Slashdot Mirror


.Mac Alternatives?

peel asks: "In the endless effort to get organized I'm looking for an alternative to signing up for a .Mac account that allows me to sync iCal and the Address Book between multiple computers (mainly work and home). I found iSyncCal to let me sync calendars, I can also publish them using my personal server setup with WebDav. I haven't found any such utilities for addresses. What I really want is something that works more like .Mac but that I can run at home on my server without paying the monthly .Mac fees. What are some solutions people are using for syncing contact info for people stored in multiple places (Palm, cell, work computer, home computer, laptop)?" There was a similar discussion over on MacInTouch, although the alternatives offered cover more basic needs, the information may still prove useful for those looking for "a cheaper .Mac".

10 of 83 comments (clear)

  1. Third Device by raverbuzzy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I would sync to a third portable device like a palm or a cell phone and use that to transfer the data.

    1. Re:Third Device by dthable · · Score: 4, Informative

      According to Palm, this is not recommended. I used to transfer data via my m500 and found a lot of duplicate entries. I don't know if a computer ID is a part of the record, but it didn't work for me.

  2. Another "how-to" article by awtbfb · · Score: 5, Informative
    1. Re:Another "how-to" article by hobbit · · Score: 4, Informative

      Seems a bit out of date now, though... Apache now includes mod_rendezvous_apple, and iTunes 4 takes care of streaming music between networked machines.

      --
      "Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something" - Plato
  3. Monthly Fees? by gamgee5273 · · Score: 4, Insightful
    What monthly fees? I've been a .Mac member from the outset (and, I will admit, a happy one) and there has yet to be any "monthly" fees.

    I agree with the translation above...there's no reason to go and gerryrig a pseudo-.Mac when this one works and is integrated already. You will end up spending more than $99/year between labor, etc.

  4. price Vs convenience by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You really need to look at what this is worth, if you have to maintain a server and spend time setting it up, and if it doesn't work 100% is that worth it?

    How much money do you make per hour at your current job, i always put it that way to see if something is worth the time. Of course if its a fun hack to do, then its priceless right?

    In the end you may see that $99 (sometimes cheaper) is worth what .Mac offers. Its not that much to pay to get rid of headaches. I only use mine for addresses, iSync, and iPhoto uploads. But for me, its worth it. But what do i know, i paid the $50 deal when it came out, heheh.

  5. Hmm, opportunity! by 2nd+Post! · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It seems there is an opportunity for a third party to establish a competitor to .Mac

    Maybe 80% of the features at 70% of the price? $69 a year, or $5.99 a month, for an email, synching, calendaring, etc?

  6. How much is your time worth?` by amichalo · · Score: 4, Insightful
    I know this is /. and all but presumiung you already have any hardware needed and the software is all free (beer), I still question the value of a homebrewed .Mac solution:

    Setup & maintain IMAP mail

    Setup & maintain sync to iCal

    Setup & maintain sync to address book

    Setup & maintain 100mb DAV

    Setup & maintain CD/DVD/on-line integrated backup

    Setup & maintain template driven web hosting

    Setup & maintain iPhoto image publishing

    Setup & maintain iCards

    Substitute anti-virus software

    Substitute access to "members only" support

    Since a .Mac account is $99.year, if you spend ONE HOUR doing each of the above each year, and your time were worth $10/hr you would LOOSE $1 a year!!! (Presuming no hardware or software costs, just time.)

    I COULD change my own oil, but to me, it isn't worth $20 every 3,000 miles to do it.

    --
    I only came here to do two things; kick some ass, and drink some beer...looks like we're almost out of beer.
  7. Not just for Macintosh... by stefanlasiewski · · Score: 4, Interesting

    As a non-mac owner, I'd love to have access to a .MAC-like service which works for non-Mac users.

    Seems that many of the .MAC services will work with any computer, as long as you have an iCal, LDAP & IMAP client. But that is probalby only 50% of the services.

    On a local box at my house, I've considered setting up Apache+WebDAV, IMAP, LDAP & iCal servers; all available via a password-protected/SSL website, or via their normal protocol (with encryption, if possible).

    But the devil is the integration of these services. I'm not sure where to start.

    --
    "Can of worms? The can is open... the worms are everywhere."
  8. Maybe it's not about money, but about convenience by fluf · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I think it's kinda funny how all these comments center around the fact that .mac 'is only 8 dollars a month'.

    I'm not interested in saving money (I'd just get an el cheapo x86 machine instead of a Mac to really save money... :p as if), I'm interested in really sharing my information between my different machines.

    Just look at my setup: at home I've got a G3 powerMac and an Ibook, at work it's a powermac G4 and the aforementioned iBook. I'm just looking at an easy (or maybe better 'straightforward') way to share Jaguar's address book and calendar between the three.

    I could do this via .Mac, but only if I have an internet connection. Now, having an internet connection isn't a problem in itself (i've got cable at home and dsl at work), the stupid thing about this imho is that, since the machines are networked anyway (through ethernet, in a powermac to ibook type of deal both at work and at home), why do I even need to go via .Mac? I just want to be able to sync locally.

    The current workaround I've got is using my T68i bluetooth phone. It works pretty well, but I think it's a shame I have to use this workaround...

    IMHO, apple should support local sync without .Mac.

    So for some, it might not be about money.

    Cheers.