PDA

View Full Version : The NotMac Challenge demands .Mac improvements


MacBytes
Dec 14, 2006, 03:11 AM
http://www.macbytes.com/images/bytessig.gif (http://www.macbytes.com)

Category: Mac Websites
Link: The NotMac Challenge demands .Mac improvements (http://www.macbytes.com/link.php?sid=20061214041117)
Description:: none

Posted on MacBytes.com (http://www.macbytes.com)
Approved by Mudbug

davegoody
Dec 14, 2006, 05:12 AM
http://www.macbytes.com/images/bytessig.gif (http://www.macbytes.com)

Category: Mac Websites
Link: The NotMac Challenge demands .Mac improvements (http://www.macbytes.com/link.php?sid=20061214041117)
Description:: none

Posted on MacBytes.com (http://www.macbytes.com)
Approved by Mudbug

IMHO .Mac was a complete waste of money. I have had it for two years and found that other solutions were free and just as useful. Goodbye from me .Mac !

amacgenius
Dec 14, 2006, 08:07 AM
IMHO .Mac was a complete waste of money. I have had it for two years and found that other solutions were free and just as useful. Goodbye from me .Mac !

I agree, I hope somebody can come up with a solution. My .Mac account expires in January and I'm not renewing for a third year, especially for $99!

wrldwzrd89
Dec 14, 2006, 09:31 AM
Couldn't agree more, .Mac is a waste of my time. I'll be renewing this year only because I won't have an alternative ready by the time it expires. Next year, though, I won't renew.

Diatribe
Dec 14, 2006, 09:46 AM
I probably won't quit on .mac but for the price they really should improve it.

I want things like:

- fully editable web calendar
- fully editable address book
- spam management
- more storage (2GB would be sufficient)
- make the Finder fast so iDisk is actually usable (because contrary to common belief it's not a slow iDisk but rather the Finder)
- web editable blog synched back to iWeb
- possibility to show subscribed iCals in web interface without having to visit their site
- integrate stickies into .mac and synch them

Sometimes I get the feeling that there are only interns working on .mac judging by the rate of their updates and the quality sometimes.

hanschien
Dec 14, 2006, 09:51 AM
I agree, I hope somebody can come up with a solution. My .Mac account expires in January and I'm not renewing for a third year, especially for $99!

Not sure if this helps on the price but you can get .Mac for $69.99 from Amazon.

Diatribe
Dec 14, 2006, 09:59 AM
The thing this challenge is about though, is not get .mac to improve. It's about finding an easy solution to a WebDV server. It is not about the other little things that .mac offers. Anyway, .mac should improve. It can't be that hard.

amacgenius
Dec 14, 2006, 02:52 PM
Not sure if this helps on the price but you can get .Mac for $69.99 from Amazon.

Still not worth it for me, .Mac is not worth the $69 for me.

59031
Dec 14, 2006, 04:04 PM
Here we go again..:rolleyes:

I LOVE my .Mac supscription. I love my .Mac IMAP email. I love .Mac synchronization between the two macs I use (home and work). I love the iDisk. I love .Mac mail aliases. I love accessing my Safari bookmarks from anywhere. I don't get spam in my .Mac email because I use my email address (and aliases) responsibly. It's totally worth the 99 dollars to me and at 99 dollars per year that's like a little less than 2K for 20 years worth of service. Big deal.

There are only two things that I would ask for, and that is more iDisk/Mail storage and fully editable web based access to my Calendars (Make a web based version using AJAX that works like how the new webmail interface mimics the desktop mail.app.) That's it.

.Mac is a great service.

SiliconAddict
Dec 14, 2006, 04:37 PM
I really can't decide where I'm going with .Mac when it expires in feb. Quite frankly I can get e-mail accounts that have filters that are just as good as anything Apple has...so that is a nonissue. That is pretty much the only thing I use .Mac for.

Its pretty dang rediculus how much space and bandwidth Apple is using on iTMS with movies. If they can throw those kind of resources behind the store why can't they do the same with .Mac

When it comes right down to it .Mac is to Apple's craptastic online strategy as Quicktime Pro with full screen support is in OS X. Both are simply ways of draining money out of the faithful without any real, meaningful return on investment and Apple is laughing all the way to the bank.

billyboy
Dec 14, 2006, 04:40 PM
I would like a calendar that is the same online as it is on my computer. Times and alarm settings all seem to be consistent before I publish, but then the times all go to pot when it gets online.

I am fed up being told I have an appointment three hours ago.

wmmk
Dec 14, 2006, 05:45 PM
wow, i hope this gets a good response! I mean, $3300 for a WebDAV installer? that's a lot of cash!

59031
Dec 14, 2006, 09:49 PM
without any real, meaningful return on investment

In your world, not mine. I'm really very happy with my .Mac account and service. Please don't make blanket statements applying to everyone.

solvs
Dec 15, 2006, 01:29 AM
I like .Mac, but it's slow and I need more space. Fix that, I will be happy. I convinced my friends to get it, because they needed something easy, which is why I use it, but for what you pay, they need to give you more. And make it faster.

Hoping iWeb 2 gives us some improvements, otherwise, it's back to DW or GoLive.

Diatribe
Dec 15, 2006, 07:29 AM
I like .Mac, but it's slow and I need more space. Fix that, I will be happy. I convinced my friends to get it, because they needed something easy, which is why I use it, but for what you pay, they need to give you more. And make it faster.

Hoping iWeb 2 gives us some improvements, otherwise, it's back to DW or GoLive.

Slow in what sense?

mkrishnan
Dec 15, 2006, 07:56 AM
I guess probably the ultimate end is to look for different solutions for the pieces of .Mac....

Places like iCal Exchange may eventually offer read-write iCals when the read/write iCal Server becomes available with Leopard.

Hopefully some service like AOL/XDisk or whatever it's called will become available that act as mountable net drives on a Mac.

There do still need to be better solutions than the things that exist for syncing the whole suite of PIM type stuff between Macs....

Diatribe
Dec 15, 2006, 08:12 AM
I guess probably the ultimate end is to look for different solutions for the pieces of .Mac....


Imagine Apple bringing out a VoIP phone that connects wirlessly to your Mac and offering real a real telephone number with .mac subscription and integrating the voice box server side so you don't have to have your Mac on.
So basically a VoIP service with a real number included in the .mac fee.

Let them up the space to 2-3GB and now think how many people would want to get .mac...

mkrishnan
Dec 15, 2006, 11:12 AM
So basically a VoIP service with a real number included in the .mac fee.

I like this idea. Who knows... as Apple is putting an answering machine into iChat, it could be part of a more sophisticated VoIP play. Yeah...I think there's a space for .Mac to be valuable, and I would even consider getting it. But it has to do some really innovative and useful things. Just bringing the current feature set up to date is not really enough to me.

Diatribe
Dec 15, 2006, 11:48 AM
I like this idea. Who knows... as Apple is putting an answering machine into iChat, it could be part of a more sophisticated VoIP play. Yeah...I think there's a space for .Mac to be valuable, and I would even consider getting it. But it has to do some really innovative and useful things. Just bringing the current feature set up to date is not really enough to me.

Exactly. It isn't for most people.

The thing is, bringing the feature set up to date would be enough for the people that already have it to stay with it. But to switch to it you need a killer feature. And that could very well be a full blown VoIP service. I know a couple of people that would go nuts over something like this.

Eraserhead
Dec 15, 2006, 11:55 AM
When it comes right down to it .Mac is to Apple's craptastic online strategy as Quicktime Pro with full screen support is in OS X.

Absolutely they are some of the few truely money-grabbing things that Apple does. If not for the jokiness of Quicktime (with it's "Upgrade to Pro" ad's in the previous versions, i have never been so tempted to pirate.) it would have displaced WMP totally on Windows.

solvs
Dec 16, 2006, 07:11 AM
Slow in what sense?
Slow as in, you know, um... not fast.

Diatribe
Dec 16, 2006, 07:48 AM
Slow as in, you know, um... not fast.

:p I meant what part of .mac you feel is slow.

solvs
Dec 16, 2006, 08:04 AM
:p I meant what part of .mac you feel is slow.

Uploading files to iDisk, even on Cable. And some iWeb pages I've created with a lot of photos on them, even when I make sure they're jpg instead of png, that are fine sometimes, slow as molasses other times. Sometimes they don't even load. I've been to sites with more photos, some even larger, and they don't have the same issues. It's random, and sporadic, but happens far more than I'd like compared to other services I've tried. Though it's still much easier to use and far more convenient, so I continue to do so.

I mean, it's not MySpace bad, but it can be pretty slow sometimes to upload, download, or even view. Make it faster, like iTunes, and I will be happy. Well, happier.

Diatribe
Dec 16, 2006, 10:47 AM
Uploading files to iDisk, even on Cable. And some iWeb pages I've created with a lot of photos on them, even when I make sure they're jpg instead of png, that are fine sometimes, slow as molasses other times. Sometimes they don't even load. I've been to sites with more photos, some even larger, and they don't have the same issues. It's random, and sporadic, but happens far more than I'd like compared to other services I've tried. Though it's still much easier to use and far more convenient, so I continue to do so.

I mean, it's not MySpace bad, but it can be pretty slow sometimes to upload, download, or even view. Make it faster, like iTunes, and I will be happy. Well, happier.

Ah ok. Yeah the sites are their servers. But the iDisk upload problem is the Finder. Try using Transmit for example and see how fast it uploads files compared to the Finder.

But I agree with you, whatever the culprit is they should fix it.

GoCubsGo
Dec 16, 2006, 11:03 AM
So far with just under a year with my .mac I've noticed that it really caters to the new mac user. It has those bells and whistles that new people like. I know because I was one of them. When the smoke settles I wish for more space for sure. Gmail is free and it gives way more space. It would be nice to get more space for my $99. I also wish in many instances that it would put my ical that is on my computer online. Someone already said that and I couldn't agree more.

Otherwise, I'm not sure what else I'd want except for idisk to work. I thought it was me, but it's looking like it may be finder's fault.

solvs
Dec 17, 2006, 07:52 AM
But the iDisk upload problem is the Finder.

Happens in Windows too.

Diatribe
Dec 17, 2006, 08:02 AM
Happens in Windows too.

Strange because Transmit flies.

wrldwzrd89
Dec 17, 2006, 09:00 AM
Happens in Windows too.
Strange, I don't experience the same slowness on the Windows side as I do on the Mac side. Gotta be the Finder, especially since Transmit works so well (as Diatribe mentioned - though I haven't used it myself).

solvs
Dec 17, 2006, 10:57 AM
I was trying to upload some photos on my friend's XP machine (otherwise fast connection) and download on my 2000 server (otherwise very fast). Kept erroring out both ways, slowed Explorer to a crawl. E-mailing was faster. Like I said, it's sporadic though. Sometimes it works fine. I later downloaded them to my Mac, and it was really fast. Normally it isn't. Syncing on my and another friend's Mac is also hit or miss. I don't use it much, especially now that I have online storage through another company (which is always faster), but I would use it more if it worked better.

Never heard of Transmit, maybe I'll give it a try.