PDA

View Full Version : Apple Testing New Time Capsules for Caching Software Updates?




MacRumors
Jun 2, 2011, 10:27 AM
http://images.macrumors.com/im/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/06/02/apple-testing-new-time-capsules-for-caching-software-updates/)


http://images.macrumors.com/article-new/2011/06/time_capsule_leap_forward.jpg
While we noted yesterday (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/06/01/apples-retail-stores-running-dry-of-airport-and-time-capsule-stocks/) that an apparent tightening of supplies of AirPort and Time Capsule products in Apple's retail stores may heighten anticipation for a possible update at next week's Worldwide Developers Conference, 9 to 5 Mac reports (http://www.9to5mac.com/70180/more-on-apples-airporttime-capsule-and-a-possible-refresh/) that it has received word that Apple has at least been internally testing new Time Capsule models capable of caching software updates for users' machines in order to speed the download and update process.What we do know is that Apple has been internally testing Time Capsules to cache Software updates for both Mac and iOS devices. The way we've heard it works is that the new Time Capsule learns which devices connect to it via Wifi. It then goes out to Apple's servers and downloads Software Updates for those products.

When the user wants to install the software update, the Time Capsule, which is also the router, routes you to the locally stored update, rather than downloading the whole thing over the Internet.A smarter version of the update capabilities found in Mac OS X Server, the new Time Capsules would know exactly which machines it needed software updates for and download only those packages.

And with Apple's latest iMac and MacBook Pro models already supporting 450 Mbps Wi-Fi (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/05/06/new-imac-joins-macbook-pro-in-supporting-450-mbit-sec-wi-fi/), distributing software updates downloaded quietly in the background by a Time Capsule to the actual machines could be accomplished with lightning speed.

As for potential tie-ins to Apple's iCloud service scheduled for introduction next Monday, new Time Capsules could integrate with the service to cache certain large or frequently-accessed files for faster access when on the local Wi-Fi network. Those files would of course instead be distributed directly from the iCloud servers when off the local network.

Article Link: Apple Testing New Time Capsules for Caching Software Updates? (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/06/02/apple-testing-new-time-capsules-for-caching-software-updates/)



montycat
Jun 2, 2011, 10:29 AM
I think this would be great for erase and installs also if Im reading this correctly.

applefan289
Jun 2, 2011, 10:31 AM
Very cool

kasei
Jun 2, 2011, 10:32 AM
Wow, I just bought a new Airport extreme a couple of weeks ago. My old one of 8 years died. I guess I'll just have to start replacing the Airport Expresses scattered all over the house.

0815
Jun 2, 2011, 10:33 AM
nice - turning the TimeCapsule into some sort of mini server for @home.

junklight
Jun 2, 2011, 10:35 AM
Everyone has been focused on the music and mobileme aspects of icloud but I'm really hoping that one thing that is arriving is non-connected sync'ing and updating - the whole plugging my ipad and phone into a specific computer regularly is a pain.

shartypants
Jun 2, 2011, 10:36 AM
Having it be a synced copy of your cloud locally would be cool. I know where this is all headed... eventually all our data will live in the cloud and we just cache it locally where we use it the most. I think we need better security before most of us will go along with that.

iCrizzo
Jun 2, 2011, 10:36 AM
Wow, I just bought a new Airport extreme a couple of weeks ago. My old one of 8 years died. I guess I'll just have to start replacing the Airport Expresses scattered all over the house.


I am in the same boat, I just bought mine a little over a month ago.. this always happens to me.. I buy something and 6 weeks later something better comes out.. da*n technology.. I can never keep up!! :p

dalvin200
Jun 2, 2011, 10:36 AM
why couldnt this be just a software update for the current gen time capsules?

shartypants
Jun 2, 2011, 10:38 AM
Everyone has been focused on the music and mobileme aspects of icloud but I'm really hoping that one thing that is arriving is non-connected sync'ing and updating - the whole plugging my ipad and phone into a specific computer regularly is a pain.

I agree, that would be cool to not have to connect your iOS device to your laptop to sync/backup/update. Probably where it is headed eventually.

flopticalcube
Jun 2, 2011, 10:39 AM
why couldnt this be just a software update for the current gen time capsules?

I agree. It's all in the sw unless the CPU is just not capable enough.

jasonxneo
Jun 2, 2011, 10:40 AM
Wait a couple more days and now macdefender can infect your whole home server!! :D

lewis82
Jun 2, 2011, 10:40 AM
It's a nice idea, but I hope there will be an option to deactivate it. Some people have very low bandwidth caps and need to control what they download.

2IS
Jun 2, 2011, 10:41 AM
why couldnt this be just a software update for the current gen time capsules?

I was thinking the same thing. It's already connected to the Internet as well as your computers, seems like it would have been easy enough to accomplish this with a firmware update. But then Apple couldn't sell you another pice of hardware.

talkingfuture
Jun 2, 2011, 10:41 AM
Sounds like a nice little touch to keep things running smoothly. I hope they can get the price of the time machine down a bit if they update it.

alex.sebenski
Jun 2, 2011, 10:41 AM
Expect "Post PC Era" to be mentioned a few times in the Keynote. This is awesome.

HMFIC03
Jun 2, 2011, 10:42 AM
I hope there is more to this possible refresh than this. They are way too overpriced when compared to other drives on the market, that are faster and fireproof.

jayducharme
Jun 2, 2011, 10:42 AM
I like this idea a lot. I just had software updates for my iPad that took 2 hours to download. With many iOS apps commonly needing 1/2 gb updates and Apple considering having the entire OS downloaded, the Time Capsule idea makes a lot of sense.

BLACKFRIDAY
Jun 2, 2011, 10:48 AM
What about those who don't have a Time Capsule? :(

Yankee617
Jun 2, 2011, 10:49 AM
I am in the same boat, I just bought mine a little over a month ago.. this always happens to me.. I buy something and 6 weeks later something better comes out.. da*n technology.. I can never keep up!! :p

Yeah... I, too, long for the good old days... when my entire music and video library was stored on punch cards and paper tape.

jav6454
Jun 2, 2011, 10:51 AM
What about those who don't have a Time Capsule? :(

They have the option of buying into one.

nagromme
Jun 2, 2011, 10:53 AM
Very nice!

But I wish it were practical (already) to have a flash-based Time Capsule. Down with spinning platters! But backups must be cheap, so they’ll be the last to go solid state.

Yeah... I, too, long for the good old days... when my entire music and video library was stored on punch cards and paper tape.

Those were the days! By the way, I once calculated that a UNIVAC I could store about 1/25 of a second of MP3 music. (Cost: around $12 million in today's dollars.)

Here’s a photo of UNIVAC memory from the early 50’s: data stored as sound waves in tanks of liquid mercury (http://picasaweb.google.com/charles.hoffmeyer/SanFranciscoCANovember2006/photo#4995209033528770578). A UNIVAC I had 7 of those tanks, each one holding about 1.5 kb.

Of course, for portable music, you can’t beat punch cards.

AllGaussian
Jun 2, 2011, 10:54 AM
Hope this comes to current AppleTV as a software upgrade...

rorschach
Jun 2, 2011, 10:57 AM
why couldnt this be just a software update for the current gen time capsules?

It's Apple.

gramirez2012
Jun 2, 2011, 10:57 AM
Bitchin'! :eek:

Detrius
Jun 2, 2011, 10:58 AM
So long as the hard drive is not easily removable, I will not buy a Time Capsule, and I will recommend against it to customers. After all, you can't check the SMART status, you can't perform a surface scan, you can't fix permissions issues, and you can't repair the directory structure without reformatting it.

bbeagle
Jun 2, 2011, 11:03 AM
What about those who don't have a Time Capsule? :(

You're right.

Why does Apple make me buy their products so I can use their stuff? I mean, Android, Palm and Blackberry users should get a free upgrade to iOS 5 as well as iPhone users. This is ridiculous!
:rolleyes:

spaceballl
Jun 2, 2011, 11:04 AM
I'd love an updated Time Capsule. Hopefully they can improve the wireless range a bit, making it so that I no longer need an Airport Express in my apartment. I think the chance is low... but I hope they don't say "oh we've found a better way to do Time Capsule - and it's completely in the cloud" - I really want a local copy of my stuff. It's invaluable to me!

nunes013
Jun 2, 2011, 11:06 AM
Expect "Post PC Era" to be mentioned a few times in the Keynote. This is awesome.

i highly agree.

the only thing and it was mentioned above is that people have limited usage in a month. My family just switched to uverse and now att decides we can only have 250 gb a month. i have over 1000 apps on my computer, getting about 10 updates a day and then on top of that software for my phone, ipad and computer. this is just me and not the other 3 people in my family. companies like att need to realize the new age we are in and think accordingly.

cadillac1234
Jun 2, 2011, 11:06 AM
Crap.

Another want but probably don't need so that means I'll be getting it for sure :p

If Apple does update the Extreme and the Express I hope they allow for web or IOS app configuration. I like traveling with just the IPad and it's always a crapshoot to set up the express beforehand

nagromme
Jun 2, 2011, 11:08 AM
So long as the hard drive is not easily removable, I will not buy a Time Capsule, and I will recommend against it to customers. After all, you can't check the SMART status, you can't perform a surface scan, you can't fix permissions issues, and you can't repair the directory structure without reformatting it.

Time Capsule DOES display SMART status. Go to Airport Utility > Disks. (This is also where you disconnect users of the disk remotely; such as if you want to unplug and you’re not sure if someone else may be connected.)

I’m led to believe that the TC does a surface scan and auto-repair on bootup (kind of like the way a Mac does when you hold Shift: you don’t see a report, it just happens). Sorry, can’t recall the source—probably an Apple tech note (I was wondering about this a couple months ago and searched online for reassurance).

Granted, some people want to (need to?) tinker, but nothing can beat my beloved TC for keeping my data backed up really well, really easily! (And without ease... I’m just not gonna back up as often. That’s trouble.) The first and most important think I need from a backup is that it be painless. Ability to do repairs manually instead of automatically is way down the list.

I'd love an updated Time Capsule. Hopefully they can improve the wireless range a bit, making it so that I no longer need an Airport Express in my apartment. I think the chance is low... but I hope they don't say "oh we've found a better way to do Time Capsule - and it's completely in the cloud" - I really want a local copy of my stuff. It's invaluable to me!

Agreed: local and cloud backups are both important. I don’t expect either option to go away.

As for range, it’s the luck of the structure I suppose! My TC (first-gen) reaches a good 200 feet away from my apartment, down an internal hallway with two bends and multiple concrete walls, in a building packed with a zillion competing networks! Over 15 listed in any one spot. I tried walking away listening to an audio stream over WiFi on my iPhone (3G off), and was amazed how far I got before the signal dropped. I can even use my TC WiFi from a fairly distant area, one building over, where I park my car.

I expect to wake up with sunburns from the thing.

trip1ex
Jun 2, 2011, 11:09 AM
This is the sign of the further untethering of iOS devices. I mean otherwise you can just use your computer to download the update can't you? Been awhile since I had an iOS device.

Or its just a feature add to keep the price of their routers high.


I'd like it more if the Time Capsule were an iTunes server.

That would make alot of sense with today's iOS devices, low storage capacity MBAs and even laptops.

I suppose though you might as well just buy a Mac Mini then.

ACTually why doesn't Apple make a $300 iTunes server in the form of a low power Mac Mini. Only needs enough ram and cpu and gpu to be an iTunes server. Doesn't even need a gpu I guess. Put a 1.4ghz C2D in there along with 1gb of ram. 8gb of Flash or so for the iTunes server and updates and some cache. Storage would be external drives. Bonus would be room for user replaceable hard drive. Doesn't need disc drive or any ports except ethernet ports.

would be controlled with iOS device or Mac.

mrfoof82
Jun 2, 2011, 11:11 AM
I wonder if this would apply to Mac App Store and iOS App Store updates as well. I don't see why it couldn't in time.

VenusianSky
Jun 2, 2011, 11:12 AM
I may get a new Time Capsule. I am still rockin with my first generation 500GB. Fortunately, I never had any issues with it. Still running perfectly. I may upgrade to a newer model for the larger disk.

Michaelgtrusa
Jun 2, 2011, 11:13 AM
Good idea.

iSee
Jun 2, 2011, 11:21 AM
Hm.. The update pre-downloading is a nice little touch, I guess. Depending on how far they go with it it's probably not too significant for most consumer environments.

I'm not excited at all about the iCloud cache idea. Wouldn't it end up being a highly limited, inflexible, rarely updated media server? Like the media serving capabilities of iTune but less. Well, if Apple opened up iCloud and TC to third party protocols and all user media and TC did automatic push and pull sync between iCloud and devices, it would be interesting. But I assume Apple won't do that.

ciTiger
Jun 2, 2011, 11:27 AM
Apple at their best... This makes the price a little more worth it... Still not enough for me...

Phil A.
Jun 2, 2011, 11:32 AM
I've been debating whether to get a Time Capsule to replace my current, aging, single band Airport Extreme: If this capability is added I think I'll definitely get one :)

diamond.g
Jun 2, 2011, 11:36 AM
I would love a TC, if it had RAID5... As it is I am unexcited about storing 450GB of iTunes video on a single drive...

ArchaicRevival
Jun 2, 2011, 11:37 AM
I can't wait to have enough money to make all the devices in my home iDevices with multi-sync capabilities!

tech3475
Jun 2, 2011, 11:40 AM
If they replace the TC, I suspect it will use an A4/5 processor and a modified iOS....which means a JB will probably come out at some point.

I wonder what hacks people could come up with?

seysearles
Jun 2, 2011, 11:42 AM
I'd love to be able to do this with my Qnap. Any ideas on how MacRumor-ors?

onetoescape
Jun 2, 2011, 11:43 AM
I called that on the other thread :eek:

TallManNY
Jun 2, 2011, 11:45 AM
i highly agree.

the only thing and it was mentioned above is that people have limited usage in a month. My family just switched to uverse and now att decides we can only have 250 gb a month. i have over 1000 apps on my computer, getting about 10 updates a day and then on top of that software for my phone, ipad and computer. this is just me and not the other 3 people in my family. companies like att need to realize the new age we are in and think accordingly.

Heavy users like yourself need to start paying for your usage instead of paying same price as light users and freeloading off of the light users. But hopefully that payment won't be too high.

This update has the real potential of streamlining your update process. So net net you will probably like it.

Amazing Iceman
Jun 2, 2011, 11:50 AM
i would certainly expect for this new feature to become available after a Firmware Update, and not by being forced to buy new hardware.
There are no excuses!

tech3475
Jun 2, 2011, 11:55 AM
i would certainly expect for this new feature to become available after a Firmware Update, and not by being forced to buy new hardware.
There are no excuses!

It's Apple?

strabes
Jun 2, 2011, 11:56 AM
nice - turning the TimeCapsule into some sort of mini server for @home.

Just so you know, Time Capsule can already be used as a file server that you can access remotely over the internet. I'm accessing the one at my house right now from work.

nunes013
Jun 2, 2011, 12:03 PM
Heavy users like yourself need to start paying for your usage instead of paying same price as light users and freeloading off of the light users. But hopefully that payment won't be too high.

This update has the real potential of streamlining your update process. So net net you will probably like it.

heavy usage, i dont think so. i only use my computer for looking at websites. no xbox live, no netflix, no internet radio, nothing. i look at websites and update my apps. its not my fault that every week i have a about 3 GBs of updates. im just saying as technology gets more advanced and we move to a more post pc era and everything moves to the cloud and so on people will be using this data likes it nothing. oh and, ive used only 4 gb of data total the one year ive had my iphone so i wouldnt call myself a heavy user. maybe somewhere in the middle.

EDIT: keep in mind my family has a netflix subscription however i dont use it. we watch maybe 5 movies a month. i have an xbox but dont have time to play online so i dont buy a live account. if it wasnt for computer updates and app updates and any kind of update my family of 4 would use maybe 15 gb a month. thats not saying though as new technology comes out there might be something we buy that will use a lot of bandwidth. cell phone and cable companies aren't thinking into the future. yes i would love this time capsule however for it download updates without me telling to could be harmful to others as some people do use a lot data. i really like the idea and apple has done good with it but it could be limited. sorry for the rant lol

strabes
Jun 2, 2011, 12:08 PM
Crap.

Another want but probably don't need so that means I'll be getting it for sure :p

If Apple does update the Extreme and the Express I hope they allow for web or IOS app configuration. I like traveling with just the IPad and it's always a crapshoot to set up the express beforehand

You could always reset the Express to its factory settings when you get to the hotel or wherever you are. It sets up its own network by default, which you can join and then modify the settings.

TheWatchfulOne
Jun 2, 2011, 12:09 PM
I wonder why I haven't seen anybody mention the idea of the next generation Time Capsule including a Thunderbolt port. Wouldn't that be slick?:cool:

And I sure do like the idea of huge updates downloading during the day while I'm at work at night while I'm asleep. I hate to come home and then have to wait 2 hours for things to finish downloading.

Hopefully you can tell it you want the combo update instead of the regular one.

I expect it's possible a firmware update could be made available for current Time Capsules to add the caching feature. But, if you want Thunderbolt, you will have to buy the new one.

jicon
Jun 2, 2011, 12:10 PM
i highly agree.

the only thing and it was mentioned above is that people have limited usage in a month. My family just switched to uverse and now att decides we can only have 250 gb a month. i have over 1000 apps on my computer, getting about 10 updates a day and then on top of that software for my phone, ipad and computer. this is just me and not the other 3 people in my family. companies like att need to realize the new age we are in and think accordingly.

Dunno whether to laugh or cry... ONLY 250GB in a month? Move to Canada... 60GB is about average on a cable modem package.

logandzwon
Jun 2, 2011, 12:11 PM
If it wasn't for iTunes I really wouldn't need my mac mini any more. I sure hope they role out an option to disconnect iOS from the mac.

strabes
Jun 2, 2011, 12:13 PM
its not my fault that every week i have a about 3 GBs of updates.

Pretty sure you are in control of how many apps you have and how often you update them. Pay for your usage and stop blaming your problems on the evil corporations.

ThisIsNotMe
Jun 2, 2011, 12:14 PM
The one feature Time Capsules need is an iTunes background process to serve iTunes content to remote devices over homeshare.

Primejimbo
Jun 2, 2011, 12:15 PM
i highly agree.

the only thing and it was mentioned above is that people have limited usage in a month. My family just switched to uverse and now att decides we can only have 250 gb a month. i have over 1000 apps on my computer, getting about 10 updates a day and then on top of that software for my phone, ipad and computer. this is just me and not the other 3 people in my family. companies like att need to realize the new age we are in and think accordingly.

I am amazed how people can use that much. I have 3 Macs, 1 PC, 2 iPhones, Apple TV2, iPad and 1 iPod Touch and we don't even hit 100GB a month. We stream Netflix almost every night also, download music from iTunes, updates and other stuff.
If you need more GB to use, pay for it. A friend has Comcast Business class for his personal so he doesn't have a cap every month.
Heavy users like yourself need to start paying for your usage instead of paying same price as light users and freeloading off of the light users. But hopefully that payment won't be too high.

This update has the real potential of streamlining your update process. So net net you will probably like it.
I think light users like us should get a break. As I said before, the people who need more than 250GB a month have an option, they just have to pay more for it.

nutmac
Jun 2, 2011, 12:17 PM
I would like Apple to take the idea even further and allow iPhone, iPod touch, and iPad to wirelessly sync against Time Capsule.

Bonus points if Time Capsule gains better thermal design to reduce hard disk failure and Thunderbolt port for direct access to the disk.

And please add QoS and bandwidth management.

iSee
Jun 2, 2011, 12:18 PM
I would love a TC, if it had RAID5... As it is I am unexcited about storing 450GB of iTunes video on a single drive...

Yes. TC is not appropriate for the primary storage of anything. But it can be used for backups and caching (which is what this rumor is suggesting).
(well, actually, it isn't perfect for backups either because it is a pain to get to the drive if the TC dies.)

filmweaver
Jun 2, 2011, 12:18 PM
This is great but the user should have control as to what times it updates. Users that have satellite (Hughes.net) internet service can only download during the night time without hitting their fair access policies.

Tamara
Jun 2, 2011, 12:22 PM
I think Apple has been caching Software Updates on your Mac HD for some time. Often I have checked Software Update to see "Downloaded" without me having done anything to initiate it, just waiting for me to hit Install.

minik
Jun 2, 2011, 12:22 PM
I was thinking the same thing. It's already connected to the Internet as well as your computers, seems like it would have been easy enough to accomplish this with a firmware update. But then Apple couldn't sell you another pice of hardware.

The current firmware for my Early 2009 model of Time Capsule is just horrible. I even thought about buying a new one, but downgrading it to 7.4.2 instead.

kirky29
Jun 2, 2011, 12:27 PM
The only thing I don't like about the Time Capsule/Time Machine, is that when it's backing up, it mounts the drive in the finder & on the desktop.

It's petty, I know, but still!
I know I could hide drives etc on the desktop, but I don't want to do that!

Other than that, I love it. :)

spazzcat
Jun 2, 2011, 12:28 PM
What about those who don't have a Time Capsule? :(

What are you waiting for, go get one :D

GoodWatch
Jun 2, 2011, 12:33 PM
WSUS! ......Gesundheit! :p

juicedropsdeuce
Jun 2, 2011, 12:38 PM
Great. Now iCloud requires Lion and an overpriced buggy piece of hardware?? Why?? :mad:

diamond.g
Jun 2, 2011, 12:39 PM
Yes. TC is not appropriate for the primary storage of anything. But it can be used for backups and caching (which is what this rumor is suggesting).
(well, actually, it isn't perfect for backups either because it is a pain to get to the drive if the TC dies.)

I have to offload that much video from my MBP somewhere, and even so I still try to wait until I get at least one backup of the files in my TM Backup before moving it else where.

Bonte
Jun 2, 2011, 12:41 PM
Macs seem competent enough not to need a dedicated caching device but it would be perfect for content, backups en updates for iOS devices, it would liberate them from the PC.

mex4eric
Jun 2, 2011, 12:48 PM
why couldnt this be just a software update for the current gen time capsules?

Because it is probably A4 or A5 powered and they aren't going to write the software for the old Intel AEBS. Just like AppleTV2.

gyumilly
Jun 2, 2011, 12:52 PM
I agree. It's all in the sw unless the CPU is just not capable enough.

We know the drill. Things that could have been done via software updates usually require you to buy new hardware.

OllyW
Jun 2, 2011, 12:54 PM
Because it is probably A4 or A5 powered and they aren't going to write the software for the old Intel AEBS. Just like AppleTV2.

It isn't Intel, the current AEBS processor is a Marvell 88F6281 1.2 GHz "Kirkwood".

ten-oak-druid
Jun 2, 2011, 12:56 PM
Why not have a cloud in the house? You sync your itunes library to the hard drive connected to the airport device. And then AppleTV or any computer on the home network can stream from it.

I hope the features being added to the time capsule will be compatible with an airport extreme that has a hard drive connected.

And also I think it would be great to have multiple usb ports in the time capsule and airport extreme. That way multiple users can have time capsules on separate hard drives. And perhaps time capsules of external drives connected to a computer could be made instead of just the boot disk.

-LikesMac-
Jun 2, 2011, 12:58 PM
Pretty sure you are in control of how many apps you have and how often you update them. Pay for your usage and stop blaming your problems on the evil corporations.

I really can't tell if this guy is serious :p

mex4eric
Jun 2, 2011, 01:14 PM
It isn't Intel, the current AEBS processor is a Marvell 88F6281 1.2 GHz "Kirkwood".

Yikes! That's an ARM variant, isn't it? So a change to A4/5 is easier, software-wise?

nebo1ss
Jun 2, 2011, 01:15 PM
I agree. It's all in the sw unless the CPU is just not capable enough.

If it is going to be available for both the Time Capsule and the Express then surely it will be more than a software update. They will probably add separate storage to the device to accommodate the downloads.

danemo
Jun 2, 2011, 01:16 PM
Netflix predicts what you like, so why not load that into big storage? You want to DVR "The Office" Wednesday night, why not download the content in advance to be opened after a certain time? If you licensed enough content, this could help distribute it for immediate access.

Full of Win
Jun 2, 2011, 01:19 PM
Dunno whether to laugh or cry... ONLY 250GB in a month? Move to Canada... 60GB is about average on a cable modem package.

Ha...I do 30+ GB on my iPad every month.

Chii
Jun 2, 2011, 01:21 PM
Any chance of an integrated adsl/cable modem in any new Time Capsule/ Airport? Its a bit of a faff to me having two boxes doing the job that just one could do, using two power sockets etc etc...

cg0def
Jun 2, 2011, 01:22 PM
Great. Now iCloud requires Lion and an overpriced buggy piece of hardware?? Why?? :mad:

do you think before you type? Where exactly does it say that you need a TC or OS X Lion in order to use the new cloud services? Not only does it not say that anywhere but in fact iCloud would run on any OS and probably any modern browser very much like MobileMe ...

OllyW
Jun 2, 2011, 01:23 PM
Yikes! That's an ARM variant, isn't it? So a change to A4/5 is easier, software-wise?

Yes, it's definitely an ARM processor but I've no idea about how easy a change to A4/5 would be.

mdriftmeyer
Jun 2, 2011, 01:26 PM
Yikes! That's an ARM variant, isn't it? So a change to A4/5 is easier, software-wise?

Yes.

pmjoe
Jun 2, 2011, 01:32 PM
New Time Capsule? In the iCloud era? I wouldn't be surprised if Jobs eliminated the product unless it entirely becomes just a cache for all your iCloud data (not just software updates).

Apple want's all your data in the iCloud so they can index and harvest it, just like Google does.

All your data are belong to us.

Mess
Jun 2, 2011, 01:32 PM
This sounds more like a software change. Hopefully it is and it can be applied to the current gen timecapsules/extreme stations.

Undecided
Jun 2, 2011, 01:37 PM
It's a nice idea, but I hope there will be an option to deactivate it. Some people have very low bandwidth caps and need to control what they download.

Well, it shouldn't increase the downloads (assuming you install everything anyway), and if you have more than one device, it should reduce the downloads (since it only downloads once).

If, however, you normally like to get your updates elsewhere (not subject to your cap), then, yes, I can see how you'd want to be able to disable it.

Gemütlichkeit
Jun 2, 2011, 01:37 PM
Like a simple version of WSUS?

grfxboy
Jun 2, 2011, 01:41 PM
This will come in handy to download all the virus fixes soon to come out. :D

dwright1974
Jun 2, 2011, 01:47 PM
Maybe they are going to allow Time Machine backups to go in to the cloud - Disk to disk to cloud, similar in concept to Jungle Disk, etc?

So your Mac backs up locally to the Time Capsule (as now) and then the TC sends it to iCloud. The local backup is "quick" and then the TC can just send it - it's normally on anyway so why not have it trickle-feed to iCloud.

I guess the only limitation is the cost of all that storage to us users and the time for that "initial" backup to take.

The advantages are that your Mac doesn't have to be on while it's sending everything "upwards".

I do like the idea of TC caching locally accessed files and would love to see it involved in Home Sharing.

I don't see centralised Software Updates as that big a deal to be honest, how many people have multiple Macs, (and I mean realistically, not us!!).

- D

nunes013
Jun 2, 2011, 02:03 PM
Dunno whether to laugh or cry... ONLY 250GB in a month? Move to Canada... 60GB is about average on a cable modem package.

Pretty sure you are in control of how many apps you have and how often you update them. Pay for your usage and stop blaming your problems on the evil corporations.

I am amazed how people can use that much. I have 3 Macs, 1 PC, 2 iPhones, Apple TV2, iPad and 1 iPod Touch and we don't even hit 100GB a month. We stream Netflix almost every night also, download music from iTunes, updates and other stuff.
If you need more GB to use, pay for it. A friend has Comcast Business class for his personal so he doesn't have a cap every month.

I think light users like us should get a break. As I said before, the people who need more than 250GB a month have an option, they just have to pay more for it.

did you guys even read what i wrote. i said in the future. i said in the coming years as more and more technology comes out. we have only had internet for less than 2 decades and there are already movies that are 15 gb per download. now with blu ray 3d. whats going to happen in another 5-10 years. 250 gb wont suffice. and jicon, im sorry, that is hardly anything. and strabes dont act like its not a big deal when there are plenty of other threads about this too. go ahead and hate me but i dont care. its my opinion. yes we get capped and im ok with that buts its also what they charge for it. look att mobility. 45 a month for 4 gb with tethering. they act like tethering is such a huge stress on the network when i am capped anyway. i dont know how much i use a month on uverse because the att data calculator is not online yet. maybe i only use 10 gb. idk. i said i estimated at 15 gb. and i know its in my control but its my opinion that overall in the world communication corporations charge too much for what we get. maybe when the calculator is up i will think different but the way i see it, i feel like 250 gb wouldnt suffice many. maybe i just dont know how much 250 gb is in terms of data usage.

HobeSoundDarryl
Jun 2, 2011, 02:22 PM
i highly agree.

the only thing and it was mentioned above is that people have limited usage in a month. My family just switched to uverse and now att decides we can only have 250 gb a month. i have over 1000 apps on my computer, getting about 10 updates a day and then on top of that software for my phone, ipad and computer. this is just me and not the other 3 people in my family. companies like att need to realize the new age we are in and think accordingly.

Companies like AT&T are thinking about that... how much more money they can make by putting the squeeze on for pipes controlled by them and just a few other companies. What can consumers do? Some have only 1 choice for broadband. Some- like me- have 2 choices but the other choice also has decided to begin the cap squeeze (also) at 250GB. Both will almost certainly (and independently:rolleyes:) decide to drop that to lower levels over time ("due to some users having unusually high bandwidth demands").

Why? Because they don't want to allow companies like Apple or Netflix to eat to much into the cash cow of their cable subscription businesses. Since Apple, Netflix, etc must flow their alternatives through broadband controlled by AT&T, Verizon, Comcast, TimeWarner, etc, the latter gatekeepers have a very easy way to save the cash cow.

At one point, one could fly with 2 checked bags for free. Then, one airline feed for bag #2 and made money. The others followed. Then, one airline feed for bag #1 and made money. The others followed.

In the wireless Internet, AT&T & Verizon have already proved that millions will pay $25 for tiers at only 2GB. That's more than 50% what I pay for a Comcast tier of 250GB. Comcast (and Time Warner, et all) will follow the leaders over time of cutting down the scope of the tiers and/or charging ever-higher fees for broadband.

And in a capitalistic society that allows big competitors to buy up little competitors so that you end up with only 1 or 2 broadband providers, what are you going to do? Switch to save money? Hint: does one save money on 3G Internet by switching from AT&T to Verizon or vice versa?

All the dreams of iClouding everything is directly in opposition with the pricing trends of broadband and wireless Internet. In an iCloud-intense future, you either will be on the sidelines with money in your pockets or iClouding as many imagine with empty pockets.

Dunno whether to laugh or cry... ONLY 250GB in a month? Move to Canada... 60GB is about average on a cable modem package.

Canada is leading the way to our future of broadband tiers. Just watch it unfold as demand goes up and the suppliers decide to try to "solve" the problem by increasing fees instead of expanding capacity for the same fees. Note that the latter involves a lot of cost for the suppliers while the former involves a lot of profit for them. Which do you think the likes of AT&T, Verizon, Comcast, Time Warner, et al will choose?

nunes013
Jun 2, 2011, 02:31 PM
Companies like AT&T are thinking about that... how much more money they can make by putting the squeeze on for pipes controlled by them and just a few other companies. What can consumers do? Some have only 1 choice for broadband. Some- like me- have 2 choices but the other choice also has decided to begin the cap squeeze (also) at 250GB. Both will almost certainly (and independently:rolleyes:) decide to drop that to lower levels over time ("due to some users having unusually high bandwidth demands").

Why? Because they don't want to allow companies like Apple or Netflix to eat to much into the cash cow of their cable subscription businesses. Since Apple, Netflix, etc must flow their alternatives through broadband controlled by AT&T, Verizon, Comcast, TimeWarner, etc, the latter gatekeepers have a very easy way to save the cash cow.

At one point, one could fly with 2 checked bags for free. Then, one airline feed for bag #2 and made money. The others followed. Then, one airline feed for bag #1 and made money. The others followed.

In the wireless Internet, AT&T & Verizon have already proved that millions will pay $25 for tiers at only 2GB. That's more than 50% what I pay for a Comcast tier of 250GB. Comcast (and Time Warner, et all) will follow the leaders over time of cutting down the scope of the tiers and/or charging ever-higher fees for broadband.

And in a capitalistic society that allows big competitors to buy up little competitors so that you end up with only 1 or 2 broadband providers, what are you going to do? Switch to save money? Hint: does one save money on 3G Internet by switching from AT&T to Verizon or vice versa?

All the dreams of iClouding everything is directly in opposition with the pricing trends of broadband and wireless Internet. In an iCloud-intense future, you either will be on the sidelines with money in your pockets or iClouding as many imagine with empty pockets.

thanks for the nice response :). i totally agree and believe in the future that caps will decrease and maybe prices :rolleyes: . they know people will pay for the service but we dont have much of a choice. i guess what im trying to say is years ago it would have been fine, but with the economy the way it is people cant always afford these high priced plans. im in no way a heavy user (middle at most) however i think it would be better if companies charge by how much you use a month. the gigabyte is set at a certain price and if use 10 gb a month you pay that amount. if you use 750 gb that month, you pay that amount. they dont do that as im sure most dont use a lot and they would lose money so they set a cap at a certain price. however in the future i would like to see it done that way. thats just me though.

flopticalcube
Jun 2, 2011, 02:41 PM
Maybe they are going to allow Time Machine backups to go in to the cloud - Disk to disk to cloud, similar in concept to Jungle Disk, etc?

So your Mac backs up locally to the Time Capsule (as now) and then the TC sends it to iCloud. The local backup is "quick" and then the TC can just send it - it's normally on anyway so why not have it trickle-feed to iCloud.

I guess the only limitation is the cost of all that storage to us users and the time for that "initial" backup to take.

The advantages are that your Mac doesn't have to be on while it's sending everything "upwards".

I do like the idea of TC caching locally accessed files and would love to see it involved in Home Sharing.

I don't see centralised Software Updates as that big a deal to be honest, how many people have multiple Macs, (and I mean realistically, not us!!).

- D

This could be accomplished with the current hardware. While it's certainly a possibility, maybe even a probability, there must be something else as well coming.

HobeSoundDarryl
Jun 2, 2011, 02:43 PM
thanks for the nice response :). i totally agree and believe in the future that caps will go away and maybe prices. they know people will pay for the service but we dont have much of a choice. i guess what im trying to say is years ago it would have been fine, but with the economy the way it is people cant always afford these high priced plans. im in no way a heavy user (middle at most) however i think it would be better if companies pay how much you use a month. the gigabyte is set at a certain price and if use 10 gb a month you pay that amount. if you use 750 gb that month, you pay that amount. they dont do that as im sure most dont use a lot and they would lose money so they set a cap at a certain price. however in the future i would like to see it done that way. thats just me though.

I think that is where we're going EXCEPT I think the bulk of the companies in control of the pipes very much like the ambiguous nature of the cell phone billing model. So rather than bill by the MB or GB, I suspect they'll go to contracts with tiers and penalties (as higher fees) when you go over your chosen allocation. That way, they guarantee themselves a certain level of income (the base tier each subscriber chooses) and they exploit their users when they go over their max usage... just like it works now on cell phone contracts.

I see no scenario where this collision of higher broadband & wireless broadband demand is met with pricing that stays about the same or shifts lower than it is now, as measured on an average price-per-user basis. This is very much analogous to getting all us dummies to pay up for big gas guzzling SUVs and then the oil gatekeepers adapting the cost of oil so the gas jumped from < $1/gal to > $4/gal. What was the reason for that again? Oh year, "increasing worldwide demand for oil".

Now the gas is going to be broadband and wireless broadband. The oil barons are going to be AT&T, Verizon, Comcast, etc and the dummies are going to be those that buy heavily into devices that increasingly require broadband to function to their fullest benefit. It's so obvious and yet most seem to ignore it in posts about how much they want to iCloud everything.

Perhaps the icon for it should be a vacumn cleaner over a wallet? ;)

nunes013
Jun 2, 2011, 02:52 PM
I think that is where we're going EXCEPT, I think the bulk of the companies in control of the pipes very much like the ambiguous nature of the cell phone billing model. So rather than bill by the MB or GB, I suspect they'll go to contracts with tiers and penalties (as higher fees) when you go over your chosen allocation. That way, they guarantee themselves a certain level of income (the base tier each subscriber chooses) and they exploit their users when they go over their max usage... just like it works now on cell phone contracts.

I see no scenario where this collision of higher broadband & wireless broadband demand is met with pricing that stays about the same or shifts lower than it now, as measured on an average price-per-user basis. This is very much analogous to getting all us dummies to pay up for big gas guzzling SUVs and then the oil gatekeepers adapting the cost of oil so the gas jumped from < $1/gal to > $4/gal.

Now the gas is going to be broadband and wireless broadband. The oil barons are going to be AT&T, Verizon, Comcast, etc and the dummies are going to be those that buy heavily into devices that increasingly require broadband to function to their fullest benefit. It's so obvious and yet most seem to ignore it in posts about how much they want to iCloud everything.

Perhaps the icon for it should be a vacumn cleaner over a wallet?;)?

hahaha yes that should very much be the icon. im just upset because i was so excited when tethering came out for iphone. it was one of the features i really really wanted. then att put in their charges. i cant afford $45 a month for my data. and to tell you the truth i love storing things locally. i have 5 tb of storage for music, movies and pictures. my parents like it because we have an apple tv that they can stream their stuff to as well. the icloud i would only use to store music if i lose it so i dont have to rebuy it and maybe some files to act as an idisk. its good when i need to give my family something that cant go in an email when im at college. the cloud is nice but i wouldnt rely on it to hold my life. the new icon is nice though ;)

TallManNY
Jun 2, 2011, 02:59 PM
I am amazed how people can use that much. I have 3 Macs, 1 PC, 2 iPhones, Apple TV2, iPad and 1 iPod Touch and we don't even hit 100GB a month. We stream Netflix almost every night also, download music from iTunes, updates and other stuff.
If you need more GB to use, pay for it. A friend has Comcast Business class for his personal so he doesn't have a cap every month.

I think light users like us should get a break. As I said before, the people who need more than 250GB a month have an option, they just have to pay more for it.

Dude, you aren't a light user if you are streaming netflix almost every night. My mom who checks her email a few times a week and only uses the web about once a month is a light user. We are all lucky that there are lots of folks doing not too much with their internet access and still paying $50 a month.

TallManNY
Jun 2, 2011, 03:03 PM
Now the gas is going to be broadband and wireless broadband. The oil barons are going to be AT&T, Verizon, Comcast, etc and the dummies are going to be those that buy heavily into devices that increasingly require broadband to function to their fullest benefit. It's so obvious and yet most seem to ignore it in posts about how much they want to iCloud everything.

Perhaps the icon for it should be a vacumn cleaner over a wallet? ;)

Love it and some truth to your worries. I'm in a monopoly location with only one cable company offering internet. I use the internet all the time and need it to work from home which I have to do. I argue and try to keep the cost down, but if my provider increased the cost by 10X I'd still have to pay it every month. Though I'd find a way to split the cost with neighbors and wi-fi extenders I suppose.

djrobsd
Jun 2, 2011, 03:06 PM
Wow, I just bought a new Airport extreme a couple of weeks ago. My old one of 8 years died. I guess I'll just have to start replacing the Airport Expresses scattered all over the house.

RETURN IT ASAP... It will only be worth 80 bucks on Craigslist once the new one comes out.

djrobsd
Jun 2, 2011, 03:07 PM
Sometimes Apple just pisses me off... They get you to buy a $180 dollar router, then they come out with a new feature that looks like it could be implemented with software, but instead you're forced to buy another router...

MikhailT
Jun 2, 2011, 03:08 PM
Heavy users like yourself need to start paying for your usage instead of paying same price as light users and freeloading off of the light users. But hopefully that payment won't be too high.

This update has the real potential of streamlining your update process. So net net you will probably like it.

It’s the other way around, the ISPs should be providing people with a lower cap for lower prices. Don’t blame the heavy users, ISPs intentionally said unlimited internet for a specific price and that’s what the heavy users are paying for.

If you only use 1GB, pay 10$ a month instead of paying 60$ a month as everybody else. If you went over the limit, you should pay 10$ extra for another 1GB and if you went into a higher tier like 250GB for 40$ a month, you shouldn’t be charged for any more than 40$ a month if you’re on 1GB plan (unless you go over 250GB).

The ISPs for years advertise “unlimited internet”. If they don’t like it, they should not have done it in the first place. People are used to not worrying about the limits.

Also, the plans have to follow the data “inflation” as well. The average may be 30-50GB for each Internet user in US, it’ll double by next year and again in following years.

HobeSoundDarryl
Jun 2, 2011, 03:10 PM
Love it and some truth to your worries. I'm in a monopoly location with only one cable company offering internet. I use the internet all the time and need it to work from home which I have to do. I argue and try to keep the cost down, but if my provider increased the cost by 10X I'd still have to pay it every month. Though I'd find a way to split the cost with neighbors and wi-fi extenders I suppose.

You're far from the only one in that situation. Worse, the bandwidth gatekeepers know it. Still worse, just about all of the companies in the business of selling broadband are also in the business of selling video subscriptions. So the much dreamed about Apple cable TV cord cutting service is just as limited for the very same reasons. Should any such service really start biting into the cable TV cash cow, the company who's pipe the replacement must flow through will simply raise the price of broadband to make their cable offering the better deal.

And if you are like me- with 2 choices for broadband- the alternative will be in the exact same boat with the exact same (Apple replacement) threat and thus take the exact same action with their broadband pricing.

Until iClouds come with solid rumors of Apple having a way to bypass the broadband and wireless internet pipes, this is where the cost of access is going.

MikhailT
Jun 2, 2011, 03:12 PM
Sometimes Apple just pisses me off... They get you to buy a $180 dollar router, then they come out with a new feature that looks like it could be implemented with software, but instead you're forced to buy another router...
Why are you pissed about something that doesn’t exist yet. Nobody knows anything about this.

The new router is likely to have a major overhaul of hardware that the new firmware can only work in and thus, they can’t put it on the old hardware.

You do not buy hardware for future software features, you buy hardware for the software at that time.

Nobody is entitled to future software upgrades (major version update, 1.x>2.x).

HobeSoundDarryl
Jun 2, 2011, 03:18 PM
It’s the other way around, the ISPs should be providing people with a lower cap for lower prices. Don’t blame the heavy users, ISPs intentionally said unlimited internet for a specific price and that’s what the heavy users are paying for.

If you only use 1GB, pay 10$ a month instead of paying 60$ a month as everybody else. If you went over the limit, you should pay 10$ extra for another 1GB and if you went into a higher tier like 250GB for 40$ a month, you shouldn’t be charged for any more than 40$ a month if you’re on 1GB plan (unless you go over 250GB).

Great concept but it will never happen. The gatekeepers have no real competition to make them fight it out on price. There is no reason at all to make less on the basis of average revenue-per-broadband-subscriber. They would basically just be throwing corporate profits out the window. It would even be illegal per their most fundamental responsibility to their shareholders to maximize profits.

The best we can hope for is something to hold things "as is". But the reality is that all signs (all actions) point toward increasing revenue-per-subscriber averages due to "increased average broadband demand."

As far as I know, "Because they should" has never resulted in lowering prices or profits from monopolistic & duopolistic players.

But even if it would happen somehow, the drive to use less broadband flies directly in the face of all these dreams to store and stream everything in/from the iCloud. Those dreams are about using more (much more) bandwidth, not less.

ravenvii
Jun 2, 2011, 03:34 PM
Great concept but it will never happen. The gatekeepers have no real competition to make them fight it out on price. There is no reason at all to make less on the basis of average revenue-per-broadband-subscriber. They would basically just be throwing corporate profits out the window. It would even be illegal per their most fundamental responsibility to their shareholders to maximize profits.

The best we can hope for is something to hold things "as is". But the reality is that all signs (all actions) point toward increasing revenue-per-subscriber averages due to "increased average broadband demand."

As far as I know, "Because they should" has never resulted in lowering prices or profits from monopolistic & duopolistic players.

But even if it would happen somehow, the drive to use less broadband flies directly in the face of all these dreams to store and stream everything in/from the iCloud. Those dreams are about using more (much more) bandwidth, not less.

You should consider Apple, Microsoft, Google, Netflix, et. al. in all this. Those are true juggernauts, and I really doubt they will sit back and let the broadband providers cramp on their style.

Yes, it happened in Canada. But 1) Netflix is a new face there, they've *just* gotten into the market when Rogers and Bell sprung their crap - and they're already trying to fight it, even though they don't have much clout there. And you know how much Apple cares about Canada - they're second-class citizens.

So we'll have to see what happens in the future. If America follows Canada down the broadband-cramping road, I have a feeling that they won't face almost no resistance like the Canadian companies have.

And no, Comcast's 250 GB limit does not count - it's a reasonable limit for now. AT&T's 150 GB limit slightly less so, but not too bad. Once it gets under 100 GB per month, that's when **** will hit the fan.

TallManNY
Jun 2, 2011, 03:50 PM
You should consider Apple, Microsoft, Google, Netflix, et. al. in all this. Those are true juggernauts, and I really doubt they will sit back and let the broadband providers cramp on their style.



The real solution is regulation, just like the energy companies are regulated. The cable companies know that if they raise prices too much, the government will just regulate them. Then they will be just like energy companies who have a monopoly (and for something even more important than the internet :eek:) but aren't allowed to raise prices beyond an amount that gives them a regulated and limited return on their capital investments. Not a perfect system but if the cable companies play too rough that is the solution.

HobeSoundDarryl
Jun 2, 2011, 04:03 PM
You should consider Apple, Microsoft, Google, Netflix, et. al. in all this. Those are true juggernauts, and I really doubt they will sit back and let the broadband providers cramp on their style.

It's already happened. I know lots of people that really want an iPhone but don't want to pay for the contract. Unless those people are few and far between (and note that there are a LOT more cell phone users that are NOT iDevice 3G users), don't you think that Apple would sell a lot more 3G iDevices if the 3G piece was cheaper? Don't you think the cost of 3G service "cramps Apple's style"?

Why aren't they putting the pinch on AT&T and Verizon to offer 3G service for prices lower than everyone else?

And no, Comcast's 250 GB limit does not count - it's a reasonable limit for now. AT&T's 150 GB limit slightly less so, but not too bad. Once it gets under 100 GB per month, that's when **** will hit the fan.

Get those fans ready for cleaning. It's only a matter of time. The excuse is going to be "due to increased worldwide bandwidth demands" much like oil is "due to increased worldwide demand for oil". If the politicians get involved, they'll repeat the show of being tough on those "greedy oil companies" which resulted in how much of an impact on the cost of gas? The bandwidth gatekeepers will throw more money into re-election campaigns and the machine will distract us with another "flag burning amendment" resurrection or something similar.

That's the very same excuse used to justify 3G fees now. When the digital television transition went down, there was abundant new bandwidth made available by freeing up a bunch of space formerly occupied by analog TV channels. Even Apple & Google showed some interest in bidding for that space (which would have very likely made them real competitors in local broadband and/or mobile phone business). The Government could have excluded the 2 dominant players from being allowed to play in hopes of spurring some genuine competition. Apple & Google (and many others) could have stepped up as real competitors. Instead, what happened? Who got the vast majority of the bandwidth?

I want to imagine that Apple, Google, Netflix etc will put the pinch on Verizon, AT&T, Comcast, etc. but the latter is in control of this one, with NO REASON WHATSOEVER to cut their own revenue throats to help Apple, Netflix, etc take their video distribution subscription businesses NOR make things cheaper for us users. Quite the contrary, with as little as NO broadband competitors in some markets, expect pricing to rise anytime they want to make a little more profit.

Has anyone's 3G bills gone down since Apple & Google got in the 3G supporting space?

Has anyone's video subscription costs gone down since Apple & Google got in the video on-demand space?

Has anyone's broadband bills gone down since Apple & Google and others started ramping up broadband demand?

All such options would be good for Apple, Google, etc and for us users? Why haven't they occurred for the masses?

Apparently, here comes a new offering that seems to beg for much greater Internet and wireless Internet usage. Consumers access that Internet not from Google or Apple or Netflix but from AT&T, Verizon, Comcast, Time Warner, etc. We can't bypass the latter. If we want all of the promise of iCloud, we have to accept whatever they want to charge for it. Will they choose to lower prices over time, keep them the same, or charge more? If you were them, what would you do? (and note if you were them, you would be bound to maximize profits for your shareholders, not cut your revenue throat because it's the "right thing to do" or because "Apple told us to lower our revenues", etc).

HobeSoundDarryl
Jun 2, 2011, 04:13 PM
The real solution is regulation, just like the energy companies are regulated. The cable companies know that if they raise prices too much, the government will just regulate them. Then they will be just like energy companies who have a monopoly (and for something even more important than the internet :eek:) but aren't allowed to raise prices beyond an amount that gives them a regulated and limited return on their capital investments. Not a perfect system but if the cable companies play too rough that is the solution.

Hoping the Government will step is a <1980's concept. The AT&T breakup was the last major play of the government stepping in to break up a dominant player exploiting it's customer base. It won't happen again.

Now we have "too big to fail" companies bailed out with taxpayer dollars and expanded into even bigger companies. The heads of those "going to fail unless we bail them out" companies then make massive contributions to the re-election coffers of both parties (look it up if you don't believe me) and then pay themselves all-time record bonuses the year after they were allegedly on the brink of bankruptcy unless the taxpayer bailed them out.

Did any of them get in trouble with the GOV? Yes there was some lip service, but was their any tangible action against them? Did any one of them get any kind of punishment? Did any of them have their bonuses blocked by the GOV or 100% taxed away from them by the GOV?

Did any of the "too big to fail" companies get broken up into "not too big to fail companies" by the GOV? Can anybody name ONE "too big to fail" company that was broken up after taxpayer dollars "saved them"?

Did the worthless paper that drove the risk of financial collapse stay on their books or are we taxpayers secretly paying full face value for it thanks to the FED (who works for us, or for them)?

More on point, did the massive wireless broadband spectrum freed up by the digital television transition get auctioned off to anyone other than the 2 dominant players in just about every market? Right there was a prime opportunity for the GOV to flex the Capitalism model muscles and inject real competition for AT&T & Verizon into every market in the United States. It wouldn't have cost any taxpayer dollars (the bidders paid us for the spectrum) nor would it have involved the GOV having to do anything more than NOT allowing the top 2 from being able to hold onto their dominance. Did the GOV do the right thing for us citizens?

Best we'll get from the GOV is a dog & pony show... some lip service about how regulation is needed for ever-increasing broadband data fee increases but no real action. They might do it loudly to encourage the broadband gatekeepers to throw a little more into the re-election coffers. And that will be it.

This same basic model keeps repeating over and over since the mid-1980's. Identify anything that the GOV has regulated to give us lower prices now than we had then, or we had even 5 or 10 years ago?

Electric? Water? Internet? Gas (did you know it's about 35 cents per gallon in Iraq & Iran, but our military chooses to pay about $400/gal for it in Afghanistan)? Health Insurance? Any Insurances? Food? Etc.

WickedStealthy
Jun 2, 2011, 04:38 PM
This is the sign of the further untethering of iOS devices. I mean otherwise you can just use your computer to download the update can't you? Been awhile since I had an iOS device.

Or its just a feature add to keep the price of their routers high.


I'd like it more if the Time Capsule were an iTunes server.

That would make alot of sense with today's iOS devices, low storage capacity MBAs and even laptops.

I suppose though you might as well just buy a Mac Mini then.

ACTually why doesn't Apple make a $300 iTunes server in the form of a low power Mac Mini. Only needs enough ram and cpu and gpu to be an iTunes server. Doesn't even need a gpu I guess. Put a 1.4ghz C2D in there along with 1gb of ram. 8gb of Flash or so for the iTunes server and updates and some cache. Storage would be external drives. Bonus would be room for user replaceable hard drive. Doesn't need disc drive or any ports except ethernet ports.

would be controlled with iOS device or Mac.

Exactly what I hope they will do. Get some kind of iTunes server so that no syncing of apps etc needs to be done by plugging devices into another PC of Mac. Just stream and sync on your local network.

It would be great to have it hooked up to something like a synology 12-bay box :) Which can also serve for other purposes ...
But I think we are dreaming :D

TallManNY
Jun 2, 2011, 04:42 PM
This same basic model keeps repeating over and over since the mid-1980's. Identify anything that the GOV has regulated to give us lower prices now than we had then, or we had even 5 or 10 years ago?

Electric? Water? Internet? Gas (did you know it's about 35 cents per gallon in Iraq & Iran, but our military chooses to pay about $400/gal for it in Afghanistan)? Health Insurance? Any Insurances? Food? Etc.

I agree with you that the Government has been fairly toothless in constraining big business (for better or worse on that matter). But electricity and water are regulated items which are provided to people at very inexpensive prices despite a company having a monopoly. I think it is a fairly successful example of government regulation based on the fact that electricity and water is readily available pretty much everywhere to the extent that you want it and it is cheap. But that level of regulation (i.e., profits basically capped at 6%) is the cable companies' biggest fear and it will keep them from totally gouging the consumer. That doesn't mean you are necessarily going to like your cable internet bill, but it will at least be something that every middle class person can afford without too much difficulty.

You are throwing out the price of gas in Iraq? Umm, you do know that that price is due to heavy heavy subsidies by the governments. The people are dirt poor due mainly to their terrible governments, but as long as their are enough subsidies that the poor people can buy gas and food, the ***** won't necessarily hit the fan.

nutmac
Jun 2, 2011, 04:46 PM
According to Arstechnica (http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2011/06/time-capsule-update-could-cache-software-updates-sync-with-icloud.ars) and other sources, Time Capsule (whose name may change) will be launched during WWDC as the 5th iOS device (1 = iPhone, 2 = iPod touch, 3 = iPad, 4 = Apple TV 2).

MikhailT
Jun 2, 2011, 04:51 PM
Don’t compare the wireless bandwidth with the wired bandwidth, they are two completely different things with different restrictions.

There are severe limits of how much you can carry traffic between wireless networks and that’s expected.

The wired bandwidth can definitely grow to outsupply the global demand but the companies have not been motivated to do this and have no incentive to do this.

The US Congress gave the companies money to do this and so far, the companies didn’t do what they were asked to do.

We can certainly supply 1Gbps fibre connection to everybody in the country if we demand it and we can certainly price it cheaply. There are many countries out there that already does this.

The only reason we haven’t done this is because of regulations, people don’t want companies digging into their backyard, hate the constructions and so on. There are also no incentives for the companies to do this as well. Every time we try to build our own fibre network with tax money in the country, the state and cities get hit with lawsuits preventing them to do this because “it’s not fair to the private sector”.

HobeSoundDarryl
Jun 2, 2011, 04:55 PM
I agree with you that the Government has been fairly toothless in constraining big business (for better or worse on that matter). But electricity and water are regulated items which are provided to people at very inexpensive prices despite a company having a monopoly. I think it is a fairly successful example of government regulation based on the fact that electricity and water is readily available pretty much everywhere to the extent that you want it and it is cheap. But that level of regulation (i.e., profits basically capped at 6%) is the cable companies' biggest fear and it will keep them from totally gouging the consumer. That doesn't mean you are necessarily going to like your cable internet bill, but it will at least be something that every middle class person can afford without too much difficulty.

I don't know where you live, but where I live our regulated electricity & water is definitely not cheap. And our GOV makes deals with our regulated electricity provider by giving them tens of millions in grants to consider building a new nuclear plant with the condition that if they decide not to build it they can keep the money (that used to be known as "free money").

I do recall what electricity and water cost even a few years ago. (Here) it is definitely a lot higher than 6% per year increases would support.

You are throwing out the price of gas in Iraq? Umm, you do know that that price is due to heavy heavy subsidies by the governments. The people are dirt poor due mainly to their terrible governments, but as long as their are enough subsidies that the poor people can buy gas and food, the ***** won't necessarily hit the fan.

That would be OUR government money flows subsidizing the price of gas. Whatever happened to "to the victor goes the spoils"? Why can't we buy all that gas (even) at full retail (35 cents/gal) and ship it over here and sell it to our people at $1/gal... maybe split the profit with about half of it going to build out energy alternatives to oil and the other half subsidizing something else to the benefit of the middle classes?

Oh that's right, that would hurt the small group who throws lots of money into re-election coffers. We can't have that.

I'd love to believe in the illusion that the GOV won't allow broadband rates to be increased too much. I just don't see the GOV doing that anywhere else, including the very near proxy of wireless internet fees nor even in the cable and broadband rates already flowing through the same pipes (those prices only move in one direction year after year).

But I'll go with you here and hope that this time... on this one thing... it will be different. I'd prefer it that way but I don't see any reason for it to play out like that.

azazel-
Jun 2, 2011, 05:03 PM
It's Apple.

Because no other company comes out with new revisions of hardware, amiright?

twoodcc
Jun 2, 2011, 05:14 PM
This makes sense. For both updates and icloud. But why isn't this just a software update?

TallManNY
Jun 2, 2011, 05:18 PM
I don't know where you live, but where I live our regulated electricity & water is definitely not cheap.

I do recall what electricity and water cost even a few years ago. (Here) it is definitely a lot higher than 6% per year increases would support.

Your electricity and water is cheap. Name me one material good that you can buy at a dollar per pound price cheaper than the water that comes out of your faucet. Heck water is so cheap you bath and take dumps in it. :p

Same thing for electricity. You are using it all day and every day and yet you rarely think about the cost. Sure it would be nice if it was basically free. But setting aside air conditioning you house, it is almost impossible for a normal person to use a really expensive amount of electricity in a month. If it is still too much for you, get a few energy saver appliances and light bulbs.



That would be OUR government money flows subsidizing the price of gas. Whatever happened to "to the victor goes the spoils"? Why can't we buy all that gas (even) at full retail (35 cents/gal) and ship it over here and sell it to our people at $1/gal... maybe split the profit with about half of it going to build out energy alternatives to oil and the other half subsidizing something else to the benefit of the middle classes?


What you are talking about is imperialism and you don't really want our country to go there. If we are going to steal the resources straight out, then we might as well just kill off everyone and plan the flag permanently. Obviously that would be immoral and I hope you wouldn't condone that.

HobeSoundDarryl
Jun 2, 2011, 05:29 PM
What you are talking about is imperialism and you don't really want our country to go there. If we are going to steal the resources straight out, then we might as well just kill off everyone and plan the flag permanently. Obviously that would be immoral and I hope you wouldn't condone that.

Since this is Mac rumors, I'll quit with the political rants. I brought up examples of the GOV failing to do what's best for us in response to someone offering up that the GOV will come to the rescue if broadband pricing starts getting "out of hand".

So, let's just buy your concept that the GOV won't allow broadband and wireless broadband pricing to get out of hand and then check it again in a few years. I'd be willing to bet my whole "energy efficient" house where "electricity is expensive" that both will cost more in just few years than both costs now (and not just the pace of inflation more expensive).

We've already played this game over and over since the mid 1980's, if not sooner. I think the middle class lost it's government somewhere thereabouts (maybe sooner) to the few who now dominate GOV policy. Among those few are the broadband and wireless broadband gatekeepers who seem quite skilled at justifying steady increases in their offerings and a GOV that chooses to do nothing about it (for years and years and years now).

nutmac
Jun 2, 2011, 05:45 PM
This makes sense. For both updates and icloud. But why isn't this just a software update?
Short answer: I am guessing the same reason why Apple TV 2 wasn't just a software update.

Long answer: Although currently shipping Time Capsule runs on ARM processor, it is an older variety (ARMv5). If Time Capsule (product name may change) becomes a 5th iOS devices (joining iPhone, iPod touch, iPad, and Apple TV 2) as rumored, Apple will want it to run on the same and latest ARMv7 architecture (A4 or A5).

SdPunk
Jun 2, 2011, 06:17 PM
Now I can hold off on buying another external HD. :)

Glideslope
Jun 2, 2011, 06:19 PM
Sounds Eco-System Friendly if true. This is the type of user experience that draws users to Apple. Hope it pans out. :apple:

Cougarcat
Jun 2, 2011, 07:36 PM
What if Time Machine is included in iOS 5? Wirelessly back up to Time Capsule.

cmaier
Jun 2, 2011, 07:49 PM
What if Time Machine is included in iOS 5? Wirelessly back up to Time Capsule.

Good way to run down your battery very quickly.

MattInOz
Jun 2, 2011, 08:14 PM
What about those who don't have a Time Capsule? :(

I'm sure you'll have the option to Buy/Activate Update Server on one of your Mac's to do the same job.

Cougarcat
Jun 2, 2011, 08:22 PM
Good way to run down your battery very quickly.

Not if it only backed up during recharging.

Primejimbo
Jun 2, 2011, 09:23 PM
Dude, you aren't a light user if you are streaming netflix almost every night. My mom who checks her email a few times a week and only uses the web about once a month is a light user. We are all lucky that there are lots of folks doing not too much with their internet access and still paying $50 a month.

Using a lot less than 100GB a month. I think last month was about 60GB.. if that. So maybe a medium user than, but never even coming close to my 250GB cap.

Cheerwino
Jun 2, 2011, 09:31 PM
Nothin' kills a decent thread like politics. Thanks folks. :mad:

WissMAN
Jun 3, 2011, 12:35 AM
I just don't get the time capsule thing. I prefer a usb external drive for backups and additional storage. I have a MBA and until iCloud delivers, this works for me.

What am I missing in the TC world? What is so special about these? Are they accessible from the internet? Are they like a personal cloud? :confused:

eldaria
Jun 3, 2011, 01:25 AM
Honestly this should be possible to do with just a firmware update not a new device, especially for the Time Capsules that already have a harddrive.

TallManNY
Jun 3, 2011, 07:49 AM
I just don't get the time capsule thing. I prefer a usb external drive for backups and additional storage. I have a MBA and until iCloud delivers, this works for me.

What am I missing in the TC world? What is so special about these? Are they accessible from the internet? Are they like a personal cloud? :confused:

TC provides remote backup without connecting your laptop. So you can backup from the couch. Also it combines form factor with wifi router that you already would have, so one less piece of equipment in the house. Remote printer might be helpful depending on your setup as well. Lets see if the updates do something a little more special. There is certainly an opening to announce some knew hardware.

crzdcolombian
Jun 3, 2011, 09:58 AM
my school has a password, my job has a password, my apartment and my friends apartments have network passwords. I use 3g very little and am almost always on a network. Unless 4g is faster than my broadband internet I don't really care. What do people do download bittorrent on an iphone?

I pay an extra $20 bucks for my iphone, 250 text and 200 mbs of data. I have never gone over it and have had that plan since they offered it. I am really happy AT&T offered this plan because $30 + 5-20 dollars in Text is crazy for just a phone unless your a buisness user. The caps are not a bad thing and glad that big companies aren't screwing over the little guys so people who download porn or movies on their phone all day don't pay the same as someone who doesn't

I want these calls to be able to make phone calls. My friend has a sprint 4g phone and he says how its so much better than the iphone and its like wow your phone can upload a movie 5 seconds faster. Good for you.:D

cmaier
Jun 3, 2011, 10:16 AM
Honestly this should be possible to do with just a firmware update not a new device, especially for the Time Capsules that already have a harddrive.

possibly, if there is sufficient RAM, etc. to support the more complicated OS required. But it's possible there will be a firmware update for the old time capsules/airports as well. The hardware may be updated for other reasons (cost, manufacturability, reliability, power consumption, performance, etc.) - you didn't expect Apple to keep selling the same device forever?

jonnysods
Jun 3, 2011, 12:22 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8J2)

I hope my existing TC gets a software upgrade.

ablashek
Jun 3, 2011, 02:47 PM
I use a Mac Server 10.5 Leopard for my Small Office. We all use Macs with the exception of our Accounting PC (Win). We use the Mac Server to handle our Jabber, Mail, Apache, iCal, and what was supposed to be Automated Updates. That is, in Theory the Mac Server Should download the Updates and pass it on to the group so that each individual Mac doesn't eat up too much Bandwidth. Also I have set up my Macs to work with Open Directory and Ldap. I've done everything short of Netboot, which if I did that it shouldn't be something they should brag about on their site.

Never worked. And I frankly don't expect the Airport to do it either. In terms of Technology it doesn't seem to be something that is very hard to accomplish, but with all the updates Apple never reallied seemed to find a solution for it.

FYI, other things that don't seem to work are the Mobility and Mail Spam Filters. But thats for another post. :). Apart from all my cribbing, I love Apple. Less Headaches.

caspersoong
Jun 4, 2011, 02:48 AM
Nice. Though the price tag needs to come down.