Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

sgrup · Jul 19, 2002, 07:01 PM

i was really hoping that my mac.com email account was permanent and didn't need to keep changing email addresses every few years!!!

s

manofsteel300 · Jul 19, 2002, 07:12 PM

yea if apple dindt ask 100 bucks a year people wouldnt be as upset, but i at least am more upset at teh buisness strategy then the unreasonalbe cost.

If apple had told me that it will start charging in a couple of years i would have rethought how i was going to use my email account with them. as of now it is my primary account. Apple never told us that they will charge for it and furthermore made it seem like that would never happen.

though their fine lines may legally protect them it still is dirty buisness and if a judge would hear a good case, has a good chance of finding them guilty of bait and switch. I'll give them 73 days to show me that they're listening. if not ill switch to something and see if anyone would be interested in suiing them.

JLL · Jul 19, 2002, 07:12 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by CarpetFluff:
 <blockquote>quote:<hr /> You bought a year, you got a year - for half the price. I don't understand what you are complaining about. Is it Apples fault that you didn't want to make use of the trial period they offered you? <hr /></blockquote>Yes you are quite right, I'm a jerk.

Only I assumed that the trial period would be added to my subscription as did a lot of people if you read Apple's own forums on this subject (assuming they haven't been entirely deleted!) And yes maybe we're just dumb, but we're dumb paying customers now!<hr /></blockquote>Asking Apple before paying might have been a good idea.

<blockquote>quote:<hr />�to bring out applications for free that require them for full functionality (i.e iPhoto and parts of the finder) and then to say, "oh by the way we're now charging for these!"<hr /></blockquote>What parts of the Finder requires .Mac?

manofsteel300 · Jul 19, 2002, 07:19 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr /> What parts of the Finder requires .Mac? <hr /></blockquote>The Go -> iDisk part

pliny · Jul 19, 2002, 07:26 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by sgrup:
i was really hoping that my mac.com email account was permanent and didn't need to keep changing email addresses every few years!!!

s<hr /></blockquote>oh but it IS permanent, it IS yours to keep--you just have to decide if ponying up the $$$ is worth this convneience. This is what Apple has always done; they've always charged a premium for the label. In the past this has been processed through the RDF and has appeared as "the meghertz myth," the BMW of computers," "think different," and all the rest of it. Interestingly enough the only reason offered at MWNY, and did all you supporters of the hefty fee increase hear the DEAD SILENCE when .MAC was mentioned, was money, yet there is no basis for all this "let's justify it" claptrap when everyone here knows that where .MAC is concerned, the SAME IF NOT BETTER can be had for much cheaper. I won't even rehaash all the points about bandwidth limitations, etc., raised by cmoney.

mmurray · Jul 19, 2002, 07:36 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by zazou:
[QB
There is no such thing as free, only things being paid for by someone else.
[/QB]<hr /></blockquote>Mostly I would have thought iTools is paid for by the same people who are buying the Macs and the MacOS. It was advertised as a part of the OS and and as anadvantage of buying a mac. When someone offers me a burger and free fries for $5 I assume I am actually paying $5 for a burger and fries. I don't think of the fries as free.

Michael

mmurray · Jul 19, 2002, 07:38 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by sgrup:
i was really hoping that my mac.com email account was permanent and didn't need to keep changing email addresses every few years!!!

s<hr /></blockquote>Complain to Apple that you want your mac.com email address forwarded. Even crappy ISP's provide this service.

Michael

JLL · Jul 19, 2002, 07:40 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by manofsteel300:
 <blockquote>quote:<hr /> What parts of the Finder requires .Mac? <hr /></blockquote>The Go -> iDisk part<hr /></blockquote>LOL!!

That's like saying that the Finder isn't fully functioning unless you have a server - what else can you use your Connect to� for?

Ah well, I'll admit it - they Finder is useless without .Mac because then it can't browse an iDisk.

And every program requires a printer - the Print menu won't work without one <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" />

[ 07-19-2002, 07:41 PM: Message edited by: JLL ]

Developer · Jul 19, 2002, 07:59 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by CarpetFluff:

And yes maybe we're just dumb, but we're dumb paying customers now!<hr /></blockquote>You are not dumb, because you can learn from your experience.

manofsteel300 · Jul 19, 2002, 08:05 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by JLL:
 <blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by manofsteel300:
 <blockquote>quote:<hr /> What parts of the Finder requires .Mac? <hr /></blockquote>The Go -> iDisk part<hr /></blockquote>LOL!!

That's like saying that the Finder isn't fully functioning unless you have a server - what else can you use your Connect to� for?

Ah well, I'll admit it - they Finder is useless without .Mac because then it can't browse an iDisk.

And every program requires a printer - the Print menu won't work without one <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" /> <hr /></blockquote>are you stupid?? look at the question YOU asked. you asked what part of the finder requires .MAC and answered you. That part requires .Mac. i never said it becomes useless did i? itools was marketed as part of the "mac solution" which a lot of folks have bought into.

by the way, just to piss you off... not every program requires a printer. every program that needs to print something requires a printer to do the printing.

JLL · Jul 19, 2002, 08:14 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by manofsteel300:
are you stupid?? look at the question YOU asked. you asked what part of the finder requires .MAC and answered you. That part requires .Mac. i never said it becomes useless did i? itools was marketed as part of the "mac solution" which a lot of folks have bought into.<hr /></blockquote>No you're the stupid one - try reading the post that I replied to instead of making smartass remarks!!

manofsteel300 · Jul 19, 2002, 08:23 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by JLL:
 <blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by manofsteel300:
are you stupid?? look at the question YOU asked. you asked what part of the finder requires .MAC and answered you. That part requires .Mac. i never said it becomes useless did i? itools was marketed as part of the "mac solution" which a lot of folks have bought into.<hr /></blockquote>No you're the stupid one - try reading the post that I replied to instead of making smartass remarks!!<hr /></blockquote>If apple puts it in their freaking menu bar.. then it should do something. asking us to pay 100 bucks a year to use something built into our operating system is ridiculous. YOU tell me how you would feel if we had another space in teh menu bar reserved for .net subscriptions or audible.com subscriptions? just cause apple makes it doesnt doenst mean its deserves more than the rest. the idisk in the menubar is very different then printing.. its subscription based. most people need printers .mac is a choice. Its awful that apple uses their position to "force" it upon you by integrating it into the operating system (the little idisk reminder). Apple sold os9 with itools as a feature. There is no doubt that making .mac cost money takes away from the functionality of the system.

sambeau · Jul 19, 2002, 08:36 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by JLL:
 <blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by manofsteel300:
are you stupid?? look at the question YOU asked. you asked what part of the finder requires .MAC and answered you. That part requires .Mac. i never said it becomes useless did i? itools was marketed as part of the "mac solution" which a lot of folks have bought into.<hr /></blockquote>No you're the stupid one - try reading the post that I replied to instead of making smartass remarks!!<hr /></blockquote>This is just plain wrong. Look at System Preferences, Mail and the Finder menu. iTools is integrated into the OS and it was free. it was genuinely useful and a real selling point.

Now we have a different situation. Without paying for .Mac, the OS isn't complete. we have to pay more to get this extra bit. Without it we have Apple light.. Windows ME..

It reminds me of when I switched from an Amiga to a Mac. Suddenly every menu option did something. It felt complete..

I'm not saying that .Mac *should* be free. I'm just saying that iTools *was* and we bought into it on a promise that has now been broken and with it the Apple brand has been cheapened.

I do feel cheated.. It's the loss of the email address more than anything. Oh how we shoffed at those poor buggers with their hotmail accounts. oh how we laughed those <a href="http://www.com" target="_blank">www.com</a> suckers who lost their cool email address. [email protected] has been with me since day one of iTools (literally day 2 I think). 5 have had a number of work email accounts but this has been consistent. It is now part of me. I feel blackmailed.

They said forever - and because they said *free* I beleived them.. They're Apple for ****'s sake. They don't do this - this is what Microsoft does.. etc..

I am very dissapointed.

real · Jul 19, 2002, 08:48 PM

All you people who are complaining are a bunch of spoiled brats, getting your panties all bunched up over nothing.If you dont like go get a hotmail account Yeah that's a real winner.If you dont feel it's worth the $100-$50 then dont pay. Acting like a bunch of little school girls isn't going to change anything.You have $50 sitting in your couch and in your car, You give that away everytime you drop change.
Bottom line if you dont like dont do it. But dont congest macnn with your spoiled remarks. Some people"I'm American there for I have rights, I'll sue you, You shouldn't have done this, this is unconsitutional".
You all should be ashamed.
The biggest impact on apple you can make is not paying the $50-$100 bucks then they'll see. Money talks and complaining get you nowhere.
REAL

Synotic · Jul 19, 2002, 08:54 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Richard5mith:
I can understand people's opinion, but why do you think that by charging you $49 Apple is just out to make a quick buck? As Phil Schiller has already said, they're basically covering costs with this thing. Have you any idea how expensive it is to host 2 million email accounts and webhosting accounts?

Think of the figures. 2 million x 5mb (that was an idisk before I think). 2 million x 2mb for email. That's a hell of a lot of disk space. Sure not all of it's going to be used, but you still need a lot. Plus processing power, plus HUGE bandwidth. Even if all 2 million users only served ONE page of image thumbnails a day, that's still 95Gb of data. Or if every person checked their email once a day and got one email - almost 10Gb of data. Most of these costs don't come down as the users increase either, the cost is pretty level from 1 user to a million users.

For $49 (13 cents a day, less than a newspaper), you get email, web access, one click photo and calendar sharing. One click machine synching. And lots more stuff coming too. Even if you don't use anything but the email, it's still only 13 cents a day, which is nothing in the scale of things. Email is obviously important to you, isn't it worth paying 13 cents a day for it? Much less than postage for a normal letter and you can send as much emails as you want.

Giving stuff away for free is not a good business model. Happy customers mean nothing when the accountants come in to shut you down. Apple is "thinking different", they've learned the lesson from the thousands of companies who thought they could make a serious business out of giving away their products, many of whom gave free hosting. Sure, there are people who still do it, but they're either laden with ads and popups, or they'll be out of business soon too.

Apple have made mistakes with this thing however. No monthly payments. No email only option. No immediate changes apart from space increases. Scatty service over the last couple of days. These are bad, and should be addressed by Apple as quick as they can.

iTools was a perk. Sure it's unfortunate that it's not around now, but as has been pointed out, it was in the license agreement that it might change. And anybody who bought a Mac just because they got a free email address has strange priorities.

Me? I'm not paying. I have email and hosting elsewhere, and will be offering my own hosting packages soon. But Apple add more nice things like the one click calendar and photo publishing - I'll stump up. The convienence is nice. And well worth 13 cents a day (or even 26, if I wait past the 70 days).<hr /></blockquote>Just a note.. iDisk's were 20 MB and Mail accounts, 5 MB.

sambeau · Jul 19, 2002, 09:02 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by real:
All you people who are complaining are a bunch of spoiled brats, getting your panties all bunched up over nothing.If you dont like go get a hotmail account Yeah that's a real winner.If you dont feel it's worth the $100-$50 then dont pay. Acting like a bunch of little school girls isn't going to change anything.You have $50 sitting in your couch and in your car, You give that away everytime you drop change.
Bottom line if you dont like dont do it. But dont congest macnn with your spoiled remarks. Some people"I'm American there for I have rights, I'll sue you, You shouldn't have done this, this is unconsitutional".
You all should be ashamed.
The biggest impact on apple you can make is not paying the $50-$100 bucks then they'll see. Money talks and complaining get you nowhere.
REAL<hr /></blockquote>Ah get a life. If no-one complained the world would be run by *******s like you.

Look. An email address has become part of the modern identity. if you have a good-one you want to keep it. Iwas told that it was *mine* - not on loan.

If an old freind had given me a coat a few years back and told me I can keep it, only to suddenly change his mind and ask for me to pay $50 to use it for a year I'd be rightly pissed off.

Apple is an old friend and I feel let down. Yeh, I'll get over it in time - but there are only so many of these 'tests of freindship' that any loyalty can take..

They should value our friendship more instead of chasing these "switchers".. `I feel a bit jilted.

JLL · Jul 19, 2002, 09:07 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by manofsteel300:
If apple puts it in their freaking menu bar.. then it should do something. asking us to pay 100 bucks a year to use something built into our operating system is ridiculous. YOU tell me how you would feel if we had another space in teh menu bar reserved for .net subscriptions or audible.com subscriptions?<hr /></blockquote>I don't own a printer but I don't complain about all those Print menus.

Look, I was responding to a poster that said that parts of the Finder required .Mac, and I was trying to say that the Finder works just like it should without .Mac - managing files, which is the Finder's job, works perfectly with or without .Mac.

It just can't manage files on one of the network disk options in the menu without .Mac, and I don't see anything wrong with that.

As I said it also requires a printer to take advantage of the built in printing capabilities or a server to tage advantage of the built in network client, but I don't complain about them if I don't have a server or a printer.

Should Apple remove the iDisk menu item because not everyone have .Mac?

Should they remove Ink because not everyone have a tablet?

[ 07-19-2002, 09:12 PM: Message edited by: JLL ]

sambeau · Jul 19, 2002, 09:19 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by JLL:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by manofsteel300:
[qb]
Should Apple remove the iDisk menu item because not everyone have .Mac?

Should they remove Ink because not everyone have a tablet?<hr /></blockquote>aaaarrggghh! give it a rest JLL will you.

You are becomeing a terrible apologist for this new Redmondite tactic.

If the only tablet that worked with inkwell was
a) Apple made
and
b) previously bundled free with every machine

then (quite rightly) YES!

Lew · Jul 19, 2002, 09:28 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by sambeau:
This is just plain wrong. Look at System Preferences, Mail and the Finder menu. iTools is integrated into the OS and it was free.<hr /></blockquote>Oh no! My Pismo doesn't have a CD-RW drive, so the 'Burn disc' option in the finder doesn't work! CD burning is integrated into the OS and it's free. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" />

sambeau · Jul 19, 2002, 09:33 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by GFive:
 <blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by sambeau:
This is just plain wrong. Look at System Preferences, Mail and the Finder menu. iTools is integrated into the OS and it was free.<hr /></blockquote>Oh no! My Pismo doesn't have a CD-RW drive, so the 'Burn disc' option in the finder doesn't work! CD burning is integrated into the OS and it's free. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" /> <hr /></blockquote>Ahh but you're going to have to pay $50 to keep your keyboard..

pliny · Jul 19, 2002, 09:38 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by JLL:
<hr /></blockquote>No you're the stupid one - try reading the post that I replied to instead of making smartass remarks!!

how old are you again? you come off sounding like a bratty child. why don't you give the forums a rest for today and do yourself and everyone else a favor before you post more nonsense like this.

rambo47 · Jul 19, 2002, 10:10 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />As for the issue of value, I also think that it is recognized that the value of a Mac.com account is pretty significant and an integral part of the Mac experience. Why else do you think so many people are up-in-arms over this?
I myself consider this a potential large blunder in Apple's efforts to make users 'switch'. This move increases the total cost of owning a Mac, which is already perceived as grossly overpriced, underpowered, and has a small marketshare (which translates into less software options). Granted all of these have counter points, but consider the buying decision and the options users face. The iTools services were a (however small) selling point. I got my dad to buy a Powerbook over a PC laptop because I convinced him that iTools would make his life easier. He won't pay $100/yr and he probably will start using his company's PC instead.<hr /></blockquote>This is the first good argument against the new .Mac policy. Most posts have been childish whining because something originally given for free is no longer free. Economic reallity seems to be lost on most of the complainers. Did anyone see Apple's last quarterly report? Not pretty, and getting worse! All that being said, I agree that iTools is part of the Mac experience. It has been a great selling point for the Mac, both the integration with the OS and getting all the features for free. Now all that's left is the integration part. Still nifty, but when you get the "oh, yeah - you can buy this great stuff that's integrated into the OS", the novlety wears off fast.

I bought the first year/$49 package and added one extra email account. For me, the features make up for the price, at least for the 1st year. But I completely understand when folks say they're not paying. Hey, that's fine. There are lots of alternatives out there, many priced well below .Mac. Use 'em if you feel strongly about this. Just please cease the whining and threats to "go Dell". As so many have said before, no one knows what the situation will be in a year. Cool off, evaluate the options, and enjoy the best OS on the planet.

diamondsw · Jul 19, 2002, 10:11 PM

Can we all agree on the following and quit arguing it over and over?

1) What Apple did was completely legal.
2) What Apple did was a PR fiasco, and was handled very badly.
3) Apple should have offered more options, along the lines of ala carte services.
4) It costs a lot of money to support the storage and bandwidth for such a service.
5) Apple is charging $50 up front, $100 later. If you're using this for more than a year (as most people will), you may as well judge its value at what it costs in the long run, not just right now.
6) Anyone who buys a membership now should have it last until September 30th, 2003. No sense in penalizing them for signing up early. Otherwise there will be an enormous bandwidth and load spike on September 30th.

Now, we can sit back and argue on whether or not this was necessary, whether Apple should have absorbed the cost, what options should have been provided, and whether or not we should have let a free service become such a central thing to us.

My opinion? (feel free to skip to the next post now

)

Apple should have kept e-mail free (the most valuable service, and least storage/bandwidth intensive), and made the original iTools services inexpensive - like $30 a year, the same as a QuickTime license. Include that year of basic service with any new computer (to woo switchers). For the expanded services, offer them ala carte. You might want Homepage, I might want an iDisk. To lessen the outrage (even at $30), keep the services until the end of the year.

I, like many people, had several e-mail accounts with Mac.com. My ISP was bought out three times in the last year, so I didn't want to use those e-mail addresses anymore. I didn't want some random e-mail provider, as the stability these days is questionable, and I didn't want Yahoo or Hotmail because of the ads. iTools was perfect, and so I set up several accounts for different purposes to minimize spam on my "primary" account. I never used iDisk (not for lack of trying, but it was just too slow), I never used Homepage (hosted it myself with Apache).

Now Apple has me. I can't change one of my e-mail addresses (it's my id at several online retailers - they all use e-mail addresses these days, and I created one for just this purpose), and I really don't want to change another one (my personal address, where a couple old addresses point to). So no matter what, I have to buy one primary account. Once you've coughed up that money, what's another $10/year?

RodriCO2000 · Jul 19, 2002, 11:22 PM

Well I have one iMac and we have 4 different users, my brother, sister, mother and me.

Its going to really s**k for them because I can't afford to buy them all .Mac accounts!!! and they probably won't buy it either!!!! That means that even thouhg we bought ONE computer each user needs to pay the 100 a year!!! Thats crazy and outrageous they are here to make some money from us and honestly I dont think its fair... I NEVER use iDisk or anything, I only use e-mail...

What a shame Apple!!!

I really want to buy one of those sweet new iMacs but not with this .Mac crap!! It makes me think twice about Apple!

I am not complaining for the price I would gladly pay for it but its not fair that they are charging SO MUCH for such BASIC Functionality!! They need to keep e-mail free or at a reduced cost!!!!

essex · Jul 19, 2002, 11:28 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by RodriCO2000:
Well I have one iMac and we have 4 different users, my brother, sister, mother and me.

Its going to really s**k for them because I can't afford to buy them all .Mac accounts!!! and they probably won't buy it either!!!! That means that even thouhg we bought ONE computer each user needs to pay the 100 a year!!! Thats crazy and outrageous they are here to make some money from us and honestly I dont think its fair... I NEVER use iDisk or anything, I only use e-mail...

What a shame Apple!!!

I really want to buy one of those sweet new iMacs but not with this .Mac crap!! It makes me think twice about Apple!

I am not complaining for the price I would gladly pay for it but its not fair that they are charging SO MUCH for such BASIC Functionality!! They need to keep e-mail free or at a reduced cost!!!!<hr /></blockquote>One of you can get .mac for $49 and add three email address for your family for $10 a piece. So you end up with $79 for the 1st year vs. $400.

[ 07-19-2002, 11:46 PM: Message edited by: essex ]

scottiB · Jul 19, 2002, 11:48 PM

What essex said, plus you've got 20 more megs of HD space.

Mr Heliums · Jul 20, 2002, 02:12 AM

[QUOTE]Originally posted by diamondsw:
[QB]Can we all agree on the following and quit arguing it over and over?

1) What Apple did was completely legal.
2) What Apple did was a PR fiasco, and was handled very badly.
3) Apple should have offered more options, along the lines of ala carte services.
4) It costs a lot of money to support the storage and bandwidth for such a service.
5) Apple is charging $50 up front, $100 later. If you're using this for more than a year (as most people will), you may as well judge its value at what it costs in the long run, not just right now.
6) Anyone who buys a membership now should have it last until September 30th, 2003. No sense in penalizing them for signing up early. Otherwise there will be an enormous bandwidth and load spike on September 30th.

That's almost exactly how I feel. Apple is free to do what it wants, but even those who support the move to fee paying (and I respect their views) must admit that Apple handled this amateurishly and treated its customers with far less respect than it should have.

On point (4) though, I worry that this is the start of something long-term. Of course Apple will make it worth $100 next year, by offering yet more services not available to standard Mac users. Eventually it will be $150 a year with bundled OS updates. I don't approve of this way of doing business and it's one reason I'll hold back on the new .Mac service, even when it starts relatively cheaply. They're baiting us all over again.

I don't think it's a good move from a basic business standpoint either, but only time will tell whether I'm right or not

manofsteel300 · Jul 20, 2002, 02:28 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr /> On point (4) though, I worry that this is the start of something long-term. Of course Apple will make it worth $100 next year, by offering yet more services not available to standard Mac users. Eventually it will be $150 a year with bundled OS updates. I don't approve of this way of doing business and it's one reason I'll hold back on the new .Mac service, even when it <hr /></blockquote>Exactly. We have no guarentee that apple will not hike up the price again. If they did it once they can do it again. As far as i'm concerned the way they handled this has lost them a lot of trust. There is no telling what future economic downturns apple can use as support for charging more.

Apple is making a profit off of this no doubt.. and not just a small one but a huge one. If you evaluate how much apple has to pay for this stuff and how much they are selling it to us the difference is ridiculous. Apple does not pay 70 bucks for virex for each user.. especially not yearly. And as someone else said if they truely arent making a profit off of this and are doing it for the mac community, they sure as heck arent winning brownie points.. they might have been better off to come up with another solution.

Nathan Adams · Jul 20, 2002, 02:36 AM

Just a little thing worth noting to those complaining:
the amount of time some have spent on these forums debating this all, you could have spent working and actually made more than enough to cover the costs of .Mac

Think about it.

manofsteel300 · Jul 20, 2002, 02:39 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Nathan Adams:
Just a little thing worth noting to those complaining:
the amount of time some have spent on these forums debating this all, you could have spent working and actually made more than enough to cover the costs of .Mac

Think about it.<hr /></blockquote>you find me a job that is as intellectually stimulating as these boards that will pay me to work for 1 hr a day and i'll take it!

CarpetFluff · Jul 20, 2002, 03:31 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr /> And every program requires a printer - the Print menu won't work without one <hr /></blockquote>Apple have built 'Print' into the finder functionality so that I can go out and buy a printer and use it if I like.

Apple have bulit 'iDisk' into because they want me to pay money to use their iDisk service, a printer is generic Apple aren't tying a specific printer to this function I can only connect to an iDisk from the Go - iDisk function in the finder, if I could connect to any remote storage and it just said something like Go - Remote Disk I wouldn't be complaining.

One of the biggest reasons I use a mac is that this is exactly the kind of crap Microsoft pull, build functionality into the operating system which is only there to make profit for them.

I feel sorry for you if you can't see this because it is 'your' right of choice that's being eroded here, supposing there is more integration with .mac over the coming years, you'll end up seeing a ton of menus and buttons in applications that serve no benefit for the user unless they subscribe to Apple's and only Apple's paid services. Supposing they suddenly turned around and started charging users for CDDB look up in iTunes or something?

The point I'm making is that I've paid for my computer and my operating system I don't expect to have to rent it as well. Sure I don't have to subscribe but then I don't want to see things I can't do integrated in my system and if we don't fight against this now then then we're all going to wake up one morning and find that we're running on Windows with a make-over.

JLL · Jul 20, 2002, 05:51 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by pliny:
 <blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by JLL:
<hr /></blockquote>No you're the stupid one - try reading the post that I replied to instead of making smartass remarks!!

how old are you again? you come off sounding like a bratty child. why don't you give the forums a rest for today and do yourself and everyone else a favor before you post more nonsense like this.<hr /></blockquote>Please read the original post and look who's calling who stupid here. I asked CarpetFluff a question and someone else took the liberty of answering while calling me stupid.

[ 07-20-2002, 06:00 AM: Message edited by: JLL ]

JLL · Jul 20, 2002, 05:58 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by CarpetFluff:
Apple have built 'Print' into the finder functionality so that I can go out and buy a printer and use it if I like.

Apple have bulit 'iDisk' into because they want me to pay money to use their iDisk service�<hr /></blockquote>�if you like.

<blockquote>quote:<hr />I feel sorry for you if you can't see this because it is 'your' right of choice that's being eroded here, supposing there is more integration with .mac over the coming years, you'll end up seeing a ton of menus and buttons in applications that serve no benefit for the user unless they subscribe to Apple's and only Apple's paid services. Supposing they suddenly turned around and started charging users for CDDB look up in iTunes or something?<hr /></blockquote>I feel sorry for you that you're upset over a shortcut to iDisk in a menu and are upset over something you don't know if will happen or not - but you suppose it will happen.

It's still my choice to use it or not, and it's still possible to mount another network disk - in the exact same menu.

All there is now is a Preference pane and an iDisk menu item - is that so terrible?

So what if Apple's iApps are integrated with .Mac. They are free Apple apps and nothing is stopping you from using another app - they can even be deleted without messing up the system.

I don't understand why some people are getting upset on something that they fear will happen in the future, when they don't really know - relax and enjoy the summer.

[ 07-20-2002, 06:12 AM: Message edited by: JLL ]

CarpetFluff · Jul 20, 2002, 06:20 AM

As a matter of interest JLL what's your postion on the integration of Internet Explorer in Windows?

I know that having something in a menu that you have to pay for but don't have to use is fairly insignificant in itself, what I'm trying to look at is the bigger picture, where will this lead? I mean following that thinking there would be no harm in having a drop down menu where I could order a pizza from Pizza Hut, but I don't want my operating system turned into a shopping mall.

I have no problem with Apple charging for a service, but that service should bolt on to the operating system not be integrated into it.

pliny · Jul 20, 2002, 09:51 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Nathan Adams:
Just a little thing worth noting to those complaining:
the amount of time some have spent on these forums debating this all, you could have spent working and actually made more than enough to cover the costs of .Mac

Think about it.<hr /></blockquote>Pffft

Spirit_VW · Jul 20, 2002, 10:30 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Nathan Adams:
Just a little thing worth noting to those complaining:
the amount of time some have spent on these forums debating this all, you could have spent working and actually made more than enough to cover the costs of .Mac

Think about it.<hr /></blockquote>hehehe, good point.

JLL · Jul 20, 2002, 11:03 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by CarpetFluff:
As a matter of interest JLL what's your postion on the integration of Internet Explorer in Windows?<hr /></blockquote>You're comparing that to an iDisk menu item?

As long as Apple don't force me to use their iApps, integrate iChat in Finder windows and make them almost impossible to remove, I don't care <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" />

Retrograde · Jul 20, 2002, 12:02 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by theolein:
I agree that for a lower price people would have been far less pissed.<hr /></blockquote>I think people would have been far less pissed if Apple had canceled the iTools service altogether and left it at that.

real · Jul 20, 2002, 03:21 PM

sambeau : everyones actting like apple was ther best friend who you spend every waking hour with then he/she found a new boyfriend/girlfriend and stoped hanging out with you all the time. Childish? YES. justifed maybe but childish yes.

iJed · Jul 20, 2002, 04:32 PM

I think that the only solution Apple can make to the .Mac calamity is to make Mac.com email addresses free once again. Surely it cannot cost all that much to provide a small amount of disk space and the bandwidth for just email. They can offer a pay for .Mac with all the other iTools services but $100 is probably a little steep. I bought my Mac and don't expect to have to subscribe to it too!

This is the first time since '97 that I have actually considered ditching the Mac! If it wasn't for Jaguar...

graffix · Jul 20, 2002, 07:27 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />I think people would have been far less pissed if Apple had canceled the iTools service altogether and left it at that.
<hr /></blockquote>Funny thing, is I agree... because it fits into Machiavellian theory...
People would be upset, but rather than ranting on about the new costs, they would instead be 'suggesting' them...
We'd see threads titled "How much would you pay to save iTools", and other such claptrap, and people would actually feel 'good' about having to pay the new fees.
Personally, .mac is not on the horizon for me... I'll make a go of it elsewhere, but Apple definitely could've handled it much, much better.

Now to address other things...
People that keep hoping for 'e-mail only' accounts shouldn't hold their breath... Apple knows that the e-mail address is quite possibly the most compelling reason to make the .mac purchase...
This was the last time Apple will test my loyalty (after 10 years as a Mac user)... one more wrong move and my next computer will be of the x86 variety (though I still can get a lot of use prior with my iBook Dual USB that's a year old).
I'm just sick and tired of Apple dicking it's users around because they think they can get more money out of us.

iTools was an integrated feature to the OS... the failure to admit that only shows how little you know about the service that we're all 'up in arms' about...

Why else would your iTools membership be the third thing that you fill out during OSX installs?
Why did Steve Jobs claim that the iDisk was the replacement for the floppy drive they were eliminating?
Why is the 'Go->iDisk' function in the Finder?
Why is there an option tab to have Mail use your 'mac.com' email account?
Why is there an iTools tab in the Internet preference pane?
Why does iPhoto automatically publish photo albums to your mac.com website?
Why does iMovie publish to your mac.com website?
(I'm sure there's more, but this is all I can think of offhand)

Now would you consider this 'integrated?' I think we all know the answer, but some of us like to justify our ass-reamings, so we can feel good about them...

How many people that are calling us 'moaners' and 'crybabies' actually use the services Apple offers? I doubt many do...
I've lost my website and my e-mail if I don't cough up some cash... and like other people said, whether or not it's factual, I feel ripped off...
I don't want or need the 'extras' that Apple feels give value to .mac.
Everyone is allowed their opinion, just don't resort to namecalling to try to prove your point... all it does is show just how immature you are, and really solves nothing. Just agree to disagree, and leave it at that.
cheers.
graffix

ls -al · Jul 20, 2002, 08:08 PM

Why do I have this nagging feeling that I've seen the whole .mac fiasco before. Those who choose to ignore history...

<img src="http://www.vanvr.com/eworld/eworldMain.jpeg" alt=" - " />

Subzero Diesel949 · Jul 21, 2002, 12:46 AM

Here's my take...and I don't care too much about the noise from the Apple apologist crowd...

Apple promised that our mac.com e-mail accounts would be "yours to keep" and always there even if we switch ISPs. So Apple put deep in their EULA that they can make iTools a pay service whenever they want. But to hype/market iTools as a free service with an e-mail address "to keep" was misleading (I'm going back to OS 9 for this). Hell, look at the OS 9 box: "Featuring iTools." I guess iTools added functionality to the system.

Then along comes OS X. The third thing asked upon registration is your iTools name/pass or to sign up if you don't have one. The Internet pref pane even gives you a chance to sign up and "get the most out of the Internet." Sounds too good to be true. But notice how Apple separates the e-mail from iDisk. Why can't Apple leave e-mail alone and simply charge for iDisk? Because they don't want to, as mentioned in another post just above. The e-mail is the bait. Then there's the Go menu option. Well, guess what? Come October 1st you'll have a system with some hobbled functionality unless you upgrade to 10.2. Although some functionality will be retained, 10.2 will be updated to reflect the change. Of course not everyone will be upgrading their systems for various reasons. But can you see what Apple is doing? Spend $100/yr for .Mac, $129 for a buggy 10.2 (that fixed what was supposed to work in 10.1 to begin with, and then some) that will probably see a 10.2.1 within two weeks (requiring $ in ISP usage time), and extra $$$ for patches/fixes/whatever for programs that might break. Know another certain company that employs the same strategy? Hint: Starts with M.

(EDIT: Okay, so I too said "free for life." I looked it up for myself and saw "yours to keep." There was even a post with the link. But that doesn't change the fact it was still a bait and switch tactic because many people felt that it was theirs to keep. Just like how Apple promised that OS X was optimized for G3s.)

[ 07-21-2002, 03:52 PM: Message edited by: Subzero Diesel949 ]

CarpetFluff · Jul 21, 2002, 02:43 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr /> You're comparing that to an iDisk menu item?
As long as Apple don't force me to use their iApps, integrate iChat in Finder windows and make them almost impossible to remove, I don't care <hr /></blockquote>The principle is the same, Apple have strategically integrated iTools in their operating system for commercial gain, not to benefit the user. If Apple are going down this road who knows where it will lead, sure I can live with it but as a wise consumer I shouldn't because I don't know what's next. In six years of supporting and promoting Apple I've never seen a move like this. I will eye each 'free' piece of software they release with suspicion from now on.

"I fear the Greeks, even when bringing gifts." Virgil (70-19 BC)

An ancient proverb is always a nice touch

sambeau · Jul 21, 2002, 09:12 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by real:
sambeau : everyones actting like apple was ther best friend who you spend every waking hour with then he/she found a new boyfriend/girlfriend and stoped hanging out with you all the time. Childish? YES. justifed maybe but childish yes.<hr /></blockquote>Nothing wrong with being childish. I do feel like a kid whose just had his beloved trike nicked and held to ransome by bthe bigger kid next door..

Muuuuuummmmmmmm!

sambeau · Jul 21, 2002, 09:14 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by CarpetFluff:
[oftware they release with suspicion from now on.

"I fear the Greeks, even when bringing gifts." Virgil (70-19 BC)

<hr /></blockquote>I fear the Geeks myself..

asxless · Jul 21, 2002, 10:23 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by diamondsw:
Can we all agree on the following and quit arguing it over and over?

1) What Apple did was completely legal.
2) What Apple did was a PR fiasco, and was handled very badly.
3) Apple should have offered more options, along the lines of ala carte services.
4) It costs a lot of money to support the storage and bandwidth for such a service.
5) Apple is charging $50 up front, $100 later. If you're using this for more than a year (as most people will), you may as well judge its value at what it costs in the long run, not just right now.
6) Anyone who buys a membership now should have it last until September 30th, 2003. No sense in penalizing them for signing up early. Otherwise there will be an enormous bandwidth and load spike on September 30th.

Now, we can sit back and argue on whether or not this was necessary, whether Apple should have absorbed the cost, what options should have been provided, and whether or not we should have let a free service become such a central thing to us.<hr /></blockquote>Excellent rational summary and suggestion. BTW I agree with all of your points.

Unfortunately many fora users are still in the earlier, more emotional, stages of dealing with this ' loss': Denial & Anger. Some are at the Bargaining stage . And some have moved on to the Acceptance stage. This is partially due to how people perceive the 'loss'. Most of the folks in Acceptance saw it as a 'loss of $'. Most of the ones in Denial/Anger see it a a 'loss of trust' which takes more time to resolve. As this an other threads demonstrate, it is very hard to reach consensus with people covering this range of stages. It just takes time.

FWIW I am in the Bargaining stage. Hoping Apple will recognize its "PR fiasco" and offer a low cost Email only account so that I don't have to go through the hassle of a 'change of Email address'. But I already have several email addresses at my ISP, ready to roll out if that doesn't happen.

asxless in iLand

Hudson · Jul 21, 2002, 10:54 PM

A handful of points for readers to consider:

1) Many people were drawn to iTools precisely because they were looking for a more-permanent solution to maintaining a single e-mail address in an environment where ISPs (along with means of access to the internet) are changing rapidly. It's like going through the area code change hassles but with a far less robust way of insuring that the mail continues to go through. Had Macintosh users known at that time that they were staring at a $100/year solution to this dilemma, I think the vast majority would have pursued a different way to obtain a permanent e-mail address other than dotMac.

2) Apple has stated that the services in dotMac are worth much more than the sum of those services if purchased separately. If so, then why doesn't Apple sell them separately? If they believe their own proclamation, then Apple should expect that everyone will want the whole enchilada whether it's a la carte or as a forced bundle. They'd generate far more good will with the a la carte approach and, by their estimates, get at least the same amount of revenue (unless they really don't believe that but have said otherwise).

3) These services didn't start costing money overnight. Why were they ever free in the first place if there was a concern about what it was costing? If it's abusers that are driving up the cost, then where are the creative ideas to stop the abuse (other than a $100/year fee)?

4) How is that just about every other e-mail hosting service can offer this service for a minimal sum when Apple says it costs a boatload of money?

5) Why not make e-mail service part of the cost of licensing the OS? As long as people were continuing to pay to upgrade their OS to be current, then wouldn't it make sense that Apple would continue to provide the e-mail service (say, up to four or five addresses) as part of the deal? If people want all of the other do-dads beyond 5MB storage or something like that, they can pay for that separately.

6) Perhaps the most important question: If a multitude of Mac users can all come up with better ideas for dotMac, then why didn't Apple?

manofsteel300 · Jul 21, 2002, 11:20 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr /> 2) Apple has stated that the services in dotMac are worth much more than the sum of those services if purchased separately. If so, then why doesn't Apple sell them separately? If they believe their own proclamation, then Apple should expect that everyone will want the whole enchilada whether it's a la carte or as a forced bundle. They'd generate far more good will with the a la carte approach and, by their estimates, get at least the same amount of revenue (unless they really don't believe that but have said otherwise). <hr /></blockquote>Apple probobly realizes that there are a lot of people that wont purchase all of the services if they were priced seperately cause all they really want was teh email and maybe idisk. This way they can get more money cause these people are willing to pay 100 bucks for those services and think of the other ones as a bonus. Apple is relying on the apple zealot losers.

<blockquote>quote:<hr /> 3) These services didn't start costing money overnight. Why were they ever free in the first place if there was a concern about what it was costing? If it's abusers that are driving up the cost, then where are the creative ideas to stop the abuse (other than a $100/year fee)? <hr /></blockquote>MS tactics!

This is truely disgusting

Stephane · Jul 22, 2002, 06:13 AM

Just a thought : and what will we do when IExplorer will no more be free ?