I agree that what Apple has done with .Mac is disgraceful. This is the=20=
address I have used to subscribe to every service, and given to every=20
friend, since iTools debuted (yes, I actually made my account that day).=20=
And now, in order to keep that address, I have to pay? And this is=20
equally true for my webpage URL. It is extortion.
Not to mention, iTools was never really a free service like Yahoo or=20
Hotmail to begin with. You had to have a Mac (running OS 9 or later) to=20=
use it. I always thought that when I paid for OS 9 and OS X, for=20
example, that part of what I was buying was access to iTools. And, many=20=
of Apple's "free" iApps, like iPhoto, will be crippled without access to=20=
iTools.
My only hope is that the massive negative reaction will convince Apple=20=
to change its mind. If you want to send Apple feedback about .Mac, visit=20=
my website at (irony of ironies) http://homepage.mac.com/stevehj. There=20=
is a direct link there to the feedback page.
sj
PS- I also agree with what I think Paul said about 10.2. I actually feel=20=
okay about paying for this. 10.1 was free because it included nothing=20
but bug fixes and "new" features that were necessary to make computers=20=
usable under the new OS. 10.2 contains NEW features that never existed=20=
in OS 9.
On Thursday, July 18, 2002, at 11:54 PM, Paul Guyot wrote:
>
> =C0 (At) 0:26 -0400 19/07/02, Rich Lindsay =E9crivait (wrote) :
>> I spent the $$ for .mac
>>
>> dont wanna change my address
>
> Congratulation. You've been sucked by Apple. I think it's a feeling
> we know here.
>
> If you consider the whole process, this is a kind of swindle. You get
> something for free, you get accustomed to it and the cost of stopping
> using it is high when some day you're told that it's no longer free.
> I think it's what drug dealers do to make you take harder products.
>
> The point is to not accept something free that you know could be
> paying at some point (or disappear) without being careful. In the
> case of e-mail addresses, it's much better to get a screen address
> than to rely on your ISP (I guess this is why mac.com users open
> their account at first). And for a screen address, Apple is
> definitely more expensive than anything else (e.g. Gandi provides up
> to 5 redirections on a single domain name that costs 12 Euros per
> year).
>
> Anyway, I have the feeling with the cost of Jaguar update and .mac
> that Apple is trying to make a lot of money out of the original user
> base without really innovating for that. This makes many users very
> angry.
>
> I actually do understand that Jaguar isn't free unlike MacOS X beta
> and MacOS 10.0.4/10.1.5 which aren't really usable because they're
> definitely unreactive -- try typing in CodeWarrior 6, it feels like
> someone is telegraphing what you type to the other side of the world
> -- and don't tell me it's the processor, I have a G4_at_350 now, thanks
> Kyle :)
> But MacOS X users often consider they paid too much for that OS,
> especially those who bought a new machine to satisfy its need of
> power.
>
> A lot of Mac users definitely don't like that. Maybe Apple will save
> its results for Q4 thanks to the .mac joke. But I don't think this
> will work forever. Just like Apple Garamond.
>
> Paul
> --
> Home page: http://www.kallisys.com/
> Newton-powered WebServer: http://newton.kallisys.net:8080/
>
> --
> Read the List FAQ/Etiquette: http://www.newtontalk.net/faq.html
> Read the Newton FAQ: http://www.guns-media.com/mirrors/newton/faq/
> This is the NewtonTalk mailing list - http://www.newtontalk.net
>
>
http://homepage.mac.com/stevehj
-- Read the List FAQ/Etiquette: http://www.newtontalk.net/faq.html Read the Newton FAQ: http://www.guns-media.com/mirrors/newton/faq/ This is the NewtonTalk mailing list - http://www.newtontalk.net
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Thu Aug 01 2002 - 06:02:53 EDT