[KiNGME]

Is .Mac worth th $99 Apple charges?

[TETENAL]

$99 is not too much to show your loyalty to Apple.

[pcryan5]

I like iDISK - very $$$ for 1G of storage - but with 2 Macs at home and 1 at work - I appreciate the convenience. I like syncing my bookmarks over the web. Would I buy it again - probably - I'm much too lazy.

[hmurchison2001]

It will be to me.

I'm looking for a place to create a cheesy website, slap up some photos and keep somewhat organized.

.mac is in need of an update but I think Apple's going to beef it up for the launch of Leopard which will come with a new iLife and iWork which in turn will utilize the services of .mac 2.0 or whatever they choose to call it.

I've noticed that many of the WWDC seesions involve using Ajax for Web 2.0 product. Currently right now Safari 2 doesn't handle Ajax sites all that well. Safari 3 will handle them much better and support the newest CSS3 web standard.

Looks like a ripe time to hope into .mac. I imagine the syncing will get better or at least more full featured.

[CharlesS]

Originally Posted by TETENAL 

$99 is not too much to show your loyalty to Apple.

Somebody tell me again whether this is a computer company or a cult?

If showing your loyalty to an electronics corporation is the only reason to buy .Mac, that would seem to imply that it is not good for anything.

[mduell]

No.

You can get better webmail for free with more space from Google and sync bookmarks in Firefox with free plugins.
$99/year for 1GB web storage with no SLA? No way!

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by CharlesS 

Somebody tell me again whether this is a computer company or a cult?

If showing your loyalty to an electronics corporation is the only reason to buy .Mac, that would seem to imply that it is not good for anything.

I took it as sarcasm…

[j03]

Originally Posted by TETENAL 

$99 is not too much to show your loyalty to Apple.

I took it seriously. I didnt get it when i bought my make, as much as i love apple. However, nothing can beat gmail with its ajax auto refresh feature (SIMPLY PRICELESS).

I do love apple though but i dont take the $100 as a way to show my appreciation. I bought a $1500 mac, that's plenty.

[CharlesS]

Originally Posted by Chuckit 

I took it as sarcasm…

Check out his posting history and you'll see that he really does think that way.

Specifically, look at his comments on the black MacBook when it came out.

[dowNNshift]

Some features of dot Mac are fluff, although some are genuinely useful.

If you only own one Mac, then the sync features won't live up to their true usefulness. The mail is nice to have an ISP-independent address, no annoying ads, browser or POP based access, and flexible storage capacity. iDisk is nice for transferring files which are to large to send as an email attachement, although sometimes its slow to upload. I'm not that impressed with the Windows XP iDisk utility... but at least it exists in an emergency.

The main feature I enjoy the most is the secure iChat functionality. The SSL certificate alone is worth the $99 dollars. I can securely video and text chat with my colleagues, very useful for telecommuters.

Check out the 2 month trial and see if the sync, mail, and iDisk features will be of use to you! Who knows -- maybe Apple will add some new features with the Leopard release in October??

[JKT]

.Mac is good at pretty much everything it does. What it isn't good for is the price that Apple is charging for it.

[red rocket]

I've been looking at the basic Joyent Connector plan.

$99 per annum, plus a one-time $25 connection fee.

5 users/5 GB
5 websites
5GB Disk
15GB Bandwidth
5 databases

What can I do with these plans?

•Use Apache and Lighttpd Web servers side-by-side
•Host PHP4 and PHP5 Web pages and applications
•Host a Weblog using Textpattern, Wordpress, MovableType, Typo, etc
•Host Ruby and Ruby on Rails applications (including FCGI and hundreds of gems)
•Host Perl applications (including 100’s of Perl modules)
•Host Python applications like Django
•Manage your code base with version control (Subversion, SVK, Darcs, Monotone & Arch)
•Share iCal files over WebDAV
•Mount a WebDAV drive on your desktop (like iDisk)
•Easily create free subdomains with wildcard DNS
•Store your Basecamp file uploads over SFTP
•Access your account via SFTP and SSH
•Add domains, unlimited IMAP and POP mail boxes and mail aliases through a control panel
•Check your email through Webmail
•Host Mailman mailing lists complete with archives
•Use MySQL (default), PostgreSQL, SQLite and Berkeley databases

.Mac is starting to look pretty crappy in comparison.

[mac128k-1984]

Well it depends, I think you'll find here at 'NN the majority of people chose not to have .mac but other forums its the opposite. While its true that you can find less expensive alternatives none will offer the integration that .mac, so its up to you.

For me, I was a .mac member since the itools days (when it was free) but I no longer am a member. email is my biggest need and it seems the spam filters for .mac are not as robust as others. I have to say though their webmail client is top notch.

Bottom line, 99 bucks isn't much and if you find value in the .mac email address and the other tools then go for it.

[KiNGME]

Originally Posted by dowNNshift 

The main feature I enjoy the most is the secure iChat functionality. The SSL certificate alone is worth the $99 dollars. I can securely video and text chat with my colleagues, very useful for telecommuters.

But don't your colleagues have to have Macs too (or a AOL account)?! I don't know any big boy businessmen who use an AOL account.

[Macola]

It has its uses...at our recent MUG meeting, I discovered that the majority of members used and liked it. If you're a typical home Mac user, and don't have advanced computer skills, .Mac can be pretty useful.

[hmurchison2001]

.mac integration is key for me. Honestly I could see myself utilizing .mac for personal stuff and something like Joyent for more biz stuff that I've planned.

Apple certainly isn't going to let .mac just fade away. What's interesting to me is this partnership with Google that seems to be growing. I'm watching closely about how Apple and Google co-operate with each other in certain areas.

.mac is, in all likelyhood, going to receive a solid update. It's just a matter of when. I think I'm going to sign up for the free 60 day account in September. That will allow me to see if any changes come to .mac after Leopards delivery.

For .mac I need braindead simplicity with understated power and functionality.

[dowNNshift]

But don't your colleagues have to have Macs too (or a AOL account)?! I don't know any big boy businessmen who use an AOL account.

...What a troll response.

You were asking what dot Mac was useful for, and I was giving a practical example of how to maximize its value. Whether you video, voice, or text chat with your family, friends, or colleagues with dot Mac accounts -- the included SSL certificate is a good value.

I agree with the last post that Apple isn't going to let dot Mac slide, new features are most likely on the way with tighter integration with Leopard.

[KiNGME]

Originally Posted by dowNNshift 

...What a troll response.

You have a point... but if you wear a hat no one will notice.

I'm using the trial version now and Apple has crippled it so much that the trial is useless. It only backs up a few files before it says that I need a real account to back up all of it.

It seems I can only chat with other .Mac users or AOL subscribers instead of it being an open source chat like Adium.

The .mac email isn't as good as Gmail... and Gmail is free.

I'm wondering what I'm missing. This seems like a $29 service AT BEST.

[dowNNshift]

Throwing insults at people trying to help you won't go far in this forum.

Jerk.

[KiNGME]

Originally Posted by dowNNshift 

Throwing insults at people trying to help you won't go far in this forum. Jerk.

You called me a troll and now a jerk... I called you what?

Go take your ball and run along now.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by pcryan5 

I like iDISK - very $$$ for 1G of storage - but with 2 Macs at home and 1 at work - I appreciate the convenience. I like syncing my bookmarks over the web. Would I buy it again - probably - I'm much too lazy.

Just so you know, Foxmarks will allow you to sync bookmarks if you use Firefox.

[JKT]

Originally Posted by KiNGME 

The .mac email isn't as good as Gmail... and Gmail is free.

Fwiw, GMail is not "free" - you are giving Google permission to scan all your e-mails and actively invade your privacy when you sign up for GMail, as well as being advertised to each time you view anything in the webmail interface. GMail is also only a POP account whereas .Mac is IMAP, and this alone makes .Mac e-mail superior to GMail.

[KiNGME]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

Just so you know, Foxmarks will allow you to sync bookmarks if you use Firefox.

Does .Mac only syncronize Safari bookmarks? I enjoy using Camino.

[KiNGME]

Originally Posted by JKT 

...whereas .Mac is IMAP, and this alone makes .Mac e-mail superior to GMail.

I'm not really familiar with IMAP. Why/how is that superior to POP?

Edit:

Never mind, I found this link:

IMAP vs. POP

Thanks!

[JKT]

Amongst other things, from a user perspective the most important are that the message status is updated in all clients rather than just one, so if you read a message in your webmail interface, it is marked as read in e.g. Mail the next time you use it (likewise if you mark something as unread or label it). Others are that when you delete a message in one client, it is deleted in all others as well. Also, as well as being able to download to your software client, the message is always stored on the server so if you have a catastrophic failure on e.g. your desktop machine, your entire e-mail history is preserved on the server and you don't lose a thing. POP accounts can't do this in the same way and their server storage is a temporary hack in comparison, so using more than one e-mail client becomes a tremendous chore as you have no idea which messages have been read or deleted, and you don't have a secondary back up of your e-mails by default - the options available are only a poor approximation of what you get with IMAP.

In other words, with IMAP, the status of e-mails is kept in synch no matter how you access them or from where. This might not be important if you only ever use a single e-mail client but if you do access your e-mail from multiple sources in multiple locations, then IMAP is just much more superior than POP.

[besson3c]

IMAP = mail stored on server
POP = mail downloaded, and tethered to your computer (unless you leave a copy on the server)

[JKT]

Another comparison:

The IMAP Connection -- Comparing Two Approaches to Remote Mailbox Access: IMAP vs. POP

Edit - here's the summary:

Characteristics common to both POP and IMAP:
-Both can support offline operation.
-Mail is delivered to a shared, "always up" mail server.
-New mail accessible from a variety of client platform types.
-New mail accessible from anywhere in network.
-Protocols are open; defined by Internet RFCs.
-Freely available implementations (including source) available.
-Clients available for PCs, Macs, and Unix.
-Commercial implementations available.
-Internet oriented; no SMTP mail gateways required.
-Protocols deal with access only; both rely on SMTP to send.
-Both support persistent message IDs (for disconnected operation).

POP protocol advantages:
-Simpler protocol; easier to implement.
-More client software currently available.

IMAP protocol advantages:
-Can manipulate persistent message status flags.
-Can store messages as well as fetch them.
-Can access and manage multiple mailboxes.
-Can support concurrent updates and access to shared mailboxes.
-Suitable for accessing non-email data; e.g., NetNews, documents.
-Can also use offline paradigm, for minimum connect time and disk use.
-Companion protocol defined for user configuration management (IMSP).
-Constructs to permit online performance optimization, especially over low-speed links.

[hldan]

For me .mac's integration is key. Here are some of my favorite features I just can't live without:
I love working with my photos in iPhoto and uploading them to my homepage. Creating and purchasing an iPhoto-Book right from the desktop is awesome.
The ability to make iCards with my own pictures. (doesn't sound like a big deal but you can't do it without .mac.
Having a local copy of my iDisk on my desktop is priceless. Even if I have issues with my internet connection or I take my Apple notebook to a place with no internet connection I still will have access to my stored files on .Mac.

Having 2 Macs in the house almost requires .mac. Each Mac in my home stays in sync with each other. My address book, my emails, calendars and if I drop a file in my local iDisk on one Mac it ends up on the other Mac automatically.

Syncing my address book is almost worth the whole $99.00. When and if I need to reformat my hard disk or even when I have purchased a new Mac my address book gets automatically downloaded to the hard drive. I don't have to copy all my phone numbers and addresses.

Access to my Safari Bookmarks from ANY computer connected to the web although I would never and I repeat never access my .Mac account from a Windows computer in fear of spyware.

Now I do agree that Apple is making a nice profit from this venture and it either needs to be cheaper or needs a ton more features. Most likely they won't lower the price but add more features when Leopard arrives.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by hldan 

For me .mac's integration is key. Here are some of my favorite features I just can't live without:
I love working with my photos in iPhoto and uploading them to my homepage. Creating and purchasing an iPhoto-Book right from the desktop is awesome.
The ability to make iCards with my own pictures. (doesn't sound like a big deal but you can't do it without .mac.
Having a local copy of my iDisk on my desktop is priceless. Even if I have issues with my internet connection or I take my Apple notebook to a place with no internet connection I still will have access to my stored files on .Mac.

Having 2 Macs in the house almost requires .mac. Each Mac in my home stays in sync with each other. My address book, my emails, calendars and if I drop a file in my local iDisk on one Mac it ends up on the other Mac automatically.

Syncing my address book is almost worth the whole $99.00. When and if I need to reformat my hard disk or even when I have purchased a new Mac my address book gets automatically downloaded to the hard drive. I don't have to copy all my phone numbers and addresses.

Access to my Safari Bookmarks from ANY computer connected to the web although I would never and I repeat never access my .Mac account from a Windows computer in fear of spyware.

Now I do agree that Apple is making a nice profit from this venture and it either needs to be cheaper or needs a ton more features. Most likely they won't lower the price but add more features when Leopard arrives.

Just FYI, not that I'm trying to make you look silly or anything of the sort, but the only features you've listed that are unique to .Mac that can't be found elsewhere are Safari bookmark syncing and Address Book syncing.

There may be some shareware that will handle the latter though, and a supported iSync cell phone will also handle this.

[Chuckit]

Out of curiosity, what other hosts offer zero-configuration WebDAV? I assume they must be out there, but I've never used one.

[besson3c]

I bet Spymac used to

Doesn't your Dreamhost or whatever it is called support this?

[shifuimam]

Originally Posted by dowNNshift 

The main feature I enjoy the most is the secure iChat functionality. The SSL certificate alone is worth the $99 dollars. I can securely video and text chat with my colleagues, very useful for telecommuters.

Gaim (Adium for OS X) has an off-the-record plugin that securely encrypts your chats.

It's also compatible with Bonjour, AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, MSN, GTalk, etc.

There is also a portable version for Windows that you can keep on a thumb drive for when you're dealing with a public computer..

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

I bet Spymac used to

Doesn't your Dreamhost or whatever it is called support this?

Looks like they do, though I'm not sure if it's somewhat recent or if I just didn't care to look back when I was using them. I use MediaTemple now, and they definitely don't. I'd like it if they did, because teaching sales reps to use an FTP client is a PITA.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Chuckit 

Looks like they do, though I'm not sure if it's somewhat recent or if I just didn't care to look back when I was using them. I use MediaTemple now, and they definitely don't. I'd like it if they did, because teaching sales reps to use an FTP client is a PITA.

Why not create a simple little script that will mount the volume via SSHfs, assuming MediaTemple supports at least that?

[hldan]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

Just FYI, not that I'm trying to make you look silly or anything of the sort, but the only features you've listed that are unique to .Mac that can't be found elsewhere are Safari bookmark syncing and Address Book syncing.

There may be some shareware that will handle the latter though, and a supported iSync cell phone will also handle this.

Um correct me if I'm wrong but am I to understand that the having a local iDisk on the desktop of each of my Macs and keeping them in sync is not unique to .Mac?
Is using iPhoto to create and order photo books from my desktop not unique to .mac?
Is creating my own iCards with my own stored photos not unique to .Mac?

Sounds like you know everything, where else on the web replaces .mac to do those things.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by hldan 

Um correct me if I'm wrong but am I to understand that the having a local iDisk on the desktop of each of my Macs and keeping them in sync is not unique to .Mac?

Correct... iDisk is just a WebDAV mount. Any server with the Apache DAV extensions can do this, and you can even access your non-Apple WebDAV mount just like you would your iDisk with a hack to your /etc/hosts and some SSL cert work. Otherwise, you can access your WebDAV mount in the Finder via the "Connect to Server" command. You can do the same thing with an AFP or SSHfs mount too...

Is using iPhoto to create and order photo books from my desktop not unique to .mac?

Nope... You can use the open source Gallery software and the iPhoto2Gallery iPhoto plug to publish photos to the web. Works beautifully. Don't think you need a .Mac account to order a photo book, they are happy to take your money regardless of whether or not you are a .Mac member, last I checked.

Is creating my own iCards with my own stored photos not unique to .Mac?

You can email others your photos or use any of the existing greeting card services, is this really a feature of any value?

Sounds like you know everything, where else on the web replaces .mac to do those things.

Lots of hosts provide access to Gallery, lots of hosts provide WebDAV, you could also do this yourself with your own server if you wanted to.

[nanodip]

In my case, I can say it is worth the money. I use 4 Mac in different places and use idisk for most doucments I am working on, Yojimbo for storing information I find during research, the .mac-mail, iCal with sync, iWeb and the .mac-groups, for keeping contact with the family. All this works quite effortles (beside the groups, there are deficits).
At least to me knowledge, there is no other company that offers this spectrum of service. Especially without iDisk, automatic sync of adresses, dates, documents and information snippets my working life would be more difficult. Important is also the automatic synching, to have always local copies on my laptop, in case there is no internet available.
Of course, the 1 GB is not enough!

[pete.z]

For me,.Mac saves a lot of money.
I host ±800 pics a month for Ebay auctions on my .mac account,if I had to host them with ebay own picture service,it would be very expensive.
I have back the $99.- in a month time. :-)

(ok,it's a bit more,since I upgraded my .mac account to handle more traffic.)

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by pete.z 

For me,.Mac saves a lot of money.
I host ±800 pics a month for Ebay auctions on my .mac account,if I had to host them with ebay own picture service,it would be very expensive.
I have back the $99.- in a month time. :-)

(ok,it's a bit more,since I upgraded my .mac account to handle more traffic.)

How much disk space do your photos consume, and how much space do you have in .Mac?

[KiNGME]

Originally Posted by pete.z 

For me,.Mac saves a lot of money. I host ±800 pics a month for Ebay auctions on my .mac account,if I had to host them with ebay own picture service,it would be very expensive. I have back the $99.- in a month time. :-)

You can get 1500MB at KnownHost.com for $5 or 10000MB at MEWebhost.com for $8.

[Terrin]

The only reason I could think of .Mac being worth the money is if you use its syncing features. I use Bluehost, and pay $6.95 a month. I get 100 Gigabits of storage, a free domain name, up to 100 email accounts using my own domain name, automatic installation of popular CMS software, such as Word-press or Drupal, and a billion other features I do not even use (e.g. credit card integration services). For what you get, I think Apple overcharges. In my mind, syncing is just not worth a hundred bucks, and on everything else Apple falls short.

When .Mac was iTools and free, I liked the service. Considering all that Google offers for free, Apple should have kept .Mac free.

Originally Posted by KiNGME 

Is .Mac worth th $99 Apple charges?

[Terrin]

I do not get it. You could get so much more, for less. See my Bluehost.com comment. You could have your own domain, with 100 email addresses, subdomains, and the list goes on for less then you are paying for .Mac. I am a loyal Apple fan, but .Mac just falls short.

Originally Posted by pete.z 

For me,.Mac saves a lot of money.
I host ±800 pics a month for Ebay auctions on my .mac account,if I had to host them with ebay own picture service,it would be very expensive.
I have back the $99.- in a month time. :-)

(ok,it's a bit more,since I upgraded my .mac account to handle more traffic.)

[KP*]

I use .Mac, but I do think it's a waste of money, since the only feature I really use is the iDisk. I have to host a lot of images and files, and it's convenient because of the integration with the OS, but not that much different than what it would be with a 3rd-party host.

I also use it for creating simple websites sometimes, but I don't have iWeb, so I'm limited to just the basic templates at the moment. I don't do any kind of syncing because I don't use Safari, Address Book or iCal, so that whole thing is kind of useless. I don't even use my .Mac e-mail address (because I don't trust that I'll always want to keep my account).

I would like the idea of the iDisk being on the desktop and syncing with the online version, but the last time I tried it was horribly slow and basically unusable. In general the iDisk is very slow. I might cancel my account someday, but I tend to forget it's coming up and it auto-renews, and then I'm like "WTF did I buy from Apple for $99?" when I see my credit card statement.

I sure hope Apple intends to add more benefits to membership, or a lower price in the future, because I will be looking into other options.

[CatOne]

Sure, you can get alternatives to .Mac for less. You can use Gmail. And you can use Firefox to sync bookmarks. But I do not WANT to use Firefox... I want to use Safari. So there you go -- workarounds.

There are lots more things to .Mac than webmail. There is bookmark synching, there is Mail account, contact, iCal, etc., synching, there is iDisk... and they're all integrated with OS X. I don't WANT to use 5 different solutions to give me what I could have in one. So maybe I pay a bit more, but it's more convenient. Given .Mac is like $8/month it's worth it to me, mainly because I have had those features for 5 years -- I don't want to look for alternatives that are less convenient and not integrated.

[Atheist]

Originally Posted by CatOne 

Sure, you can get alternatives to .Mac for less. You can use Gmail. And you can use Firefox to sync bookmarks. But I do not WANT to use Firefox... I want to use Safari. So there you go -- workarounds.

There are lots more things to .Mac than webmail. There is bookmark synching, there is Mail account, contact, iCal, etc., synching, there is iDisk... and they're all integrated with OS X. I don't WANT to use 5 different solutions to give me what I could have in one. So maybe I pay a bit more, but it's more convenient. Given .Mac is like $8/month it's worth it to me, mainly because I have had those features for 5 years -- I don't want to look for alternatives that are less convenient and not integrated.

I believe you've hit the nail on the head. This is exactly why I use .Mac. I don't want to screw around with third-party solutions when .Mac has what I want totally integrated. That is the market they are going for. They aren't trying to compete with Bluehost or any number of other services such as that. I don't need 100 email addresses. I need a simple solution that requires me clicking on a couple of buttons. What can I say... I'm lazy. That said, I do believe the price should be more like $49/yr.

[hldan]

Ditto, I like .Mac for the integration. One stop shop. It's a hassle to use multiple services to do the same thing and Apple knows this. If Apple could not compete they wouldn't offer it. Now that said, I feel that $49-$69/yr is fair but I haven't been sorry paying the $99/yr so far, it just hurts a bit come time for the renewal. It's never at the right time.

[- - e r i k - -]

Originally Posted by CatOne 

Sure, you can get alternatives to .Mac for less. You can use Gmail. And you can use Firefox to sync bookmarks. But I do not WANT to use Firefox... I want to use Safari. So there you go -- workarounds.

There are lots more things to .Mac than webmail. There is bookmark synching, there is Mail account, contact, iCal, etc., synching, there is iDisk... and they're all integrated with OS X. I don't WANT to use 5 different solutions to give me what I could have in one. So maybe I pay a bit more, but it's more convenient. Given .Mac is like $8/month it's worth it to me, mainly because I have had those features for 5 years -- I don't want to look for alternatives that are less convenient and not integrated.

I was going to post in this thread, but you already said exactly what I wanted to say. Kudos.

[KiNGME]

Hmmm. Does .mac have a spam filter?! I am getting tons of junk and I can't report it or get .mac to learn my preferences.

[hldan]

Originally Posted by KiNGME 

Hmmm. Does .mac have a spam filter?! I am getting tons of junk and I can't report it or get .mac to learn my preferences.

Not the website but the mail.app client does and will learn your preferences.

[KiNGME]

Originally Posted by hldan 

Not the website but the mail.app client does and will learn your preferences.

Sigh.

But what is the point in that? If I go online to view my mail I have 10 messages from God or something. Free Yahoo or GMail does better than this $99 pile of elitist tripe!