[Arch Stanton]

Kinda like the XP on Mac contest earlier this year, this guy is putting up a $10,000 matching contribution to inspire someone to create a open source alternative to dotMac. I sent my $10. Check it out: notMac Challenge .

[rickey939]

Hmmm....

[- - e r i k - -]

Well thought through. Only good things can come out of this.

[Chuckit]

Seeing as how .Mac is not a program, and thus does not have source code, I don't see how there could be an open-source replacement for .Mac. It's just a service that provides Web hosting and e-mail that all Apple's apps tie into, isn't it?

[Philip J. Fry]

Originally Posted by Chuckit 

Seeing as how .Mac is not a program, and thus does not have source code, I don't see how there could be an open-source replacement for .Mac. It's just a service that provides Web hosting and e-mail that all Apple's apps tie into, isn't it?

Well, it could essentially be a prefpane or standalone app that does what .Mac does on the Mac; syncing everything seamlessly without the need for much user interaction.

[wataru]

Originally Posted by Chuckit 

Seeing as how .Mac is not a program, and thus does not have source code, I don't see how there could be an open-source replacement for .Mac. It's just a service that provides Web hosting and e-mail that all Apple's apps tie into, isn't it?

Talk about pedantic This would be a service anyone could host, run on open-source software, that would integrate with OS X exactly as Apple's .Mac service does. How is that not an "open-source replacement" for .Mac?

[crazyjohnson]

Seriously, though, how is someone going to offer a *free* replacement that is actually worth using? Google already does a lot of this (e-mail, web, etc).

[Catfish_Man]

From the rules: "Must be compatible with all future releases of the iLife application suite that are publicly available at the time of the entrant's submission."

This contest is completely impossible, because it requires being able to see into the future.

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by wataru 

Talk about pedantic This would be a service anyone could host, run on open-source software, that would integrate with OS X exactly as Apple's .Mac service does. How is that not an "open-source replacement" for .Mac?

My point was that if support for .Mac is hardcoded into an app, no matter what server software I write — heck, I could run an actual clone of the .Mac software — the support wouldn't be the same. The features that they are talking about have nothing to do with any "source" in .Mac and everything to do with the source in iPhoto.

[King Bob On The Cob]

Use a hosts file to redirect the mac.com address to your address, then you need WebDAV server going. (That's the big thing to allow .Mac syncing)

[wataru]

Originally Posted by Chuckit 

My point was that if support for .Mac is hardcoded into an app, no matter what server software I write — heck, I could run an actual clone of the .Mac software — the support wouldn't be the same. The features that they are talking about have nothing to do with any "source" in .Mac and everything to do with the source in iPhoto.

But that point is moot since you can direct iPhoto and whatnot to your server so the support would be the same.

If the goal were a ".OSS" service that existed alongside .Mac instead of in place of .Mac, then I would agree that it's not a replacement but merely a competing service. But that isn't the goal at all.

[CharlesS]

If they're going to make a complete replacement for dotMac, they're going to have to set up a free web host. Trouble is, web hosting costs money every month, because bandwidth isn't free. Where's that money going to come from if the service is free?

[mduell]

Originally Posted by Catfish_Man 

From the rules: "Must be compatible with all future releases of the iLife application suite that are publicly available at the time of the entrant's submission."

This contest is completely impossible, because it requires being able to see into the future.

Reread the second half of that sentence.

[kick52]

ok, the hosting bit wouldnt be hard to do.

set up lighttpd, enable moddav, and bang.

but, writing the plugins etc, would be alot more harder.

and, its impossible to be free, as the bandwidth would cost LOADS.

[OreoCookie]

AFAIK this has been done already (although it was quite a while ago when I've read something about it). It also required quite a bit of tinkering to fool the Mac into believing it's really talking to Apple's servers.

[crazyjohnson]

Exactly. +1

Originally Posted by CharlesS 

If they're going to make a complete replacement for dotMac, they're going to have to set up a free web host. Trouble is, web hosting costs money every month, because bandwidth isn't free. Where's that money going to come from if the service is free?

[Gossamer]

Perhaps the point would be to write the software and provide it for users to use on their own servers/hosting service. I have a web server I would love to put that kind of thing on.

[mindwaves]

I would lock this since it does seem to be a spam post, but since there is interest in it, I shall keep it open.