PDA

View Full Version : Apple and Music Publishers Close to Agreement on Cloud Licensing, But Delays Still Possible




MacRumors
May 24, 2011, 08:02 AM
http://images.macrumors.com/im/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/05/24/apple-and-music-publishers-close-to-agreement-on-cloud-licensing-but-delays-still-possible/)


http://images.macrumors.com/article-new/2011/05/itunes_10_icon_150.jpg

Late last week, we reported (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/05/20/apple-still-needs-music-publishers-agreement-before-launching-cloud-based-streaming-service/) that despite having three of the four major labels on board with its plan for a cloud-based streaming service and the final label apparently close to signing a deal, Apple still needs to reach agreements with the music publishers before it can launch its service. At the time, we noted that the two sides were essentially on the same page, with only monetary compensation to be negotiated.

CNET now provides an update (http://news.cnet.com/8301-31001_3-20065489-261.html) claiming that the two sides are actually quite close on the monetary issue, leaving only a small amount of negotiation. The report does caution, however, that unexpected delays can still pop up and that even seemingly simple negotiations can take significant amounts of time in the complex landscape of music sales.Negotiations between Apple and music publishers have begun in earnest only recently but the amount of money that separates the two sides from reaching a deal is relatively small, according to two sources with knowledge of the talks. That said, these are cloud-licensing contracts, which are new and complex and there's still several ways Apple's service could be delayed, insiders say.The report lays out how Apple and music publishers are having to forge into entirely new territory with their negotiations over cloud-based streaming services. Publishers are currently paid at a fixed rate of 9.1 cents per track sold either digitally or on physical media, a rate set by the U.S. Congress. Separate cloud streaming rights are not part of that package and thus Apple and the publishers have had to hash out new standards for the industry.

Reports indicate that labels and publishers are keen to have Apple launch its service quickly, looking to the service as another revenue-generating opportunity to help reverse declines in the industry and as a means to get Google and Amazon (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/05/11/music-labels-hoping-apple-can-force-amazon-and-google-into-cloud-licensing/) to reach similar agreements after those companies launched basic cloud services without the agreement of labels and publishers. That said, there is reportedly some tension between labels and publishers, with publishers apparently upset that labels have already claimed the vast majority of money Apple is prepared to pay for cloud streaming rights, leaving little for the publishers. The disagreements may primarily be posturing by the different parties, however, and thus it is likely that they can be overcome.

CNET does still expect Apple's cloud-based streaming service to debut at the company's Worldwide Developers Conference in San Francisco, an event that begins in just two weeks.

Article Link: Apple and Music Publishers Close to Agreement on Cloud Licensing, But Delays Still Possible (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/05/24/apple-and-music-publishers-close-to-agreement-on-cloud-licensing-but-delays-still-possible/)



iceterminal
May 24, 2011, 08:07 AM
I have no need whatsoever to put any of my music up on a server that is own, operated, controlled, and prowled by a corporation who's only objective is to find new and exciting ways to separate my money from my pocket. My home computer will do fine thank you very much.

Popeye206
May 24, 2011, 08:08 AM
Can't wait for the WDC and see what's new!

hfletcher
May 24, 2011, 08:09 AM
It's good that Apple are negotiating and trying to get a deal which works for the music labels too. Googles/Amazons cloud service will just end up annoying the music labels as it didn't have their consent (even if they didn't need it)

Hopefully with the full support of the music industry, Apple will be able to launch a superior product..

talkingfuture
May 24, 2011, 08:10 AM
Looking forward to seeing what they have come up with for this and Mobile Me as a whole. Hopefully we won't have to wait long and it will be ready for WWDC.

omegaphil6
May 24, 2011, 08:13 AM
what are the chances that with this paid service it will also cover the data being used to stream to and from the cloud?

If a CD length of music is 700MB, then more than 80 minutes of listening will fry your data plan resulting in overages caused by a service we have to pay for...

cxny
May 24, 2011, 08:13 AM
I just want to park 30,000 songs somewhere so I can retire a bunch of iTunes music libraries, mostly CD rips, could that be a scenario with this service?

bbeagle
May 24, 2011, 08:14 AM
I have no need whatsoever to put any of my music up on a server that is own, operated, controlled, and prowled by a corporation who's only objective is to find new and exciting ways to separate my money from my pocket. My home computer will do fine thank you very much.

Which is why the benefits of using the cloud service must outweigh the benefits of having a home server or syncing.

One possibility I see right away is that if I buy a song, it's immediately available without downloading for everyone on my account (my wife, kids). Of course, when I download George Strait, my kids won't want to listen to it, and when my kids download Lady Gaga, I won't want to listen to it, but that's not the point! :)

Tundraboy
May 24, 2011, 08:17 AM
Yawn!!!!! Who cares!!!!!

Knowing Apple it will cost a lot of money for something you can get else where for free, but as soon as Steve says its MAGICAL fanboys will run out and buy it. Apple uses MAGICAL clouds and it will completely change the way you look at life and the sky!!!!

Full of Win
May 24, 2011, 08:19 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)

Hopefully this will be for songs other than iTunes purchased content. If not, this will be DOA for most.

Boston007
May 24, 2011, 08:20 AM
Please, keep discussing...

I've already moved on to Amazon Music for my purchased music needs...

firestarter
May 24, 2011, 08:22 AM
It's going to be US only for a year or so anyway... for sure. :(

samcraig
May 24, 2011, 08:23 AM
Two weeks, I think, is pretty "optimistic" to debut at WWDC.

And still, anything could happen and shut down negotiations. It will be interesting to see what develops. Competition is good. An iTunes media monopoly is not.

autrefois
May 24, 2011, 08:24 AM
I have no need whatsoever to put any of my music up on a server that is own, operated, controlled, and prowled by a corporation who's only objective is to find new and exciting ways to separate my money from my pocket. My home computer will do fine thank you very much.

Thank goodness this service will be completely optional then and we won't be required by law to sign up for it! (Unless there's some hidden provision of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act I haven't heard about ;)).

It will have to be a pretty interesting deal for me to jump on board. I just hope that this much-rumored cloud initiative by Apple will not be "just" for music, and will incorporate, expand, and improve on MobileMe features. (And I hope the main update on that end won't just be @icloud.com email addresses. :p)

aibo82
May 24, 2011, 08:31 AM
Well will this support the 100's of mp3s that have been downloaded of pirate bay and the like?

I don't see how this is going to work because deny it all you like people download dodgy mp3s!

I'm sticking to my computer and a NAS drive :p

I'm my own cloud from the crowd!

bbeagle
May 24, 2011, 08:32 AM
Knowing Apple it will cost a lot of money for something you can get else where for free, but as soon as Steve says its MAGICAL fanboys will run out and buy it. Apple uses MAGICAL clouds and it will completely change the way you look at life and the sky!!!!

Only if something really is BETTER will Apple fans go out and use it.

Are Apple fanboys using Ping in great numbers? No. Because it doesn't offer more than facebook/twitter/etc. yet. Are they using .ME in great numbers? No. Because it isn't better than Google mail, etc.

Just because you don't see what makes an iPad magical and 1000x better than an Android tablet, doesn't make you right and everyone else in the world wrong.

ratzzo
May 24, 2011, 08:35 AM
Cloud storage is the future indeed, as internet speeds go past hardware limits.. however most good connections are limited to a few countries, and even so uploading dozens of GBs to the cloud seems like an unrealistic scenario even for today. Downloading music, on the other hand, seems easier.

bbeagle
May 24, 2011, 08:36 AM
I don't see how this is going to work because deny it all you like people download dodgy mp3s!


Riddle me this, Einstein.

Apple makes money SELLING music. Exactly why would Apple make something to help people who pirate music?

OllyW
May 24, 2011, 08:39 AM
I have no need whatsoever to put any of my music up on a server that is own, operated, controlled, and prowled by a corporation who's only objective is to find new and exciting ways to separate my money from my pocket. My home computer will do fine thank you very much.

I don't think it will be compulsory. :)

guitarman777
May 24, 2011, 08:41 AM
Not only do I have precisely zero need for a cloud-based service for my music, I don't know a single person who does. And I'm a touring musician. Just seems like a pointless service to me. I've got a laptop with my entire music library on it and bring it with me virtually everywhere I go. If I don't have my laptop, I have my iPhone. Plenty of room for the music I'm particularly digging from my library. If my wife and I want to share some new music from each other's libraries, we share it when we're at home together. I just don't get it. But then again, there are lots of tech tools & toys out there that I just don't get either.

HobeSoundDarryl
May 24, 2011, 08:43 AM
I just want to park 30,000 songs somewhere so I can retire a bunch of iTunes music libraries, mostly CD rips, could that be a scenario with this service?

The working perception of Apple's version is the concept that the ONE master copy they offer for sale in the iTunes store can be made available to many owners of that song via this cloud. So, for example, right now you buy a song, download it and use it almost as you wish. This new model would probably work like that too, but it would also note your ownership of the song so that you have access to it even when you are not at home (or it is not one you chose to sync to your iDevice before you left home).

Your desire would require some kind of arrangement where either:

you have to upload & store all of your non-iTunes-purchased songs (all those CD rips, etc) OR
Apple works some kind of "magical" deal where if it's in your music library now (iTunes purchases or not) it is recognized and you gain access to the master version on the iTunes server when needed.


For business reasons, Apple (and the music industry) would almost certainly go with the former. For Apple, it becomes another motivator to exclusively buy your music via iTunes. For the music industry, it encourages sales (even the "buy it again" mentality) rather than allowing any pirated music to have enhanced convenience.

My best guess is that except for iTunes-purchased music, anything else in your iTunes library that you want to stream from the cloud will have to be uploaded, which would make that part of the service work similarly to what Amazon & Google are already doing.

I suppose a third (longshot) option might be something like the iTunes Plus conversion in which all of the non-iTunes-purchased music could be scanned and for a smaller transaction (something shy of full price), those tracks could become the equivalent of iTunes-purchased tracks for these streaming purposes. This might even become some sort of amnesty concept through which any illegally obtained media could become legally licensed by paying the fee.

I could see that working for both Apple & the music companies as Apple could basically pass through any money made in the amnesty upgrades and the music companies could potentially be paid something... instead of potentially nothing. However, for big collections like yours, if I assume that maybe 90% of your songs are from non-iTunes-store purchases (CD rips), that would add up to 27K songs for this kind of option. Even if the price was something like 39 cents per song, the fee to do all 27K would exceed $10K. And, IMO, I could easily see such an option priced higher than 39 cents per... at least as easy as one could imagine something a bit lower. I suppose such an option would turn into picking & choosing which you want to access via the master copy and which you might want to upload with the sole financial driver being how much Apple wants to store your own rips vs. how much they want you to pay for access to the master copy.

I doubt this whole thing can be a winner if it ends up isolating the benefits solely to iTunes-purchased media... except for those who have always & only purchased their media via iTunes.

Morod
May 24, 2011, 08:43 AM
No music cloud needed here....

Tiger8
May 24, 2011, 08:44 AM
I wonder if there is more than meets the eye for this one. I mean, surely Apple can't be doing all those negotiations simply to allow people to stream their iTunes from everywhere? Maybe they are going to finally introduce a subscription service ala Napster? Something in between?

aibo82
May 24, 2011, 08:44 AM
Riddle me this, Einstein.

Apple makes money SELLING music. Exactly why would Apple make something to help people who pirate music?

That's why people will boycott it if it's free or cheap elsewhere why use the cloud to stream it at the cost of a very expensive 3G bill or unlimited home broadband plan!

goosnarrggh
May 24, 2011, 08:45 AM
Riddle me this, Einstein.

Apple makes money SELLING music. Exactly why would Apple make something to help people who pirate music?

It seems fairly obvious, to me at least, that aiboi82 is not asking Apple to go out of its way to create a corporate cloud music service that supports people who pirate music.

Instead, I think (s)he was simply pointing out their opinion that corporate-backed cloud music services are a non-starter, in which s(he) will never have any interest whatsoever, specifically because, by the very nature of the legal interests of the people in charge of such services, they will always present roadblocks to doing the things the way s(he) is interested in doing them.

drockett8
May 24, 2011, 08:46 AM
I have heard nothing but music talk every time I read rumors about the cloud service. A much more useful service would be housing the 100s of GBs in TV shows I have downloaded that won't even fit on my MacBook Pro. Being able to access those files through AppleTV/iPhone/iPad with out hooking up an external Hard drive is how I have envisioned it to work. Not to mention alleviate the massive storage constraints of owning a few seasons of your favorite shows.

In my opinion video is the real need for cloud storage. Most TV shows you watch once, then again maybe a year later to get ready for the new season. I may listen to the same music file 100 times in a year so I don't mind hosting that file on my hard drive, but holding 300 GBs of video files makes a 500GB HD disappear real fast.

aibo82
May 24, 2011, 08:49 AM
Apples plan!

Scrap MacBooks for iPads

Scrap internal storage for iPads/iPods/iPhones only storage for firmware/iOS

All you music and apps on the cloud!

That's a win for apple because your device is a brick unless you spend money on the cloud in turn this kills piracy as it's all controlled on apple servers!

Welcome to the future of the Internet!

gnasher729
May 24, 2011, 08:49 AM
I just want to park 30,000 songs somewhere so I can retire a bunch of iTunes music libraries, mostly CD rips, could that be a scenario with this service?

I'd read the small print what happens if they lose your data. Most likely you get your money back, which isn't very helpful if the service is free.

A cheap 1 TB terabyte drive, plus another drive for backup, will be cheaper and more reliable.

samcraig
May 24, 2011, 08:49 AM
None needed here either. Hard drives are incredibly cheap - so no desire or need to put it up in a cloud for a monthly/yearly cost.

Clouds also go down. Or internet goes down. Things happen. Prefer to keep everything local. And if there were ever tracks I needed (minimal at best) that I wanted in the cloud in case I wanted to stream elsewhere - dropbox (free) is plenty for the rare and few songs I'd ever want/need.

And while I am sure some would trust the cloud 100% and upload their music - and maybe ditching hard media/their own storage - it's a bit risky. Sure Apple has tons of money (now). But anything could happen and then - poof. Or at least - it would be challenging if everyone needed to remove their music around the same time due to some issue.

Also - it's interesting to note - that I wonder how many people will be "technically" breaking the law by going completely on the cloud. IE - they'll rip their CD's and then sell them. Yes this goes on now, I am sure, all the time. But Apple providing the service and marketing it as such as a combined way to eliminate your media AND store all your online purchases - increases the infractions...

kirky29
May 24, 2011, 08:50 AM
Which is why the benefits of using the cloud service must outweigh the benefits of having a home server or syncing.

One possibility I see right away is that if I buy a song, it's immediately available without downloading for everyone on my account (my wife, kids). Of course, when I download George Strait, my kids won't want to listen to it, and when my kids download Lady Gaga, I won't want to listen to it, but that's not the point! :)

That would be good! Love to be able to play the King of Country anywhere, instantly without downloading. Although, I do want the offline version too.

DaveDaveDave
May 24, 2011, 08:52 AM
what are the chances that with this paid service it will also cover the data being used to stream to and from the cloud?

If a CD length of music is 700MB, then more than 80 minutes of listening will fry your data plan resulting in overages caused by a service we have to pay for...

Except that the compression ratio of MP3 to wav is usually between 11:1 and 7:1 - but point taken. I'm glad I held on to my unlimited data plan!

bbeagle
May 24, 2011, 08:56 AM
That's why people will boycott it if it's free or cheap elsewhere why use the cloud to stream it at the cost of a very expensive 3G bill or unlimited home broadband plan!

I agree that those on limited data plans who pirate their music (high school or college students?) won't use the service.

But look at a different type of user - professionals. I have unlimited data on my ipad, and use Pandora to stream music 6 hours a day at work. If I could stream my own music, I would definately use a service. Money is not a critical issue with me. If it's less than $10 a month, I would use it.

aibo82
May 24, 2011, 08:56 AM
Album roughly 42 tracks

iTunes track roughly 6-7mb a track

That's nearly 250mb per album at iTunes quality which is a very expensive data plan as that's half your 3G limit per month :p

O2 500mb limit
Voda 500mb limit
Orange 500mb limit

See a pattern?

Not sure about U.S networks and then they have to stump up 99p per track did they see people coming with this?

jeff33702
May 24, 2011, 08:59 AM
I get it - they're close. What? -They're close to finalizing it? Oh wait, today they are close again - maybe a little closer? What - a music exec sneezed? How about you guys just let us know when it's actually a done deal?

bbeagle
May 24, 2011, 09:03 AM
If it's less than $10 a month, I would use it.

I actually predict that it will be free. Just another benefit of buying music on iTunes.

aibo82
May 24, 2011, 09:07 AM
Welcome to cloud you can stream 100s of pics of your favourite family times, steam music and upload personal document with sensitive content!

Yes at apple we really want to screw you with any 12 year old hacker letting the whole world get at this like Sony and the recent PSN problem!

Cloud you'll be throwing your arms up in the air at it!

WiiDSmoker
May 24, 2011, 09:18 AM
Anything cloud based is pointless right now with the low data caps and transfer rates.

bbeagle
May 24, 2011, 09:23 AM
Anything cloud based is pointless right now with the low data caps and transfer rates.

Nobody uses Pandora or Netflix?

firestarter
May 24, 2011, 09:24 AM
Anything cloud based is pointless right now with the low data caps and transfer rates.

Speak for yourself. I have 18Mbit/s and no cap. Audio streaming would work well.

On my phone, I also have no cap.

Born Again
May 24, 2011, 09:24 AM
I just want to park 30,000 songs somewhere so I can retire a bunch of iTunes music libraries, mostly CD rips, could that be a scenario with this service?

Exactly what I wish for but wont get

This will be a paid for streaming service.

Does anyone want to pay for streaming?

Born Again
May 24, 2011, 09:28 AM
I actually predict that it will be free. Just another benefit of buying music on iTunes.

So that makes sense

U buy a song u just downloaded to your iPhone and now u can use bandwidth and stream it.

Not only will most people have small purchased iTunes collections u are asking everyone who legitimately buy CDs to rebuy on iTunes.

Its garbage!

Garbage I tell yah! Let's wait and see!

Porchland
May 24, 2011, 09:29 AM
I doubt this whole thing can be a winner if it ends up isolating the benefits solely to iTunes-purchased media... except for those who have always & only purchased their media via iTunes.

That's why I think there is a good chance that this will be a two-option deal:

1. You can stream all of the tracks you have ever purchased from iTunes, add and delete tracks from you devices without syncing back to your iTunes computer, OTA sync changes from one device to your other devices, and re-download tracks that you have deleted accidentally,

and, if you're so inclined,

2. You can sign up for a subscription plan for $9.99-$14.99 a month (or included as part of an iCloud service with other features) that will allow you to stream any track in the iTunes database, create and edit playlists, and (maybe) burn CDs with limitations on the number of tracks and number of CDs you can burn each month.

That brings streaming to every iTunes user, allows Apple to brand the subscription plan as one of its iCloud services, and gives users a new option without taking anything away.

Apple could extend iCloud later with a catalog TV/movie tier that would be priced competitively with Netflix and with a tier for new shows that would compete with cable carriers. Those are technologically possible now, so it's purely a function of getting license rights from enough of a critical mass of Viacom, Disney, NBCU, etc., to market the tier as comprehensive.

chrono1081
May 24, 2011, 09:35 AM
Yawn!!!!! Who cares!!!!!

Knowing Apple it will cost a lot of money for something you can get else where for free, but as soon as Steve says its MAGICAL fanboys will run out and buy it. Apple uses MAGICAL clouds and it will completely change the way you look at life and the sky!!!!

Not the brightest bulb on the tree are you..

bbeagle
May 24, 2011, 09:48 AM
That's why I think there is a good chance that this will be a two-option deal

Sounds about right.

The iCloud service could also be part of mobile me (rebranded as iCloud). That would make a lot of sense too.

aibo82
May 24, 2011, 09:55 AM
Sounds about right.

The iCloud service could also be part of mobile me (rebranded as iCloud). That would make a lot of sense too.

Not all iClouds have a silver lining! ;):apple:

Iceland have gave the UK an ash cloud so we are probably stuck with Obama for a few more days I ain't liking these clouds!

Dcuellar
May 24, 2011, 09:59 AM
I have no need whatsoever to put any of my music up on a server that is own, operated, controlled, and prowled by a corporation who's only objective is to find new and exciting ways to separate my money from my pocket. My home computer will do fine thank you very much.

First comment on this thread happens to be the most ignorant...

What is the goal of a corporation or any business for that sake? To make money. That need to make money is what brings us the cool gadgets and technology we use today, including the computer, keyboard, internet and forums you used to post this ridiculous comment.

I won't even get into how good it is for our economy...

aibo82
May 24, 2011, 10:07 AM
First comment on this thread happens to be the most ignorant...

What is the goal of a corporation or any business for that sake? To make money. That need to make money is what brings us the cool gadgets and technology we use today, including the computer, keyboard, internet and forums you used to post this ridiculous comment.

I won't even get into how good it is for our economy...

We need iBanks to stop them lending our iMoney or the government spending it on a duck pond!

If apple control the door to music with the cloud surely google will control the door to the internet and our other personal stuff!

So you'll be paying for the documents you have wrote yourself! And music to be streamed! When will it end will I have to pay a company to walk soon? What will I actualy own apart from a brick device with a screen that has to use the Internet to work and doors that these companys have created to make money!

maroontiger2k9
May 24, 2011, 10:29 AM
I have no need whatsoever to put any of my music up on a server that is own, operated, controlled, and prowled by a corporation who's only objective is to find new and exciting ways to separate my money from my pocket. My home computer will do fine thank you very much.

you wouldnt feel that way if you actually maxed out your iphone/ipod/ipad HDD capacity...

and the rumor is that you still get a local copy of your purchases(home) but get a remote copy as well..

THIS MEANS THAT YOU WOULDNT HAVE TO upgrade your iOS device every year to get a HHD upgrade... you can simply pay for the iCloud and enjoy more media

when the prices get affordable for the iCloud, you'll actually see iOS sales drop to a certain degree

this practically gives you an infinite amount of media on the go... WIN :apple:

skellener
May 24, 2011, 10:43 AM
Google and Amazon have realized that the labels are irrelevant.

maroontiger2k9
May 24, 2011, 10:43 AM
I have heard nothing but music talk every time I read rumors about the cloud service. A much more useful service would be housing the 100s of GBs in TV shows I have downloaded that won't even fit on my MacBook Pro. Being able to access those files through AppleTV/iPhone/iPad with out hooking up an external Hard drive is how I have envisioned it to work. Not to mention alleviate the massive storage constraints of owning a few seasons of your favorite shows.

In my opinion video is the real need for cloud storage. Most TV shows you watch once, then again maybe a year later to get ready for the new season. I may listen to the same music file 100 times in a year so I don't mind hosting that file on my hard drive, but holding 300 GBs of video files makes a 500GB HD disappear real fast.

T H I S,

video will really be a great feature for the iOS devices... especially if you could mobile sync your device recorded videos and audio memos, pictures, etc..

the ability to not have to wait 1092309248021932 hrs to download a movie if you're only on a 3g network, but you could stream it and choose to download the movie when you get home

idk what the performance would be like if you tried to stream an SD/HD movie to your iOS device but its worth a shot

aibo82
May 24, 2011, 11:03 AM
T H I S,

video will really be a great feature for the iOS devices... especially if you could mobile sync your device recorded videos and audio memos, pictures, etc..

the ability to not have to wait 1092309248021932 hrs to download a movie if you're only on a 3g network, but you could stream it and choose to download the movie when you get home

idk what the performance would be like if you tried to stream an SD/HD movie to your iOS device but its worth a shot

Terrible I guess I have a 3mb broadband connection and that's all I can get due to the distance of the exchange!

BBC iPlayer in HD don't work at all! For HD to stream without artefacts it need at least 5mbps or more!

bmturney
May 24, 2011, 11:28 AM
It only gets complex and complicated when you involve lawyers.. keep those scumbags out of the equation and you can do amazing things extremely efficiently

Jaredly
May 24, 2011, 11:40 AM
Every since they started to discuss cloud based storage I have seen a vision of everything being cloud based. Imagine if wifi was as common as cell service(which I believe one day will happpen) why wouldnt you want something in the cloud. This would cause hard drives to become oppsolite and would help to reduce the size of computers even more. Imagine you go to buy a mac and instead of asking how big of a HD you want they ask you how much room on their server do you want to purchase. This will happen in the near future.

Jaredly
May 24, 2011, 11:52 AM
We need iBanks to stop them lending our iMoney or the government spending it on a duck pond!

If apple control the door to music with the cloud surely google will control the door to the internet and our other personal stuff!

So you'll be paying for the documents you have wrote yourself! And music to be streamed! When will it end will I have to pay a company to walk soon? What will I actualy own apart from a brick device with a screen that has to use the Internet to work and doors that these companys have created to make money!

Lets think about this a little. Your complaining about paying for a service. If you like the idea you pay for it, if you dont like it then you dont. If you hate the idea of paying for things that you can use then you should think about getting rid of your highspeed internet, cable tv, cell phones, home phones.

Piggie
May 24, 2011, 12:11 PM
I'm still failing to see exactly what the record industry have to do with an online cloud storage service from Apple.

Unless it's just some kind of online music library and nothing else which would be disappointing indeed.

SilverRubicon
May 24, 2011, 12:26 PM
I'm still failing to see exactly what the record industry have to do with an online cloud storage service from Apple.

Unless it's just some kind of online music library and nothing else which would be disappointing indeed.

I feel the same. I don't need access to MY music in the cloud. What I want is Rdio, MOG, Rhapsody, Napster, etc...

Kusanagi6913
May 24, 2011, 02:02 PM
First comment on this thread happens to be the most ignorant...

What is the goal of a corporation or any business for that sake? To make money. That need to make money is what brings us the cool gadgets and technology we use today, including the computer, keyboard, internet and forums you used to post this ridiculous comment.

I won't even get into how good it is for our economy...

Amen.

I do not comment regularly on here but I never cease to be amazed at the sheer cockiness of most of the posters on here who just feel compelled to tell us their innermost comment about what a multi-billion dollar company is considering to do.

My favorite element though is the realization that while most of these brainiacs will comment about how crazy apple is (remember their disdain for the apple tv or iPhone or most recently iPad?) -- these suckers will be buying the product anyway--after spending time bashing it.

I wish Apple would invent a a forum that would track these guys when they post and then show that they actually bought the items they claimed to think were 'stupid' or a waste of time.

Sheer silliness but thank you for making a great post in response dcuellar.

iEvolution
May 24, 2011, 04:09 PM
I think it'll be nice as backup storage but as far as streaming, forget it.
a) you don't get the best signal everywhere, how annoying would that be to get cut off constantly because you are in an area that has poor reception, like a canyon, building with blockers (government), etc.

b) lack of unlimited options from wireless providers makes it nearly unusable for the average consumer because they are so pricey. Except T-Mobile what other carrier offers unlimited at all anymore? Even then if t-mobile gets purchased by AT&T I'm sure that goes out the door.

c) The idea that you essentially are putting your data on a companies server means they can pretty much do anything at anytime. I'm sure there is plenty of fine print in the Terms of Service.

I would be interested to use it as a backup but forget using it to stream content anywhere, technology isn't ready for it.

baritz
May 24, 2011, 04:24 PM
THIS MEANS THAT YOU WOULDNT HAVE TO upgrade your iOS device every year to get a HHD upgrade... you can simply pay for the iCloud and enjoy more media

I imagine that all of the exiting new cloud features would be tied to the newest iOS release, which has built-in obsolescence (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/05/24/no-ios-5-for-iphone-3gs/) for your iOS device.

charlituna
May 24, 2011, 05:26 PM
I have no need whatsoever to put any of my music up on a server that is own, operated, controlled, and prowled by a corporation who's only objective is to find new and exciting ways to separate my money from my pocket. My home computer will do fine thank you very much.

Enjoy that. But some of us feel otherwise so we are curious about what is going on.

that said, can one really say that something that hasn't actually been announced has been or could be delayed. Don't you need a date to be delaying from.

shaynes
May 24, 2011, 05:47 PM
I have no need whatsoever to put any of my music up on a server that is own, operated, controlled, and prowled by a corporation who's only objective is to find new and exciting ways to separate my money from my pocket. My home computer will do fine thank you very much.

Not only do I have precisely zero need for a cloud-based service for my music, I don't know a single person who does. And I'm a touring musician. Just seems like a pointless service to me. I've got a laptop with my entire music library on it and bring it with me virtually everywhere I go. If I don't have my laptop, I have my iPhone. Plenty of room for the music I'm particularly digging from my library. If my wife and I want to share some new music from each other's libraries, we share it when we're at home together. I just don't get it. But then again, there are lots of tech tools & toys out there that I just don't get either.

Looking forward to linking to these quotes in the 1 year iCloud anniversary thread. Should be a good laugh.

MacNewsFix
May 24, 2011, 08:03 PM
Take your time and get it right. Don't cede any ground in the negotiations.

We're willing to wait to finally have a groundbreaking, rocking solution.

caspersoong
May 27, 2011, 07:53 AM
Free please or goodbye. Don't waste the money we pay you Apple, please.