- Related Stories
-
Apple recalls some MacBook Pro batteries
July 31, 2006 -
High-definition video add-on coming to iPod
July 26, 2006 -
Apple's multibutton mouse loses its tail
July 25, 2006 -
Macs see growth spurt
July 19, 2006 -
Mac sales up 12 percent as Apple profits soar
July 19, 2006 -
Virtual Windows on a Mac coming to stores
July 17, 2006
Apple Computer's latest advertising campaign, pegged to the slogan "It just works," is irritating some .Mac users as they wonder when the service will become operational again.
Over the past four days, .Mac users have struggled to get its Web site publishing features, iWeb, and related file-share capabilities, iDisk, to work. Users have complained not only about the length of the outage, but also what they say is a tardy response from .Mac's technical support team, according to postings on Apple's discussion board.
"It is going on 96 hours for me. Completely Unacceptable," wrote a user named BK Broiler in a post to the discussion board. "The .76 IP now pings, since yesterday, but iDisk does not work still. It'll only work with the /etc/hosts trick, but not on its own. I got a canned e-mail from Apple today after 72 hours of silence from the time I sent the trouble call. Thanks, Apple, for making a joke out of long term customer loyalty, and for just not giving a ****. It may be time to switch away from Mac after 20 years."
Apple said Monday it is investigating the issue.
"We are aware of the outage and are looking into it," an Apple representative said.
The representative noted that it is premature to discuss whether Apple plans to reimburse users a portion of their $99.95 annual fee for .Mac service, which also includes data synchronization tools and group e-mail.
The outage has created particular problems for some .Mac users, who rely on the service for their businesses.
Brian Guy, a technology consultant in Seattle, noted he built an SVN server to replace iDisk and has since deleted all his files off iDisk.
"I'll still use iDisk in the future, but only for noncritical needs," he said.
Guy, along with several others on Apple's iDisk discussion board. point to a ripple effect iDisk is having on the .Mac service.
".Mac's entire iLife suite is affected, because so many things rely on iDisk," said Guy, pointing to iPhoto, iWeb and the ability to perform daily backups via iDisk.
Apple declined to comment on the extent to which any iDisk issues might be affecting the iLife suite.
Meanwhile, the ad campaign only adds to the exasperation some users are describing.
"(I) had no issues with any .Mac service before now...I am now suffering from post-traumatic-Windows-type stress symptoms, i.e. nail biting and hair pulling," a user named Allan Bell wrote on the discussion board. "And those new Apple adverts are now starting to irritate me lol. Yes, 'it just works' is looking funnier by the minute...'occasionally' would be more apt lol."
See more CNET content tagged:
.Mac, outage, Apple iWeb, Apple Computer, Apple iLife
accessing it this weekend when my cable modem started acting up,
but dot Mac does require a good internet connection! ;)
trouble accessing my account.
Don't think its just that guy. That being said, I doubt if it is nearly as widespread as we cnet would have us believe, but it probably is a serious issue for some.
has had 1 single install of Mac OS X installed since 10.0.
Through the years I've upgraded from a G4 DP 500, to G4 1.2 to
a new G5 DP 2.0. At the same time, I've also been upgrading the
OS from 10.0 ->10.1 -> 10.2 ->10.3 -> 10.4 without ever
doing a fresh install of the OS and all of my Apps. With Windows
it starts out fine the slowly goes down hill from there. I got so
fed up with Windows, I recently installed Fedora Core 5, VMware
Workstation and Windows XP. Now I do regular clones and
snapshots, just incase windows breaks and moving from my
current machine an HP nc6000 to a future machine should be as
easy as copying over my vmdk's. Mac OS X and Linux just
works! Windows mostly works.
Have you ever met a Windows user that hasn't rebuilt their
machine at least once? If they haven't is it as fast and as snappy
as when they first purchased it?
Apple folks know the stakes and they'll do their best to get the
outtage fixed. Just like the telephone company and the power
company and the cable company, and, and, and. Go do something
productive. By the time you think of it again it will be all better. No
more boo-boos.
Now-a-days Windows runs just as good as Linux from an install perspective. Now crashes and reboots are another story, but that is more a software thing than an OS thing. I could write software to crash a Mac and Linux box too. :)
I would love to switch to Linux if my software compatibility met that OS. I just don't like to pay for OS's, or have them tied to my hardware.
away.</sarcasm> What happened to the vaunted software
advantage Windows is supposed to have?
My apps weren't crapware/adware/spyware. All were corporate apps.
This is the problem with creating an experience as generally seamless as Apple's... you have to deal with really indignant users when something does go wrong.
I can't wait to hear this guy scream once he switches to Windows!
here, some of the crap that some of the fanboyswrite is incredible!
Just learn o enjoy what you have and don't try to shove it down
everyone else's throats! I love my Mac but you won't find one of my
posts claiming total superiority over everything that has ever
existed.
here, some of the crap that some of the fanboys write is incredible!
Just learn o enjoy what you have and don't try to shove it down
everyone else's throats! I love my Mac but you won't find one of my
posts claiming total superiority over everything that has ever
existed.
here, some of the crap that some of the fanboys write is incredible!
Just learn to enjoy what you have and don't try to shove it down
everyone else's throats! I love my Mac but you won't find one of my
posts claiming total superiority over everything that has ever
existed.
Don't feel to bad about the service, things like that happen in the windows world as well. No doubt, apple will have it fixed soon enough.
can't tell the difference between C|Net blog posts and C|Net
stories is because there is no difference, just a starstruck bunch
of bad writers who go to every catered event around the Bay
Area congratulating their hosts on what how great their products
are.
As you can tell, Apple doesn't throw many of these kinds of
parties - and they don't buy many ads on News.com, either -
hence the moutain made out a molehill - I have NO .Mac
problems, and the ones spoken of here appear to have more to
do with certain users' ISP than anything Apple has control over.
Nice reporting once again, C|Net.
And for the record, my .Mac account hasn't gone down at all in, oh, maybe two years or so.
with OS's from 10.1 to 10.4. Without any OS crashes. When
software crashes - and it does - the OS remains solid as a rock.
That is, essentially, five years of running an OS 24 hours a day,
365 days a year, without a crash, on what is clearly obsolete
hardware.
I recently bought a Intel Core Duo iMac and loaded Windows XP.
XP crashed three times in the first hour! and, almost
immediately, was infected with spyware and adware. (I have
never had either on any Mac I have used - the last virus I
encountered using MacOS was in the late 1990's, when I found a
copy of nVir on a piece of shrink wrapped, commercial software)
I have three other Windows machines that run half as often and
crash at least two or three times a week, per machine.
Given Apple's poor history with online services - anyone
remember eWorld? - and the low priority Apple gives these
services, it does not surprise me that .Mac is having problems.
Apple should stick to what they know and do best - OS's and
hardware.
Oh, and they should hurry up and get out a Power Mac with two
Intel Core 2 Duos! I am thirsting for PCI slots and more
computing power than ten space shuttles... LOL
As far as the windows boxes crashing, I guess its a user issue, as I've never had a problem with my XP, but I tried a mac and had nothing but problems with it. :)
Thus, its all from your experience.
I love Mac's for their sheer beauty and for making many tasks work flawlessly, but its ridiculous to suggest that they are so much better because Windows is crash happy.
Obviously XP has its flaws when compared to OS X. If your XP box is crashing so often and littered with spyware, though, its more likely something other than XP that is at fault.
Best regards
Björn Lundahl
Göteborg Sweden
Björn Lundahl
Göteborg Sweden
and I want to help set it straight.
I have used my .Mac account all weekend without any problem
whatsoever.
I'm in charge of a large family reunion website with 6 different
PC family members who successfully uploaded over 3 GB of pix
and video clips from all over the country without one hiccup
yesterday alone.
I subsequently uploaded and published 4 new completed pages
last night, and have been using my .Mac account all day today.
No problems whatsoever!
Further, there are some 150+ family members who are ALL PC
owners, and many have already reviewed the new pages, again
without ANY problems.
If there is some problem with .Mac, no one has experienced it in
our family!
scheduled sync one afternoon. (Some changes I had made to iCal
at work hadn't shown up on my home computer)
But a short time later the changes appeared, and I haven't had any
trouble since then.
I don't use .mac, but if I had such problems and it was apple's fault (I'm not sure if it is or not at this point), I would ask for my money back. But switch to windows? Sounds a bit silly to me.
that's news to me, since I haven't had any problems.
CNET, as usual, completely distorts matters. They write the
article as if all .Mac users are having problems, when really only
a few are. Even the title is bull. One person mocking Apple ads
becomes users in general?
So a few people having problems with .Mac, which might have
nothing to do with .Mac itself and their ISP is to blame, and
CNET deems it a "Top Headline." CNET has really become a joke.
admitted that there is a problem. As one of the people who have
this .Mac problem, I am happy that CNET is making it known. I am,
however, disappointed that fellow Mac users would resort to a "kill
the messenger" attitude.
a while for 5 to 35 it may go down for me... but usually, this is
when I am sleeping... so, I don't give a rats a$$ anyhoo. Now, if I
could only get my WAMU account working again!!!!!!!
What disturbs me most is reports about very poor customer service from Apple, with flippant, arrogant and couldn't-care-less attitude responses to customers' complaints. However, judging from the fanatical responses made by Apple die-hard fans in this column, one can start to see why and how Apple staffs start to develop their corporate we-are-above-reproach attitude.
server-side issue. To me the rules for servers are different than
the rules for desktop machines so all this hyper-reacting is silly.
I also assume these folks will disconnect their cable, their
phone, and their power when they run into problems associated
with those services.
That said, Apple needs to stop being so secret about
EVERYTHING. I understand the secrecy of product releases (to a
degree). But if they a providing a service such as .Mac, there
should be a place to obtain server performance/access status
that is easily accessible to their customers.
Once they find and address the problem, they should also
explain what happened and how they are going to insure it
doesn't happen in the future.
Now is not the time to get in the cone of silence.
I am not seeing enough companies doing this and I hope that the trend will change for the better.
and because for historical reasons it is a far more insecure
operating system than ANY Unix based system. Mac OS 9 still
had thousands of viruses, despite a tiny market share.
The thing that Windows and Mac OS 9 have in common is that
they were PERSONAL computer operating systems, that grew
features like networking and admin accounts, etc, while trying
not to break what was already there.
2) Stability. I had a Windows PC that went for 3 years with no
problems - absolutely stable. Soon as I added a couple of
components it crashed. My wife's laptop crashes all the time,
frequently resulting in total corruption of the Windows
installation - problem traced to an issue with network cards.
Point being that XP is far more susceptible to driver problems
than the approach used in OS X AND Vista.
3) I use XP and OS X every day. After a year of using OS X I can
understand why people who use it always slag off XP.
based mail w/o ads forwardable anywhere; a constant email
address independent of your ISP; backup solutions; Home Page;
etc. However all the associated problems with it severly detract
from it and keep making me question if it is worth its yearly fee.
Virus protection , when they had it was buggy to the point of
almost unusable so I have mixed feelings about them taking that
away. Virus Protection was one of their big selling points that
they took away and have never offered anything to replace it.
Why would a .Mac person need virus protection if there are no
serious viruses associated with Mac? So you don't pass a
Windows virus on to your friends when you send them files. Now
with dual boot, it is even a greater issue. Does .Mac offer a
solution as orginally promised? No.
.Mac also promises additional benefits, extras, and undefined
features that never seem to happen or are anemic when they do.
Addotionally may of these so called benefits are really nothing
more that opportunites to spend more money with Apple thinly
discused and enhancements or features. . .MAC now seems to
be charging the same for less features. And then there is the
stability issues that seem to occur at the most inconvient times.
A lot of this would be more tolerated if it wern't for the abysmal
tech support that comes with this product. Phone tech support is
simply not available even under AppleCare. Support is email
only, which is real useful if your .Mac address is not working!
The promise 48hr max responce, not very timely. But your lucky
if you get that as it is as rigorously adhered to as a well known
grocery store slogan of "threes a crowd." If you have shopped
there you know what I mean. If not, you don't want to.
When you are finally annointed with a response it is usually
"boilerplate" that often as not does not address your real issues.
Usually you have to email the problem several times and state
your problem in a number of different ways before you might
get a satisfactory answer. ,NAC suuport gives me the impression
that the staff rarely completely reads a message but they on
scan the first line or two and then copy and paste a boilerplate
response.
Often times if they don't have a boilerplate response for a
question they will send you a general boilerplate response of
common troubleshooting techniques in the hope that such
procedures and a little bit of luck will solve the problem. But you
had better not reject such a response or then next one will be
that your question is deemed inappropriate and as such will not
be answered.
Additionally for .MAC there is no escalation path for users. If you
don't like, agree with, or have an issue with an agents response
- forget it. There is no way to escalate the issue - not even in
person at MacWorld SF. Believe me, when I say I have tried and
failed. The staff that supports .MAC is untouchable, unreachable
and unappealable. Their email responses are like messages from
the Pope himself.
For what I pay for .MAC I just expect better. Instead it leaves me
with the sinking feeling that when it comes to .MAC either the
Apple Executive Management Team does not care about
the .Mac service or the customers that use it.
I signed up for the 90 day free tiral and I let it expire, I don't see the benefits for the money.
There are free email account that work very well, and rarely go down. I am a person who likes to tweak his work to fit what I need to do, and .Mac is too restrictive to advanced users like me.
Someone who is stupid and don't know anything about how servers works, HTML, a little bit of scripting, to them I am sure it is worth the money, point and lick, I mean click and you're done.
I spend $2000 on a G5 Power Mac, I should get my frist year for free, is what I am thinking, but it isn't anything but that.
This is the only area where Apple is screwing up and getting too greedy, can anyone say, Microsoft.
Other then that I am a loyal fan of Apple, but I guess 100% satisfaction is not realistic to ask these days from no one.
walk, ride a bike, or catch public transport but instead we like
our own car because it gets us there faster. .mac is a little like
that because it just gets you to the end point. Sure its no F1 car
with every bit of power pushed out of it, its more like a Jaguar
where its about speed and comfort and the whole package. I am
willing to pay a premium for that so long as it suits my needs.
Also you say:
"Someone who is stupid and don't know anything about how
servers works, HTML, a little bit of scripting, to them I am sure it
is worth the money, point and lick, I mean click and you're done"
Some might argue that your sentence structure points to a
person who is a little short on smarts. Not me.
I agree with the statement regarding 1 yr free with every new
Mac. If for no other reason than they would increase their user
base and that would mean better profits from the .Mac services.
Finally what do you mean by:
"but I guess 100% satisfaction is not realistic to ask these days
from no one"
When could we ask for 100% satisfaction. If you are living on the
same planet in the same reality as I am then I think you would
find that everything is stuffed up in some way shape or form and
nothing can provide 100% satisfaction if for no other reason
than the satisfaction only lasts a short period of time. Maybe 1
day, a week, month, year or even a decade. But at some point it
looses its sparkle and we are on the hunt again for something to
fill the void... but as void fillers go I am sure that Apple will
continue to make new and short lived exciting products that I
can replace my tired ones with.
- .MAC outage
- by peterdom July 31, 2006 3:29 PM PDT
- I've had no problems with iDisk or mail
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
Showing 1 of 2 pages (106 Comments)