EyeTV's interface is unfortunately just not usable with only a remote control (even with v3, there still are times when you need to reach for the keyboard and mouse), so forget it for your living room TV. Cost wise, with their new version almost every year, it's no cheaper, and in some countries there's a fee on top of that if you want to get TV listings info beyond the first year.

And that doesn't even take into account the other differences, such as the quality of the metadata about the TV shows. TiVo's feed allows it to do more than just record a program off the air at a given time, or record all shows of the same title.

A TiVo interface on the Mac would be great. (As would the release of this product to the EU market.)

The same Vodafone run by CEO Arun Sarin, who said the iPhone handset is "a pretty poor experience"? (source: Financial Times - http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/059a6b9a-9640-11dc-b7ec-0000779fd2ac.html?nclick_check=1)

I looked at it when they first launched, but their backup client failed to backup resource forks - which would render some files, and some applications, useless after a restore.

I assume that's all fixed, now?

Is Xsan 2 still based upon the Quantum (formerly ADIC) StorNext clustered filesystem product? They released v3.0 of that last year.

Time to restore is the big factor - Restoring a time machine backup, which will include the Aperture database (the large file within the Aperture library folder) and the thumbnails, could be quicker than restoring from vault which, for Aperture version 1, required a time consuming thumbnail, preview, and database regeneration.

But Aperture v2 may have changed its vault/restore process. Especially as they've made vast improvements in speed by using image file's embedded preview images where possible/when not requested otherwise.

The discussion on the 'git' list perfectly covers the flaws with HFS+. The encoding mechanisms for Unicode data that HFS+ uses lead to corrupt information - you can't always get out what you put in, and encoding approaches changed across different versions of Mac OS.

http://kerneltrap.org/mailarchive/git/2008/1/17/576170

(I expect by the third or fourth day of that discussion being dragged out they were all so sick of talking about it of course they'd outright dismiss HFS+ as crap.)

I suspect this is all related to a recent mailing list discussion - which pointed out how HFS+ gets its Unicode filename mapping really, really wrong.

This is the thread - http://kerneltrap.org/mailarchive/git/2008/1/23/592628

It's actually pretty cool as it is - because if you shoot RAW+JPEG it'll store the RAW image on the inbuilt storage and just upload your JPEG.

Great if your camera model doesn't have a Wifi transmitter option, and even if it does the Eye-Fi is a cheaper option. (If you've got a DSLR with two-slot support, you could put this - inside of a CF/SD adaptor - in one slot, and your regular storage card in the other. Then store JPEGs to this, and RAWs to the other.)

Even those who use the Nikon WT-* transmitters for the D2/D3 tend to only send JPEG across the wireless network, because RAWs are big and take too long to transmit.

I do think instant upload to online services is just a bit of a gimmick, though. But if that sells it for them, fair play.

(that was meant to be a reply to the 'sluggish' comment.)

I find that, often, just restarting Safari is enough...