Review: BusyCal 2.0 remains superior to Apple's Calendar
Posted 12 November 2012 - 03:34 AM
Posted 12 November 2012 - 05:16 AM
Agreed. Sadly, that's a limitation of supporting Apple Notifications, which doesn't support variable snooze times.
Posted 12 November 2012 - 05:18 AM
Posted 12 November 2012 - 05:45 AM
It's a nice enough programm, but at the end of the day, it's still a calendar app that hardly does anything that free, included in the OS iCal doesn't.
For what it is, BusyCal was always expensive. But this kind of money for an upgrade, just so the Gif of the sun is displayed a little bigger... thanks, but no, thanks.
Posted 12 November 2012 - 06:08 AM
I think they have fixed a few of the problems that plagued Busycal 1.6 and made a pigs ear of both my Zimbra and my Google calendars, but I fail to see what else is superior. OK, the weather icons are cute! I was constantly frustrated by the fact that it just did not work with those systems, particularly with things like invitations. Sure, you can create your own internal calendar so the family can send each other invites, but who does that? How many real companies rely on an application such as this for their day-to-day use?
I am in agreement with Flexmeister. After bashing my head against the wall trying to get Busycal 1.6 to play nice with all my other systems, and stop creating triplicates of every calendar I had, I am loathed to spend $30 on another upgrade when it appears their solution to fixing Busycal's problems was simply to remove a number of features.
Maybe I am missing something, but I just found Busycal, on our campus system, but be a bag of frustration.
I am reminded of the Emperor's New Clothes every time I read a BusyCal review!
Posted 12 November 2012 - 06:22 AM
- Move to Mac App Store only distribution
- No upgrade pricing for long-time users (see above) - Mountain Lion only
- No improvement in time zone support
- Control over printing less capable
- No variable snooze
- Rather than go on, I'll let BusyMac outline the loss of features versus 1.6 for you - https://support.busy...m/tickets/10983 (at least they realized it was such a downgrade that they felt morally compelled to list them all)
- I can have a turkey leg mark Thanksgiving and a Santa hat mark Christmas
This post has been edited by samadore: 12 November 2012 - 06:25 AM
Posted 12 November 2012 - 06:30 AM
Unless they do what other app developers do (especially with iOS apps), and when a new, sufficiently-upgraded version is ready simply remove the current app as end-of-life and then reveal the new version available for separate purchase.
Posted 12 November 2012 - 06:34 AM
This might actually be a Pro if we assume they abide by the Apple Store upgrade agreements, and make future upgrades free.
The handcuffs the MAS puts on developers outweighs any price benefit which might accrue for me.
Posted 12 November 2012 - 06:49 AM
Agree 100%. This was the only real reason to buy BusyCal. Without the Snooze it's just as useless as 10.8's Calendar app.
Posted 12 November 2012 - 06:55 AM
Can't publish an existing local calendar to google calendar (and one's you have published just vanish from google), can't republish cloud calendars to LAN, local calendars don't connect to iCal. I understand sync services deprecation leads to some changes with LAN and iCal but did Google change something? Why can't we publish to Google calendar anymore?
All in all, I don't see what is compelling about this upgrade to 1.6 users, especially those of us that already bought Fantastical.
Posted 12 November 2012 - 07:37 AM
No, it's because BusyMac removed a feature that still works quite well in version 1.6.