c. One reason is the iCal functionality. I love iCal and I use it everyday. I can sync to my motorola phone and to the web, so I can look it up while I'm at work on my windows laptop.
Really? iCal is one of the reasons I'm planning to give up .Mac - it's completely useless to me if it's not editable over the web. I've wondered why they don't do that for ages. I've contacted them about it several times and you'd think they'd at least reply to me considering how much I pay for .Mac - but nothing, not even a thankyou for contacting us email.
I use Plaxo instead - keeps you synchronised across Mac and PC, calendars and address books. Then you can use Foxmarks in Firefox to synchronise bookmarks, and it *actually* works, unlike .Mac bookmark synchronising (or Bookmark synchronising on the Mac in general), which has never worked as long as I've used it.
The only (stupid) reason I'm keeping .Mac now is because of the IMAP mail and decent address. I have a couple of GoogleMail accounts, but the .Mac address is nicer. But that's it. I don't find anything else on .Mac of any real use.
I'm trying to gauge interest for a replacement .Mac service in another thread. Would a lower-priced service that offered a good portion of .Mac's functionality interest anyone?
Absolutely. .Mac is a jack of all trades and a master of none.
Email: .Mac (and the reason I still hang on to my account) - but Google now has IMAP, just .Mac has better addresses.
I haven't used Back To My Mac yet, but considering I work on a PC and am behind a major firewall, I don't think it's really that much use to me.
The funny thing I'm hearing though (and I am also a victim) is that there are lots of answers saying "yes I pay for .Mac, but it's not worth it". Why do we keep using it then? Is it because we are under the desperate hope that someday it will produce the killer app, and that we will be able to sit back smugly and know we were right all along?
I'm really sorry to say, and don't take this as a slight of your website, but the photos pages that you have for your canoeing trip, published by iPhoto... Errgh. They're disgusting, they don't even show up properly in Apple's own browser, plus their insistence on having that horrible centre-aligned menu link to all the other photo pages at the top of the screen looks totally hideous.
Flickr and other tools are out there. Not only are they free of charge (and much cheaper then .Mac for the pro version), they look infinitely better, you can properly tag your photos and other people can look at and comment on anything you publish. If you want lots of hits, Flickr and other similar sites are a much better bet. What's more you can get Flickr plugins for most photo library software, including iPhoto.
Comments
If you use it for that then you definitely need to think twice about your membership.
I never said what I use it for.
c. One reason is the iCal functionality. I love iCal and I use it everyday. I can sync to my motorola phone and to the web, so I can look it up while I'm at work on my windows laptop.
Really? iCal is one of the reasons I'm planning to give up .Mac - it's completely useless to me if it's not editable over the web. I've wondered why they don't do that for ages. I've contacted them about it several times and you'd think they'd at least reply to me considering how much I pay for .Mac - but nothing, not even a thankyou for contacting us email.
I use Plaxo instead - keeps you synchronised across Mac and PC, calendars and address books. Then you can use Foxmarks in Firefox to synchronise bookmarks, and it *actually* works, unlike .Mac bookmark synchronising (or Bookmark synchronising on the Mac in general), which has never worked as long as I've used it.
The only (stupid) reason I'm keeping .Mac now is because of the IMAP mail and decent address. I have a couple of GoogleMail accounts, but the .Mac address is nicer. But that's it. I don't find anything else on .Mac of any real use.
I'm trying to gauge interest for a replacement .Mac service in another thread. Would a lower-priced service that offered a good portion of .Mac's functionality interest anyone?
Absolutely. .Mac is a jack of all trades and a master of none.
These are the tools I use:
Photo sharing: Flickr
Address book and calendar sync'ing: Plaxo
Webhosting & online storage: Streamline.net (but costs)
Backup software: Errr, Time Machine now!
Email: .Mac (and the reason I still hang on to my account) - but Google now has IMAP, just .Mac has better addresses.
I haven't used Back To My Mac yet, but considering I work on a PC and am behind a major firewall, I don't think it's really that much use to me.
The funny thing I'm hearing though (and I am also a victim) is that there are lots of answers saying "yes I pay for .Mac, but it's not worth it". Why do we keep using it then? Is it because we are under the desperate hope that someday it will produce the killer app, and that we will be able to sit back smugly and know we were right all along?
As for .Mac I love it. And with the iWeb thing it's even better. Here is a link to the stuff I've done, just since the summer.
Click here
Hi normhead,
I'm really sorry to say, and don't take this as a slight of your website, but the photos pages that you have for your canoeing trip, published by iPhoto... Errgh. They're disgusting, they don't even show up properly in Apple's own browser, plus their insistence on having that horrible centre-aligned menu link to all the other photo pages at the top of the screen looks totally hideous.
Flickr and other tools are out there. Not only are they free of charge (and much cheaper then .Mac for the pro version), they look infinitely better, you can properly tag your photos and other people can look at and comment on anything you publish. If you want lots of hits, Flickr and other similar sites are a much better bet. What's more you can get Flickr plugins for most photo library software, including iPhoto.