of the files that would make up your new site pages. As usual, though, you'll want to click on the HTML files to see stuff properly in your browser.
RobinS - Jun 28, 2006 - 12:23 pm
OK - that makes sense.
How about making it go away?
Imagine having thousands of irrelevant files scattered through hundreds of documents..........hope that makes sense. I want to see just my file for that document.
How about making it go away?
Imagine having thousands of irrelevant files scattered through hundreds of documents..........hope that makes sense. I want to see just my file for that document.
earthsaver - Jun 28, 2006 - 1:53 pm
See what you get when you open the HTML file when the CSS file is not next to it. Does it look okay? If so, I guess I have no argument. If not, then the reason is that the CSS file defines the full nature of the page and the styles of elements thereon. Read about Cascading Style Sheets on Wikipedia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cascading_Style_Sheets
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cascading_Style_Sheets
RobinS - Jun 28, 2006 - 3:51 pm
Seems to look the same. Guess its ok to trash it.
We can close this up. Thanks for all your input.
We can close this up. Thanks for all your input.
IF THIS IS YOUR QUESTION AND YOU WISH TO RESPOND, LOGIN HERE FIRST.
