Apple's .Mac Service to be Renamed, Revamped?

[Virgil-TB2]

"Mobile Me"??? WTF?

I think you mean they've applied for a trademark for MOBILE ME, an application which is currently suspended.

The name sounds like something T-Mobile would have come up with...not Apple.

To me, "Mobile Me" just reeks of the 1990's.

What a super-collosal, extra-dumb name.

Here's hoping the mobileMe website is for iphone users and is free and the .Mac service is kept as a paid for and separate entity. After eight years and four months with the same email address, I sure don't want to have to change it. Especially to something as dumb as "Mobile Me."

Edit: No offence to the person that named their laptop "mobile me." It's a cute name used that way, but for a massive online service/presence? Nuh-uh.

 

[stagi]

I don't really like Mobile Me, but it will hopefully grow on me.

 

[Virgil-TB2]

Apple Online Services? Not a bad name. Plain but clear.

Certainly to be preferred over "Mobile Me."

 

[tmelvin]

Does the current .Mac [or new Mobile Me] have [or plan to have] e-commerce capabilities? My wife has a small business, and we have a static web site. But we'd like to be able to have folks purchase via credit card [e.g. PayPal'ish?]...

 

[danny_w]

Syncing with Windows has my vote.

Agreed 100%. Why have Safari on Windows if you can't sync the bookmarks?

 

[mes789]

You're paying $99 a year for that!? I understand paying $99 a year for iDisk hosting, .Mac Web Gallery, the ad-free email with IMAP, and Syncing, but this scares me...

Sebastian

I don't find it scary as you say. I think part of some people's love of Mac and Apple is the semi-cult following, kind of an esoteric experience if you will. If someone has $99 in discretionary income each year, and they identify with the brand, then more power to them if they want to purchase the service that, admittedly, could be had for free on other websites. And for ~$8.25 per month, there are far worse things to waste your money on. I have considered .Mac but I personally can't justify $99 dollars a year on things that gmail does well for me, but, then again, that could be the student budget talking too

 

[Virgil-TB2]

I would really like broader syncing abilities (ala SugarSync and dropbox) I use .Mac to sync iCal, Address Book and bookmarks and it works (mostly) but I would really like to sync other files (iWeb, checkbook register program) between my home iMac and macbook. I shouldn't have to buy other services to do what .Mac and iDisk should do well. (I have made attempts at syncing using funky iDisk configurations, but it is very unreliable and slow)

Typically Apple doesn't allow for outside protocols in things like this unless they have already got their own stuff in order.

As a .Mac user for years, I can say that the .Mac syncing hardly works at all a great deal of the time. And "Back to My Mac" has worked (for me), for all of about a week on and off since it's inception. That's with all brand new Apple hardware too (MacPro and MacBook Air running through a time Capsule hub on a decent high-speed connection.)

The sync interface in Leopard is also very confusing and poorly done, an afterthought at best by the UI designers. Let's hope that Apple *doesn't* add outside syncing until they at least get their own product to work properly.

 

[weg]

Mmmm...

Maybe they should call it, er, ah... iTools

Yeah, and you get a free T-Shirt with it, saying iFool...

 

[-hh]

.Mac is great and for me good value for money as it saves my time and has many features I use on a regular basis :-

I publish 6 web sites from iWeb to .Mac very easily and quickly.

I'm currently only using iWeb for publishing to one of my domains' websites. I find it personally irritating that I have to publish to folder and then FTP the whole thing because Apple chose to 'crippleware' that feature. My workaround is to simply let the FTP run during a meal, or do it overnight.

I publish Photos and Videos from iMovie and iPhoto.
All of which resides on my 10Gb of space (of which I am only using 2Gb at the moment.

YMMV. My current iPhoto library is 60GB. I can't even use a FAMILY .mac account if I wanted to make it all available online (and I haven't even started to digitize my film yet).

I use the free Backup software to backup key information to my .Mac iDisk.

Since the 50GB of the family account isn't even enough for me to do just my iPhoto image library, remote data backup via .mac isn't an option for me, even before I go check what size my Documents folder is. YMMV.

I use iDisk to transfer large qualities of data to my friends.

I just FTP it up to my domain and then email them the URL to click to download. Works cross-platform, too.

For me it is simply the only way to do all the above seamlessly and with no fuss or pain. Yes you can do it for free or less from various suppliers, but for ease of use it can't be beaten.

I don't disagree entirely, but some things are worth some extra hassles for, such as the trade-off between "seamless" and simple raw storage capacity, which is why my needs are higher.

And more pragmatically, the general utilty of remote storage is still limited by our local bandwidth connections and their price points.

IMO, what's pragmatically needed for me is the equivalent of a 10bT (1.25MByte/sec) worth of bandwidth, as this would theoretically allow a transfer (ie, backup) of 100GB of data per 22 hours (assumes 100% efficiency; no bandwidth conflicts, etc). Afterall, you don't want a weekly backup to take up the entire week!

But in the USA, bandwidth isn't cheap. Even I were you go to "just" a T1, that's 0.192 MByte/sec (1/10th the speed of 10bT, and 1/1000th of Gigabit Ethernet), which means that the max daily transfer rate (eg, data backup) is ~16.5GB, which would mean for me personally that just my iPhoto library would take 4 days running full blast (no other use) to transfer but a single backup....and the cost for a T1 is roughly $500/month. And forget going faster than 10bT: a T3 is roughly 5MByte/sec, but average cost is around $10,000/month.

Gosh, for $500/month, I can simply buy a new external HD every month and rent a big Safety Deposit Box at my local bank for my remote site backup...and save $300/month. The grim reality is the the cost of bandwidth needs to come down by roughly a full order of magnitude (10x) for such things to really become practical for the home consumer market to seriously consider implimenting.

Maybe AppleTV and other 'Streaming Media' services will help, but considering the problems with 'Net Neutrality' by various ISPs...including what I've seen as suspiciously slow FTP transfers on my current ISP...I don't think that most ISPs want to be a simple provider of the commodity of bandwidth because commodities don't carry fat profit margins. As such, market forces are against the consumer for this type of low-profit product.


-hh

 

[swissmann]

I'm a fan

I've been using .Mac since it was iTools. (Says I've been a member since 2001). I have never paid more than $70 for it (I buy when it is on sale and then use the code to active for the next year). I know that there are other services that individually are better but you have to manage the many parts instead of the one service. (I could easily be wrong but am personally not aware of an all in one replacement).

I use .Mac for the following things:
Training new employees on the basics of OS X and other apps like iLife (through the learning center)
I currently have about 25 websites for my business as well as clients of mine.
I upload sample of my work for proofing with my customers all the time. (The integration with iLife makes this really easy.)
I have a bunch of email accounts through gmail that forward to an alias of my .mac email which is all synced through mail.
All of my clients and employees scheduled are synced across all of our computers and the internet through iCal.
My remote employees use the iDisk storage to access our database and other business files and sell from their home.
Other things that are synced up with all of our computers: Bookmarks, Contacts, Widgets, Dock, Keychain, Notes, Preferences) It makes it really nice to jump on any one computer and know that the placement of things an the our critical data is all the same.
I use the backup program to secure our critical stuff to their iDisk server offsite.
I also use backup in conjunction with time machine to make a permanent backup monthly that I store offsite.
I also use it for back to my mac for when I am on the road I can access my main computer if needed.

There are some features I would like to see.
With the web of course more speed and more space is always nice.
Free would be awesome.
I would like to have some more pro web server stuff like domain name registration (right now use godaddy and then do a blind mask to the lengthy .mac domain), PHP service, MySQL, etc., then integrate this with iWeb and Filemaker and Bento).
Why not have a filemaker database and click on a "publish to .Mac" button. All of a sudden you have a webform that people can fill out that populates the filemaker database stored on your iDisk that syncs with your local hard drive.
Or in iWeb have a form creation function where people can fill out stuff and have it use a PHP server to email the form to you.
I would also like to have the iLife stuff publish to iWeb first where it could be manipulated before publishing to the web.

For me .Mac is almost the complete package and would like to see it become more complete. I do use it and love it.

 

[Westside guy]

I think $99 stops a lot of people (including myself) that just don't see that kind of value in it. The only unique feature is the OS X integration. I realize that has value in itself; but not $99 a year's worth of value. Everything else compares unfavorably with what's available elsewhere either for free or for a lower cost.

I pay $120 a year for web hosting. With that I get quite a few gigs of disk space, basically unlimited bandwidth (several hundred gigs), a couple gigs of email, SSH shell access, WebDAV, etc. Oh, and my own chosen domain name. And it's not particularly difficult to manage.

BTW you people that are using FTP to access your stuff... that's just bogus. Tell your provider to move into the 21st century. There's no excuse for using insecure transport.

 

[Porco]

If they make it better value I might consider it - though I personally still hate what Apple did with .Mac yeas ago, my girlfriend got a mac, signed up for the (then-) free e-mail address and then just as everyone she knew had that address Apple decided to turn all Dick Turpin on her and demand her money or her e-mail address. She couldn't afford .mac, so she had the hassle of changing her e-mail address. Not cool, or impressive to a new mac user (her, not me).

So I've kind of held a grudge against .mac on principle since then, as well as the fact I didn't really think it was worth the money anyway. Despite that, I've always thought there were things about it that did look nice, and the OS integration is a good idea. So I hope Apple can win me over on the revamped version.

 

[belovedmonster]

For the love of all that is holy, just make .Mac free for all Mac users and use it as loss leader to take over the world.

Apple would generate way more income from getting extra hardware sales using a free .Mac than they ever will get by charging a stupid amount for a bunch of features you can get for free online.

 

[crazedbytheheat]

I only hope that they don't start requiring .Mac (or whatever it will be called) for some of these iPhone syncing features.

... and I'm still waiting for the ability to sync and edit Notes on the computer, along with a proper "to-do" app. I'm sure there will be 3rd party apps to solve those issues though.

OmniGroup is supposedly working on a version of OmniFocus for the iPhone. http://blog.omnigroup.com/2008/03/06/omnifocus-coming-for-the-iphone/

NOTE: I haven't read the whole thread yet, so maybe this is a dup?

 

[Quillz]

I don't mind the name ".Mac," and it's certainly better than "Mobile Me."

 

[holo2015]

Are you sure? We had an Apple dealership in Sunnyvale, CA that was 7/10 mile from Apple HQ (then Mariani/Bandley in Cupertino).

I remember (sometime in the 1980s) the store Manager, showing me this "new" system that Apple was testing for entering our orders/returns, etc. It was experimental (and not very reliable), then, using dial-up modems.

I am almost positive that Apple used CompuServe (H&R Block's network) as it was the best network available... yeah, there was IBM/Sears Prodigy, but it sucked!

That almost sounds like the old AppleOrder system, which eventually changed over to GSX (Global Service Exchange)

I could be wrong tho, it's been awhile

 

[macam]

I will be happy

if...

1. They DO NOT change the @mac.com email address. The amount of people who have that email address is ridiculous
2. They drop the price of .mac and I get a rebate (I renewed in April/May)
3. I get a discount for being a LOYAL member of .mac on a new 3G iPhone
4. The upload to .mac is VASTLY increased and doesn't take an 80meg file half a day to upload (I have 2meg upload speed on a SDSL it should be done in minutes!)
5. With the price we're paying for .mac every year they should offer us the ability to purchase a one off domain address that we can attach and host on .mac (Although if point 2 comes to fruitian then this point is moot)
6. We finally get the full bloody downloads of Garageband Jam Packs... I mean seriously what's with giving us a small piece of each of them... just give all of them for free now...
7. I quite like the interface that was introduced in the last iteration. It's like looking at my mail on mail... very cool and responds pretty damn quickly too. Very nice.
8. Back to my mac will work. Even if it's just the once. I would love to be able to control my home Powermac from the office... not to do anything really but just to show off that I could do it.
9. MORE SPACE. I can get a 16 gig flash drive for less that what I am paying a month now... errrr HELLO!


I think that's it... If I think of anymore... oh actually... Apple if you're listening... please don't call it 'MobileMe' I mean seriously... it sounds like something Vodafone would come up with and you know how inventive they are with their stuff.... Errrrr not very.

macam

 

[janitorC7]

Typically Apple doesn't allow for outside protocols in things like this unless they have already got their own stuff in order.

As a .Mac user for years, I can say that the .Mac syncing hardly works at all a great deal of the time. And "Back to My Mac" has worked (for me), for all of about a week on and off since it's inception. That's with all brand new Apple hardware too (MacPro and MacBook Air running through a time Capsule hub on a decent high-speed connection.)

The sync interface in Leopard is also very confusing and poorly done, an afterthought at best by the UI designers. Let's hope that Apple *doesn't* add outside syncing until they at least get their own product to work properly.

Apple Sync Services are open to other developers. Panic Software for one, syncs Transmit favorites over .mac. I know that there are other applications that do the same. SyncServices is an open sync platform

 

[aprilfools]

I don't care what they call it but.....

I don't care what they call it but I will not be a happy camper if I have to change my email address from the @.mac extension!!!

 

[marbles]

Apple are you listening...

I think $99 stops a lot of people (including myself) that just don't see that kind of value in it. The only unique feature is the OS X integration. I realize that has value in itself; but not $99 a year's worth of value. Everything else compares unfavorably with what's available elsewhere either for free or for a lower cost.

I pay $120 a year for web hosting. With that I get quite a few gigs of disk space, basically unlimited bandwidth (several hundred gigs), a couple gigs of email, SSH shell access, WebDAV, etc. Oh, and my own chosen domain name. And it's not particularly difficult to manage.

BTW you people that are using FTP to access your stuff... that's just bogus. Tell your provider to move into the 21st century. There's no excuse for using insecure transport.

Just to clarify .....

For the love of all that is holy, just make .Mac free for all Mac users and use it as loss leader to take over the world.

Apple would generate way more income from getting extra hardware sales using a free .Mac than they ever will get by charging a stupid amount for a bunch of features you can get for free online.

....you know it's the right thing

 

[mwp98223]

Typically Apple doesn't allow for outside protocols in things like this unless they have already got their own stuff in order.

As a .Mac user for years, I can say that the .Mac syncing hardly works at all a great deal of the time. And "Back to My Mac" has worked (for me), for all of about a week on and off since it's inception. That's with all brand new Apple hardware too (MacPro and MacBook Air running through a time Capsule hub on a decent high-speed connection.)

The sync interface in Leopard is also very confusing and poorly done, an afterthought at best by the UI designers. Let's hope that Apple *doesn't* add outside syncing until they at least get their own product to work properly.

I wasn't suggesting Apple use these outside services, but that .Mac provide an added syncing service like these services. I would like the current .Mac syncing of iCal, address book, etc. to work better, but I would like the added benefit of being able to sync my other types of files (like these 3rd party services currently offer for a fee)

 

[Mal]

1. They DO NOT change the @mac.com email address. The amount of people who have that email address is ridiculous

Agreed

2. They drop the price of .mac and I get a rebate (I renewed in April/May)
3. I get a discount for being a LOYAL member of .mac on a new 3G iPhone

Definitely iffy. Apple's not one to vary costs too much, except with purchase of a new machine. It's possible though.

4. The upload to .mac is VASTLY increased and doesn't take an 80meg file half a day to upload (I have 2meg upload speed on a SDSL it should be done in minutes!)

I've never had that problem, though I don't typically use the iDisk feature. iWeb uploading is perfect even with large files though, so the problem may just be in the Finder.

5. With the price we're paying for .mac every year they should offer us the ability to purchase a one off domain address that we can attach and host on .mac (Although if point 2 comes to fruitian then this point is moot)

True, a domain name free with .Mac would be feasible in the pricing scheme, but they would have to register as a domain registrar or reseller. Besides, it's likely to not be able to be the same as your username. Still a possibility.

6. We finally get the full bloody downloads of Garageband Jam Packs... I mean seriously what's with giving us a small piece of each of them... just give all of them for free now...

What? It's far more likely they won't give it to you at all, but the Jam Packs are $99 each! They're not going to give them to you free just because you're paying $99 a year for a bunch of other things as well, they'd never make money off of them (and yes, they probably not only cost a decent amount to make originally, but they may have to pay royalties on some of them).

8. Back to my mac will work. Even if it's just the once. I would love to be able to control my home Powermac from the office... not to do anything really but just to show off that I could do it.

Check your router settings, it's the largest contributer to failures in BTMM.

9. MORE SPACE. I can get a 16 gig flash drive for less that what I am paying a month now... errrr HELLO!

That's a given, I think.

Oh, and give the MobileMe name time to catch on (if indeed it's the name), because I heard many of the same comments about the MacBook, the MacBook Pro, the MacBook Air, the Mac Pro, etc, and look how accepted they are now?

jW

 

[twoodcc]

wow, i can't wait for this. i'm sure this will come at wwdc though

 

[kornyboy]

Wirelessly posted (iPhone: Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU like Mac OS X; en) AppleWebKit/420.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.0 Mobile/4A102 Safari/419.3)

I think you mean they've applied for a trademark for MOBILE ME, an application which is currently suspended.

The name sounds like something T-Mobile would have come up with...not Apple.

To me, "Mobile Me" just reeks of the 1990's.

What a super-collosal, extra-dumb name.

Here's hoping the mobileMe website is for iphone users and is free and the .Mac service is kept as a paid for and separate entity. After eight years and four months with the same email address, I sure don't want to have to change it. Especially to something as dumb as "Mobile Me."

Edit: No offence to the person that named their laptop "mobile me." It's a cute name used that way, but for a massive online service/presence? Nuh-uh.

I agree about the silliness of the name. I don't want to change my email address after this long.

 

[MacFanBoyMike]

DotMac Pricing

It's about time. I'd certainly love an easy way to sync my contacts, calendars and to-do's over-the-air. Even if it would just sync wirelessly through my LAN would be a big improvement over having to use the cable.

I think $99 is too much to pay for this service, however. I'm not likely to make much use of .mac's other services. Maybe at a price point closer to $39/yr I'd bite, to save the hassle of manual sync'ing.

I agree completely, I would have paid $39/yr. But whenever I thought about that nearly $100, I always thought about other things I could really spend the money on!