A longtime MacSurfer reader from Adelaide, South Australia, sent in the following tidbit to MacSurfer on Thursday:
"Apple Australia is considering opening their first UberStore in the state. Redevelopment of a large site in Rundle Mall, the prime retail area of Adelaide's CBD, means that a suitable location has opened up for an Apple Store. Overheard two days ago was a conversation between a major property identity, and a third party on the other end of the Iphone, with the pertinent question being, "have you arranged that meeting yet with Apple about the Harris Scarfe development?"
Details of progress of the redeveloped site were included with schematics in this article from August 2011 in the local daily newspaper, The Advertiser."
http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/south-australia/new-image-of-rundle-place-385-million-development-of-old-harris-scarfe-site/story-e6frea83-1226120252527"
Congrats to Apple fans in Adelaide, should this info bear ... fruit.
Friday, February 03, 2012
Tuesday, April 28, 2009
Firefox 3.5 Beta and AppleScript - Still Broken
I have been holding out hope that Mozilla would, by now, have gotten its act together in fixing AppleScript for Firefox 3.0.x, and now up thru 3.5b.
Unfortunately not the case.
Things are a little different with the nightly builds; however, but still not up to snuff.
The newest 3.5 beta release falls prey to the already documented (here, here, and here) AppleScript bugs introduced with 3.0. The latest nightly builds by and large fix those issues, but introduce a new one, and a particularly glaring omission, at that.
Where before I documented that the properties of a particular window neglected to include the title of said window, in 3.6a pre1, they do.
But where 3.6a pre1 fails is in completely losing the ability to get the URL of the current page. It no longer exists in the properties as the class curl or as "URL". That property has simply ceased to exist.
For reference, this AppleScript is to get the properties of the current, front window in Firefox 3.5:
tell application "Firefox"
get properties of window 1
end tell
And from that I get this result:
{«class pObT»:window, «class pTit»:"Google News", «class curl»:"http://news.google.com/", index:1, bounds:{0, 0, 1440, 900}, «class pLcn»:{0, 0}, closeable:false, titled:false, modal:false, resizable:false, zoomable:false, zoomed:false, «class pNMo»:true, «class pMMo»:false, floating:false, visible:false}
You can see that «class pTit» is now filled properly. But add "activate" to that script and it will fail as it has in previous testing.
Enter Minefield (3.6a1pre) with this AppleScript:
tell application "Minefield"
get properties of window 1
end tell
The results are telling:
{zoomed:false, closeable:true, resizable:true, miniaturized:false, document:missing value, bounds:{440, 22, 1440, 790}, titled:true, floating:false, miniaturizable:true, zoomable:true, modal:false, class:window, name:"Minefield Start Page", id:2071, index:1, visible:true}
A little more cocoa goodness here with class names, etc. in place of «class pTit» is "name" and it is filled appropriately. But gone is «class curl», or "URL" entirely. No mention, thus no way to grab it properly with AppleScript - at least no way that I know of.
Beside that glaring omission, AppleScript no longer errors out as it did under previous versions (not including 2.x). There is promise... and disappointment all in one. Cheers for fixing the breakage, boos for dropping URL support.
So there's obviously a lot of work yet to be done. And for those of us who rely on AppleScript for our jobs, and who wish to use Firefox, we're out of luck. I have been able to work around some of these shortcomings, but with the newest update, all the add-ons have broken (not to mention that it is an ugly, inelegant way to get what I want, and it doesn't work all the time as AppleScript would).
So I'm pretty much left to Safari and Camino here, even though neither is 100% satisfactory. Yes, I've sung the praises of both browsers, and I'm using Safari 4 beta right now which I do like. Problem being that Safari 4 is a memory hog on my aging PowerPC, and Camino tends to leak as well. I have found Firefox tends to be the least leaky of all. Your mileage may vary.
Unfortunately not the case.
Things are a little different with the nightly builds; however, but still not up to snuff.
The newest 3.5 beta release falls prey to the already documented (here, here, and here) AppleScript bugs introduced with 3.0. The latest nightly builds by and large fix those issues, but introduce a new one, and a particularly glaring omission, at that.
Where before I documented that the properties of a particular window neglected to include the title of said window, in 3.6a pre1, they do.
But where 3.6a pre1 fails is in completely losing the ability to get the URL of the current page. It no longer exists in the properties as the class curl or as "URL". That property has simply ceased to exist.
For reference, this AppleScript is to get the properties of the current, front window in Firefox 3.5:
tell application "Firefox"
get properties of window 1
end tell
And from that I get this result:
{«class pObT»:window, «class pTit»:"Google News", «class curl»:"http://news.google.com/", index:1, bounds:{0, 0, 1440, 900}, «class pLcn»:{0, 0}, closeable:false, titled:false, modal:false, resizable:false, zoomable:false, zoomed:false, «class pNMo»:true, «class pMMo»:false, floating:false, visible:false}
You can see that «class pTit» is now filled properly. But add "activate" to that script and it will fail as it has in previous testing.
Enter Minefield (3.6a1pre) with this AppleScript:
tell application "Minefield"
get properties of window 1
end tell
The results are telling:
{zoomed:false, closeable:true, resizable:true, miniaturized:false, document:missing value, bounds:{440, 22, 1440, 790}, titled:true, floating:false, miniaturizable:true, zoomable:true, modal:false, class:window, name:"Minefield Start Page", id:2071, index:1, visible:true}
A little more cocoa goodness here with class names, etc. in place of «class pTit» is "name" and it is filled appropriately. But gone is «class curl», or "URL" entirely. No mention, thus no way to grab it properly with AppleScript - at least no way that I know of.
Beside that glaring omission, AppleScript no longer errors out as it did under previous versions (not including 2.x). There is promise... and disappointment all in one. Cheers for fixing the breakage, boos for dropping URL support.
So there's obviously a lot of work yet to be done. And for those of us who rely on AppleScript for our jobs, and who wish to use Firefox, we're out of luck. I have been able to work around some of these shortcomings, but with the newest update, all the add-ons have broken (not to mention that it is an ugly, inelegant way to get what I want, and it doesn't work all the time as AppleScript would).
So I'm pretty much left to Safari and Camino here, even though neither is 100% satisfactory. Yes, I've sung the praises of both browsers, and I'm using Safari 4 beta right now which I do like. Problem being that Safari 4 is a memory hog on my aging PowerPC, and Camino tends to leak as well. I have found Firefox tends to be the least leaky of all. Your mileage may vary.
Tuesday, December 09, 2008
Firefox 3.1b2 - AppleScript *STILL* Broken
I've been messing around with the different alphas and betas of Firefox, including FF3.1b2 released yesterday.
Sorry to announce that Mozilla still has not fixed it. If you have no idea what I'm talking about, please refer to my previous posts where I detailed the problems here and here.
This extends all the way to the Minefield nightly builds, and Shiretoko builds as well.
Mozilla - PLEASE - fix AppleScript support. I realize AppleScript has never been a priority, but hey, it works in 2.x but it was broken (regression) in 3.x and it messes with workflows and other apps as well.
In the mean time, Safari has been working well; however, it has begun choking on sites like reuters.com while something loads in the background. Takes about 40-50 seconds.
Sorry to announce that Mozilla still has not fixed it. If you have no idea what I'm talking about, please refer to my previous posts where I detailed the problems here and here.
This extends all the way to the Minefield nightly builds, and Shiretoko builds as well.
Mozilla - PLEASE - fix AppleScript support. I realize AppleScript has never been a priority, but hey, it works in 2.x but it was broken (regression) in 3.x and it messes with workflows and other apps as well.
In the mean time, Safari has been working well; however, it has begun choking on sites like reuters.com while something loads in the background. Takes about 40-50 seconds.
Monday, July 21, 2008
From MobileMe to Google Apps: A Progress Report
It is disappointing, the hassles facing MobileMe users, and I'm sure the team(s) within Apple are pulling their collective hair out trying to find resolution. And I'm sure Steve and the management team are not a little bit irked that this persists in the face of today's earnings report. There will be some shareholder angst to be sure.
On a smaller scale, back in my days as an IT Manager, I recall well the departmental shift into crisis mode when services went dark. But one thing was for certain, customer service became the critical priority externally, while service restoration becames the #1 internal priority. It seems that Apple is having a tough time with this.
As for my own MobileMe experiences, blogged about here and here, I decided to transition to Google for email and calendaring. Jury is out on whether or not I'll use Google's online office. The interface is yet quirky, although it is certainly functional.
If Apple were to put iWork online, that'd be pretty swell, if not an extremely daunting task (for Apple's engineers).
I pay daily visits to MobileMe with hopes things have improved only to find they haven't. I won't rehash all the reasons for me switching, suffice it to say, Gmail and Google Calendar (Gcal) are excellent apps, in particular the sharing functionality of Gcal. Picasa Web Albums is also excellent. It differs primarily from MMe's Photo Gallery in looks, which are pretty slick appearance-wise, I'll chalk that up to MMe's favor; however, looks are not everything.
From Mail/MobileMe to Gmail: Gmail wins me over for superior online options, customizations, tagging, calendaring integration. The usual suspects creep up with any address change: getting people to change to the new one. It hasn't been too bad thus far, but could be better.
Transition has been smooth, and the thought of losing our .Mac addresses is less troublesome with each passing day. I suppose you could say that the breakup is not as bad as I thought it'd be.
From iCal/MobileMe to Google Calendar: Couple things here. iCal/MobileMe is a local/online solution. Locally, iCal beats Gcal because it has ToDo's, and it is local. With Google Gears on the horizon for Gmail and Calendar, and the excellent plug-in architecture for ToDo's in Google services, it will be come local for 1-3 months in advance...
Still, for online Calendaring, MobileMe calendar is a long way from competing with Gcal. Sorry, but it just is. So Google Calendar wins here rather easily. The transition has been smooth since that is what actually started this whole thing back when MMe was announced.
Do I mind that it isn't local? Meh, maybe sometimes. I haven't yet had an outage during which I needed my calendar info. Yet.
From MobileMe Photo Gallery to Picasa Web Albums: Here again we have the interface being the main difference between these two. Google has gone to great strides integrating PWA into iPhoto; however, it is still a few extra steps and less elegant. Just like you're able to change the "Mail" icon in iPhoto, I'd like to have a PWA icon to upload to that service instead of Exporting to the service.
And the online experience goes in favor of MMe Photo Gallery simply because it looks better. But functionally they are on pretty much the same playing field. Where PWA pulls ahead is in sharing of albums - public or unlisted, and in ability to purchase from the web page. No option in MMe Photo Gallery.
Thus the photo situation has not been a difficult transition. But I will say that I liked .Mac's video viewing back in the day when I used it. That was cool. Haven't tested that in PWA, so don't know how/if it performs.
From AddressBook to Google Contacts: This one has not been as easy. Google Contacts seems like more of an afterthought than a great service/feature. It does most of what I need it to do, but for some reason the interface bothers me. It is not as clean and easy as AddressBook. And MMe's online AddressBook is quite nice, although again, there's more that you can do - online - on the Google side of the fence here.
From iDisk to Google (?): Um, no. There is no from iDisk to Google because Google falls down here. Yes there are hacks that allow you to use your Gmail space as storage space, but I don't like that solution at all. If Google were to offer an iDisk-like alternative, that'd be great. They don't, so it ain't.
This is the one area that is stckiest. Bottom line for me is that iDisk alone is not worth $99/yr. if I'm not using the rest of the service. For you it might be. I'd rather go to Costco and pick up the under $200 750GB Western Digital external drive. That's 2 years of iDisk with vastly more storage space. Granted, it isn't in the cloud, but it's more practical in this case. There are free online storage systems, I'm subscribed to Box.net which I like, but it has less space. Did I mention it is free?
Conclusion: The transition from MMe to Google has been going very well, the only areas that fall a bit short are with AddressBook and iDisk although there are solutions both free and shareware.
Any of you switching from MobileMe to Google?
On a smaller scale, back in my days as an IT Manager, I recall well the departmental shift into crisis mode when services went dark. But one thing was for certain, customer service became the critical priority externally, while service restoration becames the #1 internal priority. It seems that Apple is having a tough time with this.
As for my own MobileMe experiences, blogged about here and here, I decided to transition to Google for email and calendaring. Jury is out on whether or not I'll use Google's online office. The interface is yet quirky, although it is certainly functional.
If Apple were to put iWork online, that'd be pretty swell, if not an extremely daunting task (for Apple's engineers).
I pay daily visits to MobileMe with hopes things have improved only to find they haven't. I won't rehash all the reasons for me switching, suffice it to say, Gmail and Google Calendar (Gcal) are excellent apps, in particular the sharing functionality of Gcal. Picasa Web Albums is also excellent. It differs primarily from MMe's Photo Gallery in looks, which are pretty slick appearance-wise, I'll chalk that up to MMe's favor; however, looks are not everything.
From Mail/MobileMe to Gmail: Gmail wins me over for superior online options, customizations, tagging, calendaring integration. The usual suspects creep up with any address change: getting people to change to the new one. It hasn't been too bad thus far, but could be better.
Transition has been smooth, and the thought of losing our .Mac addresses is less troublesome with each passing day. I suppose you could say that the breakup is not as bad as I thought it'd be.
From iCal/MobileMe to Google Calendar: Couple things here. iCal/MobileMe is a local/online solution. Locally, iCal beats Gcal because it has ToDo's, and it is local. With Google Gears on the horizon for Gmail and Calendar, and the excellent plug-in architecture for ToDo's in Google services, it will be come local for 1-3 months in advance...
Still, for online Calendaring, MobileMe calendar is a long way from competing with Gcal. Sorry, but it just is. So Google Calendar wins here rather easily. The transition has been smooth since that is what actually started this whole thing back when MMe was announced.
Do I mind that it isn't local? Meh, maybe sometimes. I haven't yet had an outage during which I needed my calendar info. Yet.
From MobileMe Photo Gallery to Picasa Web Albums: Here again we have the interface being the main difference between these two. Google has gone to great strides integrating PWA into iPhoto; however, it is still a few extra steps and less elegant. Just like you're able to change the "Mail" icon in iPhoto, I'd like to have a PWA icon to upload to that service instead of Exporting to the service.
And the online experience goes in favor of MMe Photo Gallery simply because it looks better. But functionally they are on pretty much the same playing field. Where PWA pulls ahead is in sharing of albums - public or unlisted, and in ability to purchase from the web page. No option in MMe Photo Gallery.
Thus the photo situation has not been a difficult transition. But I will say that I liked .Mac's video viewing back in the day when I used it. That was cool. Haven't tested that in PWA, so don't know how/if it performs.
From AddressBook to Google Contacts: This one has not been as easy. Google Contacts seems like more of an afterthought than a great service/feature. It does most of what I need it to do, but for some reason the interface bothers me. It is not as clean and easy as AddressBook. And MMe's online AddressBook is quite nice, although again, there's more that you can do - online - on the Google side of the fence here.
From iDisk to Google (?): Um, no. There is no from iDisk to Google because Google falls down here. Yes there are hacks that allow you to use your Gmail space as storage space, but I don't like that solution at all. If Google were to offer an iDisk-like alternative, that'd be great. They don't, so it ain't.
This is the one area that is stckiest. Bottom line for me is that iDisk alone is not worth $99/yr. if I'm not using the rest of the service. For you it might be. I'd rather go to Costco and pick up the under $200 750GB Western Digital external drive. That's 2 years of iDisk with vastly more storage space. Granted, it isn't in the cloud, but it's more practical in this case. There are free online storage systems, I'm subscribed to Box.net which I like, but it has less space. Did I mention it is free?
Conclusion: The transition from MMe to Google has been going very well, the only areas that fall a bit short are with AddressBook and iDisk although there are solutions both free and shareware.
Any of you switching from MobileMe to Google?
Wednesday, July 16, 2008
MobleMe Continues to Disappoint
As I mentioned in my last post, I've been an iTools/.Mac/MobileMe user since it was a free service. It has taken me, I guess, 8 years to come to the conclusion that it no longer meets my needs, therefore, it no longer justifies $110/yr.
Some of you reading this will undoubtedly disagree finding MobileMe meets your needs and then some. That is great and I'm glad it works for you. For me the cost is a too high considering the free services out there. But I totally understand the ad-free MobileMe service, I really do. If it were free, of course I'd keep it, but I'd still be critiquing the offerings in light of my needs all the while gazing over at the Google side of the fence.
So I write this a bit surprised at myself. It is almost like an awakening from a strange RDF-induced dream I've been in for so long. Gosh it feels weird to write that.
The conclusion I've arrived at (as of today - gotta leave myself a way out in case the RDF returns) is that the service Apple provides is not really geared toward users like me any more. As I read over the weekend (can't recall where), MobileMe is geared for (best taken advantage of by) the iPhone generation more than the non-iPhone set.
Not that we non-iPhoners can't use it, don't get me wrong. But for me it boils down to functionality, customization, and flexibility. I want it to be more like Google Apps, which I suppose is why I'm moving that direction.
I've mostly loved Apple's no nonsense, K.I.S.S. approach to hardware and software as opposed to Microsoft/et al's "how much useless stuff can we fill this PC with" approach. And for so long I've lumped Google into that latter category - until now.
When people extol Google's Gmail, Calendar, etc., I used to yawn and turn away (except for Picasa - hurry on that OS X version guys). No more. It is really weird - having been a Mail user since the beginning, even bringing Gmail down via POP access - how much Gmail's online methodology has grown on me. It has become more intuitive, even addicting.
Over the weekend, and today, I put MobileMe thru the paces, you know, giving it a chance. And yeah, I did say Apple may work out kinks in the coming weeks so I'd give it more time (and I will as I've got 90 days left before renewal). But even as MobileMe has sped up a bit, I still find it *way* to slow. And I find the lack of customization leaving me indifferent to the service as a whole. MobileMe Calendar, IMHO, is a complete waste of time. Just doesn't work for me or my workflow.
IMHO, MobileMe is polished on the outside, but lacking in "meatiness" on the inside. As Clara Peller said, "Where's the beef?" This is one instance where I wish Apple put a lot more stuff into a product beside looks.
As mentioned in the first paragraph, I do not plan to renew our membership with MobileMe. My wife and I already use Google Calendar, and have all our .Mac/MobileMe mail filtering through our Gmail addresses. A long relationship, custom .Mac/me.com email addresses - all things I've loved about Apple's iTools and .Mac, seem to no longer hold sway over me. And it feels weirdly liberating.
Some of you reading this will undoubtedly disagree finding MobileMe meets your needs and then some. That is great and I'm glad it works for you. For me the cost is a too high considering the free services out there. But I totally understand the ad-free MobileMe service, I really do. If it were free, of course I'd keep it, but I'd still be critiquing the offerings in light of my needs all the while gazing over at the Google side of the fence.
So I write this a bit surprised at myself. It is almost like an awakening from a strange RDF-induced dream I've been in for so long. Gosh it feels weird to write that.
The conclusion I've arrived at (as of today - gotta leave myself a way out in case the RDF returns) is that the service Apple provides is not really geared toward users like me any more. As I read over the weekend (can't recall where), MobileMe is geared for (best taken advantage of by) the iPhone generation more than the non-iPhone set.
Not that we non-iPhoners can't use it, don't get me wrong. But for me it boils down to functionality, customization, and flexibility. I want it to be more like Google Apps, which I suppose is why I'm moving that direction.
I've mostly loved Apple's no nonsense, K.I.S.S. approach to hardware and software as opposed to Microsoft/et al's "how much useless stuff can we fill this PC with" approach. And for so long I've lumped Google into that latter category - until now.
When people extol Google's Gmail, Calendar, etc., I used to yawn and turn away (except for Picasa - hurry on that OS X version guys). No more. It is really weird - having been a Mail user since the beginning, even bringing Gmail down via POP access - how much Gmail's online methodology has grown on me. It has become more intuitive, even addicting.
Over the weekend, and today, I put MobileMe thru the paces, you know, giving it a chance. And yeah, I did say Apple may work out kinks in the coming weeks so I'd give it more time (and I will as I've got 90 days left before renewal). But even as MobileMe has sped up a bit, I still find it *way* to slow. And I find the lack of customization leaving me indifferent to the service as a whole. MobileMe Calendar, IMHO, is a complete waste of time. Just doesn't work for me or my workflow.
IMHO, MobileMe is polished on the outside, but lacking in "meatiness" on the inside. As Clara Peller said, "Where's the beef?" This is one instance where I wish Apple put a lot more stuff into a product beside looks.
As mentioned in the first paragraph, I do not plan to renew our membership with MobileMe. My wife and I already use Google Calendar, and have all our .Mac/MobileMe mail filtering through our Gmail addresses. A long relationship, custom .Mac/me.com email addresses - all things I've loved about Apple's iTools and .Mac, seem to no longer hold sway over me. And it feels weirdly liberating.
Saturday, July 12, 2008
iCal & MobileMe or Google Calendar?
Caveat: as for a lot of computing, preferences are entirely subjective. These are my opinions based on how I use iCal, Google Calendar. Your MO may be quite different from mine. That's okee-day. I happen to know there's a lot of folks pondering whether to keep paying the fee for MobileMe, or jump ship to free resources. Perhaps we can help each other out with some sage advice.
------
I've had great expectations for MobileMe since Jobs announced/demo'd it at WWDC. On the other hand, I was on the edge of diving into Google Apps more (Calendar) for family scheduling purposes since iCal was not filling the need adequately.
Needless to say, I was quite excited about MobileMe, thinking my $110/year (extra email) would now be more justifiable.
I'm one of those folks who has been with it since it was iTools. Every year a new iLife was announced with .Mac integration I got excited - but rarely ever use the additional features. Pretty much just email. So with the whole "push" thing, it seemed like it just might get there.
Since MobileMe was a ways out, I decided to give Google Calendar a whirl (not just toying with it as I've done for a year now). See, my family is down to two computers. My aging 17" PowerBook, and a "new", cheap P4 for family stuff. Though my work life is all about Apple, I'm one of those who just can't afford to lay out the $$ for a family iMac (not interested in mini's).
I've never been a "cloud computing" fan, always liked local desktop apps. Still do, but I'm getting used to the Google cloud now, and actually enjoying it.
See, the best thing about Google Calendar is that my wife and I, from each of our Google accounts, can edit and save all the calendars we share (we set them up that way). Can't do that in iCal. The other thing, prior to MobileMe, is that we can access our calendars from any computer anywhere. Can't do that in iCal, can in MobileMe.
So we've spent the better part of a month immersed in Google calendar for our boys' swimming events, family events, work schedules, and lots more. But in the back of my mind MobileMe lurked - would it work as well as Google Calendar? To be honest, I was assuming MobileMe would totally replace Google.
However, after lots of patience trying to get in to MobileMe, and finally doing so, I have been thus far disappointed.
First and foremost, it is slow. Mail in particular can be excruciating say just trying to click on "Sent" items. Now I understand the servers are still seeing high demand, so maybe it'll peter out in a week or two. But wow, is it slow. Even on my P4 with XP Pro SP2 - which is a lot snappier than my 1.33GHz G4 with 2GB RAM - MobileMe is slow.
I wrote a buddy who recently bought a new MacBook, and asked if it was fast on his machine and he said "nope".
I was honestly expecting it to be as snappy as in Apple's demo videos with good 'ol John at the helm.
Next up would be iCal vs. Google Calendar. iCal has To Do, Google Calendar does not. But Google Calender allows me to go into a calendar and choose not only to share it, but to set permissions as to what others can do (edit/delete, etc.). That has been awesome for my wife and me. Same calendars which both of us can edit from different Google accounts. Updates are instant on either account.
iCal/MobileMe cannot do that. At least with my current set up with my wife only having an email account. But with Google, we share the same calendars from different Google accounts ... for free.
So when I logged in for my wife. The only icons accessible to her were Mail, Contacts, and Account Settings. No calendar. I shook off the cobwebs and realized that's because she's email only. So I looked at Amazon and saw $135 for the MobileMe Family Pack, $150 at the Apple Store. Ugh, more money.
MobileMe = $135/year with no ads, a beautiful interface, we get to keep our beloved .mac/.me addresses, 20GB space - OR - Google Apps = FREE with ads (though to me they're unobtrusive), so/so interface with @gmail.com addresses, and less space. Hmmm.
Let's see, gas is $3.91/gal here in Hampton Roads, VA, our energy bills are set to jump over 9% this year, maybe more. FREE looks awfully attractive. But there's that nagging feeling that I'd be losing a friend - those (formerly) prestigious @mac.com addresses. See, I've been a member since iTools, so it is sentimental.
So I decided to see if I could duplicate what we can do in Google Calendar in iCal: share a calendar with ability of assigning another person (wife) to edit and share from another account. Nope.
I was also excited about the whole Push thing. But I don't do iPhone (I'm a Verizon guy), so that doesn't matter ... and I don't do any data plans or email ... so it would be pushing between the cloud and my computers only.
So here's where I'm at: Google's Calendar is FREE, fast, stable, can be shared editing-wise. It is not as glamorous as iCal, doesn't have To Do's. It does have Google Notifier which is pretty darn awesome up in my menu bar, thank you very much.
iCal, local and pushed to the cloud, elegant client locally and MobileMe-ified. $110/yr, currently much slower than Google Calendar, can't be shared/edited in the cloud between multiple users, only viewed via subscription.
As of now, the balance is leaning toward Google Calendar. I will, of course, give Apple a few weeks to sort things out, namely speed. I don't see them altering how iCal is shared at this point. But for Apple to tout this as Exchange for the rest of us, they need to make calendars editable by the likes of secretaries in small businesses, co-workers, and family members.
------
I've had great expectations for MobileMe since Jobs announced/demo'd it at WWDC. On the other hand, I was on the edge of diving into Google Apps more (Calendar) for family scheduling purposes since iCal was not filling the need adequately.
Needless to say, I was quite excited about MobileMe, thinking my $110/year (extra email) would now be more justifiable.
I'm one of those folks who has been with it since it was iTools. Every year a new iLife was announced with .Mac integration I got excited - but rarely ever use the additional features. Pretty much just email. So with the whole "push" thing, it seemed like it just might get there.
Since MobileMe was a ways out, I decided to give Google Calendar a whirl (not just toying with it as I've done for a year now). See, my family is down to two computers. My aging 17" PowerBook, and a "new", cheap P4 for family stuff. Though my work life is all about Apple, I'm one of those who just can't afford to lay out the $$ for a family iMac (not interested in mini's).
I've never been a "cloud computing" fan, always liked local desktop apps. Still do, but I'm getting used to the Google cloud now, and actually enjoying it.
See, the best thing about Google Calendar is that my wife and I, from each of our Google accounts, can edit and save all the calendars we share (we set them up that way). Can't do that in iCal. The other thing, prior to MobileMe, is that we can access our calendars from any computer anywhere. Can't do that in iCal, can in MobileMe.
So we've spent the better part of a month immersed in Google calendar for our boys' swimming events, family events, work schedules, and lots more. But in the back of my mind MobileMe lurked - would it work as well as Google Calendar? To be honest, I was assuming MobileMe would totally replace Google.
However, after lots of patience trying to get in to MobileMe, and finally doing so, I have been thus far disappointed.
First and foremost, it is slow. Mail in particular can be excruciating say just trying to click on "Sent" items. Now I understand the servers are still seeing high demand, so maybe it'll peter out in a week or two. But wow, is it slow. Even on my P4 with XP Pro SP2 - which is a lot snappier than my 1.33GHz G4 with 2GB RAM - MobileMe is slow.
I wrote a buddy who recently bought a new MacBook, and asked if it was fast on his machine and he said "nope".
I was honestly expecting it to be as snappy as in Apple's demo videos with good 'ol John at the helm.
Next up would be iCal vs. Google Calendar. iCal has To Do, Google Calendar does not. But Google Calender allows me to go into a calendar and choose not only to share it, but to set permissions as to what others can do (edit/delete, etc.). That has been awesome for my wife and me. Same calendars which both of us can edit from different Google accounts. Updates are instant on either account.
iCal/MobileMe cannot do that. At least with my current set up with my wife only having an email account. But with Google, we share the same calendars from different Google accounts ... for free.
So when I logged in for my wife. The only icons accessible to her were Mail, Contacts, and Account Settings. No calendar. I shook off the cobwebs and realized that's because she's email only. So I looked at Amazon and saw $135 for the MobileMe Family Pack, $150 at the Apple Store. Ugh, more money.
MobileMe = $135/year with no ads, a beautiful interface, we get to keep our beloved .mac/.me addresses, 20GB space - OR - Google Apps = FREE with ads (though to me they're unobtrusive), so/so interface with @gmail.com addresses, and less space. Hmmm.
Let's see, gas is $3.91/gal here in Hampton Roads, VA, our energy bills are set to jump over 9% this year, maybe more. FREE looks awfully attractive. But there's that nagging feeling that I'd be losing a friend - those (formerly) prestigious @mac.com addresses. See, I've been a member since iTools, so it is sentimental.
So I decided to see if I could duplicate what we can do in Google Calendar in iCal: share a calendar with ability of assigning another person (wife) to edit and share from another account. Nope.
I was also excited about the whole Push thing. But I don't do iPhone (I'm a Verizon guy), so that doesn't matter ... and I don't do any data plans or email ... so it would be pushing between the cloud and my computers only.
So here's where I'm at: Google's Calendar is FREE, fast, stable, can be shared editing-wise. It is not as glamorous as iCal, doesn't have To Do's. It does have Google Notifier which is pretty darn awesome up in my menu bar, thank you very much.
iCal, local and pushed to the cloud, elegant client locally and MobileMe-ified. $110/yr, currently much slower than Google Calendar, can't be shared/edited in the cloud between multiple users, only viewed via subscription.
As of now, the balance is leaning toward Google Calendar. I will, of course, give Apple a few weeks to sort things out, namely speed. I don't see them altering how iCal is shared at this point. But for Apple to tout this as Exchange for the rest of us, they need to make calendars editable by the likes of secretaries in small businesses, co-workers, and family members.
Wednesday, June 04, 2008
Firefox 3.0 RC2 - AppleScript still broken, Safari 3.1.1 to the rescue
I've got a confession to make. Safari 3.1.1 is a really good browser.
Mozilla is losing me over this AppleScript issue with Firefox 3.0. Sure I use FF3 from time to time, but not for MacSurfer work or general browsing any more, unless I'm on my XP box, that is.
In my previous post back in March, I placed Safari 3.0 at the bottom of my browser list and for good reason, 3.0 was not a good browser, unable to handle the beating I give a browser for MacSurfer work. But 3.1 changed everything. It doesn't choke, and with extensions like Saft, Safari Tabs and others (along with my AppleScripts), I can almost do everything Firefox did.
In fact, I've gotten so used to Safari 3.1.1 that Firefox seems somewhat foreign now - even a bit clunkier on the UI front, IMHO, while Safari is smooth and clean. Purely subjective, YMMV. And speed-wise, they're similar - both are, IMO, faster than Camino now as well as more compatible with plug-ins and general web suff.
Regarding AppleScript and FF3, I'd like to say thanks to Luis at WebnoteHappy for writing a post about Firefox - he references this blog and the entry I made in the Mozilla forums under "rdm44". Yeah, both are mine. He's obviously got connections so that's a great thing. I'm just glad someone with clout is taking the ball and running with it. Thanks, Luis!
I won't recap the script problems, you can find 'em here. Suffice it to say, RC2 fixes nothing, and since it's technically been out since 5/30 (at least that's the date that was on the FTP site and the file date) it is no surprise that Luis' patch hasn't been applied yet. I'm curious to know if his patch fixes ALL of the issues I mentioned...
Obviously Firefox does things that Safari can't do, namely the plug-in architecture, but for my uses Firefox can't do what Safari does and that's support AppleScript.
Folks who don't use AppleScript will find Firefox 3 a great browser. My issue shouldn't dissuade anyone from using it. Especially on Windows, FF3 rocks.Now, FWIW, I do have workarounds for Firefox 3 so I can use AppleScripts to gather titles and URLs; however, they involve GUI scripting and the use of the excellent Copy URL + extension. Not the prettiest workarounds, and because they make several GUI calls they're a little slower than usual.
If Mozilla gets around to fixing AppleScript support, I may use FF more frequently again, but I don't think Dave Hyatt and the Safari team will be idling around. I expect both FF and Safari to make continued strides towards excellence, so with that I'm optimistic.
Oh, if you're interested in helping Luis get the bug(s) fixed, he has a list of ways you can assist.
For those of you who use the MacSurfer submission AppleScript for Firefox, realize that it will not work with FF3. You'll need to either stay with FF2, or switch over to Safari or Camino for submissions. You can write me for submission scripts.
Mozilla is losing me over this AppleScript issue with Firefox 3.0. Sure I use FF3 from time to time, but not for MacSurfer work or general browsing any more, unless I'm on my XP box, that is.
In my previous post back in March, I placed Safari 3.0 at the bottom of my browser list and for good reason, 3.0 was not a good browser, unable to handle the beating I give a browser for MacSurfer work. But 3.1 changed everything. It doesn't choke, and with extensions like Saft, Safari Tabs and others (along with my AppleScripts), I can almost do everything Firefox did.
In fact, I've gotten so used to Safari 3.1.1 that Firefox seems somewhat foreign now - even a bit clunkier on the UI front, IMHO, while Safari is smooth and clean. Purely subjective, YMMV. And speed-wise, they're similar - both are, IMO, faster than Camino now as well as more compatible with plug-ins and general web suff.
Regarding AppleScript and FF3, I'd like to say thanks to Luis at WebnoteHappy for writing a post about Firefox - he references this blog and the entry I made in the Mozilla forums under "rdm44". Yeah, both are mine. He's obviously got connections so that's a great thing. I'm just glad someone with clout is taking the ball and running with it. Thanks, Luis!
I won't recap the script problems, you can find 'em here. Suffice it to say, RC2 fixes nothing, and since it's technically been out since 5/30 (at least that's the date that was on the FTP site and the file date) it is no surprise that Luis' patch hasn't been applied yet. I'm curious to know if his patch fixes ALL of the issues I mentioned...
Obviously Firefox does things that Safari can't do, namely the plug-in architecture, but for my uses Firefox can't do what Safari does and that's support AppleScript.
Folks who don't use AppleScript will find Firefox 3 a great browser. My issue shouldn't dissuade anyone from using it. Especially on Windows, FF3 rocks.Now, FWIW, I do have workarounds for Firefox 3 so I can use AppleScripts to gather titles and URLs; however, they involve GUI scripting and the use of the excellent Copy URL + extension. Not the prettiest workarounds, and because they make several GUI calls they're a little slower than usual.
If Mozilla gets around to fixing AppleScript support, I may use FF more frequently again, but I don't think Dave Hyatt and the Safari team will be idling around. I expect both FF and Safari to make continued strides towards excellence, so with that I'm optimistic.
Oh, if you're interested in helping Luis get the bug(s) fixed, he has a list of ways you can assist.
For those of you who use the MacSurfer submission AppleScript for Firefox, realize that it will not work with FF3. You'll need to either stay with FF2, or switch over to Safari or Camino for submissions. You can write me for submission scripts.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)