This is a follow up to the post I did a couple weeks ago about the Microsoft Word compatible word processing apps for the iPad. In that post, we compared how the different iPad apps handled some basic Word formatting that a lawyer would use in notes, correspondence, memoranda and the like. In this post, we’ll see how the different iPad apps handle pleading specific formatting.
Once again, our four major contenders are:
- QuickOffice Connect Mobile Suite (iTunes link)
- Pages (iTunes Link)
- Documents to Go Premium (iTunes Link)
- Office2 HD (iTunes link)
My methodology for this test was the same as the first test. First, I created a basic pleading on my desktop using Microsoft Word 2003. I made sure to include the major types of formatting one might find in a pleading: line numbering, caption, case citations, a text box, a footer and footnotes.
Click on the image for a larger view of the original file.
Once I had an original, I imported it into four iPad word processing programs. Within each app, I made a change to the document to ensure that the file was being saved anew by the app. I then exported the file from the iPad back to Word on my desktop. I created a pdf of the resulting output for use in this post.
A quick note about WYSIWYG performance. The iPad version of the file and the ultimate output often bore no resemblance to one another. While the ultimate output from a couple of the iPad apps was very good, you wouldn’t know it from looking at the iPad screen. In other words, the iPad, while having Word compatibility, does not provide a WYSIWYG experience. To highlight this, I captured a screen shot of the iPad screen of each app as I was editing the. Those images are also pasted below.
QuickOffice Connect Mobile Suite (iTunes link). QuickOffice did a great job. All formatting elements in the final product appear to be intact. Footnote preserved (even though not visible while editing on iPad). No WYSIWYG on the iPad. No line numbering, no text box, lost the footnote.
QuickOffice final output
QuickOffice on iPad
Pages (iTunes Link). Far from great. Caption has been moved around a bit and a bunch of extra space has crept in beneath the caption. The pleading now takes up a page and a half rather than one page like the original (only first page below). Footnote was also lost. Pages is closest to WYSIWYG on the iPad. Line numbers and text box made are showing up, but some formatting and spacing problems have already crept in distorting it from the original.
Pages final output
Pages on iPad
Documents to Go Premium (iTunes Link). About tied with QuickOffice. Caption, line numbering, case formatting, footnote, text box all appear intact in the final product. Terrible WYSIWYG performance (no line numbering, butchered caption, no text box), but gets top marks for final output.
DTG final output
DTG on iPad
Office2 HD (iTunes link). Sadly, Office 2 HD turned in dead last. Lots of formatting changes, caption is a wreck, line numbering lost, line formatting lost, pleading pushed onto a second page. Oy. Far from WYSIWYG performance on the iPad.
Office 2 HD final output
Office 2 HD on iPad
Verdict. As before, the ultimate output from Documents to Go Premium and QuickOffice Connect Mobile Suite are best. Both of these apps preserved line numbering, the caption box, case citation form and the footnote. Sadly, the output from Office 2 HD and Pages isn’t even a close second. Interestingly, the app that provided the best WYSIWYG experience on the iPad was Pages by handling the line numbering successfully.
I have all of these apps on my iPad for testing purposes, but QuickOffice Connect Mobile Suite (iTunes link) is the one that I use when I need Word compatible functionality. Even though the final output is on par with Documents to Go Premium (iTunes Link), I find the file management capabilities of QuickOffice to be superior (or at least easier for my brain to understand). That said, I am still muddling around in these apps a bit. I do most of my iPad writing in SimpleNote, so I haven’t had the experience with the full featured word processing apps on the iPad to learn all their respective quirks yet.
Next in this series I think we are going to tackle contract drafting. I think the most notable formatting element there is use of outline numbering of various styles (each with differing indentation) and automatic cross references. Let me know in the comments if there is something you’d like to make sure I address.
Not directly relevant to this article, but it’d be interesting to see how Office Live does with WYSIWYG on the iPad, if it runs at all.
Great test – really interesting to see the output from all the different packages in one place as well (especially if you don’t want to invest in all the different packages yourself!).
For the contract drafting review it would be helpful to see a document which uses Styles in Word to deal with formatting and numbering (e.g. ) as most firms seem to use this now for their document templates (indeed it seems to be the best way to use MS Word for complex numbered documents).
This is where Pages really fell down for me – it basically strips out most of the styles which kills the document and renders it basically as garbage.
Documents2Go seems to handle it fine, but it would be interesting to see how the others compare.
Keep up the good work!
Great job, Josh.
I’m also interested in document origination on the iPad. It seems that the only data merge capability lies in Pages at this point I look forward to additional posts.
Hi!
Thank you for these tests!!! Great.
I am not working in the leagal business… I am an IT-consultant living in Sweden. I have just ordered my iPad from USA since it’s not released in Sweden yet.
I am looking for office apps for iPad, mostly a “word” -program. I am thinking of using it for typing minutes from the boardmeetings of our housing comunity. I will mostly use documents that were create in Word and edit them on iPad for these purposes. I will use header and footer as well as numbered lists and, within each numbered element, there will be bullits. There are also some tabs here and there.
I think, by reading your excelent tests, I can conclude that Quick Office seens the best for me.
Again, thank you very much!!
Regards
Christer
Welcome, Christer!
My tests haven’t specifically addressed headers and footers, so I will be interested to hear your experience. I think QuickOffice and Documents to Go are quite close right now. I switch back and forth in my use. The most recent update of DTG improved the file management interface enough that it is now my preferred app when I have office compatibility needs.
Is there a solution in quick office that let’s you access the footnotes?
Not yet that I know of. Documents to Go supports footnotes.
Nice! Thanks for the tests. It was neat to see the comparison between the working copy and the final output.
Thanks! So far this is why I have not bought an ipad and its probably why I wont. Something as simple as “no support for footnotes” is a deathnail.
I know it is blasphemy, but this is why I stick to my HP 2740p tablet PC. It’s huge by comparison (3.8# vs. 1.3#, and 1.2″ thick), but it is a Win7 machine with full touch/pen input and a keyboard. Pretty svelte by Windows standards, but a real heavyweight by iPad standards and not near as sexy at Starbucks. Dressed up with 8gb ram and a 256gb SSD, it’s really pretty snappy even by iPad standards, but only 3.5-4.0 hours per replaceable battery.
Perhaptheeh day will come when Ballmer let’theeh Mac group port Office to iPad, but doubtful at best. Until then, I’m shackled to tablet PC.
Not blasphemy, just sounds like the right tool for your workflow.
At the ABA Techshow I did a “tablet shootout” presentation with someone using an older tablet PC. While I see the benefit of not ever having to worry about compatibility or workarounds, the pen navigation and input was frustratingly slow at times (even when operated by someone who uses it as her primary machine) compared to the iPad and the digital ink input didn’t seem practical. But again, this is an opinion based on workflow perspective. The weaknesses of .doc compatibility and file management on the iPad are more than made up for by the fact that it is light, instant on, and lets me work in places and at times I simply couldn’t with the tablet PC you describe.
While I’d love to see a Microsoft developed version of Word for the iPad, ever since I quit looking at the iPad as a PC or laptop replacement and more of a supplement, I’ve found more ways it fits into my workflow. At the end of the day, the tool that works best for you is the right tool!
thanks for the writeup! really good info. I’ve been looking for a legal doc editor, and was primarily concerned with whether pleading paper was supported by any of the apps. I really appreciate this writeup as now I don’t have to waste money testing out which apps are right for me.
Lack of footnotes is a total deal killer for pleadings. If I am reviewing a pleading sent to me I have go to be able so see footnotes!