It's Time for a .Mac Makeover

[Editor's Note: 2G refers to "second generation," taking nomenclature used for iPod. But it caused confusion here, because of 2.5G and 3G wireless technologies. Apologies.]

I don't easily malign .Mac and associated Apple Web services efforts. The company was once a trendsetter, but it has failed to extend early leadership and since fell behind Google and, gasp, even Microsoft.

There are rumors of an impending .Mac renaming, following rumors of a major makeover. Today, Dmitry Chestnykh blogged in English a report from Deep Apple about indications in this week's Mac OS X 10.5.3 update that .Mac would be renamed (I got to Dmitry's post via post at TUAW; isn't blog linking fun?).

The .Mac makeover has to happen. Otherwise, Apple will have made a serious tactical blunder and missed huge opportunity to take leadership again. The secret sauce is synchronization—and iPhone is the means by which Apple can leap ahead.

Sync is the Future
Sync is the killer application for the Web 2.0 era. Microsoft's Live Mesh will attempt to do sync right between the server cloud, Windows PCs and other devices. Google's Web services sync to the Mac are farther along than Live Mesh or even Apple's efforts.

Strangely, Apple started down the right path by making the operating system the synchronization hub for multiple devices and services. The approach made loads of sense in autumn 2002, when iSync released with Mac OS X 10.2. The operating system is a powerful synchronization hub.

Problem: Apple had started down a competing synchronization path 18 months earlier. The iPod/iTunes model succeeded for many reasons, but synchronization was fundamental. Sync is the killer user interface for iPod/iTunes. Apple applied similar synchronization principles to other products, like iPhoto. But iTunes became Apple's main sync engine, almost to a fault: Why should the music software be the sync hub for iPhone, particularly when activated or used by businesses? But that's the software Apple had developed for both Mac OS and Windows and which popularity spread with iPod.

Apple does sync very well, better than any other technology company. But the music player is the wrong place for long-term success. The sync engine needs to be at least part of the operating system and, five years later, the server cloud and cell phone make even more sense. Apple has the fundamental pieces to assemble and build on, but the company has failed to take action. .Mac, or whatever it might become, is natural synchronization hub, along with iSync (for Mac OS and Windows) and iPhone.

The Web services features are almost immaterial next to the importance of making sync work, and extraordinarily well, across multiple services and devices. Sync takes many forms in the Mac world. There is iTunes and the easy synchronization of digital content across multiple devices, including Apple TV and iPhone. Related: Mail sync on iPhone, in the setting up of accounts and their use with IMAP. There is .Mac sync, such as settings, contacts and calendars from the desktop to the server cloud. Back to the Mac and Time Machine offer variations on sync. Not to be left out: iSync, which simply hasn't changed enough in nearly six years.

Apple offers better sync but in too many places. The company needs to consolidate sync into a single mechanism that can synchronize data across multiple devices and Macs, including iPhone, iPod, .Mac, Macs, set-top boxes, third-party cell phones and other portable devices and Windows PCs.

Put the Dot Back in .Mac
Apple didn't just set trends with sync but with actual Web services. Apple launched .Mac predecessor iTools in January 2000 (years after closing an online community service). But in summer 2002, Apple changed the name to .Mac and started charging $100 for what had been free services. The change put Apple in direct competition with free services, particularly those that later came from Google.

While fee is treated like a dirty word in the free services Web 2.0 world, I see no problem with making people pay. Flickr is a great service, but the for-fee Flickr Pro is better. Even better: SmugMug, which charges anywhere from $39.95 to $149.95 a year. With SmugMug, users get real value for the money, and not just in the absence of ads. SmugMug regularly adds new features.

There is a place for paid services, but .Mac isn't among them. Apple has done very little over the last six years to make .Mac a valuable service, even even had it been free. Last year's minor revamp, coming with iLife `08, brought some improvements. It's drop-dead easy to put up a blog or post personal digital content, like photos or movies. Apple even added support for personal domains. The advances were good, but they're not progress enough, particularly when Google offers so much for free and Microsoft is tying more Live services to Windows.

Then there is the iPhone connection, or should I say busy signal. There needs to be lots more integration and synchronization between the device, Apple Web services and iLife. Yes, there is some sync capability, through iTunes, but .Mac support is pathetic—and that's being really polite. Frankly, 2G iPhone is good reason and right timing for broadly extending .Mac services capabilities.

I keep wondering why posting to iWeb isn't easier from iPhone. Sure, iPhone users can post pics to Web Gallery, but what about easy .Mac blogging or mobile syncing calendars and contacts and other data? Shouldn't there be a Back to My iPhone feature or even Back to Mac from iPhone? Third-party Web services are crazily supporting iPhone. Why not Apple?

Apple Should Lead, Not Fall Behind
If Apple is to compete in the realm of Web services—and in doing extend the Mac's digital lifestyle capabilities—some big changes must be announced on June 9, during CEO Steve Jobs' developer conference keynote. What Apple should do:

• Release a single sync service/mechanism/protocol. As I explained earlier, Apple has too many disparate sync services. There needs to be one capable of syncing data across multiple devices and services.
• Unify sync across platforms. That would be the Web server cloud, computer and mobile device. Data transfer, sync should be absolutely seamless among these hubs.
• Offer over-the-air-sync. It's wonderful that people can buy music from iTunes Music Store on an iPhone. But that's only a start. The iPhone should be capable of syncing with Mac or .Mac via Bluetooth, 3G or Wi-Fi. It's ridiculous that Apple requires iPhone users to tether the device to sync.
• Make no-PC-required the requirement. The revamped .Mac should do away with the computer. There should be iPhone device-to-service content sync without the need for Mac or PC. Same should apply to iTunes. Apple knows what music people purchased. There should be a licensing provision that allows streaming of content from an iTunes storage cloud to iPhone or iPod Touch. Anybody should be able to create content on an iPhone and post to their .Mac services without buying a computer. There, 100 bucks a year would be cheaper than buying a computer just to manage iPhone content.
• Make the main synchronization engine/service available for Windows as well as Mac. There is no iSync for Windows, but there should be. Closest thing is iTunes sync. Apple already invaded Windows with services like Apple Software Update and Bonjour. The latter would be good foundation for a synchronization service.

Web services and data sync are the future of digital content creation and consumption. But Apple is stuck in the past. The 2G iPhone is opportunity for Apple to seize the future. There are much better phones than iPhone. But there are few better, if any, smartphones. The 2G iPhone should be Apple's third digital hub, and it should easily communicate easily with the other two, the Mac and .Mac.

Will Apple be a leader, follower or trailer behind?

Posted by Joe Wilcox on May 30, 2008 2:59 PM