On 2012-10-24 17:19:57 +0000, Sebastian Tombs said:
> I am using Snow Leopard so far, and I have a copy of BusyCal 1.6 on
> board the Mac. I got an email from BusyCal telling me that I can buy a
> copy of the 2.0, but it looks like I am not going to touch that with a
> 10 foot pole. First off, I don't think it works on a previous MacOS;
> secondly they do state that it will not allow you to synch from the
> BusyCal to an iPhone - or, it seems, any other smart phone.
AFAIK, Busycal never synced directly to the iPhone or iOS device. It synced to
Apple's iCal calender file on your computer and you may or may not have
been syncing *that* via iTunes (or otherwise) to your iOS device.
> They are saying that Apple has abandoned the capability to synch
> directly to the device in Mountain Lion, and you MUST use iCloud to
> synch to a hand held device.
iOS devices may still sync to your computer's Calendar via iTunes.
It just appears that Busycal may no longer sync to the local calendar
on your mac (which used to be accessed via iCal).
Busycal seems to be recommending using iCloud or Google Calendar.
> Which distresses me, as I have already
> walked away from iCloud within the past 2 months, because it doesn't
> move ALL the data I think it should...
What's it missing? Calendar syncing is through a standardized protocol.
I wasn't thrilled with discontinuation of MobileMe, since I had a
machine which couldn't be upgraded past 10.6, but I've not had any
problems so far with iCloud.
OTOH, I'm not sure I see a point in paying for the BusyCal 2.0 upgrade.
I am using the latest 1.x release and am quite happy with it.
The TidBits guys wrote a nice review of BusyCal 2.0 (and reading it now
makes me think maybe it'll be worth upgrading). And they have a free
e-book about calendars and calendar syncing. Link is in the Tidbits
> So what? Am I reading too much into this? Does anyone else know what
> BusyCal is talking about? Is this functionality going to disappear, or
> is it just something that Apple is doing to their "competitors" to make
> life more fun for them?
I think you're reading too much "doing to" into this. They aren't
doing this to anyone. They are simply doing it. Busycal got rid of
some inherently unstable things (calendar republishing) and Apple got
rid of Sync Services (which means, of course, that Busycal loses the
things that came with that). If these changes are part of making the
system more stable, or expanding the use of standardized protocols
(CalDAV instead of Apple's sync services), I see no conspiracy here but
just simplification and stability improvements, even if there are
sometimes some downsides to getting rid of outdated techniques or