Q: How to locally sync an iPhone with OS X Mavericks? iCloud is NOT an option.

snozdop wrote:

 

we figured that we might as well use Windows, it still supports local USB sync via iTunes

 

For now... Any idea when Apple will remove that feature from Windows? Then what will you do? Name any other mobile phone operating system that allows local USB syncing natively.

 

Face it - local syncing is on the way out. It's unreliable. Conflict resolution is painful and frequently causes data loss. That is why ALL of the major players are moving to cloud-based solutions, and most are using EXACTLY the same industry-standard, cross-platform protocols Apple is using.

 

Sell all your Macs and switch to Windows if you want, but I can guarantee you'll be in the same situation there sooner or later, and then you'll be stuck with no alternative but using an inferior desktop OS.

It won't matter to us what Apple does once we switch. Windows support is long term - heck, we can still open legacy technical and accounting applications going back decades on current Win OSes. Can't even run AppleScript in new Pages anymore. Apple support is fickle.

Your guarantee for our business is pretty humorous, since you're not really in tune with what we do and what our needs are. Inferior or not desktop OS is a completely separate, boring debate with which I'm simply uninterested. We're in the business of supporting our customers, so we're only interested in vendors who support that effort. Apple's OS X no longer does that - the end of the line for us is the force-feeding of iCloud.

Your post is a bit odd to me, since this change for us is really not a big deal. Not a big deal at all. It will not cost us anything - once we sell our MacBook Airs and MacBook Pros & replace with Win laptops, we will have extra funds available. But why would it matter to you at all?

The only reason I posted our plan here is because it's one of only a very limited number of solutions to the local USB sync issue, which is the topic of this discussion.

But if possible, since you're in a guaranteeing prediction frame of mind, please post the NFL playoff winners so we can all get to Vegas and place a bet at the sports book :-)

Have a great holiday.

Matt Schultz wrote:

 

Your guarantee for our business is pretty humorous, since you're not really in tune with what we do and what our needs are.

As 'we' are just other Apple users 'we' do not guarantee anything.

What's humerous about that?

What is an NFL?

Pete

petermac87 wrote:

 

What is an NFL?

 

Nothing important.

It won't matter to us what Apple does once we switch.

Really? So you're absolutely sure there won't be any iTunes or iOS update released in the future which you need (or want) that also removes the local USB sync function? You'll be happy to forego any security, bugfix or new features forever more to keep your USB sync?

Your guarantee for our business is pretty humorous, since you're not really in tune with what we do and what our needs are.

Apparently you've forgotten the topic of this thread and why you're here. You've already told us that 'your need' is to be able to sync locally via USB.

the end of the line for us is the force-feeding of iCloud.

For the billionth time, nobody is forcing you to use iCloud. Numerous other options are still available (Google Sync, Yahoo, Fruux, Exchange, Memotoo to name just 5).

It will not cost us anything - once we sell our MacBook Airs and MacBook Pros

So you don't use ANY paid software on your Macs that you'll have to re-buy or find alternatives for on Windows?

hi all,

can one still expect replies to real questions here?

so I understand there are two works around this problem.

One is Baïcal and the other one is OX server, right?

could someone summarise the good and bad sides of each and if they are mutually exclusive?

Best, and Merry Christmas to all.

Ryks wrote:

 

hi all,

can one still expect replies to real questions here?

so I understand there are two works around this problem.

 

One is Baïcal and the other one is OX server, right?

 

could someone summarise the good and bad sides of each and if they are mutually exclusive?

 

Best, and Merry Christmas to all.

There are likely very few people who have tried both to provide any useful pros and cons.

The basics are:

Baïkal is somewhat difficult to set up and the data is stored in a single databse which would make restoring individual items from a backup difficult.

Server is a bit overkill for just needing a Calendar and Contacts server, and it costs $20.

I tried both...settled on Baikal on an already running Linux server.  I tested both OS X server and Baikal on Mavericks.  If you've got lots of resources upgrading(?) to OS X Server is easier, but does use more resources (even when disabling everything else you'll still see a bunch of perl processes and whatnot).  If you want to run lean, go Mavericks as apache is already installed anyways and I think even already running.  Baikal IS a doable solution...I sent the dev $10 for support..it was worth it.

Ryks wrote:

 

hi all,

can one still expect replies to real questions here?

so I understand there are two works around this problem.

 

One is Baïcal and the other one is OX server, right?

 

could someone summarise the good and bad sides of each and if they are mutually exclusive?

 

Best, and Merry Christmas to all.

There are four paths to synching of Calendar and Contacts in OS X 10.9:

     1. Baikal

     2. OS X Server

     3. iCloud

     4. Windows as an alternative solution

The way we see it, Baikal and OS X Server are complex solutions requiring constant monitoring and support. If you upgrade any part of your system chain, relationships between devices could be broken and would then demand more of your time. For our company, a server set in some office does us absolutely no good - our team needs to sync in the field, often at the time of the event. We are all working remotely.

iCloud is not for us, due to 3 factors: (1) Apple has a dismal historical track record on cloud based services, MobileMe, dot-Mac, et al, and is not a dependable cloud vendor in our opinion; (2) Our tech team is rarely working in an area that has internet connectivity or even cell service; therefore, a physical, local connection solution is absolutely required; and, (3) We have contractual obligations with our customers that prohibit uploading their confidential data to an internet-accessible database (such as iCloud).

Apple currently supports local USB sync in Windows via iTunes. Even if they abandon this support in the future, the last version of iTunes to support local USB sync will continue to be supported by the Windows operating system for years to come.

While many of us would prefer continuing to operate OS X, it is not that big of a deal to move our laptops over to Windows to maintain long term USB support. It's servicing our accounts that is important to us. We're not religious about computers like others on this forum may be. To us, they are just a tool to do a job. Each system has it's positive and negative attributes.

For our company, lack of local sync is a major detriment to our team being able to do their jobs. It is why we selected OS X in the first place. The removal of this key feature is the end of the line for us as an OS X based company. We will continue to deploy iPhones & iPads.

Apple has provided a very clear path by supporting Windows while deprecating OS X. YMMV. Good luck.

Just move to windows already and stop repeating yourself over and over. If you are not capable of setting up a local network, then Windows sounds ideal for you.

Cheers

Pete

A local network does us no good. I was replying to another post, not yours, FYI.

You will find cheap Windoze computers at the Boxing Day Sales.

Good Luck and Bye

Pete

Matt Schultz wrote:

 

(3) We have contractual obligations with our customers that prohibit uploading their confidential data to an internet-accessible database (such as iCloud).

We have the same issue !

We have tested

• Baikal
• OS X Server
• own cloud service

All of these solutions were rejected by our end users (management).

The IT team has been tasked to propose an easy to use solution (comparable to the one offered by OS X 10.8) regardless which manufacture is providing it. Local USB sync is a mandatory requirement for us.

BTW: Feedback to Apple (via the official channel) has been provided some time ago.

Matt Schultz wrote:

<snip>The way we see it, Baikal and OS X Server are complex solutions requiring constant monitoring and support. If you upgrade any part of your system chain, relationships between devices could be broken and would then demand more of your time. For our company, a server set in some office does us absolutely no good - our team needs to sync in the field, often at the time of the event. We are all working remotely.<snip>

This may represent a difference between a corporate user and a SOHO user. IME Baïkal does not require constant monitoring and support, and operates invisibly. It enables syncing between the user's computer and mobile device, this can either be on a trusted LAN, or direct between computer and device. It does not depend on a server running on a box in an office somewhere, but one installed and running on the user's perfectly standard laptop without any internet access needed. Syncing in the field at the time of the event is perfectly possible using the 'Create Netowrk…' item from the laptop's WiFi menu.

But again in the coproate environment, needing to keep a number of non-techie users up and running 24/7, there could be issues that affect you that don't affect me in the same way as a SOHO user.

James Richards wrote:

 

This may represent a difference between a corporate user and a SOHO user. IME Baïkal does not require constant monitoring and support, and operates invisibly. It enables syncing between the user's computer and mobile device, this can either be on a trusted LAN, or direct between computer and device. It does not depend on a server running on a box in an office somewhere, but one installed and running on the user's perfectly standard laptop without any internet access needed. Syncing in the field at the time of the event is perfectly possible using the 'Create Netowrk…' item from the laptop's WiFi menu.

 

But again in the coproate environment, needing to keep a number of non-techie users up and running 24/7, there could be issues that affect you that don't affect me in the same way as a SOHO user.

Baïkal uses the built in Apache, PHP plus a user installed MySQL server.

Have you never seen an Apple Software update break customized PHP or Apache install?

I have been running web development environment using the built Apple Apache for years & updates have changed the installed PHP libraries & altered configs… Reading the release notes to try to guess what has changed is the only option for anyone on a deadline who want's to install security updates (& good backups obviously).

It doesn't really make it an 'invisible' system, it's simply an accident waiting to happen for a 'regular' (e.g. a non-geek) user.

How many Baïkal updates have you installed? Currently the upgrade process look simple (to a web developer), but it's not something I'd want support with multiple end users 'in the field'.

Baikal/UPGRADE.md