Forums | MacLife

last year i bought a subscription to both MW and MA.  and i must say MW  is a waste of the money so i'm not getting another, i'll replace it with machome to see if it's better for a year, but i'm definately gonna keep my MA subscription.

Agreed.  Granted, this is only stuff that I've gleaned from the web, but I find no reason to read Macworld when I already subscribe to MacAddict.  I'm not impressed that they did nearly the exact same thing that MacAddict did in their August issue, though I thought MacAddict's comparo went into a lot more detail.  I'm also not impressed with the mini reviews of Apple hardware, like this one that didn't even mention (like MacAddict did) that the 1 GHz eMac is faster than the 1 GHz iMac, despite the inclusion of DDR in the iMac.  And once you get past the eMac's specs, there's really nothing to that review!  In comparison, MacAddict did a whole page on it, which makes me wonder... did Macworld even turn the thing on?  Did they actually have one to test, or did they just drive down to the local Apple retail store and jot down a few notes from the machine's spec sheet before security was called?  They did a more thorough review of the original eMac back in their September 2002 issue, but, frankly, I'm too damn lazy to go rooting around for a back issue or refer to their website just because a reviewer was too lazy to write a full review!

I used to love MacUser, and I was disappointed when I read that Macworld and MacUser were merging.  I was even more disappointed with the results of said merge: there was a segregated MacUser section in the middle of the magazine that didn't feel like it belonged.  Eventually, they did away with that and started having the remaining MacUser editors included in other parts of the magazine.  I thought that might help give Macworld the cooler flare that MacUser possessed, but it never happened.  Let's just say I didn't shed a tear when my subscription lapsed.  MacAddict has filled the niche left by the assimilation of MacUser by Macworld of Borg.

I have honestly never picked up a copy of Macworld in at least two or three years, and, as I said above, since I subscribe to MacAddict, I see no reason to do so.  A few months ago, I bought Macworld's Mac OS X Super Guide while I was picking up groceries, and I regret the thirteen bucks I spent on it.  There was nothing in there I didn't already know, and there was nothing on the included CDs that couldn't be found on the internet.  I usually save magazines, but I have no idea where this thing went... nor do I really care.

About the only things you mentioned from that article that I didn't already know how to do were building a Mac clone (though since you said that it's basically upgrading an old Mac clone, it's really more trouble than it's worth) and getting better video editing feedback (but since I don't edit video on my Mac, I couldn't care less).  Other than that, I've actually done most of that stuff.  I've swapped out the DVD-ROM drive in my G4 for a faster one, I've set up my printer so my roommate can print to it, and, since I've read my digicam's manual, I know how to set the white balance.  I don't own a flat panel iMac, and if I did, I certainly wouldn't want to crack it open, and I don't see a need for a wireless network, especially after my roommate put a hole in the wall for Cat 5 cable.  (I hope a little Spackle will fix that right up... otherwise, it's bye-bye security deposit!)

Well, just my 2

I too was noticing that most of the stuff in MW was redunant as far as info I was getting online.

I didn't renew my subscription and I don't miss it.

MA for life!

Alright! A debate!

I deleted the points we seem to agree on.

First of all, I want to preface this by saying that I prefer MacAddict to MacWorld. However, you're criticism is a bit over the top. First of all, you can't judge a magazine by one article, especially when you distort the content of that article when describing it. Second, and more importantly, Andy Ihnatko is one of my all time favorite Mac writers and he is popular with a lot of other people as well judging by his longevity in the business.

This was hardly the first issue of MacWorld that I had ever picked up. I simply used this article as an example. I've pretty much had the same complaint about MacWorld for some time now, their writing tends to be dry, and their solutions to most issues involve throwing money at the problem.

As for Andy, I've complained about him here before. He may be a great guy to hang out with, and I have nothing against the man, but his writing style leaves me wondering when the hell he is going to get to the point already. (I'll admit, the August column seemed more coherent than usual.) You like him, that's great. I don't and I don't care how many fans he has... I hate the way he writes.

Put USB Printers on a Network - After mentioning that you could use Printer Sharing on a Mac you keep on all the time (but never telling you how), their suggestion? Buy a print server.  Gee. Thanks.

They don't just tell you to buy a print server. They give you a link to a low cost one and let readers know that a generic model will work with any printer, something most people probably didn't know. Then they tell you how to set it up. Again, something most wouldn't know.

That's great, but there's that "throw money at it" mentality again. I have one Mac that I leave on 24/7 and would rather they talked about how to set that up as a print server. The free solution barely got mentioned. What happens if you don't buy the model they recommend?

Extend Your Airport's Range - Buy an external antenna. (Again - Gee, thanks)

Wrong again. Actually, they tell owners of older Airport base stations that DON'T come with an external antenna jack how to install an external antenna.

Again, they neglected possible free solutions like optimizing the placement of the base station, removing or working around possible sources of interference. (Cordless phones, baby monitors, big honkin' metal shelves, etc.) Their only answer was to throw money at it and buy an external antenna. Sure they show you how to install it, and that's fine, but most people could probably use a primer on the best way to set up a base station in the first place.

Get Better Video Editing Feedback - Add a TV monitor to your DV setup. More disclaimers about TV color fidelity than anything, they only offer one possible solution and if you have a camcorder like mine, it won't work. Thanks a lot. (And how does this "rev up" anything?)

It is a simple tip but it isn't something that would be in your video camera manual. Therefore, it could be a very helpful tip to a lot of people. And, since most people using iMovie or Final Cut Pro have a video camera with Firewire this would work for them.

Yes, I too use a DV camcorder with FireWire but my camcorder does not have a an S-Video jack. I believe it does have a component video jack, but I doubt their solution would work since the only time I see video being sent to my camera is when I "Export to Camera" from iMovie.

Again, how does setting up a TV monitor "Rev up" your Mac? This tip was totally out of place in this article. I guess I can give them a nod in the fact that this was a solution that didn't require an additional purchase, but it shouldn't have been in this article.

Configure a Wireless Bridge - 2 pages on how to set up a Linksys WET11 bridge. Gee, don't you think they cover that in the manual?

I haven't seen the maual for this item but most manuals for these type of comodity devices aren't very good. Also, most of them don't have Mac specific instructions and most of this advice would translate to working with other brands as well.

They used a Linksys bridge and from my experience, Linksys' manuals are excellent. (They claim the manual doesn't mention Macs.) Also, they completely neglected to mention that AirPort base stations can be set up as a wireless bridge. (like mine is) If you already have a router and an AirPort, you don't need the WET-11... but you may not know that by reading this article.

Upgrade the 15-inch Flat-Panel iMac 3 1/2 pages on how to void your warranty by swapping out the hard drive and replace the RAM in the upper RAM slot. Pretty informative, but how many people are going to risk it?

This was the best part of the article (if you own an iMac). The instructions were detailed and very impressive. Also, a lot of the people that purchased an lcd iMac have already run through their warranty, unless they purchased the extended AppleCare. Even if you only use the instructions for upgrading the RAM it would make the article worth it since they all have an internal module that needs upgrading unless you upgraded from Apple when you originally purchased it. And, the RAM that goes in that slot is a very inexpensive variety.

Agreed. I gave it a nod that it was informative, but that was like the part they seemed to focus on the most. I feel they took up a lot of space for something that really isn't that much of a "mass-appeal" project. No doubt, the space that upgrade took dictated how much space was left for the rest of the tips.

I see Andy Ihnatko still likes to hear himself talk.

Again, your opinion but I certainly don't agree with this. Andy has ALWAYS been one of my favorites.

As much as I hate this expression... I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on this one.

MacAddict just plain rocks. .....edit..... Seriously... keep up the good work.

Again, I agree with you here but I had to comment on the lame rip you did of that MacWorld article. Neither magazine is perfect. I would lean toward MacAddict if I had to pick one of the two but I much prefer to have more Mac magazines to choose from.

I think the reason I felt that I had to respond is that I've seen a few lame issues of MacAddict over the years so I found it a little ridiculous of you to rip apart an entire magazine based on one issue, especially since you didn't give an accurate portrayal of said issue.

Later, Frank

I don't think my rip was lame, although I probably could have explained myself better. I still stand by my opinions. You say I "distorted" the article, I say I summarized it. Ok, I probably way oversimplified it but I really didn't feel like rewriting half the article. (Hell, it already took me about an hour to write that in the first place)

I also noted in my original post that I hadn't finished reading it yet and I still haven't. Maybe I'll find something other than the QuickTime article I mentioned that interests me, but the cover story was lame as hell.

No, MacAddict isn't perfect. They've had some lame issues/articles/whatever too. But overall I find MacAddict to be more helpful, more informative and more interesting to read.

Thanks for actually debating, rather than ripping me to shreds.

Aaaah, thanks.  I needed that.