Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
I'm vert pleased by this update. Many were asking for the 1 GB iDisk, apparently Apple was listening. Now the family pack is enticing also, my wife and I both will be able to have the 1 GB iDisk. A much better deal now IMHO.
 
peterj1967 said:
I don't think you're completely correct. You lose access to the standard .mac services, but you can still use the services associated with the .mac groups you belong to.
Good point! Yes, you can still get to the groups, but you lose any "personal" access (email, backup space, etc.).
 
Not bad...

This isn't a bad update.

I don't know if it's worth $100/year, but I get it for free every year so I can't complain!

I do wish they had a way to edit iCal calendars online. that would be nice.
 
schatten said:
This isn't a bad update.

I don't know if it's worth $100/year, but I get it for free every year so I can't complain!

I do with they had a way to edit iCal calendars online. that would be nice.


Free :eek: ??
 
I really, really want .Mac, but 1 GB just doesn't cut it. I don't know why Apple is so stingy with disk space. Heck, I've got 2 GB in my PDA, why can't I have at least as much with a hosting service?
 
schatten said:
Yeah; I work for an Authorized Apple Reseller, and Apple's Sales Training offers a free .mac account if you take their online training for it. I take it every year, to keep my free account. :)


cool. i wish there was an apple store (not necesarilly a retail store) or somthing i could work at around here. I wonder if it is worth it to get certified?
 
Haha great, so now we'll be seeing a bunch of porn there? Nah, it's just a great service indeed. Just wish you could revert that GMail account into a webhost account instead ;)
 
About time they upped the storage.

But maybe a bit too late for me. I mostly just considered it for online storage, but my e-mail provider just recently added DAV support, so I don't have much need for .Mac now.

A shame you need .Mac to Sync, but I can live without it (and I can use FF extensions to sync my bookmarks anyway).
 
Diatribe said:
You also get 2GB space for 50$ more. This is really not bad. I haven't checked out iDisk's speed yet but if it is really faster it is the update we have been waiting for...

What if one paid the $50 for the 1 Gb of space under the previous settings?
 
NicP said:
I agree, and what really annoys me is the fact that to sync between 2 (local) macs you are required to have .mac, i mean that should be a standard part of the OS!

Most people do not have more than one Mac. Why should it be standard?

Or, why not look for a third party util to synchronize undated bookmarks and other data without having a server as an intermediary. Oh wait, there are none - maybe it's more difficult than you think?
 
I wish some of the basic aspects of .Mac were free, like getting an e-mail address. Gmail is kicking everyone's butt right now. Pay if you want the more advanced features, but at the least offer a @mac.com address for free as an enticement and a way to get people in the door.

And I wish the high-end features of .Mac were even more high-end. I wish Apple would upgrade .Mac into a full hosting service where I can host a little WebObjects-based site for cheap (try looking around online for cheap WebObjects hosting...grumble). I think they could pull it off. I'd definitely pay $100 a year to have a WebObjects site using PostgreSQL hosted on Apple servers instead of relying on (sigh) PHP/MySQL as supported on every other hosting service on the planet.

Just my thoughts. I signed up for the free 60-day trial today for the first time. I wonder if I'll end up liking the service.
 
Yvan256 said:
I still think .Mac is a rip-off, I should be able to sync data between my two Apple computers without requiring an expensive external service. :mad:

Some of the data .Mac syncs does not track the date/time of update in its native file (e.g. bookmarks), so you need a respository to track the dates of all the updates. .Mac provides that, and also provides a way to synch so all of the synched computers don't need to be turned on and connected.

How do you suggest doing it between two computers without a server holding the data (and tracking the updates) somewhere?

It can be done, but it's much more difficult, and the user has to understand the implications of where to store the sync data, and when/where it is available. This is not the type of user Apple is targetting with .Mac sync.

If you want that capability, you should look at writing your own utility, or asking a developer to write one - it won't be easy.
 
So in other words, it won't matter how much or what Apple puts into .mac; the fact is you just aren't willing to pay $100 for service?

JFreak said:
i'm still not getting the one and only improvement i'm waiting for - A PRICE DROP. dotmac is ridiculously overpriced and no ease-of-use argument can justify that.

i'd pay $20 for it, but no more.
 
Phatpat said:
The intro movie on http://www.mac.com includes php. Is this a new feature?

False alarm. PHP not supported. I too was hopeful but it looks like its just to show how "complicated" the web is comapred to .mac. No forum hosting yet :-/
 
stid said:
I have the same problem. My iDisk still at 125MB.


I noticed that also when I checked my preferences. However I changed the size of my storage preferences and it registered the change.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.