Apple's .Mac (Google) overhaul finally near?

Warning: rumor and speculation ahead.

Here's an oldie but a goodie. Remember rumors last year that Apple's .Mac was about to get a Google overhaul? It's back with a bullet thanks to the latest 10.5.3 Leopard update. That iCal code snippet above replaces ".Mac" with the "%@" variable which Apple can fill-in later with any name it chooses. If that's not enough of a hint then there's always the text, "the new name of Apple's online service (was .Mac)." This code change has also been found in the newly updated Safari and Mail apps and did not exist prior to the 10.5.3 update. So now the question: will the name change, presumably coming next week at WWDC, usher in Jobs' promise to "make up for lost time" with the beleaguered service, or will it simply reflect the new semantics related to Apple's Computer's increased emphasis on iPhones, iPods, and other consumer level products? We're hoping for the former but expecting the latter.

[Thanks, Supermario]

[Chris Hutchinson @ May 30th 2008 5:46AM]

I hope .mac gets an overhaul. It sounds like a good idea, but a bit of a cobbled together last minute idea, so reform would be good.
And for gods sakes, a lower price, or even free. We have all seen the free .macs'. Plus, I paid enough for the Mac in the first place.

[aaronsheath @ May 30th 2008 5:58AM]

Too right,

I have spent - with UK sales taxes - over $6,000 on Apple products in the past 6-weeks (top spec MBP & iMac).

I also have Apple peripherals, pro software, and have collected 4 iPods over the past few years (30B 5G, old and new nano, and a 2GB shuffle).

Why should I now have to pay for .Mac??

[kevinm @ May 30th 2008 6:04AM]

I hear ya loud and clear. If this services was free for every Mac it would give a really great reason to go Mac. That may be more true considering Google will be a part of it.

[Alessio @ May 30th 2008 7:14AM]

There was a RUMOR that .MAC will gain Exchange-like functionality (push email + push iCal + push AddressBook).
Maybe that's why they also update the name, not to be labeled like a cool-but-not-so-useful service.

[nikster @ May 30th 2008 7:30AM]

I doubt that they'll introduce anything that will make me stay. I am finally getting out of this thing in October. I have had it for 5 years (or more? I have had it since it was free...) and I am now thinking that was a wasted $500.

The problem with .Mac is that for every service it offers, there's a better service that's free. Gmail is better than .Mac mail, mozy better than .Mac backup, flickr or any other photo site equivalent to photo gallery and so on and so forth. I think about paying $100/year if .Mac was better than the free offers. But as it is, .Mac is not better, and in many cases it's decidedly worse than free.

[toxicpiano @ May 30th 2008 6:00AM]

It would be nice if they made a free basic package or something. (Maybe more than 1GB, google seem to manage 6GB+ storage for gmail)

[Starg4ze @ May 30th 2008 6:15AM]

First of all...Its got to be faster! Here in sweden the speed of .mac is the speed of the snail...When you're on a 100Mbit-link(Bahnhof rules!), and you only get about 8-900kbit/s from .mac it realy stinks!

The bandwitdth is instead used with giganews...I love to see the sustained 11MB/sek I get from them...if only I could get the same speed from .mac!

[Tony Rayo @ May 30th 2008 6:24AM]

Sweden's internal fiber network doesn't always get great speeds on outside networks. The same goes for Internet2. I had a nearly empty OC3 access during upgrades at UMD but still got the same horrid speeds I always get between a friend in Japan who has 100mbit home fiber.

[nikster @ May 30th 2008 7:25AM]

Yep but in this case it's .Mac that sucks big time. It's just super slow from Europe or anywhere outside the U.S., and always has been. I used it over the dedicated University line which pretty much maxes out anything that it's accessing (e.g. server side throttles b/c the server doesn't like to serve that fast to a single person)... .Mac just happens to max out at 10KB/s :P

[One @ May 30th 2008 6:21AM]

I think this might have something to do with the new iPhone. You pay for the new .mac and you can use the new iPhone with full functions and unlocked. This makes Apple get incomes without having to set up a deal or contract with mobile carrier.

[bob @ May 30th 2008 6:26AM]

i wouldnt exactly call it bealeugered, apple sells a new or renewal membership of .mac with about 30% of new macs.

[ChrisM @ May 30th 2008 9:05AM]

I think thats a testament to the sales team and ill informed customers.

[Tony @ May 30th 2008 10:17PM]

You spelled "bealeugered" wrong. It is spelled "beleaguered," no 'a' before the 'l'.

[FThorn @ May 30th 2008 6:57AM]

Love .Mac more than I ever thought I would. The Family Pack (discounted via eBay sellers) is a real bargain.

Anything they can add except price would be welcome. The name dot mac never really sounded good to me. I think everyone still likes the old 'eWorld'.

:)

[Atanas Boev @ May 30th 2008 7:08AM]

My @% account does not $#!%% open, because of my ##@$ internet connection!

[Ian @ May 30th 2008 7:33AM]

As someone who has been paying $100 a year for essentially an email address, I say I hope its free or cheaper. When I had my mac, it was meh, now that I no longer have a mac, but have had the .mac email for almost 5 years now, and am basically stuck with it... ugh.

[7on @ May 30th 2008 10:37AM]

You do know that you can buy just email for $10 a year?

[Ian @ May 30th 2008 10:38AM]

Where?

http://www.apple.com/dotmac/pricing.html

[Ian @ May 30th 2008 10:46AM]

After reading, its $10 for another email account... but you need to have a full $100 membership to ADD that $10/year email address.

[THJ @ May 30th 2008 7:59AM]

The sync alone is worth it for me.

[Brendan Sheehan @ May 30th 2008 8:42AM]

I agree, the sync alone is worth it for free! :P

[BobTurbo @ May 30th 2008 8:18AM]

"Warning: rumor and speculation ahead."

Sums up this entire site. I must say I am starting to go back to cnet more often.

[thethirdmoose @ May 30th 2008 10:24AM]

Get ready for more exciting stories about Samsung ramping up chip fabrication!

[Brendan Sheehan @ May 30th 2008 8:50AM]

As a .Mac subscriber this news does matter to me. If you are not interested in this story just skip it. I hope the new service is dramatically cheaper. .Mac is $99, but it should really be either $29 or free!!

[John Stracke @ May 30th 2008 9:18AM]

I have to say, this change in the strings doesn't convince me that they're going to change the name. It could just mean they think they *might* want to change the name someday, and they want to make sure the installed base will pick up the name change.

[psxp @ May 30th 2008 9:13AM]

On my second year on it.. (why? I ask myself often) and not planning to renew again. I'd rather pay for proper syncing next time with a 3rd party then to use the .Mac contacts sync.

I wasted my money :(

[Vidit Bhargava @ May 30th 2008 9:46AM]

no warning required...we assume if its anything about apple on engadget..it has to be a rumor ;)

[Lou @ May 30th 2008 9:59AM]

I've been saying this since they announced exchange support!!! Apple needs a way to treat iphone customers the way that RIM treats blackberry customers.

I believe that apple will change .mac to allow for exchange style functionality. This means, if you have addressbook full of contacts, press sync with .mac, and bam - it ends up being pushed to your iphone.

Got a new email 4 seconds ago, bam, pushed to your iphone.

Made a calendar appointment change on your iphone - bam, its on your desktop before you sit down.

Push Sync Technology made possible by apple modifying .mac to include exchange style functionality. thats my guess for apple's surprise.

[7on @ May 30th 2008 10:38AM]

One thing's for sure, my bloody email/website address better not change!

>:(

[Ben @ May 30th 2008 11:00AM]

I'd pay a reasonable price (~$20~$30/year) for push gmail AND contact syncing

Don't need anything else.

[Perry @ May 30th 2008 11:14AM]

Makes sense if they plan to expand its use beyond Macs to iPhone or iPods.

[Distortedloop @ May 30th 2008 12:06PM]

Your love or hate of .Mac probably depends on a few things:

1) - how much $99 is worth to you. The higher your income, the less of a concern the price becomes. Harsh, but true.

2) - how geeky you are. There may be free services, or cheaper services to accomplish all the same tasks, but if you're not interested in figuring them out (whether lazy or technically challenged), .Mac provides a pretty good all in one package for the those who don't mind the added expense.

3) - how many Macs you're using and how important it is for you to have them all synced up seamlessly in terms of bookmarks, address book, calendar, dock icons, widgets, password keychains, mail account settings, and even third party stuff like TextExpander snippets, and Transmit options. Please before you flame me for this one, go back to 1 & 2.

Generally, how I value this convenience is based on my own needs, disposable income, and interest in seeking other alternatives. Your mileage may vary, and there's nothing wrong with that. If it's of value to some, why hate on them just because you don't find the value?

[Harkonian @ May 30th 2008 12:05PM]

WWDC is _not_ next week. It is the week after, June 9-13.

[Timothy @ May 30th 2008 1:03PM]

It will be called "Mobile Me" if this interesting tid-bit comes true...
http://daringfireball.net/2008/05/mobile_me

[Scott Miller @ May 31st 2008 5:43AM]

My guess is there is going to be a major partnership between Apple and Google. Google has what Apple needs and Apple has what Google needs.

Google has the back end, mail, search, advertising, news, etc...
Apple has the front end, integration, ease of use, design

Google has a boring look to it, it works, it's simple, but it's boring.
.mac has a nice design and it's easy to use.

Sounds like a good combination.