PDA

View Full Version : iCloud Free Trial, $25 Per Year, and Ads?




Pages : [1] 2

MacRumors
Jun 2, 2011, 03:20 PM
http://images.macrumors.com/im/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/06/02/icloud-free-trial-25-dollars-ads/)


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

Rumors are flowing fast in the days before WWDC. LATimes (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/entertainmentnewsbuzz/2011/06/major-labels-music-publishers-apple-icloud.html) reveals some additional details about Apple's iCloud service.

The iCloud service will function as many have expected. Offering iTunes users the ability to save their purchases to iCloud and then being able to listen to it from any web browser or Apple device. Apple will be offering a free trial for those who buy music from iTunes and later expects to charge "about" $25/year for the service.

The LATimes also adds without detail that "Apple would also sell advertising around its iCloud service." It's not clear in what form this advertising would be, and whether it would be present for only free or also paid customers.

Finally, Apple expects to extend the iCloud concept to movies, TV shows and other digital content. Apple will be announcing iCloud at next week's WWDC.

Article Link: iCloud Free Trial, $25 Per Year, and Ads? (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/06/02/icloud-free-trial-25-dollars-ads/)



mrat93
Jun 2, 2011, 03:23 PM
$25 per year would be pretty nice since my MobileMe subscription renews the day after the keynote. :)

robEstyles
Jun 2, 2011, 03:23 PM
Soooooo no music on iCloud if it's not purchased from iTunes I can assume?

neiltc13
Jun 2, 2011, 03:24 PM
So not really a good competitor to Spotify then.

ugahairydawgs
Jun 2, 2011, 03:25 PM
So this is basically just an online locker for iTunes store purchases?

If true that is pretty disappointing.

GimmeSlack12
Jun 2, 2011, 03:26 PM
$25 a year? Wow, that's only $2.08 a month. Shoot, I spend more than that on iPhone apps every couple weeks.

Skika
Jun 2, 2011, 03:26 PM
Good price. I will subscribe in an instand

rWally
Jun 2, 2011, 03:26 PM
Unless the vast majority of your music collection is purchased from iTunes I fail to see why anyone would buy this service.

I'd like to have a way to integrate my iTunes library on my NAS at home into the cloud service. This way I could have a combination of streaming from my own drives and apple's servers depending on where I purchased it.

Mattsasa
Jun 2, 2011, 03:28 PM
$25 a year? Wow, that's only $2.08 a month. Shoot, I spend more than that on iPhone apps every couple weeks.

and its like half the price of paying for text messages... $5 per month

Warbrain
Jun 2, 2011, 03:28 PM
There's no way that the labels would agree to let Apple host all of the music files that you have because there's no guarantee that you actually purchased those files or legitimately ripped them from a CD. This isn't surprising at all.

Everyone should be taking all of this with a grain of salt and waiting for Monday.

david77
Jun 2, 2011, 03:28 PM
$25 a year? Wow, that's only $2.08 a month. Shoot, I spend more than that on iPhone apps every couple weeks.

QFT, especially since it might include movies. I hope, hope, hope this includes photos as well.

KALLT
Jun 2, 2011, 03:30 PM
$25 per year would be pretty nice since my MobileMe subscription renews the day after the keynote. :)

Do you expect that MobileMe will be included in iCloud or think it is a nice coincidence that your subscription renews on the same day? :-)

iTunes is unfortunately not my only source of music, since I have to buy songs on CD that are not available on the Store. Paying for a streaming service that lets me play my purchased songs from iTunes is very much too limited as I would pay such considerable price for that.

Sky Blue
Jun 2, 2011, 03:30 PM
I'd rather store things locally, not have to worry about buffering and save $25 a year.

mathewr
Jun 2, 2011, 03:30 PM
is this going to be the new mobile me or in conjunction with mobile me. i renewed in feb. im going to want money back if thats the price pt and theres no more mobile me.

0815
Jun 2, 2011, 03:30 PM
I'm Ok with ads if it brings the price down and is not interruptive and in my face - I would hate ad jingles between streamed songs.

rWally
Jun 2, 2011, 03:30 PM
There's no way that the labels would agree to let Apple host all of the music files that you have because there's no guarantee that you actually purchased those files or legitimately ripped them from a CD. This isn't surprising at all.

Everyone should be taking all of this with a grain of salt and waiting for Monday.

I agree, but couldn't apple allow me to stream from my own NAS for music I didn't purchase from them? I use StreamToMe right now but it would be nice to have something that would integrate with the iPod app on my iPhone.

bushido
Jun 2, 2011, 03:30 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_3 like Mac OS X; de-de) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8J2 Safari/6533.18.5)

lol 25$ and u can only use music u already paid for LAME .... and useless to me as i have like 20 songs purchased from the store

WeegieMac
Jun 2, 2011, 03:31 PM
And yet Cult of Mac ran this ...

http://www.cultofmac.com/icloud-may-sync-and-stream-even-pirated-music-thanks-to-apple-licensing-deal/98061

Nomadski
Jun 2, 2011, 03:31 PM
Considering ive got exactly zero songs purchased thru iTunes, it would seem iCloud may as well be vapourware for me.

Žalgiris
Jun 2, 2011, 03:31 PM
25 sounds interesting.

iggypod
Jun 2, 2011, 03:31 PM
Interesting. I'm anxious to learn how/if this will play with MobileMe.

I have an apple ID for MoMe and another one for iTunes. Not sure how it will or won't jive.

notjustjay
Jun 2, 2011, 03:32 PM
There's no way that the labels would agree to let Apple host all of the music files that you have because there's no guarantee that you actually purchased those files or legitimately ripped them from a CD. This isn't surprising at all.

Everyone should be taking all of this with a grain of salt and waiting for Monday.

Well the MR story just below this one suggests that it will be for iTunes-purchased music for now, but that Apple hopes to be able to extend this later. So... maybe?

The vast majority of my online-purchased music has been from iTunes anyway, since there are very few other alternatives here in Canada -- we don't have Amazon MP3, nor Wal-Mart, etc. Most of my music is ripped from CDs though, so this service would have relatively little value to me at the beginning.

$25 sounds like a great start though! Looking forward to Monday.

ssk2
Jun 2, 2011, 03:33 PM
Eugh....

I want a digital locker for all of MY music, whether it be downloaded from iTunes, ripped from my CD or vinyl or even borrowed from a friend (yes, I don't do illegit music...). I don't and won't want to pay to have only my iTunes purchases, which represent a small part of my music collection, stored somewhere else. I can't see the value for a serious music collector.

Will alter my opinion if the keynote offers something else though.

robEstyles
Jun 2, 2011, 03:33 PM
There's no way that the labels would agree to let Apple host all of the music files that you have because there's no guarantee that you actually purchased those files or legitimately ripped them from a CD. This isn't surprising at all.

Everyone should be taking all of this with a grain of salt and waiting for Monday.

Which is why Google and Amazon had the right idea in not even asking them. Apple had to ask them because my guess is your not actually uploading any of your music. iCloud is just streaming a song from its service if its flagged that you bought it. Which is why they needed a licensing agreement.

I don't see this working unless your entire library can be used for it. Can you imagine only being able to put songs you downloaded from iTunes on your iPod?

jclardy
Jun 2, 2011, 03:33 PM
So this is basically just an online locker for iTunes store purchases?

If true that is pretty disappointing.

I think it will be much more than that.

The cloud icon looks like an app icon and they are putting it on the same level as Lion and iOS 5 at a developer conference.

I wouldn't be surprised if Apple came out with an iCloud SDK for developers allowing them to easily sync data between iPhone/iPad/Mac.

In addition to shared files, contacts, calendar and the other stuff that is already in MobileMe.

altecXP
Jun 2, 2011, 03:34 PM
As long as I keep my @mac.com I'll be happy.

mrmattmarks
Jun 2, 2011, 03:34 PM
[removed by user]

ccraig13
Jun 2, 2011, 03:35 PM
So not really a good competitor to Spotify then.

or MOG.

nagromme
Jun 2, 2011, 03:36 PM
I like the (rumored) price, but I’m assuming it does more than just let me “fit more” songs on my mobile devices; that’s nice, but not really a burning need for me! In principle I do like the idea of having ALL my music everywhere, but the songs I actually play seem to come from a much smaller set.

SevenInchScrew
Jun 2, 2011, 03:37 PM
I use both the Google Music Beta and the Amazon Cloud Player on my Captivate, and they both work quite well. I'm interested to see Apple's take on this type of service.

fabian9
Jun 2, 2011, 03:39 PM
Too bad, looks like I'll have to stick with spotify for music.

gramirez2012
Jun 2, 2011, 03:39 PM
If this includes all of the existing MobileMe features, than this is really awesome! If it's only for music, than it's pretty lame. I sure hope it's the former.

wd89
Jun 2, 2011, 03:39 PM
Let's say MobileMe subscribers get this service for free until it's time to renew...

I have 2 Apple ID's (one created in 2005 that has all my music purchases on) and the @me.com Apple ID that I have purchased nothing with.

Would that mean I can't use the "$25 per year paid service" (I know it's speculation) because my main Apple ID has no ties with MobileMe?

rsbagga
Jun 2, 2011, 03:39 PM
Some saying that mobileme taken over by iCloud, some saying that mobile me continues to exist.

If its taken over, I hope there's some extra benefit for those of us who dropped another $100/yr within the last few months to renew....(!)

regandarcy
Jun 2, 2011, 03:39 PM
Although cool sounding....i am still struggling with the real usefullness of the icloud. Whats the point of storing your music on a remote server, if you cant ACCESS it? I mean your ipod or laptop may have wifi....but you wont ALWAYS be near a wifi signal when out and about with your device. So what do you do then? If you store your music on your ipod or laptop....what exactly is the pointof the cloud then? Lol.

But what do i know? I pay apple $99 a year for a mobile me account. :-)

Warbrain
Jun 2, 2011, 03:39 PM
I agree, but couldn't apple allow me to stream from my own NAS for music I didn't purchase from them? I use StreamToMe right now but it would be nice to have something that would integrate with the iPod app on my iPhone.

Again, the issue of whether or not you purchased that music comes up. RIAA and labels won't want a licensed service stream pirated tracks.

Which is why Google and Amazon had the right idea in not even asking them. Apple had to ask them because my guess is your not actually uploading any of your music. iCloud is just streaming a song from its service if its flagged that you bought it. Which is why they needed a licensing agreement.

I don't see this working unless your entire library can be used for it. Can you imagine only being able to put songs you downloaded from iTunes on your iPod?

If Apple hadn't gone the route of iTunes before the store and promoting the ripping of CDs then yes, I could easily see that Apple would go that route if they could do it over again.

314631
Jun 2, 2011, 03:41 PM
And yet Cult of Mac ran this ...

http://www.cultofmac.com/icloud-may-sync-and-stream-even-pirated-music-thanks-to-apple-licensing-deal/98061

Yeah I'm going to trust a Cult of Mac article over common sense. There is no chance in hell the recording industry will ever permit pirated content on any legally licensed music service. And nor should they.

rickdollar
Jun 2, 2011, 03:41 PM
The LA Times story is not accurate.
They've got it all backwards.

"The agreements, finalized this week, call for Apple to share 30% of any revenue from iCloud's music service with record labels, as well as 12% with music publishers holding the songwriting rights. Apple is expected to keep the remaining 58%, said people knowledgeable with the terms."

HAHA. Apple keeps 58% "says people knowledgeable with the terms."
I would disregard the whole article. They don't know what they're talking about.

wordoflife
Jun 2, 2011, 03:41 PM
I'd rather store things locally, not have to worry about buffering and save $25 a year.

Same here. I'm not really concerned since I always have my iPhone/iPod with me. Plus if I'm dying to listen to music, then I'd just use grooveshark.

I guess its not bad for the price

MetalMoon
Jun 2, 2011, 03:41 PM
Sorry, but paying rent to use someone's harddrive to store music sounds pretty silly to me. Just buy a ipod classic and you'll be able to carry 120GB of music around you, much bigger and cheaper then any cloud service could give you.

aprilfools
Jun 2, 2011, 03:41 PM
Finally, some clarification. This is evidence that iCloud won't be a replacement for MobileMe. Maybe a replacement of iDisk, but I have yet to see anything about email within iCloud - therefore MobileMe will probably still exist.

Than why can't anyone purchase Mobile Me from Apple right now. Try to buy it. you can't.

diamond.g
Jun 2, 2011, 03:43 PM
Again, the issue of whether or not you purchased that music comes up. RIAA and labels won't want a licensed service stream pirated tracks.



If Apple hadn't gone the route of iTunes before the store and promoting the ripping of CDs then yes, I could easily see that Apple would go that route if they could do it over again.

So how does this service compete with what Amazon/Google are providing?

I would find this service more compelling if it enabled streaming of shows bought off iTunes on day 1.

I hope this isn't screwing up MobileMe, because I value that service more then what I am hearing thus far...

organerito
Jun 2, 2011, 03:43 PM
If Ping felt lonely, it is going to have a neighbor very soon. this iCloud service is just going to be as useless if only iTunes store music is allowed.

wd89
Jun 2, 2011, 03:44 PM
Than why can't anyone purchase Mobile Me from Apple right now. Try to buy it. you can't.

Yes you can.

W1MRK
Jun 2, 2011, 03:44 PM
Ads? Seriously? Count me out. I am fed up with iAds.

Razeus
Jun 2, 2011, 03:44 PM
Let the bitching begin...

diamond.g
Jun 2, 2011, 03:45 PM
Yes you can.

How so? I thought it was removed (I can't seem to renew my service).

Warbrain
Jun 2, 2011, 03:45 PM
So how does this service compete with what Amazon/Google are providing?

I would find this service more compelling if it enabled streaming of shows bought off iTunes on day 1.

I hope this isn't screwing up MobileMe, because I value that service more then what I am hearing thus far...

If it supports every purchase you made in the iTunes Store from day 1 that's huge.

This competes with Amazon more than Google as it'll be what you bought stored and streamed.

Reach9
Jun 2, 2011, 03:45 PM
As long as the 'iDisk" or Dropbox-like feature, will be free then i couldn't care less about iTunes streaming for now.

ugahairydawgs
Jun 2, 2011, 03:46 PM
There's no way that the labels would agree to let Apple host all of the music files that you have because there's no guarantee that you actually purchased those files or legitimately ripped them from a CD. This isn't surprising at all.

Everyone should be taking all of this with a grain of salt and waiting for Monday.

That was the whole point of Apple signing the deals with the labels is that this was a way for them to get some compensation from those who have pirated music. Give them a place to store it and the $$ made off of the subscription fees would go to the labels (who are getting diddly right now).

SevenInchScrew
Jun 2, 2011, 03:46 PM
Sorry, but paying rent to use someone's harddrive to store music sounds pretty silly to me. [b]Just buy a ipod classic and you'll be able to carry 120GB of music around you, much bigger and cheaper then any cloud service could give you.
But then you have to carry one more device. I like having it all in just one device, personally.

mrmattmarks
Jun 2, 2011, 03:47 PM
[removed by user]

Warbrain
Jun 2, 2011, 03:47 PM
That was the whole point of Apple signing the deals with the labels is that this was a way for them to get some compensation from those who have pirated music. Give them a place to store it and the $$ made off of the subscription fees would go to the labels (who are getting diddly right now).

Or they're licensing deals that allow for the streaming of the music that was purchased through iTunes as that would require a royalty for each play. I imagine that it would require Apple to pay something similar to an Internet radio station.

wd89
Jun 2, 2011, 03:48 PM
How so? I thought it was removed (I can't seem to renew my service).

New users sign up for a free trial. When it ends, they're charged (unless they cancel).

Existing users have the option to automatically renew their subscription (if their card details are stored with Apple) or let their subscription expire.

AlligatorBloodz
Jun 2, 2011, 03:50 PM
If this is true, why would this service cost money?1!?!?!?!?! Apple already has the songs on their servers. They already transmit 1:30 of it for free to sample. Where is the extra cost to them? Why do they need to charge? This doesn't make any sense.

0815
Jun 2, 2011, 03:50 PM
And again, people got nuts about less than 7cents a day without even knowing what is offered for that price ....

ugahairydawgs
Jun 2, 2011, 03:51 PM
Or they're licensing deals that allow for the streaming of the music that was purchased through iTunes as that would require a royalty for each play. I imagine that it would require Apple to pay something similar to an Internet radio station.

That type of service doesn't really jive with the whole iCloud name.

diamond.g
Jun 2, 2011, 03:51 PM
If it supports every purchase you made in the iTunes Store from day 1 that's huge.

This competes with Amazon more than Google as it'll be what you bought stored and streamed.

So I guess we have to wait to see if Apple will allow uploading of personal songs (things not purchased through iTunes) because at the moment, Amazon supports that capability, plus the streaming of things purchased. Which would make it superior to iCloud (if we can't upload our non-iTunes content for streaming).

aprilfools
Jun 2, 2011, 03:51 PM
For the same reason we can't purchase anything while the store is down for updating a new product (iPad...etc).

Ex. When the iPad came out I couldn't purchase a ipod case from the online store (it goes down during product releases), does that mean that iPad was a replacement for a ipod case?



No. I'm not talking about Apple store being down. Im talking about Mobile Me has not been available to purchase on Apple website for the past several months.. Again, assuming Apple Store is up... go find where you can buy Mobile Me.. You can't.

Mattsasa
Jun 2, 2011, 03:51 PM
its actually going to be $25 per MegaByte....

SIGN ME UP!!

FatMax
Jun 2, 2011, 03:52 PM
If this is true, why would this service cost money?1!?!?!?!?! Apple already has the songs on their servers. They already transmit 1:30 of it for free to sample. Where is the extra cost to them? Why do they need to charge? This doesn't make any sense.

Because of bandwith charges.

Macrumors is on fire today!

mrmattmarks
Jun 2, 2011, 03:52 PM
[removed by user]

iggypod
Jun 2, 2011, 03:52 PM
Let's say MobileMe subscribers get this service for free until it's time to renew...

I have 2 Apple ID's (one created in 2005 that has all my music purchases on) and the @me.com Apple ID that I have purchased nothing with.

Would that mean I can't use the "$25 per year paid service" (I know it's speculation) because my main Apple ID has no ties with MobileMe?


I'm in the exact same boat as your situation, wondering the same thing.

Anxious to learn more.

The Beatles
Jun 2, 2011, 03:53 PM
i really dont care about all this cloud bs. Bummer thats where apples focus is and most likely will be for the foreseeable future. The last thing i want is to give my internet service provider control over my content. And believe me, thats what they will do if they're in the middle.

Me >CONTENT PROVIDER<My content. Not good.

mrmattmarks
Jun 2, 2011, 03:53 PM
[removed by user]

adbe
Jun 2, 2011, 03:53 PM
Sorry, but paying rent to use someone's harddrive to store music sounds pretty silly to me.

You aren't even, since no hard drive space is actually being used. If it's only iTunes content, then Apple already have that stuff on their servers.

As presented so far, this is a service that will fit the needs of only a select few users, namely those people who only have iTunes music collections, and spend significant periods of time near WiFi[1].

Everyone else will either take a pass, or hit up Amazon/Google.


[1] Streaming over 3g is going to get heavy on the bandwidth usage for the kinds of people who'd actually have a use for this service.

kiljoy616
Jun 2, 2011, 03:53 PM
So it cost $25.00 and on top of that there will be marketing also. Sound like Hulu + have fun fangirls.

ninjadex
Jun 2, 2011, 03:54 PM
iCloud is going to be a smash-hit. How do I know this? From the sheer amount of nerds already discounting it, before it's feature-set has formally been announced. :)

Full of Win
Jun 2, 2011, 03:55 PM
iCloud for iTunes content only = Ping 2

roocka
Jun 2, 2011, 03:55 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) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8J2 Safari/6533.18.5)

Pandora RIP...

kiljoy616
Jun 2, 2011, 03:56 PM
But then you have to carry one more device. I like having it all in just one device, personally.

For the price better to get the 32 gig and move one. Even at MP3 320 you still could have more music than you will listen in a week.

I wonder if this will hold back the release of a 64 Gig iphone. :confused:

SevenInchScrew
Jun 2, 2011, 03:56 PM
No. I'm not talking about Apple store being down. Im talking about Mobile Me has not been available to purchase on Apple website for the past several months.. Again, assuming Apple Store is up... go find where you can buy Mobile Me.. You can't.
Can't you just start a free 60-day trial, and then enter your credit card info into your account so that when the trial is up it bills you?

http://www.apple.com/mobileme/pricing/

btcutter
Jun 2, 2011, 03:56 PM
$25 per year would be pretty nice since my MobileMe subscription renews the day after the keynote. :)

does iCloud include the MobileMe services? Doesn't sound like it so far.:mad:

kiljoy616
Jun 2, 2011, 03:57 PM
iCloud is going to be a smash-hit. How do I know this? From the sheer amount of nerds already discounting it, before it's feature-set has formally been announced. :)

No it will be a hit not because of the sane nerds but the insane fangirls. That is what will make it viable and nothing else.

Tilpots
Jun 2, 2011, 03:57 PM
Slightly off topic, but very relevant, could MR please stop using that music note on a cloud icon and start using the one revealed today? Don't know why, but that old icon annoys the hell outta me. Sorry. I'll shut up now.

fabian9
Jun 2, 2011, 03:58 PM
Yeah I'm going to trust a Cult of Mac article over common sense. There is no chance in hell the recording industry will ever permit pirated content on any legally licensed music service. And nor should they.

There are 1 or 2 other places on the internet where people can legally purchase mp3s, apart from iTunes... :rolleyes:

ARF900
Jun 2, 2011, 03:58 PM
$25 a year is incredibly reasonable, looking forward to this.

wd89
Jun 2, 2011, 03:58 PM
slightly off topic, but very relevant, could mr please stop using that music note on a cloud icon and start using the one revealed today? Don't know why, but that old icon annoys the hell outta me. Sorry. I'll shut up now.

thank you!

Krovem
Jun 2, 2011, 03:59 PM
$25 is not bad, what exactly does it do?

adbe
Jun 2, 2011, 04:01 PM
There are 1 or 2 other places on the internet where people can legally purchase mp3s, apart from iTunes... :rolleyes:

To say nothing of CD rips, which whilst the RIAA likes to decry it, is probably covered under format shifting rights.

Piggie
Jun 2, 2011, 04:01 PM
$25 a year to stream only iTunes purchased content and have adverts thrown in on top.

If that's what Apple offer then I hope it bombs as it's ridiculous.

Thataboy
Jun 2, 2011, 04:01 PM
It CAN'T be that iCloud is just for songs you have purchased in iTunes. That would make it FAR inferior to Amazon/Google -- it would mean a failure of Ping magnitude.

I have to assume there is a mistake in communication here. Maybe it will be that Apple will allow iCloud access to all songs in your library that they OFFER through iTunes (i.e., songs they can match -- think of the old iMixes, where you make a playlist, upload to iTunes, but only songs that match iTunes Store tracks are listed). Then in the future, they allow you to upload your own iTunes-absent tracks, Amazon/Google style -- to supplement the standard iCloud experience.

It has to be that... right?? It is beyond comprehension that anyone would cheer a service for iTunes purchases only. I am an :apple: and iTunes fanboy and even I would see no purpose in that.

seamer
Jun 2, 2011, 04:03 PM
Don't forget the rumor the other day where Apple scans your library and replaces questionable/low quality content with a "better" quality version via download.

Not sure how this would work if you've mislabeled stuff, but it's still just a rumor and has no known basis in reality... I'm interested, if it's true.

Justinf79
Jun 2, 2011, 04:05 PM
About 98% of my 28GBs of music is from iTunes, so this would be worth it for me. But then again, I don't really listen to music while on the go. I may run Pandora on my N1 once and awhile at most.

Eye4Desyn
Jun 2, 2011, 04:06 PM
I'd rather store things locally, not have to worry about buffering and save $25 a year.

Agreed. I'm more interested in seeing if and how iCloud will integrate with other :apple: desktop applications and/or their mobile counterparts. Albeit that roughly 80-85% of my music and movie library was purchased from iTunes, at the moment, iCloud will need to do more than just be a digital media locker for me to submit to the $25/year pricing model rumored here. Otherwise, I'm fine with just keeping things stored locally. Oh and please, no ads or iAds of any sort - for anyone. Yeesh.

ten-oak-druid
Jun 2, 2011, 04:07 PM
Put me down in the column of people not likely to use the streaming service but hoping mobileme is merged with this for the lower price.

Astro7x
Jun 2, 2011, 04:07 PM
I'd rather store things locally, not have to worry about buffering and save $25 a year.

I agree. I don't get the point of this all. $25 for basically an Apple Run Drop Box, I'm up for it! $25 for me to access my digital downloads from anywhere? No thanks...

rmhop81
Jun 2, 2011, 04:08 PM
It CAN'T be that iCloud is just for songs you have purchased in iTunes. That would make it FAR inferior to Amazon/Google -- it would mean a failure of Ping magnitude.

I have to assume there is a mistake in communication here. Maybe it will be that Apple will allow iCloud access to all songs in your library that they OFFER through iTunes (i.e., songs they can match -- think of the old iMixes, where you make a playlist, upload to iTunes, but only songs that match iTunes Store tracks are listed). Then in the future, they allow you to upload your own iTunes-absent tracks, Amazon/Google style -- to supplement the standard iCloud experience.

It has to be that... right?? It is beyond comprehension that anyone would cheer a service for iTunes purchases only. I am an :apple: and iTunes fanboy and even I would see no purpose in that.
my bet is that it will be tied to your apple ID and will be itunes purchases only.

why would they need all this approval for people to store music online? it can already be done with google docs etc.

Mad Man
Jun 2, 2011, 04:08 PM
And again, people got nuts about less than 7cents a day without even knowing what is offered for that price ....

Too many people think they are entitled to get everything they want for free ... and even if they get something for free they keep complaining because it could be better.

Minimoose 360
Jun 2, 2011, 04:13 PM
25 bucks? A lot better than I was expecting. Sign me up for whatever :cool:

codymac
Jun 2, 2011, 04:14 PM
Eugh....

I want a digital locker for all of MY music, whether it be downloaded from iTunes, ripped from my CD or vinyl or even borrowed from a friend (yes, I don't do illegit music...). I don't and won't want to pay to have only my iTunes purchases, which represent a small part of my music collection, stored somewhere else. I can't see the value for a serious music collector.

Will alter my opinion if the keynote offers something else though.

I'll just keep using pulptunes, thankyouverymuchsteve.
:)

Nuvi
Jun 2, 2011, 04:14 PM
So is this $25 for iTunes only songs or any that you own? There is huge difference especially if they want to compete with Amazon which offers their "locker" free for songs purchased from them + 20GB extra for free for your non Amazon tracks.

ArchaicRevival
Jun 2, 2011, 04:14 PM
It would be cool if included in the service is something along the lines of Shazam or Soundhound that will recoginze music and title it for us :)

PeterQVenkman
Jun 2, 2011, 04:15 PM
Bring on iAds for mac. I need more ads. iCloud iAds.

icloudiads.

newagemac
Jun 2, 2011, 04:15 PM
Which is why Google and Amazon had the right idea in not even asking them. Apple had to ask them because my guess is your not actually uploading any of your music. iCloud is just streaming a song from its service if its flagged that you bought it. Which is why they needed a licensing agreement.

I don't see this working unless your entire library can be used for it. Can you imagine only being able to put songs you downloaded from iTunes on your iPod?

Yes, I can also imagine a lot more people buying only from iTunes from now on because of the value added services like this that it adds. If the rumors are true that Apple's iCloud will automatically upgrade any lower bit rate songs to higher quality then that is another example of value added services.

This is how business operates. The more value you add to what you are selling, the more someone is likely to buy from you.

bushido
Jun 2, 2011, 04:15 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_3 like Mac OS X; de-de) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8J2 Safari/6533.18.5)

And again, people got nuts about less than 7cents a day without even knowing what is offered for that price ....

Too many people think they are entitled to get everything they want for free ... and even if they get something for free they keep complaining because it could be better.

well 25$ to stream 4 itunes songs i own is a bit silly ;)

useless to me anyway, i have all the music i need fit on my iphone, thats what playlists r for. its not like i can listen to like 29 GB of songs on a day + buffering and data caps no thx

vincenz
Jun 2, 2011, 04:16 PM
Where do current MobileMe members stand? :confused:

(guess we'll find out Monday.)

BWhaler
Jun 2, 2011, 04:18 PM
iCloud is going to be a smash-hit. How do I know this? From the sheer amount of nerds already discounting it, before it's feature-set has formally been announced. :)

Brilliant observation and historically accurate. I bet you're correct.

stridemat
Jun 2, 2011, 04:18 PM
Where do current MobileMe members stand? :confused:

(guess we'll find out Monday.)

Hopefully grandfathered in.

Mattie Num Nums
Jun 2, 2011, 04:19 PM
Where do current MobileMe members stand? :confused:

(guess we'll find out Monday.)

Thats what I want to know. I just renewed May 17th.

cube
Jun 2, 2011, 04:20 PM
I don't download music. I buy CDs.

Amazon and Google are better.

fabian9
Jun 2, 2011, 04:20 PM
On a related note, I've just signed up to a 60 day MobileMe trial to see if it'll let me stream audio files - and it does!

So in a way, MobileMe is already like Amazon's cloud drive, because you can already stream your data to your iPhone using the iDisk application, the only thing that's missing is the integration with the iPod.app so that playlists etc. can be played.

So that makes me wonder if this iCloud deal does actually include streaming your own stuff, except you have to upload it first rather than it being readily available on iCloud...

Listening to your own files could also use the limited MobileMe bandwidth (I think it's 200GB/month), whereas songs purchased on iTunes don't affect the bandwidth allowance.

Just a few thoughts, not much longer now until we find out. :)

ovrlrd
Jun 2, 2011, 04:21 PM
Put me down in the column of people not likely to use the streaming service but hoping mobileme is merged with this for the lower price.

If this rumor is true about the pricing,

The best reason they won't merge MobileMe (at least entirely) with iCloud is because it would completely screw over people who recently paid to renew their MobileMe subscription. Also how do they deal with MobileMe Family plans?

There is a lot of questions here, but I feel like Apple will absolutely have to do something to make existing MobileMe users happy. I think if the $25 pricing is true then there will be a few options that Apple might go:


They offer multiple tiers, which offer either more storage or more features. This gives existing subscribers the highest tier.
They refund existing subscribers the difference. That is very unlikely since a lot of people didn't pay full price, and bought it in a retail store, etc.
MobileMe remains separate, but is cheaper still, and existing subscribers get iCloud free. So basically they would do a $25 for iCloud and $75 for MobileMe sort of thing if this was true.


They have to come up with an elegant solution to this problem though, people will be really pissed if they just make MobileMe cheaper as a result and offer nothing to existing subscribers.

SevenInchScrew
Jun 2, 2011, 04:22 PM
Thats what I want to know. I just renewed May 17th.
May 1st for me.

Defender2010
Jun 2, 2011, 04:22 PM
I doubt Apple would build such a huge data centre unless we could store our own music on a personal cloud as well as our purchased stuff from iTunes...umm...what am I trying to say?.....everything available in iTunes is already stored somewhere and as another member said, it can already stream 1.30 mins of previews...so, perhaps the data centre will be for all the personal lockers we have to pay for to keep our "own" stuff (music and films etc)

PCClone
Jun 2, 2011, 04:23 PM
Here is a crazy idea..quit your bitching and see what Apple delivers on Monday. Geez, some people get their panties in a wad based on rumor sites.

acslater017
Jun 2, 2011, 04:25 PM
Interesting. I'm anxious to learn how/if this will play with MobileMe.

I have an apple ID for MoMe and another one for iTunes. Not sure how it will or won't jive.

I imagine:
1) Competitive price if you're a brand new customer
2) Included in your $99 MobileMe subscription, or minimal fee
3) Free with a new Time Capsule! (my theory is that Time Capsule will act as an always-on link between Mac and mobiles)

Benjamins
Jun 2, 2011, 04:27 PM
Here is a crazy idea..quit your bitching and see what Apple delivers on Monday. Geez, some people get their panties in a wad based on rumor sites.

that's crazy!

juicedropsdeuce
Jun 2, 2011, 04:27 PM
WHY use this when...
1. At home, use Home Sharing.
2. Not at home, worry about data caps present on all new US cell plans.
3. Crappy data speeds and constant buffering.
4. Pandora has more music than your iTunes library.
5. Netflix has more movies that your iTunes library.

WHY no rumors of...
1. App data-syncing across devices (iPads and iPhones).
2. Wireless syncing.
3. Wireless OS updates.

Sounds like the market leader is acting like one. :rolleyes:

Cougarcat
Jun 2, 2011, 04:29 PM
Guys, iCloud is going to be more than just music. Apple told us themselves in the press release: "At the keynote, Apple will unveil its next generation software - Lion, the eighth major release of Mac OS X; iOS 5, the next version of Apples advanced mobile operating system which powers the iPad, iPhone and iPod touch; and iCloud, Apple's upcoming cloud services offering."

It's entirely possible that the $25 though will just cover the iTunes portion; we'll have to see.

rWally
Jun 2, 2011, 04:30 PM
On a related note, I've just signed up to a 60 day MobileMe trial to see if it'll let me stream audio files - and it does!

So in a way, MobileMe is already like Amazon's cloud drive, because you can already stream your data to your iPhone using the iDisk application, the only thing that's missing is the integration with the iPod.app so that playlists etc. can be played.

So that makes me wonder if this iCloud deal does actually include streaming your own stuff, except you have to upload it first rather than it being readily available on iCloud...

Listening to your own files could also use the limited MobileMe bandwidth (I think it's 200GB/month), whereas songs purchased on iTunes don't affect the bandwidth allowance.

Just a few thoughts, not much longer now until we find out. :)


Yup, all mobileMe is missing is integration with the ipod app. It already integrates with iCal, contacts, mail, etc. Wouldn't be hard to add the ipod functionality as well.

peteo
Jun 2, 2011, 04:33 PM
I have to say that If this is the iCloud service then I do not think its for me.
I use MOG right now and pay $10 a month and I love it. I can search for almost any song (they have10 million tracks!) and stream it instantly, I can also download whole albums for offline play (I loose signal allot on AT&T :P)
I wish apple would get in this game. They pretty much have almost every song and would like it to be integrated into the iPod app, apple tv etc..

Guess i'll have to wait.

devianter
Jun 2, 2011, 04:35 PM
Well. I was always hoping iTunes will become something like Spotify. Buying each song for .99c is just plain stupid. Buy your stuff on CDs or Vinyls, at least you get something you can show your kids someday and can hold it in your hands lol.

FearlessFreep
Jun 2, 2011, 04:35 PM
My internet stinks at home (no available broadband above 1MB), so I couldn't use this even if I wanted to ... but I have everything synched to my devices, and I stream to my AppleTV ... so what's the benefit here?

0815
Jun 2, 2011, 04:37 PM
My internet stinks at home (no available broadband above 1MB), so I couldn't use this even if I wanted to ... but I have everything synched to my devices, and I stream to my AppleTV ... so what's the benefit here?

that stinks ... guess you don't need to sign up for it. A new service is not necessarily for everyone, luckily you are not forced to sign up for it.

WestonHarvey1
Jun 2, 2011, 04:38 PM
I don't download music. I buy CDs.

Amazon and Google are better.

*shrug* suit yourself. Seems a bit Amish but to each his own.

kas23
Jun 2, 2011, 04:38 PM
So, $25 per year to intermittently listen to my own music (such as when my signal is suboptimal) while using up my limited cellphone data plan vs placing my own already-purchased high-quality (no cellphone signal needed) music on flash storage I already paid much money on while using up no data? Hmmm.

This is an interesting idea and no doubt millions of people will eagerly spend their money on this (see recent release of Beatles on iTunes), but I'll pass.

As for people who just recently bought/renewed MobileMe; you're going to be mad at any cheaper/free cloud service that is introduced, really? If you're actually posting in this thread (or at least reading it), you would have known something like this has been coming for 6 months now.

peteo
Jun 2, 2011, 04:39 PM
About 98% of my 28GBs of music is from iTunes, so this would be worth it for me. But then again, I don't really listen to music while on the go. I may run Pandora on my N1 once and awhile at most.

Wow, thats around $9,300 spent on iTunes. Apple must love you!

mlayer
Jun 2, 2011, 04:40 PM
The last version of lala, which closed almost exactly one year ago after Apple bought it, had the matching service AND allowed users to upload their own music if matches couldn't be found. It also allowed a single free stream for any song (no time limit) an you could buy songs as a download (99c) or stream (10c). I wouldn't expect the last two features to be available, but the matching and uploads should be. The probem with buying lala was that the agreements the company had with the labels weren't transferable to Apple once lala was acquired. I've always thought tht Apple has spent the last 18 months trying to renegotiate those deals with the idea that they'd be the basis of their cloud music service, and that it took Google and Amazon jumping the gun to get he labels to the table. If the matching/upload service plus other MobileMe stuff is only $25/yr it's an absolute steal for consumers, probably too good to be true. If it's limited only to iTunes-purchased tracks I have to question why Apple is even bothering since they know it's not going to be an elegant solution.

iSee
Jun 2, 2011, 04:41 PM
If this is just for iTunes-purchased context it's not so interesting.

I guess it could work if you have a significant amount of iTunes content that you access on the go and you usually have good Internet access. You could even save money by buying, e.g., the 16GB device instead of the 32GB device (assuming the useful life of the device is < 4 years and buying the smaller capacity dervice saves $100).

organerito
Jun 2, 2011, 04:43 PM
Here is a crazy idea..quit your bitching and see what Apple delivers on Monday. Geez, some people get their panties in a wad based on rumor sites.

Bitching about people bitching is just as annoying.


Let's hope monday is going to be full of good surprises!

WestonHarvey1
Jun 2, 2011, 04:44 PM
So, $25 per year to intermittently listen to my own music (such as when my signal is suboptimal) while using up my limited cellphone data plan vs placing my own already-purchased high-quality (no cellphone signal needed) music on flash storage I already paid much money on while using up no data? Hmmm.

This is an interesting idea and no doubt millions of people will eagerly spend their money on this (see recent release of Beatles on iTunes), but I'll pass.

Yeah really not getting the music bit. I've been racking my brain trying to think of where this thing makes any sense. All I can come up with are Apple TV 2 movie purchases.

I never buy movies because I hate the thought of having to download and store multi-gigabyte files. If I could purchase unlimited streaming rights, then I might be convinced to buy some things rather than rent.

Of course, you can't even purchase movies from an Apple TV 2 anyway... it would require an update. I'm sure this isn't in the pipeline.

mdriftmeyer
Jun 2, 2011, 04:44 PM
Would everyone pull their heads out of their proverbial rear ends and wait until WWDC?

LoganT
Jun 2, 2011, 04:46 PM
Would everyone pull their heads out of their proverbial rear ends and wait until WWDC?

Yes everyone listen to him! Macrumors should just shut down the website until Monday! We should all be talking about kittens!

jsep
Jun 2, 2011, 04:47 PM
I think services like Rdio and Spotify are the future of music. Why buy music, and then on top of that pay $25/year, when I can pay $10/month for unlimited music. That's around $6000 over the next 50 years for an "unlimited" selection of music.

Now if iCloud let me stream the entire iTunes catalog for ~$10/month, then i'd consider it.

kas23
Jun 2, 2011, 04:47 PM
Would everyone pull their heads out of their proverbial rear ends and wait until WWDC?

But, they're only doing what you're exactly doing here; trolling around on a RUMORS site.

BLACKFRIDAY
Jun 2, 2011, 04:49 PM
Here is a crazy idea..quit your bitching and see what Apple delivers on Monday. Geez, some people get their panties in a wad based on rumor sites.

Weird that, after tens of rumours about the good thing, there's one bad rumour and people get pissed off.

bobr1952
Jun 2, 2011, 04:49 PM
Well I guess we will see what happens on Monday. Not sure the advantage of what is rumored here. I've used Amazon's locker--and it is free for purchases from Amazon--plus the free 5GB they give you for other stuff. So paying to store your own music seems a bit unappealing at face value so hopefully there is more to this.

thefourthpope
Jun 2, 2011, 04:50 PM
So this is basically just an online locker for iTunes store purchases?

If true that is pretty disappointing.

I totally agree. I don't want Apple placing too much effort into the music side of this. I'd rather them finally nail integrated file sharing, calendar sharing, email, etc, etc. Sure, they have massive resources, and can of course work multiple streams, but all these rumors are still prioritizing the music.

Streaming is too network-dependent for my tastes anyway.

cpucrash0
Jun 2, 2011, 04:50 PM
so the studios are double dipping? I purchase the music then they want more money after I purchased the music so I can have my music I purchased on the cloud? Why would apple even agree to pay them twice if they already get money from the songs purchased on itunes? Apple should have just done it without them like amazon and google did.

InTheUnion
Jun 2, 2011, 04:50 PM
Guys, iCloud is going to be more than just music. Apple told us themselves in the press release: "At the keynote, Apple will unveil its next generation software - Lion, the eighth major release of Mac OS X; iOS 5, the next version of Apples advanced mobile operating system which powers the iPad, iPhone and iPod touch; and iCloud, Apple's upcoming cloud services offering."

It's entirely possible that the $25 though will just cover the iTunes portion; we'll have to see.

That's what I think. Apart from the requirement of permission from a record label, how would this different to just streaming podcasts? And why would they need the huge data centre if they already distribute as much music as they do currently?

Another thing, are any other iOS apps ad-supported? Would they even want that?

d0minick
Jun 2, 2011, 04:52 PM
Bleh. I am really hoping for a *SUPRISE*, music streaming over 3g with their massive catalog.

Well come Monday i'll see if I stick with Apple or make the jump to Napster.

manu chao
Jun 2, 2011, 04:52 PM
WHY use this when...
WHY no rumors of...
1. App data-syncing across devices (iPads and iPhones).
2. Wireless syncing.
3. Wireless OS updates.

Steve Jobs has said last year wireless syncing will come in the future.

But there is another usage that is not very much commented on, moving the master for any iTunes library (and iOS device) from a single computer to the cloud. If you have both a desktop and a laptop and have your iOS device synced with the desktop and then travel with the laptop you cannot sync your iOS device while travelling. Moving the master to the cloud, you can sync your iOS from every computer (that has internet access).
In the same way you could sync two different iOS devices to two different iTunes libraries (eg, from two people in a household) without having to change user accounts.
Which is why Google and Amazon had the right idea in not even asking them. Apple had to ask them because my guess is your not actually uploading any of your music. iCloud is just streaming a song from its service if its flagged that you bought it.
Amazon is already doing this even for their S3 service. If you upload a media file to S3 that somebody else has already uploaded, Amazon simply links you to that file.

fabian9
Jun 2, 2011, 04:52 PM
Another thing, are any other iOS apps ad-supported? Would they even want that?

Since they introduced iAds last year, they'll probably look for other potential applications. This may be one of them...

manu chao
Jun 2, 2011, 04:55 PM
Merged with previous post

mingoglia
Jun 2, 2011, 04:55 PM
This is the worst idea I've ever heard of.

Oh wait, I don't know what the service actually is. LOL

Honestly though, I hope Apple fails at whatever they're trying to do with this. I like Apple hardware and hope any other venture, particularly any venture that has to do with serving up ads fails in a pingfully spectacular way.

dwright1974
Jun 2, 2011, 04:59 PM
Interesting. I'm anxious to learn how/if this will play with MobileMe.

I have an apple ID for MoMe and another one for iTunes. Not sure how it will or won't jive.

That's a good point as that's the same as me.

I once tried to change my Apple ID to my @me.com email address and iTunes Tech Support said that wasn't possible.

- D

Porchland
Jun 2, 2011, 05:03 PM
Considering ive got exactly zero songs purchased thru iTunes, it would seem iCloud may as well be vapourware for me.

You don't buy their iTunes products now, so I don't really think you're in Apple's target market for cloud-based storage for them.

juicedropsdeuce
Jun 2, 2011, 05:04 PM
so the studios are double dipping? I purchase the music then they want more money after I purchased the music so I can have my music I purchased on the cloud? Why would apple even agree to pay them twice if they already get money from the songs purchased on itunes? Apple should have just done it without them like amazon and google did.

Finally someone who gets it! Pay the RIAA twice, suckers. :rolleyes:

azazel-
Jun 2, 2011, 05:05 PM
Interesting. I'm anxious to learn how/if this will play with MobileMe.

I have an apple ID for MoMe and another one for iTunes. Not sure how it will or won't jive.

If you call them (apple), they can actually merge your various accounts into one main account, or so I've heard.

ciTiger
Jun 2, 2011, 05:06 PM
If that price is the correct I'm gonna pay for it!:D

FatMax
Jun 2, 2011, 05:06 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_3 like Mac OS X; nb-no) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8J2 Safari/6533.18.5)

I tried that to! Annoying really, as my AID adress has been long gone for years..

juicedropsdeuce
Jun 2, 2011, 05:07 PM
But, they're only doing what you're exactly doing here; trolling around on a RUMORS site.

Or maybe they are realists after living through MobileMe, iDisk, and Ping. :apple:

smitty078
Jun 2, 2011, 05:08 PM
Than why can't anyone purchase Mobile Me from Apple right now. Try to buy it. you can't.

Actually, you can. http://www.apple.com/mobileme/ Sign up for the free trial, after 60 days you will get billed. This has been the purchasing procedure for months.

oliversl
Jun 2, 2011, 05:12 PM
This is one of those moments before WWDC that is you want to skip all spoilers, you need to resist and stop reading MR until after the keynote ;)

I think I'm going offline as of this post ...

Piggie
Jun 2, 2011, 05:19 PM
I suppose I'm of the opinion that ANY Service the media companies like and sign up to HAS to be bad for the consumer.
That's just the way of the world.
Good for Big Business = Bad for the man in the street.

We all want more freedom, options, better pricing, more openness and all these things are the opposite of what the major companies want.

So if Apple has done deals and they are happy, whatever it is, it's probably bad. that's what I fear anyway.

twoodcc
Jun 2, 2011, 05:20 PM
That's not bad, but if I pay, I don't want ads.

Lethal785
Jun 2, 2011, 05:24 PM
$25 for only songs purchased in iTunes. Sound like a ripoff to me.

iggypod
Jun 2, 2011, 05:25 PM
That's a good point as that's the same as me.

I once tried to change my Apple ID to my @me.com email address and iTunes Tech Support said that wasn't possible.

- D

Same here. The rep said it could not be done so this will have to be addressed at some point.

Porchland
Jun 2, 2011, 05:26 PM
But there is another usage that is not very much commented on, moving the master for any iTunes library (and iOS device) from a single computer to the cloud. If you have both a desktop and a laptop and have your iOS device synced with the desktop and then travel with the laptop you cannot sync your iOS device while travelling. Moving the master to the cloud, you can sync your iOS from every computer (that has internet access).
In the same way you could sync two different iOS devices to two different iTunes libraries (eg, from two people in a household) without having to change user accounts.


Down with the mother ship.

It is frustrating that my iPad/iPhone update apps without syncing back to my computer but that I can't update free podcasts, downloaded music, playlist changes, etc., on my computer and other devices without syncing back to my computer and then syncing the other devices.

If you are downloading and making changes from, say, two iPhones and an iPod, it takes 20 minutes to sync all of the changes to your computer and then sync them all back to the devices. And I invariably get the Playlist/Playlist 1 problem with multiple playlists and have to take time to sort those out.

I hope that whatever else Apple does with iCloud on a paid basis that they make wireless syncing across devices that use the same account a standard feature of iOS 5.

Porchland
Jun 2, 2011, 05:38 PM
so the studios are double dipping? I purchase the music then they want more money after I purchased the music so I can have my music I purchased on the cloud? Why would apple even agree to pay them twice if they already get money from the songs purchased on itunes? Apple should have just done it without them like amazon and google did.

My guess: iCloud's music feature will not be primarily for storage. Apple wants to allow users to (1) download and sync tracks to multiple devices, and (2) stream tracks to devices, and the current license agreements did not allow for either of those features.

I hope Apple went one step further and worked out subscription agreements with the labels that would allow users to continue downloading albums and single tracks at current pricing but would add a subscription plan for $9.99-$14.99 a month for users who want access to the full catalog.

The story a few weeks ago about Apple applying to patent a system for storing the first few seconds of a track on a device and then switch to streaming after the buffer catches up makes perfect sense for subscription plans; you download a short placeholder track to use for managing playlists, but you never have to download the actual track.

firewood
Jun 2, 2011, 05:38 PM
so the studios are double dipping? I purchase the music ...

This is another mental error. Check with the copyright office. The copyright on that music composition or performance doesn't list you as the legal assignee, artist or owner. So you purchased something else. Something far more limited. Not the music.

Full of Win
Jun 2, 2011, 05:41 PM
*shrug* suit yourself. Seems a bit Amish but to each his own.

That dude is so stupid, he went out and purchased music in high quality, DRM free, and in a format with the option to make multiple digital formats. Not only that, the physical CDs are an asset that has value and can easily resold later. Oh, and adding to his foolisness, the pressed CD's purchased will survive for decades. Let us all point and laugh at this moron.

slb
Jun 2, 2011, 05:42 PM
I'd rather store things locally, not have to worry about buffering and save $25 a year.

Then don't pay the $25, and the rest of us who don't want to manage backups or constantly sync a myriad of devices can enjoy the mobile convenience you'll miss out on. Every single Apple product announcement has this same crotchety grump who loudly proclaims his refusal to embrace new technology.

ppc_michael
Jun 2, 2011, 05:44 PM
I don't know, man. If it's locked to iTunes purchases, I don't like having a subscription fee for cloud access to music I am already verified as having paid for. It's already on their servers so I'm not even paying for storage space.

If these rumors turn out to be true, I have no incentive to move away from Subsonic, which allows access to all of my music and movies (iTunes or otherwise) for like a one-time $5 fee.

Obi-Wan Kubrick
Jun 2, 2011, 05:44 PM
It hasn't even been confirmed that they are songs only bought from iTunes and people are freaking out. Just wait till Apple goes official with iCloud.

Northgrove
Jun 2, 2011, 05:44 PM
If this is true, why would this service cost money?1!?!?!?!?! Apple already has the songs on their servers. They already transmit 1:30 of it for free to sample. Where is the extra cost to them? Why do they need to charge? This doesn't make any sense.
I agree. This feature would seem more like a feature of the next version of iTunes. VLC does a similar thing for free, with the difference that it's streaming from your computer instead. But in both cases (iCloud and VLC) -- the music is already there and stored.

Big deal to extend the "free streaming" from 1:30 to the full length if you already own the song. That even makes sense. Then you'd basically already be here... If both iTunes for iOS and Mac OS X were updated for this.

Slurpy2k8
Jun 2, 2011, 05:45 PM
That dude is so stupid, he went out and purchased music in high quality, DRM free, and in a format with the option to make multiple digital formats. Oh, and adding to his foolisness, the pressed CD's purchased will survive for decades. What a moron.

Who called him 'stupid'? Also, your signature is one of the stupidest things I've ever seen.

adbe
Jun 2, 2011, 05:47 PM
Then don't pay the $25, and the rest of us who don't want to manage backups or constantly sync a myriad of devices can enjoy the convenience you'll miss out on.

It's only convenient if I can back up all of my music. Any less than the whole, and I need to backup services, and I need to shear my library to ensure that songs are correctly assigned to a backup target.

Alternatively I could just find a one size fits all approach that saves me messing around, and comes with a hefty dollop of that convenience you're promoting there.

Unless the user's entire library can be uploaded, this is not going to be useful to the majority of people.

BlindMellon
Jun 2, 2011, 05:47 PM
$25 a year? Wow, that's only $2.08 a month. Shoot, I spend more than that on iPhone apps every couple weeks.

Good price. I will subscribe in an instand

its actually going to be $25 per MegaByte....

SIGN ME UP!!
You guys do realize you'll be 1.) paying for the music, 2.) paying to store it and 3.) paying data charges to stream it back to yourself. All with ever expanding limited data packages.

Man, Apple saw you guys coming.

Full of Win
Jun 2, 2011, 05:50 PM
Who called him 'stupid'? Also, your signature is one of the stupidest things I've ever seen.

Is your sarcasm detector broken. Buying physical CDs is a great idea, it gives you options in formats, its not hampered by DRM, and represents a tangible asset.

Dcuellar
Jun 2, 2011, 05:51 PM
What I'm hoping for is the ability to stream from my home computer. I'm already doing that with iSub and Subsonic now, but I want a more official method with better buffering. Don't get me wrong...iSub is almost perfect now, but there are some little things missing like coverflow that I could enjoy. I spent a lot of time organizing and making sure my music is all 320kbps which is why I prefer to stream from my home server. I remember there being a post on this site some time ago which spoke of Apple's plans to at least allow streaming from home if they couldn't get the permissions from the music labels. If they they did this I feel that would satisfy those who didn't purchase their music from itunes. Of course the downside is that you have to have a computer running 24/7.

I'm also looking forward to wireless syncing and other benefits of having a cloud. I want my calendars/contacts/etc synced without having to use the cable.

I think this is all possible and a realistic list of features that could be seen on Monday.

skellener
Jun 2, 2011, 05:52 PM
I would expect Apple to do $29 not $25.

ugp
Jun 2, 2011, 05:55 PM
I really hope it is not limited to iTunes purchases only. That is not very appealing compared to Amazon or Google's services that offer uploading of your own music.

skellener
Jun 2, 2011, 05:56 PM
Then don't pay the $25, and the rest of us who don't want to manage backups or constantly sync a myriad of devices can enjoy the mobile convenience you'll miss out on. Every single Apple product announcement has this same crotchety grump who loudly proclaims his refusal to embrace new technology.You could also just use Audio Galaxy (http://www.audiogalaxy.com) for free. It's your own music on your own computer an you can get to it from a myriad of devices and enjoy the mobile convenience of new technology. ;)

314631
Jun 2, 2011, 05:58 PM
There are 1 or 2 other places on the internet where people can legally purchase mp3s, apart from iTunes... :rolleyes:

You are missing the point. Apple can only verify music has been lawfully purchased when it comes from iTunes because they have your purchases on record. All the other files are unprotected mp3 files that could have been obtained any source. There's no way to prove you legally purchased an mp3 from the digital fingerprints on the files on your computer. And there's no way the music industry is going to turn a blind eye to pirated music for a cut of $25/yr Apple is supposedly going to charge people.

jacollins
Jun 2, 2011, 05:58 PM
I wonder how fast iCloud will take off with that data cap anchor that ATT and Verizon want...

d0minick
Jun 2, 2011, 06:08 PM
I would expect Apple to do $29 not $25.


Is there a reason they would do that other then round? Is that a tax issue?:confused:

Full of Win
Jun 2, 2011, 06:08 PM
I wonder how fast iCloud will take off with that data cap anchor that ATT and Verizon want...

Likely as fast as Pandora and other streaming services. One would assum that, as with the YouTube app, the quality would be reduced while on 3G.

Nishi100
Jun 2, 2011, 06:18 PM
IMO:

Free - Just iTunes music / movies, but movies are limited to <720p; only a select few computers / one iDevice (at a time?) and a few iAds and limited storage; doesn't store apps; have to manually sync - doesn't sync using cloud.
Paid - Any music (including ripped from a CD); any where; rentals, from iTunes; movies in 720p; syncing from cloud; stores apps and unlimited storage.

mrklaw
Jun 2, 2011, 06:36 PM
if you already have your local collection, isn't there already an app/collection of apps that lets you do this right now, using your existing internet connection? i.e accessing your computer from outside your home via the internet and streaming content? For music at least, the bandwidth required should be low enough for most people's broadband to handle it

Cougarcat
Jun 2, 2011, 06:41 PM
Is there a reason they would do that other then round? Is that a tax issue?:confused:

Apple has a $29 price point for a lot of things--accessories, Snow Leopard.

SdPunk
Jun 2, 2011, 06:46 PM
I just hope it will be more affordable than Mobil Me. I would like the opportunity to sync from all my Apple devices.

skellener
Jun 2, 2011, 06:48 PM
Is there a reason they would do that other then round? Is that a tax issue?:confused: Dot Mac & Mobile Me $99, Leopard $129, Snow Leopard $29, iLife $49, iWork $79, Final Cut Studio $999, FCPX $299, Songs on iTunes $1.29 & $.99, etc........

toddybody
Jun 2, 2011, 06:49 PM
So, I have to pay for it, can only "upload" iTunes originated content, deal with ads (while paying them), and surpass my already expensive and finite data plan?

Apple, at least buy me dinner first:(

-Garry-
Jun 2, 2011, 06:50 PM
I'm surprised by the lack of imagination of some posters on here. This is Apple we're talking about and if there's one thing Apple tend to do very well it's innovation.

I don't honestly believe Apple would charge $25 for what would essentially be an online dropbox for music files only - especially only iTunes-purchased music files. It's just not their style. Furthermore, I see no reason why Apple would need to negotiate with the music labels if this is all they were doing. God knows none of the other online-storage companies have deals with them.

Apple also know that the vast majority of users can fit their entire music library on their iPods, iPads and iPhones. Of course there will always be some of us who can't, but then it becomes a simple case of choosing to sync the music you're most likely to want to listen to.

Apple know that many, many people listen to music on their iDevices while commuting or travelling. Generally, if you're in a place with a good, solid WiFi signal you're likely doing something that would preclude you listening to music anyway. Either in the office, or at home where you can listen to your music from your computer. It wouldn't make sense for them to launch a service which requires you to have a decent 3G connection to listen to music because the time most users want to listen to music is the time they're least likely to have a decent, stable, signal.

Personally I believe Apple will use iCloud as an online-syncing service. For example, I will purchase music on my computer and have it download as happens now. This will also be synced into my 'iCloud', from which my iPhone and iPad (if I choose them to) will also sync - so when I want to listen to a particular song, it'll just be there, on my phone, without having to resync with my computer.

Of course that's only the beginning of what's possible and I'm sure Apple will have some surprises in store.

skellener
Jun 2, 2011, 06:52 PM
I just hope it will be more affordable than Mobil Me. I would like the opportunity to sync from all my Apple devices. Gmail IMAP if free and can be used with Apple Mail and iOS devices, Google Calendar is free and syncs with iCal and iOS devices, 2GB of Dropbox is free and syncs with OSX and iOS devices. Google and Amazon now offer free or almost free storage for music. There's plenty of stuff out there that syncs and you don't have to spend a dime. :)

Dcuellar
Jun 2, 2011, 06:52 PM
Dot Mac & Mobile Me $99, Leopard $129, Snow Leopard $29, iLife $49, iWork $79, Final Cut Studio $999, FCPX $299, Songs on iTunes $1.29 & $.99, etc........

Sitting in front of your computer and knowing it all is going to "just work"... priceless.

toddybody
Jun 2, 2011, 06:53 PM
I'm surprised by the lack of imagination of some posters on here. This is Apple we're talking about and if there's one thing Apple tend to do very well it's innovation.

I don't honestly believe Apple would charge $25 for what would essentially be an online dropbox for music files only - especially only iTunes-purchased music files. It's just not their style. Furthermore, I see no reason why Apple would need to negotiate with the music labels if this is all they were doing. God knows none of the other online-storage companies have deals with them.

Apple also know that the vast majority of users can fit their entire music library on their iPods, iPads and iPhones. Of course there will always be some of us who can't, but then it becomes a simple case of choosing to sync the music you're most likely to want to listen to.

Apple know that many, many people listen to music on their iDevices while commuting or travelling. Generally, if you're in a place with a good, solid WiFi signal you're likely doing something that would preclude you listening to music anyway. Either in the office, or at home where you can listen to your music from your computer. It wouldn't make sense for them to launch a service which requires you to have a decent 3G connection to listen to music because the time most users want to listen to music is the time they're least likely to have a decent, stable, signal.

Personally I believe Apple will use iCloud as an online-syncing service. For example, I will purchase music on my computer and have it download as happens now. This will also be synced into my 'iCloud', from which my iPhone and iPad (if I choose them to) will also sync - so when I want to listen to a particular song, it'll just be there, on my phone, without having to resync with my computer.

Of course that's only the beginning of what's possible and I'm sure Apple will have some surprises in store.

Enjoy your drink

http://images-mediawiki-sites.thefullwiki.org/11/4/2/1/52938552101848048.jpeg

-Garry-
Jun 2, 2011, 06:56 PM
Enjoy your drink

Image (http://images-mediawiki-sites.thefullwiki.org/11/4/2/1/52938552101848048.jpeg)

Excuse me?

Applepi
Jun 2, 2011, 06:57 PM
Bring on the iCloud! Hope this doesn't fail like MM did upon release.

Kid A
Jun 2, 2011, 06:57 PM
There's no way that the labels would agree to let Apple host all of the music files that you have because there's no guarantee that you actually purchased those files or legitimately ripped them from a CD. This isn't surprising at all.

Everyone should be taking all of this with a grain of salt and waiting for Monday.

So then when will the labels be asking Apple to disable my use of my 1000s of legally-ripped CDs in iTunes or iOS???

ugahairydawgs
Jun 2, 2011, 06:58 PM
I'm surprised by the lack of imagination of some posters on here. This is Apple we're talking about and if there's one thing Apple tend to do very well it's innovation.

I don't honestly believe Apple would charge $25 for what would essentially be an online dropbox for music files only - especially only iTunes-purchased music files. It's just not their style. Furthermore, I see no reason why Apple would need to negotiate with the music labels if this is all they were doing. God knows none of the other online-storage companies have deals with them.


You are obviously not familiar with MobileMe.

I am hopeful for what they will lay out on Monday, but I'm not holding my breath that it will be much more than what the LA Times laid out.

Dcuellar
Jun 2, 2011, 07:01 PM
I'm surprised by the lack of imagination of some posters on here. This is Apple we're talking about and if there's one thing Apple tend to do very well it's innovation.

I don't honestly believe Apple would charge $25 for what would essentially be an online dropbox for music files only - especially only iTunes-purchased music files. It's just not their style. Furthermore, I see no reason why Apple would need to negotiate with the music labels if this is all they were doing. God knows none of the other online-storage companies have deals with them.

Apple also know that the vast majority of users can fit their entire music library on their iPods, iPads and iPhones. Of course there will always be some of us who can't, but then it becomes a simple case of choosing to sync the music you're most likely to want to listen to.

Apple know that many, many people listen to music on their iDevices while commuting or travelling. Generally, if you're in a place with a good, solid WiFi signal you're likely doing something that would preclude you listening to music anyway. Either in the office, or at home where you can listen to your music from your computer. It wouldn't make sense for them to launch a service which requires you to have a decent 3G connection to listen to music because the time most users want to listen to music is the time they're least likely to have a decent, stable, signal.

Personally I believe Apple will use iCloud as an online-syncing service. For example, I will purchase music on my computer and have it download as happens now. This will also be synced into my 'iCloud', from which my iPhone and iPad (if I choose them to) will also sync - so when I want to listen to a particular song, it'll just be there, on my phone, without having to resync with my computer.

Of course that's only the beginning of what's possible and I'm sure Apple will have some surprises in store.

Exactly how I'm envisioning this. It's all possible too.

Bubba Satori
Jun 2, 2011, 07:03 PM
Sitting in front of your computer and knowing it all is going to "just work"... priceless.

Nice slogan from the 90's.

"You're holding it wrong" would be more timely.

skellener
Jun 2, 2011, 07:04 PM
Bring on the iCloud! Hope this doesn't fail like MM did upon release.I am interested to see if they can pull it off. Apple makes great devices and great software. But they have never done the web/cloud well at all. Ever. Other companies like Google and Dropbox "get it" when it comes to cloud services. Maybe not as pretty as Apple, but the services deliver. Hook up Gmail IMAP into Apple Mail - no problem - and Dropbox is the iDisk that Apple could never deliver. They're stuff "just works" which is what one always expects from Apple. Hopefully they will change all of that and Apple will now "get it" when it comes to the cloud.

toddybody
Jun 2, 2011, 07:04 PM
Excuse me?

Excused friend:P

-Garry-
Jun 2, 2011, 07:05 PM
You are obviously not familiar with MobileMe.

I am hopeful for what they will lay out on Monday, but I'm not holding my breath that it will be much more than what the LA Times laid out.

Obviously. I've only been a subscriber since day one.

Just as my post states I believe iCloud will, MobileMe synchronises e-mail, iDisk, calendars, contacts, notes, etc. It doesn't require your iDevice to have an Internet connection to view them. I see no reason to believe iCloud won't do the same for music.

Cougarcat
Jun 2, 2011, 07:08 PM
I am hopeful for what they will lay out on Monday, but I'm not holding my breath that it will be much more than what the LA Times laid out.

There's evidence in Lion and iOS that it will be a larger set of syncing services.
See here (http://www.9to5mac.com/70274/icloud-icon-revealed-looks-familiar/) and here (http://www.9to5mac.com/47420/apple-to-fight-facebook-with-ios-5/).

Moreover, the Lion+ iOS 5 + iCloud banner would indicate that iCloud will be a pervasive part of both OSs, and that means data syncing. Apple would not be hyping this is if it were just a music service. Hell, on their own press release they describe it as their cloud services.

(That said, it's completely possible that the LA Times is getting the $25 from an iTunes streaming only tier to the service, which would be disappointing.)

mrklaw
Jun 2, 2011, 07:10 PM
I don't honestly believe Apple would charge $25 for what would essentially be an online dropbox for music files only

ok..



Personally I believe Apple will use iCloud as an online-syncing service. For example, I will purchase music on my computer and have it download as happens now. This will also be synced into my 'iCloud', from which my iPhone and iPad (if I choose them to) will also sync - so when I want to listen to a particular song, it'll just be there, on my phone, without having to resync with my computer.

Of course that's only the beginning of what's possible and I'm sure Apple will have some surprises in store.

but what you've just described basically *is* a music version of dropbox?

AidenShaw
Jun 2, 2011, 07:12 PM
Excuse me?

Cultural tidbit. The clear glass pitcher with a smiling face was featured in many television ads in the US for the powdered drink mix called Kool-Aid (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koolaid).

Kool-Aid is also commonly assumed to be the base of the poison mix that 909 people used to commit suicide at Jonestown (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonestown).

So, Kool-Aid has become associated with blind allegiance to an authority figure.

Dcuellar
Jun 2, 2011, 07:13 PM
Nice slogan from the 90's.

"You're holding it wrong" would be more timely.

LOL. I almost choked on my drink when I read this. Hilarious. I stand corrected...

-Garry-
Jun 2, 2011, 07:14 PM
ok..
but what you've just described basically *is* a music version of dropbox?

Yes, bad example. I shouldn't have used the term dropbox. I meant online-storage, without zero-touch syncing.

Hueyfreeman
Jun 2, 2011, 07:22 PM
Is apple trying? Come on apple what the hell are you thinking? Your suppose to come up with a better solution then the other guys, not a more restrictive one. Come on you can do better. If amazon can do it for free so can you get the ****** out of bed with the labels and do some real inovation

iRobby
Jun 2, 2011, 07:24 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_3 like Mac OS X; de-de) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8J2 Safari/6533.18.5)

lol 25$ and u can only use music u already paid for LAME .... and useless to me as i have like 20 songs purchased from the store

Unless the vast majority of your music collection is purchased from iTunes I fail to see why anyone would buy this service.

I'd like to have a way to integrate my iTunes library on my NAS at home into the cloud service. This way I could have a combination of streaming from my own drives and apple's servers depending on where I purchased it.

Considering ive got exactly zero songs purchased thru iTunes, it would seem iCloud may as well be vapourware for me.


iCloud will not only be a music streaming service. It will be a small part of iCloud. THEREFORE evaluate the other parts before saying you won't pay for iCloud.

GeekLawyer
Jun 2, 2011, 07:25 PM
Yes, bad example. I shouldn't have used the term dropbox. I meant online-storage, without zero-touch syncing.I'm inclined to agree with you. I don't think Apple would build this much hype without anticipating some kind of PR/user payoff.

Justinf79
Jun 2, 2011, 07:25 PM
I think services like Rdio and Spotify are the future of music. Why buy music, and then on top of that pay $25/year, when I can pay $10/month for unlimited music. That's around $6000 over the next 50 years for an "unlimited" selection of music.

Now if iCloud let me stream the entire iTunes catalog for ~$10/month, then i'd consider it.

Why pay money for something you can't own. This is why I've favored iTunes over subscription services. To each their own. :D

skellener
Jun 2, 2011, 07:26 PM
iCloud will not only be a music streaming service. It will be a small part of iCloud. THEREFORE evaluate the other parts before saying you won't pay for iCloud.Apple hasn't announced anything. We'll find out Monday what iCloud entails and what it costs.

kdimitt
Jun 2, 2011, 07:27 PM
I'm surprised by the lack of imagination of some posters on here. This is Apple we're talking about and if there's one thing Apple tend to do very well it's innovation.

I don't honestly believe Apple would charge $25 for what would essentially be an online dropbox for music files only - especially only iTunes-purchased music files. It's just not their style. Furthermore, I see no reason why Apple would need to negotiate with the music labels if this is all they were doing. God knows none of the other online-storage companies have deals with them.

Apple also know that the vast majority of users can fit their entire music library on their iPods, iPads and iPhones. Of course there will always be some of us who can't, but then it becomes a simple case of choosing to sync the music you're most likely to want to listen to.

Apple know that many, many people listen to music on their iDevices while commuting or travelling. Generally, if you're in a place with a good, solid WiFi signal you're likely doing something that would preclude you listening to music anyway. Either in the office, or at home where you can listen to your music from your computer. It wouldn't make sense for them to launch a service which requires you to have a decent 3G connection to listen to music because the time most users want to listen to music is the time they're least likely to have a decent, stable, signal.

Personally I believe Apple will use iCloud as an online-syncing service. For example, I will purchase music on my computer and have it download as happens now. This will also be synced into my 'iCloud', from which my iPhone and iPad (if I choose them to) will also sync - so when I want to listen to a particular song, it'll just be there, on my phone, without having to resync with my computer.

Of course that's only the beginning of what's possible and I'm sure Apple will have some surprises in store.

I agree, everyone is bashing icloud before it's even out and its features known. Apple is smarter than some are assuming.

iRobby
Jun 2, 2011, 07:32 PM
I agree, everyone is bashing icloud before it's even out and its features known. Apple is smarter than some are assuming.

DITTO!! Thank You!

bbeagle
Jun 2, 2011, 07:38 PM
Enjoy your drink

Image (http://images-mediawiki-sites.thefullwiki.org/11/4/2/1/52938552101848048.jpeg)

So, if anyone thinks that Apple will do something beyond charging $25 for an iTunes-purchased-only streaming service, they are a fanboy? I guess you're one of those people who thinks an iPad is just a useless oversized iPod Touch?

Please find somewhere else to troll.

johnfnwhiteside
Jun 2, 2011, 07:39 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_8 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8E401 Safari/6533.18.5)

I see no use for this if it only works with purchases.

GeekLawyer
Jun 2, 2011, 07:42 PM
I see no use for this if it only works with purchases.Retrospectively, no, not really. But prospectively, maybe.

My hope remains that it will be bigger than the limited terms most are thinking in.

Full of Win
Jun 2, 2011, 08:02 PM
Retrospectively, no, not really. But prospectively, maybe.

My hope remains that it will be bigger than the limited terms most are thinking in.

I hope they knock it out of the park. However, be ready for Ping 2.

BTW, I think you need to change your location, since your tile no longer has the tent of the Internet Superstar from the iPad 1.5 launch a few months ago.

taxiapple
Jun 2, 2011, 08:03 PM
Apple bought them in December of 2009 for 80 Milllion.

Lala was an online music store created by Silicon Valley entrepreneur Bill Nguyen. The service allowed members to legally create online shareable "playlists" (formerly known as "radio stations") of their own uploaded music which could play full length songs for other registered Lala members, purchase MP3s, stream music on a one-time basis or as inexpensively purchased "web songs," buy new CDs from the Lala store, leave blurbs on other members' pages, and participate in the community forums. Lala contracted with major labels and offered a large catalog of albums to stream or purchase. Their home page claimed over 8 million licensed songs available.

bbeagle
Jun 2, 2011, 08:08 PM
taxiapple,

What would make perfect sense for iCloud, because of the Lala purchase, would be something like a Pandora clone where you could listen to any music in the iTunes library for $25/year. And you could create your own stations just like Pandora. And it would help Apple sell more music on iTunes, as you could click any music you hear, and buy it.

Maybe this is why Pandora is not on AppleTV?

julianbdavis
Jun 2, 2011, 08:15 PM
Well I was expecting at least some sort of free service, maybe a small amount of storage for free and then pay for more. If this costs any amount of money, any at all, I'm not interested. And ads too? No thanks.

I've got hundreds of gigs of music I downloaded from other places than ITMS, and I'm sure most people are like that too (maybe not hundreds, but I doubt most people have the majority of their library from ITMS, I'm sure most of it is from p2p and CDs). So if iCloud doesn't play nice with a collection like that it's going to be a failure.

GeekLawyer
Jun 2, 2011, 08:15 PM
I hope they knock it out of the park. However, be ready for Ping 2.

BTW, I think you need to change your location, since your tile no longer has the tent of the Internet Superstar from the iPad 1.5 launch a few months ago.

Your concern for Apple's roadmap being so noted. ;)

Maybe I will change my location. Thinking cap's on...

Centient
Jun 2, 2011, 08:16 PM
I hope they knock it out of the park. However, be ready for Ping 2.

I think it'll have its strong points, be very well integrated within the Apple ecosystem, and might have a couple of surprises still. But yeah, the music aspect seems likely to be a let down. Can't blame Apple for that, but it does take some of the sheen off the product.

PCClone
Jun 2, 2011, 08:29 PM
I suppose I'm of the opinion that ANY Service the media companies like and sign up to HAS to be bad for the consumer.
That's just the way of the world.
Good for Big Business = Bad for the man in the street.

We all want more freedom, options, better pricing, more openness and all these things are the opposite of what the major companies want.

So if Apple has done deals and they are happy, whatever it is, it's probably bad. that's what I fear anyway.

Go buy a Windows PC, a Zune and use google.

CaryMacGuy
Jun 2, 2011, 08:30 PM
I'd rather store things locally, not have to worry about buffering and save $25 a year.

I would have said that until I got all my music on Google Music and used it. I love having everything on there and with me at all times. When I get a new device, my music is magically loaded on there.

tbrinkma
Jun 2, 2011, 08:31 PM
This is another mental error. Check with the copyright office. The copyright on that music composition or performance doesn't list you as the legal assignee, artist or owner. So you purchased something else. Something far more limited. Not the music.

That's because the copyright office only tracks the owner of registered *copyrights*, not the owner of *copies*. (You also can't check with the copyright office and see yourself registered as the owner of that book you bought at the local book store, because it is a *copy* of the work, not the *copyright* for the work.)

audio_inside
Jun 2, 2011, 08:34 PM
I'd rather spend $150 for 128G of flash upgrades and keep all my media files local.

Drag'nGT
Jun 2, 2011, 08:41 PM
$25 per year would be pretty nice since my MobileMe subscription renews the day after the keynote. :)

So should we all be smart and start a MobileMe trial before the switch so we can have a better @me.com email? :D

Seriously, I'm thinking I should do it now before things get changed around. :confused:

MacAddict1978
Jun 2, 2011, 08:54 PM
There's no way that the labels would agree to let Apple host all of the music files that you have because there's no guarantee that you actually purchased those files or legitimately ripped them from a CD. This isn't surprising at all.

Everyone should be taking all of this with a grain of salt and waiting for Monday.

Interesting statement. Google/Amazon's work with you uploading a copy, where what you buy in iTunes should just be there. I could just upload what I buy in iTunes to my Amazon drive and be done with it.

Will be interesting to see the details next week.

Personally, I think Mobile me should be included with the service for $25 a year. Mobile Me doesn't nothing free services don't already offer (and in most cases the free services are better).

dernhelm
Jun 2, 2011, 08:54 PM
Should come free for us mobile me users. I have no interest if it doesn't.

DakotaGuy
Jun 2, 2011, 09:01 PM
I'm just going to try Google Music for now. It's free (at least for now) and you can upload any music you want. It doesn't have to be iTMS purchased stuff. I buy CD's, Amazon, and iTMS as well so it would be nice to be able to load up everything and not just the iTMS content.

frankjl
Jun 2, 2011, 09:05 PM
What i want out of this.

Is for apple to integrate icloud into native apps.

Like music in ipod.

pictures in the native photo app.

Instead they have other apps in place. I dont care the price or what if.

I am already paying for spotify (U.S) if they can make me use the ipod app with icloud i am sold.

frankjl
Jun 2, 2011, 09:06 PM
I'm just going to try Google Music for now. It's free (at least for now) and you can upload any music you want. It doesn't have to be iTMS purchased stuff. I buy CD's, Amazon, and iTMS as well so it would be nice to be able to load up everything and not just the iTMS content.


Wait so icloud will only work with ITMS purchases?

DakotaGuy
Jun 2, 2011, 09:07 PM
Wait so icloud will only work with ITMS purchases?

That is what they are saying... I guess we find out on Monday.

bbeagle
Jun 2, 2011, 09:08 PM
Should come free for us mobile me users. I have no interest if it doesn't.

You have no interest in something you're only speculating about?

ericinboston
Jun 2, 2011, 09:11 PM
I'd rather store things locally, not have to worry about buffering and save $25 a year.

Exactly....or all the other questions that Apple and other cloud services refuse to answer in a simple FAQ:


what happens if your account is accidentally deleted/corrupted by no fault of your own?
what happens to the tunes if you do not renew?
what happens if the service is bought or goes out of business?
who exactly owns the tunes? Can you download them in full quality? How often? Are they copy protected somehow?
just like owning a cd, can my family members access my service? What are the limitations?
just like owning a cd or book, can I transfer/sell/give my songs to others? What are the limitations?
can I get a backup of all my music?
what is the guarantee that my music will 100% always be there? afterall, I paid not only for the service but also the songs in the first place.


and a ton of other questions the public SHOULD BE ASKING BEFORE SIGNING UP.

BlackMangoTree
Jun 2, 2011, 09:11 PM
This service will simply FAIL. Internet coverage is not good, speeds are slow and capped plans make this all poor.

PCClone
Jun 2, 2011, 09:18 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_8 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8E401 Safari/6533.18.5)

I see no use for this if it only works with purchases.

About time someone says this. :confused:

ericinboston
Jun 2, 2011, 09:19 PM
This service will simply FAIL. Internet coverage is not good, speeds are slow and capped plans make this all poor.

Care to elaborate?

Your post makes some sense for cell-carrier data transmissions...but IMO your comment makes no sense for the billions of us on WIFI. In fact, my iPhone is on WIFI 90% of the time given that rarely NEED to get data transmissions while in my car or walking down the street or sitting on a beach. But that's me.

Cloud services, in general, have a big appeal (storage really, not so much streaming speeds) and is a huge market segment for the entire computer (personal and business) industry. Cloud services will grow exponentially over the next 10-20 years.

BlackMangoTree
Jun 2, 2011, 09:19 PM
About time someone says this. :confused:
I see no use for this if it only works with purchases.

david77
Jun 2, 2011, 09:20 PM
I'm curious to know how many people still purchase CDs. I haven't in at least 5 years.

arkmannj
Jun 2, 2011, 09:25 PM
It sounds like it could have great potential and I'm certainly interested to see what all Apple will actually be doing/offering with iCloud. But, the part that confuses me the most is the idea of paying and having advertisements. Maybe it will be that if you use the "free" services then you will be served advertisements, or if you choose to go with a paid subscription then you get the additional offerings and no ads. I dunno, just speculation on my part.

toddybody
Jun 2, 2011, 09:26 PM
So, if anyone thinks that Apple will do something beyond charging $25 for an iTunes-purchased-only streaming service, they are a fanboy? I guess you're one of those people who thinks an iPad is just a useless oversized iPod Touch?

Please find somewhere else to troll.

IF these iCloud rumors are true...THEN yes, it would be a fairly prohibitive service (iTunes originated media only, bandwidth concerns/data caps, ads + user cost). The member's post in question, conveyed a VERY unquestionable perspective toward anything Apple, and I made light of the situation. Did I call him/her a "fanboy"? No. You are the one who's putrefying the conversation with personal jabs.

In regards to my sentiments on the iPad (which of course has NOTHING to do with your horribly failed attempt at mockery)...read my signature;)

Peace

arkmannj
Jun 2, 2011, 09:26 PM
I'm curious to know how many people still purchase CDs. I haven't in at least 5 years.

I haven't purchased a CD in several years that I can remember, but I haven't purchased all of my music from iTunes either.

DrRadon
Jun 2, 2011, 09:30 PM
You guys donŽt think broad enough. Pay a monthly fee and be able to use (almost) EVERY song... like napster or that sony service that just got hacked with PSN.

If all the MobileMe stuff stays, or even gets extras, iŽed still consider paying it... but all in all, if you consider dropbox n such is free they better bring some more to the table.

BlackMangoTree
Jun 2, 2011, 09:32 PM
You need to purchase Apples gold plated Wifi extender for this service to work.

david77
Jun 2, 2011, 09:32 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) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8J2 Safari/6533.18.5)

[meant to quote]

dialed1
Jun 2, 2011, 09:32 PM
I pay for mobile me so I'm "rare" so I will probably pay for this. Question though what bit rate is iTunes music?

david77
Jun 2, 2011, 09:33 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) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8J2 Safari/6533.18.5)

I'm curious to know how many people still purchase CDs. I haven't in at least 5 years.

I haven't purchased a CD in several years that I can remember, but I haven't purchased all of my music from iTunes either.

Amazon?

mabaker
Jun 2, 2011, 09:35 PM
That üöus the MobileMe functionality for 25 dollars? Way to go! :apple:

toddybody
Jun 2, 2011, 09:40 PM
Care to elaborate?

Your post makes some sense for cell-carrier data transmissions...but IMO your comment makes no sense for the billions of us on WIFI.

Thats certainly true for most folks...however, there are those with capped broadband services (thank heavens not me yet).

Anyways, I dont see how this will really change much for folks like myself...why do I need my media stored via server, when its faster and cheaper to keep it locally? Disclaimer: Im not one of those who can brag about 200GB of Music and 2 TB of Videos...music library is only 10GB...my 32 GB iPad and iP4 are never completely full. When I upgrade devices, it will be much quicker to sync all that data over TB anyways.

BWhaler
Jun 2, 2011, 09:44 PM
Please no ads. I don't need tacky stuff on my iPhone, iPad and desktop.

Let me pay. I don't want The Android Experience.

joemama
Jun 2, 2011, 09:50 PM
Can someone explain to me WHY record companies think they should get money from the iCloud service?

If you pay for a song, it should be yours to listen to wherever and whenever you want. Why should they get more?

lkrupp
Jun 2, 2011, 09:52 PM
I see no use for this if it only works with purchases.

Okay how do you prove to Apple that you are not uploading pirated files? If you are found to be uploading copyrighted material does Apple get sued like other services? Or are you saying that it's none of Apple's business what you upload onto their servers?

1986alexander
Jun 2, 2011, 09:52 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) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8J2 Safari/6533.18.5)

iCloud app for iPhone already have the music tab. Looks like apple already working on it

GeekLawyer
Jun 2, 2011, 10:03 PM
Can someone explain to me WHY record companies think they should get money from the iCloud service?

If you pay for a song, it should be yours to listen to wherever and whenever you want. Why should they get more?That's a fair criticism. But in theory you're getting extra rights to the songs that you didn't have before. The right to stream them from a centralized server. And Apple has some costs in storage and network access to pass on.

BlackMangoTree
Jun 2, 2011, 10:05 PM
Okay how do you prove to Apple that you are not uploading pirated files? If you are found to be uploading copyrighted material does Apple get sued like other services? Or are you saying that it's none of Apple's business what you upload onto their servers?

Others are doing so one can upload anything, if Apple can't then it's a fail.

Joshwawilson
Jun 2, 2011, 10:09 PM
Honestly this won't be useful at all to me. My iPad holds all my music and more

min_t
Jun 2, 2011, 10:16 PM
for 25 dollars without itunes subscription, it better include iDevices syncing.

aprilfools
Jun 2, 2011, 10:35 PM
I'm curious to know how many people still purchase CDs. I haven't in at least 5 years.

i still purchase cd's

#1 I'm an old guy and like to touch physical media such as a cd or vinyl record.
#2 digital download files feel much more disposable like most current music offerings which seem to be flavor of the day.

I don't expect the youth of today to understand this. very sad indeed.
long live vinyl and cd's. digital downloads bad!!!!!

BTW, The only reason CDs haven’t gone the way of the floppy disk is because the record labels still make the most profit selling CD's. As for the public demanding CD's, the public never would have given up floppies if Steve Jobs didn’t kill them.

zerocustom1989
Jun 2, 2011, 10:37 PM
i still purchase cd's

#1 I'm an old guy and like to touch physical media such as a cd or vinyl record.
#2 digital download files feel much more disposable like most current music offerings which seem to be flavor of the day.

I don't expect the youth of today to understand this. very sad indeed.
long live vinyl and cd's. digital downloads bad!!!!!

I bought a CD recently. I want to have an infinite number of copies at whatever compression I want.

vomer
Jun 2, 2011, 11:05 PM
why pay for email? gmail already has a solid service for free?

Sacird
Jun 2, 2011, 11:06 PM
I bought a CD recently. I want to have an infinite number of copies at whatever compression I want.

Same here. Buying CD's till its no longer possible. No iTunes for me, personal preference.

PBF
Jun 2, 2011, 11:21 PM
Wait, if iCloud supposedly replaces MobileMe, does it mean that we'll be getting the new @i.com email addresses instead of @me.com? :confused:

Fine by me. :D