Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Apple Implements the CalDAV Standard For MobileMe

kdawson posted about 4 years ago | from the camel's-nose-under-the-enterprise-tent dept.

Businesses 152

Vermyndax writes "Apple announced the new MobileMe Calendar beta on July 6th. The mainstream press picked up the story and plugged the gorgeous new iPad-like interface for all devices. It seems, however, that they missed the real story: MobileMe's new Calendar application is an implementation of CalDAV, the proposed calendaring standard. This may be the same implementation that exists in Snow Leopard Server and is open sourced. The hidden gem in all of this is that Apple plans to bring this CalDAV connectivity to Outlook users on MobileMe. Where might they take it next?"

cancel ×

152 comments

Unpossible (3, Interesting)

Rational (1990) | about 4 years ago | (#32844586)

As everybody knows, Apple is a closed and evil company, therefore the headline is misleading and the story inaccurate. QED.

Re:Unpossible (-1, Flamebait)

Dishevel (1105119) | about 4 years ago | (#32844610)

Awesome. You got first post on an article that is not bashing Apple and used it to prove that your brain was washed in Apple juice long ago.

Carry on.

Re:Unpossible (4, Insightful)

Goaway (82658) | about 4 years ago | (#32844650)

Pointing out that Slashdot is full of anti-Apple fanboys means your "braiin was washed in Apple juice"?

Re:Unpossible (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#32844696)

Slashdot is equally full of Apple fanbois and apologists. Ever seen a comment by the user named jo_ham? It was most likely Apple propaganda.

Re:Unpossible (1, Interesting)

Goaway (82658) | about 4 years ago | (#32844766)

Slashdot is equally full of Apple fanbois and apologists.

That's ridiculous. The Slashdot user base is heavily biased against Apple. The fact that you name a single name of someone who is supposedly an "apologist" is pretty telling.

Re:Unpossible (4, Funny)

cheesybagel (670288) | about 4 years ago | (#32844862)

Try pointing out any negative trait on Apple products. Then do the same for Microsoft products. Then for Linux. Then watch how you get moderated. The results are... interesting.

Re:Unpossible (0, Offtopic)

99BottlesOfBeerInMyF (813746) | about 4 years ago | (#32845096)

Try pointing out any negative trait on Apple products. Then do the same for Microsoft products. Then for Linux. Then watch how you get moderated. The results are... interesting.

Speaking of mods, the person to whom you are replying was modded down as flambait, despite clearly being anything but. It kind of refutes your assertion about unfair moderation, no?

Anyway, I regularly point out negative traits about Apple products and Microsoft product and Linux. Linux is the least fairly modded (as would be expected) with negative comments routinely modded down for no reason other than that people don't like hearing about the areas where Linux still needs work. Similar comments about flaws in OS X or the iPhone regularly get modded up.

Re:Unpossible (1)

dr.newton (648217) | about 4 years ago | (#32845596)

It kind of refutes your assertion about unfair moderation, no?

No, since he made no such assertion. His only assertion was that the results were... interesting.

Re:Unpossible (-1, Flamebait)

ZosX (517789) | about 4 years ago | (#32846402)

Yeah. Linux isn't competition. Its the ghetto OS of choice by reeking communists who are too expect everything in life to be free.

Go ahead. Mod me down. I dare you.

Re:Unpossible (-1, Flamebait)

ZosX (517789) | about 4 years ago | (#32846418)

Yeah. Windows really blows. I mean like how many viruses did you clean off of windows machines last week? I counted 30. On one machine. Why would you even pay money for that garbage when linux is free?

Go ahead. Mod me up. I dare you.

Re:Unpossible (-1, Flamebait)

ZosX (517789) | about 4 years ago | (#32846468)

Yeah. OS X is the gay candyland of choice. Only butt pirates would love a computer with one mouse button that costs 5x as much as a comparable PC running Windows, which can play actual games and has real non-apple software by the way. "Think different." Hmm. Who might that slogan appeal to? The gay population in the united states is 9% of the total. Macs make up 9% of the market share for personal computers. Need I say more? Everyone knows that steve jobs is gay and is dying of AIDs. I read that on the internet somewhere, so I know its true.

Go ahead. Mod me down. I dare you.

Re:Unpossible (1)

smash (1351) | about 4 years ago | (#32846630)

For values of "interesting" == "predictable".

I am an unapologetic apple fanboy at the moment. I've "been there" and "done that" with regards to using Linux, FreeBSD and Windows.

I still DO use all of the above.

I use/admin Windows because I have to. I use FreeBSD and Apple products because I want to.

Re:Unpossible (0, Offtopic)

Unordained (262962) | about 4 years ago | (#32844864)

He named one apologist. You named zero bashers. I don't see how that proves that he's wrong and you're right.

apologist? (0, Offtopic)

Gary W. Longsine (124661) | about 4 years ago | (#32844938)

The user jo_ham doesn't seem like an apologist, just somebody else who is annoyed at this phenomenon. See this discussion: jo_ham on Slashdot moderation of non-negative Apple comments [slashdot.org] . So, the score appears to be zero to zero, which means they're both untested, and you're wrong.

Re:apologist? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#32845016)

The user jo_ham doesn't seem like an apologist, just somebody else who is annoyed at this phenomenon.

Good catch, I see the motherfucker was still at +1. Where are my mod points when I need them...

Re:Unpossible (0, Offtopic)

Goaway (82658) | about 4 years ago | (#32844960)

Why bother naming names, when I can just open any story whatsoever about Apple, and get a face full of angry bashing?

Re:Unpossible (1)

Gilmoure (18428) | about 4 years ago | (#32845212)

You mean every Apple story is full of lots of Apple Worshiping. Slashdot is filled with Apple lovers who do nothing but fill up the forums, going on and on and on about how great Apple products are.

Re:Unpossible (5, Insightful)

DJRumpy (1345787) | about 4 years ago | (#32845942)

A year ago I would have agreed with you, as things tended to be pretty balanced, and pretty fair, with initial flambait, troll mods balanced out after a few hours. One of the most recent posts about Apple tells a different story with any positive posts about Apple all being modded down as troll or flamebait regardless of content.

http://apple.slashdot.org/story/10/07/06/1839240/More-Trouble-In-Apples-App-Store [slashdot.org]

Look at the above link, at what's being modded 'Insightful', 'Informative', and on the opposite side, trolling and flamebait.

Claiming that things are pretty even handed looks a little ridiculous. The above link is about a story where someone hacked an iTunes account and bought his own app. It immediately turned into a slew of Apple is Evil, the Walled Garden doesn't work, the app store is a failure, all modded insightful and informative, when it had nothing to do with apps other than the guy hacking the accounts bought his own app.

Slashdot has become a haven for anti-Apple trolls. Look through that link and tell me that the posts deserved Insightful, and that the trolls deserved the bashing. It's pointless anymore to even enter an Apple thread as it is immediately filled with FUD, "Apple Sucks +Insightful", and "Evil + Informative".

I particularly like the one stating "WTF, did you suck Steve's dick or something" being modded Insightful and Informative.

Re:Unpossible (1)

Gilmoure (18428) | about 4 years ago | (#32846852)

Oops, sorry. Forgot my /sarcasm tag.

Re:Unpossible (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#32845044)

>> The Slashdot user base is heavily biased against Apple

HA HA HA
HA HA HA
HA HA HA
HA HA HA
HA HA HA

Re:Unpossible (2, Insightful)

bonch (38532) | about 4 years ago | (#32844874)

You're an idiot. Nearly every Apple story gets flooded with Apple haters invented melodrama where there is none, because it's such a horrible thing for a company to approve what runs on its device (even though every console manufacturer does exactly the same thing).

Re:Unpossible (-1, Flamebait)

MrHanky (141717) | about 4 years ago | (#32845008)

LOL, you just refuted the AC by way of apologetics (consoles are toys, and thus irrelevant). Way to fail, fanboy.

Re:Unpossible (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#32845218)

A phone used for other purposes than making a remote call is as much a toy as a video game console is. The fact that you use it to check your email or post to your blog only reinforces this image.

To balance my post: OSX blows (so I don't develop for the iPhone) and the Android is half-broken garbage. You're all idiots.

Re:Unpossible (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#32845168)

You just proved the AC right, fanboi!

Re:Unpossible (1)

icebraining (1313345) | about 4 years ago | (#32845798)

even though every console manufacturer does exactly the same thing

Yes, because Microsoft and Sony never get bashed on /.

Re:Unpossible (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#32844626)

(Bitches.)

Re:Unpossible (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#32844716)

Looking at the editor who approved the summary, you very well may be right.

Re:Unpossible (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#32844746)

Fuck you macfag. We don't want your kind here.

Re:Unpossible (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#32844822)

Even Microsoft has done some decent things. But a few small islands of niceness in the immense sea of dickishness that is the broader attitude of the corporation doesn't really change anything.

Close (0, Flamebait)

copponex (13876) | about 4 years ago | (#32845050)

As everybody knows, Apple is just another company and pursues open standards when it suits them. They favor closed ecosystems, censorship, top-down control, and form over function.

If you want to open yourself up to legal liability for running the software of your choice on your own hardware, Apple is the company for you. If you want to pay 200% markup on parts for your computer, or for hard drives for your server farm, Apple is the company for you. If you want to pay extra for dismal 3D application performance, Apple is the company for you.

And if you want to develop brand loyalty for an organization whose primary purpose is profit - and be admired for such an empty gesture - my friends, there is no better choice than Apple.

Re:Close (4, Insightful)

abigor (540274) | about 4 years ago | (#32845214)

In all fairness, no platform is perfect, let's face it. You seem to be commenting on OS X (hard drives, 3d performance, etc.), so let's see:

If you want non-working cut and paste (the general case is it only works for text), no 3d performance at all, barely any wireless support, no commercial software support including de facto standards like MS Office and Photoshop, no games, amateurish and inconsistent guis, etc. ad infinitum, then run desktop Linux.

If you don't mind a pretty substandard operating system in return for all the software you could ever want and you don't need Unix, run Windows.

If you want a usable, well thought-out desktop Unix with lots of commercial software (though much less than Windows), good open source and open standards support, and you don't care about games, run OS X.

As cliche as it sounds, it's all about what works best for you.

Re:Close (4, Interesting)

copponex (13876) | about 4 years ago | (#32845668)

As cliche as it sounds, it's all about what works best for you.

I totally agree. I've been vocal about the shortcomings about Windows and Linux (no Quickbooks alternative!?) for a depressing amount of time. Though I wouldn't exactly put Windows in the "substandard OS" category if I wasn't throwing OS X and Linux in the same box as well.

The issue I have with Apple is that the pride has turned to arrogance. Now you're buying "magical and revolutionary devices" that "change the world" and people are actually believing the bullshit. I mean, their phones suck at making phone calls, but good news! You can edit movies instead. And if video chat is a revolution, don't tell the Japanese consumers who have been doing it for years. Or anyone who's used Skype.

I guess it taps into the same disappointment I have with people in general when it comes to propaganda. But maybe the only thing worse than someone who thinks a phone or an iPod Touch XL is going to change their life is the guy with so much free time he decides to complain publicly about it...

Re:Close (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#32846494)

I've never used 'magical' to describe my iDevices, although I've used revolutionary when the first gen iPhone came out. It was revolutionary and it changed the smartphone market. Sometimes the term is deserved. Look at the interface of the HTC/Android, and the newer touch RIM devices.

"Magical" I agree is total bullshit, and the only folks who should be saying that are marketing reps. I don't think I've ever heard an Apple 'fanboi' claim their device was magical. It's PR speak and just something you ignore.

You point out some of the 'cool' features on the iPhone and then proceed to ignore the perks. Sure people have been using skype on phones for years. Of course the person you're calling also has to use skype, have a phone that supports it, and have it running to get a call. Easy enough among geeks, but not so much among the 'non-geek folk'.

Apple took existing open standards, and made it easy in a nice wrapped up package. No accounts necessary, you don't have to have something running, other than your phone. It's what they do. They take a neat feature and make it user friendly, and that is their strength. Was it Revolutionary? No. Was it evolutionary? I think so. Time will tell. Trends on phones have shown video chat usage to actually be trending downwards. Why? Because it's gimmicky, and not something that grandpa, or your technically challenged parents could just click and go. Geeks may use it, but for day to day uses, it's just not all that commonly used by average Joe's. With Facetime, you don't have to know anything about video chat, other than clicking a button.

Time will tell if 3rd party hardware vendors run with it and incorporate it into home routers and whatnot. It has potential, just like the iPad. Geeks claimed for months prior to iPad release that tablets had tried and failed for a decade and the same fate awaited Apple. They were proved wrong. They still don't get them. They are simple appliances that aren't overly complicated, and they don't need to be. They do what they do well, and they changed the face of the tablet market, which was arguably on it's deathbed. Since iPad's release and success, there are a slew of new tablet devices coming out, or planned in the next year.

Re:Close (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#32846996)

You tried hard, but you still reek of naked fanboism. Stop pretending.

Re:Close (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#32847288)

Sometimes the term is deserved. Look at the interface of the HTC/Android, and the newer touch RIM devices.

Why? Just look at pre-iPhone smartphones. Only a complete moron couldn't admit Apple is a mover and shaker.

Re:Close (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#32845904)

If you want non-working cut and paste (the general case is it only works for text), no 3d performance at all, barely any wireless support, no commercial software support including de facto standards like MS Office and Photoshop, no games, amateurish and inconsistent guis, etc. ad infinitum, then run desktop Linux.

I love it when Mac users use inaccurate stereotypes about Linux to dismiss inaccurate stereotypes about OS X. Most of that shit hasn't been true for many years now, and yet these things are trotted out every time as if they were undisputed fact. You OS zealots fucktards (whether you are pro-linux or pro-OSX) are all the same. Fuck you all.

Re:Close (2, Interesting)

atmurray (983797) | about 4 years ago | (#32845912)

Which is why I run: 1) Ubuntu Linux on my home server/gateway 2) Mac OS on my laptop for day-to-day use 3) Windows inside my vm for running e-Tax (Australian Gov. tax return software - only runs under Windows/Wine)

While I can't speak for Windows... (2, Informative)

IANAAC (692242) | about 4 years ago | (#32845940)

If you want non-working cut and paste (the general case is it only works for text), no 3d performance at all, barely any wireless support, no commercial software support including de facto standards like MS Office and Photoshop, no games, amateurish and inconsistent guis, etc. ad infinitum, then run desktop Linux.

I do use Linux consistently (Ubuntu and Suse). The above statement tells me you've probably got a grudge of some sort against Linux (or really just don't know), as everything, with the exception of Photoshop, has been done for quite some time now on Linux.

Copy and paste - not just text - is doable. Ditto for 3d hardware performance (I assume you were referring to hardware acceleration). For commercial MS Office support, you may want to check out Softmaker - it's an excellent office suite. I'm not a gamer, but I know that there are commercial games available for Linux as well. The GUI, well, I suppose that's what you make of it - at least you can tweak it to your heart's content.

As you say:

As cliche as it sounds, it's all about what works best for you.

No need to sound bitter when describing something you don't use.

Re:While I can't speak for Windows... (3, Interesting)

ToasterMonkey (467067) | about 4 years ago | (#32847438)

Copy and paste - not just text - is doable. Ditto for 3d hardware performance (I assume you were referring to hardware acceleration). For commercial MS Office support, you may want to check out Softmaker - it's an excellent office suite. I'm not a gamer, but I know that there are commercial games available for Linux as well. The GUI, well, I suppose that's what you make of it - at least you can tweak it to your heart's content.

Let me guess, you found at least two applications that can copy and paste something non-text, you have an nvdia video card, you "don't need Office", and you found at least one commercial game for Linux, so everything he said is false.

Guy, if the bar was REALLY as low as you make it out to be, Linux would be on everyone's desktop by virtue of being free, and "good enough". Clearly, "good enough" is further out of reach than you would have us believe.

No need to sound bitter when describing something you don't use.

More current Windows and Mac users have Linux experience than you think. Your whole "you don't get it" attitude is so 2000. Any self respecting IT nerd has at least toyed with Linux at this point, and sorry if you feelings get hurt if we think Windows or Macs are worth the price. Linux has been in the mainstream long enough for plenty of people to have extensively been there, done that, and you're not fooling us.

P.S.
If case you still aren't convinced the whole world doesn't love Linux. There are still a lot of resentful UNIX server admins out there that appreciate the free tools and would happily shove all Linux outside the cross-platform GNU userland up your ass for you.

P.P.S.
If you mod me flamebait, you "just don't get it," and you're probably a Linux shill or something.

Re:Close (1)

E IS mC(Square) (721736) | about 4 years ago | (#32847006)

Insightful? wow.

I think the last time you tried linux was probably in 1852. It has improved a bit since. You should try it.

And you should believe in your own cliche - linux works for most of the people who are not as blind as some of the folks here on slashdot.

Re:Unpossible (5, Informative)

leamanc (961376) | about 4 years ago | (#32845164)

Yeah, I know because Apple never [cups.org] gives [zeroconf.org] anything [webkit.org] back to the open source community at all!

Re:Unpossible (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#32845220)

Yeah, I know because Apple never [cups.org] gives [zeroconf.org] anything [webkit.org] back to the open source community at all!

If there was a fairy that allowed me to abolish Apple with the cost of getting rid of these products, I'd hit it.

We should really develop a new standard printing system. Hopefully the google cloud printing one will turn out to bewarthwhile. As for webkit - I love Chrome, but I could live with the new firefox.

Re:Unpossible (1)

UnknowingFool (672806) | about 4 years ago | (#32845916)

So you'd get rid of products that actually work and are all Open Source just because Apple is involved. Does your hatred of Apple run that deep? Did you print on Linux before CUPS? It wasn't easy. Apple purchased CUPS and hired the developer. And CUPS hasn't really changed at all. Did you ever use KHTML before Apple forked it into WebKit? KHTML is nothing compared to WebKit, and Apple has done a tremendous job of extending it.

Re:Unpossible (4, Informative)

mean pun (717227) | about 4 years ago | (#32845680)

Agreed [llvm.org] .

Re:Unpossible (2, Informative)

Guy Harris (3803) | about 4 years ago | (#32846104)

Yeah, I know because Apple never [cups.org] gives [zeroconf.org] anything [webkit.org] back to the open source community at all!

To be fair, "developed by Apple" in "CUPS is the standards-based, open source printing system developed by Apple Inc. for Mac OS® X and other UNIX®-like operating systems." in the CUPS home page means "Apple hired the guy who created CUPS, and it's now an Apple project", not "Apple were the original developers of CUPS".

iCal (4, Insightful)

99BottlesOfBeerInMyF (813746) | about 4 years ago | (#32844658)

Apple was one of the three companies that wrote the CalDAV RFC and they implemented it immediately in iCal in 2007. (iCal is the built in calendaring app in OS X.) Previous to that that iCal already used WebDAV. They offer an OSS CalDAV server in OS X server. Why would anyone find it surprising that the rewritten WebApp version of iCal is using CalDAV?Apple has already been pushing it as hard as possible as an open standard alternative to Exchange.

Re:iCal (1)

Bryansix (761547) | about 4 years ago | (#32844666)

My only question is "Why did it take so long?".

Re:iCal (3, Interesting)

ZERO1ZERO (948669) | about 4 years ago | (#32844732)

Apple always seems to 'take ages' to implement stuff. This applies in hardware, software, services etc. The upshot is that when they do it's usually implemented properly, in a nice easy to use way, with a shiny interface layer on top. Look at Ipod. When they firstbrought it out people said it was lame and it had less space than current competing mp3 players. But what they did have was solid. And there wasn't even an itunes store at that point. A few revisions later and they dominate the mp3 player space. iPad will be the same. Look at some of there software offereings and it's the same story.

Re:iCal (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#32844812)

Not really. Some of the essential unix utilities in 10.3.9 had bugs most Linux distros would label "release critical", but then again OS X is "unix" only in a trademark sense: useful for marketing, clumsy and broken in actual use.

Re:iCal (1)

abigor (540274) | about 4 years ago | (#32844988)

This is such a good troll that it deserves a +1, just to show other trolls how it's really done.

Re:iCal (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#32845502)

Nah, it would have been a half decent troll if he had put a period after - "useful for marketing". AC blew it with the rest of the sentence.

Re:iCal (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#32846788)

Anyone who has ported software to OSX or worked extensively with the included "Unix" environment will recognize the truth in the parent's post. While I can't enumerate them offhand, there have been a number of occasions where I have come across fundamental Unix tools which are clearly broken in some aspect or other. Hell, even something as fundamental as fsync() semantics are broken on OSX.

The problem is exactly that Apple uses the Unix label as nothing more than an advertising bullet. Even their IPv6 support is just the same, where mDNSresponder is severely broken; try running IPv6 only and see how that works. (Something as fundamental as the resolver should not be broken.) This applies to just about everything Apple though; as long as everything mostly works, it is considered good enough. That philosophy isn't acceptable for the foundation of a *nix system though; to build upon it, the individual pieces must be reliable.

They customize all sorts of things with Apple-specific hacks. Meanwhile, they introduce severe bugs which never get fixed, since there is so little attention to the Unix environment. (Which is itself composed of ancient tools which are rarely updated.) Among the worst offenses are the home-grown Apple utilities which very much do not conform to the Unix philosophy, and can't be depended upon to work properly outside of the exact ways in which the GUI uses them.

I have had extensive experience with nearly every Unix platform of the years, and Darwin truly is the red-headed stepchild among them.

Re:iCal (4, Informative)

dgatwood (11270) | about 4 years ago | (#32847004)

In order to use the name UNIX, an operating system is required to pass a strict set of conformance tests. Therefore, Mac OS X is UNIX in far more than just a trademark sense.

Re:iCal (5, Funny)

Mononoke (88668) | about 4 years ago | (#32844820)

Look at Ipod. When they firstbrought it out people said it was lame and it had less space than current competing mp3 players.

NO WAY! Someone really said that? In public?!? ^_-

Re:iCal (1)

Bryansix (761547) | about 4 years ago | (#32844912)

This was before it was cultural suicide to say anything negative about the iPod.

Re:iCal (1)

Mononoke (88668) | about 4 years ago | (#32846042)

Welcome to Slashdot [slashdot.org]

Re:iCal (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#32845034)

Look at Ipod. When they firstbrought it out people said it was lame and it had less space than current competing mp3 players.

[citation needed]

Re:iCal (1)

Miseph (979059) | about 4 years ago | (#32845186)

The "people" he is referencing includes, most notably CmdrTaco.

Of course, you could just read the Wikipedia entry for yourself, it would inform you AND quench your clear lust for the Wikipedo way.

Re:iCal (2, Interesting)

kabloom (755503) | about 4 years ago | (#32844808)

It's worthwhile to have someone point out that the protocol behind this service is CalDAV, because that lets us Evolution users know how to synchronize with it.

syncml (1)

Werrismys (764601) | about 4 years ago | (#32844692)

I'd rather have syncml support in osx calendar and iphone. The only reason to hang on nokias...

Re:syncml (4, Informative)

metamatic (202216) | about 4 years ago | (#32844954)

Yeesh. SyncML? Have you ever looked at that standard? Ghastly.

Besides, converting CalDAV to SyncML on the server side shouldn't be hard, since CalDAV is iCalendar files in a set of directories on a WebDAV server, and SyncML is iCalendar files wrapped in XML and sent to a SyncML server across whatever protocol the vendor chooses. In fact, a quick Googling suggests that there are already numerous SyncML to CalDAV gateways, including open source ones.

Re:syncml (1)

Werrismys (764601) | about 4 years ago | (#32845056)

Yeesh. SyncML? Have you ever looked at that standard? Ghastly.

Yes it's horrible and obsolete, technically speaking. It's still used in lots of collaborative calendar software. Having syncml clients for OSX and iPhone would help me and lots of other people too to get rid of horrible nokias etc.

Re:syncml (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#32845052)

Does SyncML go over HTTP pipes?

One of the big deals of using CalDAV and CardDAV is that it can go over more common HTTP/HTTPS ports. More and more free wifi spots and corporate proxies are only allowing HTTP/HTTPS, and these protocols can punch through those proxies and firewalls more easily.

Re:syncml (1)

icebraining (1313345) | about 4 years ago | (#32845862)

Yes, it does [google.com] .

Where might they take it next? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#32844706)

Steve Jobs' anus

Re:Where might they take it next? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#32847238)

Now that's one calendar that all the Cupertino employees will be subscribing to. Especially the ones that hang out in the Castro district.

Where might they take it next? (1)

thodelu (1748596) | about 4 years ago | (#32844758)

iDONTKNOW. In any case this is incompatible with my lunar calendar.

Does it matter? (1)

jsebrech (525647) | about 4 years ago | (#32844806)

As long as you have to pay for mobileme, it doesn't really matter. One of apple's biggest blunders is not considering mobileme a loss leader.

Re:Does it matter? (1)

gyrogeerloose (849181) | about 4 years ago | (#32844876)

In fact, as mac.com, MobileMe was free for a few years. I tried the paid service for a while but didn't find enough value in it to make re-upping worth it. Besides, "MobileMe" has got to be one of the worst names for a product to ever come out of Apple

PassMe, WiFiMe, FlashMe, sounds like DS (1)

tepples (727027) | about 4 years ago | (#32845826)

Besides, "MobileMe" has got to be one of the worst names for a product to ever come out of Apple

But it does sound like a good name for a DS flash card product [pineight.com] .

Re:PassMe, WiFiMe, FlashMe, sounds like DS (2, Funny)

gyrogeerloose (849181) | about 4 years ago | (#32845896)

It sounds like some weird cybernetic sexual come-on: "Hey, baby--mobile me!"

iCaramba...

Re:Does it matter? (2, Interesting)

e4g4 (533831) | about 4 years ago | (#32845880)

"MobileMe" has got to be one of the worst names for a product to ever come out of Apple

No argument there - I'd put it one step down from the "iPad" as far as bad product names go. You do have to admit, though, that me.com is a pretty good domain for an email address.

Re:Does it matter? (3, Insightful)

HumanEmulator (1062440) | about 4 years ago | (#32844992)

One of apple's biggest blunders is not considering mobileme a loss leader.

Back when it was known as iTools [wikipedia.org] , it was a loss leader. They gave that up after 2 years so there was a probably a good reason. Perhaps because people are willing to pay?

Re:Does it matter? (1)

IANAAC (692242) | about 4 years ago | (#32845208)

Because I don't use MobileMe (or mac.com), I don't know... this is an honest question:

What does MobileMe offer that the free options out there don't? What's the feature that would make me want to pay?

Re:Does it matter? (1)

maxume (22995) | about 4 years ago | (#32845666)

Shiny integration and a Christmas card that supposedly comes from Steve Jobs.

Re:Does it matter? (2, Informative)

BitZtream (692029) | about 4 years ago | (#32846160)

If you want features, you won't pay for it and you'll be disappointed when you see it.

Its strength is actually, imo, its lack of features.

It does have a pretty interface that works reasonable well for standard email client, web host/photo album, but its not particularly impressive. Its simple and elegant.

The MobileMe photo browser that gets created or whatever when you upload an album from iPhoto to MobileMe is surprisingly pretty for something so plain.

I only have an account for the Find My iPhone feature, I wouldn't buy one without that feature. I'm a douche who leaves his phone in random places and its been really useful for tracking it down. It has paid for itself, but I doubt most people would need the same feature, my wife for instance has never seen it and I think its probably only been accessed for her when I set it up.

I would not pay for the service without Find My iPhone

Because I have the MobileMe account I also do the following:

Secondary, over the air backup of the various things the iPhone syncs with mobileme. I have this all backed up elsewhere, but since I have it I turned it on here too. More backups are not a bad thing.

A backup copy of my ITMS music that I can easily keep synced across machines using iDisk, its just easier than bothering with an rsync or something since I already have this.

I used to use it for push email since Google's exchange support didn't support push, now that it does however I no longer check my email at all at the me.com address.

Its a bridge to chat with some people on AIM without creating another AIM account since I never seem to remember my old ones. I don't even do that anymore.

Other than Find My iPhone I could do everything else free in another way, probably a technically better way, but since I have an account, using it for some things is just easier than setting something up somewhere else, free or otherwise.

Its up for renewal in a month and I'm not sure I'll renew it, depends on if I bother to upgrade to an iPhone 4 or not, probably won't do either.

Re:Does it matter? (1)

Skuld-Chan (302449) | about 4 years ago | (#32845154)

A lot of these features I get for free with google/android - if I didn't have them for free I'm certain I'd probably shell out for it these days :(.

Re:Does it matter? (2, Informative)

SimonTheSoundMan (1012395) | about 4 years ago | (#32845386)

Google supports CalDAV which they give away for free.

Exchange support on Google accounts, Dropbox and Wordpress makes MobileMe worthless, unless you want to find your lost iPhone.

Re:Does it matter? (2, Informative)

darrylo (97569) | about 4 years ago | (#32845586)

There is one reason to get MobileMe: contact groups

MobileMe is the only big name to support automatic/bidirectional syncing of contacts in multiple groups. I like keeping my friends, family, co-workers, and business numbers separate. The only big question here is whether multiple groups is worth the price. I think it is, but others won't.

Google's idea of contact sync is to shovel all of your contacts into one big steamy pile (on the iPhone, since we're talking about MobileMe -- I think multiple groups are supported on the android). I imagine that they'll fix this someday, but I think "someday" is still years off. Until then, I'm stuck with MobileMe (although there are one or two alternatives on the horizon).

Re:Does it matter? (1)

iluvcapra (782887) | about 4 years ago | (#32846722)

A lot of these features I get for free with google/android

As with all of these things, when you pay for something it means that the party you're buying from has an actual interest in delivering what they say they will, as opposed to the other model, where they let you sharecrop a corner of their server in order to funnel your eyeballs to the highest bidder.

The nice thing about paying directly for things is it eliminates that fundamental conflict of interest that the service provider has between the end users, who want all their data completely private, and his revenue-generating partners, the advertisers, who want as much timely and specific information about the end users as possible.

Google and Apple (4, Interesting)

Irick (1842362) | about 4 years ago | (#32844818)

People seem to forget these two companies actually press open standards above proprietary formats. For two companies that are pitted against each other so much by the media and marketing, they really do remain nearly seamlessly interoperable. I have no problems switching between Apple's default software to alternative applications just because of how standardized it is. Mail, iCal, etc.

Re:Google and Apple (1)

Itninja (937614) | about 4 years ago | (#32845038)

Are they pitted against each other? Other than the Android (which Google only makes the OS for) vs iPhone, what else is there?

Re:Google and Apple (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#32845194)

iAd is a direct attack against google's advertising business. Unfortunately for Apple, the iPhone4 hasn't really killed Android as everyone was predicting, so iAd is not likely going to hurt google very much in the long term.

Google and Apple compete in mobile advertising (1)

perpenso (1613749) | about 4 years ago | (#32845210)

Are they pitted against each other? Other than the Android (which Google only makes the OS for) vs iPhone, what else is there?

Advertising on mobile devices.
http://advertising.apple.com/ [apple.com]

Re:Google and Apple (5, Insightful)

ducomputergeek (595742) | about 4 years ago | (#32845266)

Apple became the white knights of Opensource by adopting a BSD-based userland (It wasn't Linux but it gave the Linux fans the ability to say "See, Apple is doing it we can too"). Then Apple embraced and extended CUPS. But it's been how many years and they've not extinguished it. CUPS is used by every Linux distro I've tried and Apple has done nothing to stop them. Same with all their other technologies, they embraced the open standards and contributed a lot to different projects, but still held parts to be propitary. They were "open" but not "open enough" for some people. But largely the early appeal of OSX was to the geek crowd. Every LAMP developer I knew at the time left Linux for OSX as their desktop (usually laptop) of choice. I was one of them after spending 2 years trying to get printers and my sound card to work with Linux I got tired and just wanted something that worked. So I bought an iBook and never looked back.

Then things changed when Apple forked KHTML. For some reason, that was seen as suspicious by the /. crowd. I'm not sure why. Eventually Apple created Webkit and offered it back to the community with the KHTML folks eventually adopting it (iirc). But that's when the negativity began and then continued with the iPods.

But then, there was iTunes and the iTMS. Apple was against DRM, but added just enough DRM to get labels to sign up. And the DRM they added never once got in my way. If I wanted to burn to CD to listen in my car, I could. I could copy to a number of computers and iPods and listen to what I had purchased and the biggest factor was I could buy the couple tracks I wanted from a CD and not the entire album for $.99. It didn't mesh with some peoples idea of "freedom", but to the masses it became having cake and eating it too. Apple was the first company that was able to put it all together in a package the average person could use.

And because Apple was for the masses now and no longer aimed for the "geeks", the /. crowd began hating Apple as Apple found more and more success with more people. It was OSX that was becoming the *iux of the masses, not Linux. This continued with the iPhone. Although at first it was more of a shrug, then came the iPhone 2 with the App Store and it was full on rabid hatred. Mainly I think because, again, Apple developed a product that went over extremely well for the masses, but ignored what the "geeks" might want.

And so the Geeks went to Google. What was not to love about google, lots of geeks, lots of geeky tools made by geeks for geeks. And so, Google is now the company that replaced Apple about 2007 as the great "white knight". It will last another 3 - 5 years, and then Google will become the new "Evil company that must die" replaced by someone else. Who knows, maybe by that time the new white knight will be Microsoft. Stranger things have happened.

Re:Google and Apple (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#32845432)

I don't need a white knight. I'm not a techo-bigot. I can accept that everyone puts out good products and bad products and I don't need to hide that fact behind witless memes and outright lies. I don't give a fuck if your OS can beat up my OS. It works for me and no amount of political banter or shit coming from fanboi's mouths is going to change that.

Re:Google and Apple (0)

thePsychologist (1062886) | about 4 years ago | (#32845938)

Even in a seemingly anti-apple place like this, I don't think there's much negativity towards OS X. It started with the iPod and continued with the iPhone/iPad because they're not open enough.

I dislike the iPortables because without modding I can't open a terminal and browse the filesystem, install arbitrary software, and look at the source. I suspect a lot of geeks want something that 'Just Works' AND is open. The anger comes from the thought that IF only Apple opened the iDevices then geeks could finally have this.

IMO the n810 which I am typing on now (and similarly the n900) is pretty damn close if only more developer efforts were directed towards it. Sadly few people care about open source so right now devices like the n810 show promise and the fade away into obscurity.

Hopefully Nokia with MeeGo will come a bit closer.

Re:Google and Apple (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#32846248)

This place isn't anti-apple. You're just a fucking fanboi.

Re:Google and Apple (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#32846206)

Adidas Goodyear [adidasbox.com] , Adidas Goodyear

Nike Air Zoom [af1box.com] , Nike Air Zoom

Nike Zoom Soldier [lebronshoesbox.com] , Nike Zoom Soldier

air jordan I [usaairjordan.com] , air jordan I

Re:Google and Apple (1)

SimonTheSoundMan (1012395) | about 4 years ago | (#32845414)

Of which, both iPhone and Android both use CalDAV for Google services. They are not "pitted against each other" in any way when it comes to calendar services.

Re:Google and Apple (1)

PaulMeigh (1277544) | about 4 years ago | (#32847124)

They're both aiming at Microsoft, the company that makes all the money in this space. You don't see the same level of love and happiness in their core businesses.

Where might they take it next? (1)

geekoid (135745) | about 4 years ago | (#32844962)

where ever they want you to go.

fir5t (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#32845036)

obvious that the+re

"Where might they take it next?" (1)

nine-times (778537) | about 4 years ago | (#32845092)

Where might they take it next?

It'd be nice if they ported their fancy web interface over to OSX server. The webmail and other web interfaces are kind of weak points in Apple's server offerings.

default calendar with CalDAV? (1)

johnrpenner (40054) | about 4 years ago | (#32845178)

running an xserve, OD user configured, with their email address in the open directory 'info' pane. user receives .ics calendar invites - double-click - and these always get added to her default local calendar - any geeks out there know any way to get invites to default to a CalDAV calendar? i think its not a feature, but if you can ctrl-click to select which calendar to belong to - but is there no way to make the CalDAV calendar the default instead of a local calendar? any leads much appreciated.

j

sorry for the OT post - but i read the documentation, and its just not in therw -- and this is a functional mac calDAV question

Re:default calendar with CalDAV? (2, Informative)

curmi (205804) | about 4 years ago | (#32845288)

This has always been this way, and I have logged a bug with Apple over the issue. With 10.6.4 it seems that some of us have suddenly found the invites go in to the CalDAV calendar by default now, instead of the local calendar. This is great, but we aren't sure why, and we've seen it only occur on some machines. There does not seem to be an option to say which calendar should be the default, so it is all a little bizarre.

Re:default calendar with CalDAV? (1)

MarkCollette (459340) | about 4 years ago | (#32847062)

Just a guess, but try opening iCal, and clicking on the calendar that you want the events to go into. Now go back to Mail, and click on the invite.

Well gee (1)

Saint Stephen (19450) | about 4 years ago | (#32845424)

Well that's just great. Do you think this time it might be able to remind me of my appointments more than one time before it doesn't remind me anymore

  My Microsoft phone did a much better of scheduling my tasks and appointments that my iPhone

  Dictated on my iPhone using drag

Where could they take it next? (0, Offtopic)

Servaas (1050156) | about 4 years ago | (#32845722)

To the moon?

Th1s FP for GNAA (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#32845842)

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...