Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Apple Not Likely to Introduce Cloud-Based or Subscription iTunes Tomorrow?

It's interesting how in the Italian Apple website the sentence gives out a slightly different meaning. Translated reads:

"Tomorrow will be a day like any other.
Or maybe not.

Come back here tomorrow, you'll find a special news ABOUT iTunes".

It specifically says "about" iTunes, not "from" iTunes.
 
hitekalex said:
Beatles on iTunes music store would be a complete non-event.. even less exciting than 90-second iTunes preview.

Are there really people are out there in 2010 saying "Gee, if only there was a way to get MP3 of those old Beatles songs.. why oh why can't I buy them from Apple" ?

Beatles and their greed have "negotiated" themselves into irrelevance in the digital music age.
Click to expand...

One of the dumbest comments I have ever seen on Macrumors. First, the Beatles on iTunes would be a HUGE event- I imagine there would be millions of songs sold in the first few days. Secondly, the Beatles are only irrelevant in terms of "digital" music, precisely because they aren't on iTunes, yet. But if you are suggesting they are irrelavent to the music industry in general, well that's like saying Apple isn't relevant to the computer, cellphone industries. Come on man, they're the f**cking Beatles!
 
something significant?

just curious, wouldnt a significant change in iTunes hint towards a new 10.x version of itunes... this soon after 10.1 release?

- Perhaps a 64 bit version?
- Perhaps a new feature that when you 'forget' the name of a song, you could simply choose to sing a part of it and that sample would be analyzed to show possible results in the iTunes Store?

'Did you mean.. LaLaLa? -> Buy NOW!'

sheer speculation, yes. lets see what happens tomorrow.
 
What about - With the release of iphone 4.2 - iTunes instant wifi sync and wifi/3G iOS update? Hinted at by Jobs in an interview this year - well actually said "We are working on it"
 
Surf Monkey said:
Again, if you understand the long relationship between Apple and Apple Music I think you'd be less inclined to think that.



If you have some way to back up that statement with verifiable evidence, I'd love to see it. Until then it's pure unsupported speculation.
Click to expand...

You think Apple thinks everyone is up to date on the dispute between the two Apple companies? Your average user doesn't give two *****s. Again, not a reason to take down the front page.

I don't need an accurate census that Beatles fans already have their songs in their iTunes library. It's just common knowledge. Unless you're saying that these Beatle fans refuse to listen to the albums unless they're purchasable on iTunes. Now you're grasping for straws.
 
Tears Apart said:
It's interesting how in the Italian Apple website the sentence gives out a slightly different meaning. Translated reads:

"Tomorrow will be a day like any other.
Or maybe not.

Come back here tomorrow, you'll find a special news ABOUT iTunes".

It specifically says "about" iTunes, not "from" iTunes.
Click to expand...

And at the same time their are articles in their language that are not translatable to English. So maybe the translation is wrong or just the way they say it mmmmmmm?
 
I still don't see how they could announce something "unforgettable" without a proper press conference.
 
SteveKnobs said:
One of the dumbest comments I have ever seen on Macrumors. First, the Beatles on iTunes would be a HUGE event- I imagine there would be millions of songs sold in the first few days. Secondly, the Beatles are only irrelevant in terms of "digital" music, precisely because they aren't on iTunes, yet. But if you are suggesting they are irrelavent to the music industry in general, well that's like saying Apple isn't relevant to the computer, cellphone industries. Come on man, they're the f**cking Beatles!
Click to expand...

Completely agree. Anyone who suggests that The Beatles are irrelevant in the digital or any other realm is WAY off base. Like them or not, The Beatles are still arguably the most popular and successful rock/pop act of all time. Their introduction on iTunes would be huge news that would be carried on every major news service world wide. This would not be a minor event by any stretch of the imagination, particularly given the history of the relationship between Apple and Apple Music.
 
iTunes will be completely free worldwide with an "all-you-can-download" announcement where Jony Ives contemplates and over-concentrates on (insert Jony Ives photo here) "how Apple could do something so revolutionary" and "how it's the greatest thing they've done in the history of the company" (and then shortly afterward revealing that he never worked on anything to do with this since it's not a physical product).

Then prepare for iPhone 4 style server mayhem, and everybody getting pissed off that they can't download 8TB of music for free.

I'm 100% sure this will happen.
 
1. What's to become of that meeting Jobs and Zuckerberg had a few weeks back.

2. Waiting on iOS 4.2

3. Ping just added to to iTunes on iPad.

4. Jobs wants facebook integration

5. Zuckerberg introduces facebook mail today

6. Ping just integrated with Twitter

7. Boy do iPad users really need a facebook app

Idk.......maybe the answer lies somewhere in there.
 
While my first instinct is to suspect The Beatles catalog will be available on iTunes, the use of the world clocks makes me wonder if they'll be linking the different regional selections and opening up international markets.
 
There is no way the EXCITING announcement is 90 Second song previews. A day 'you'll never forget' - It MUST be way bigger news than that. Otherwise, Apple will look like fools if they don't deliver on something at least somewhat important.
 
Brinkman said:
You think Apple thinks everyone is up to date on the dispute between the two Apple companies? Your average user doesn't give two *****s. Again, not a reason to take down the front page.
Click to expand...

Do you have reading comprehension problems? I clearly said that it wouldn't necessarily be a big deal for Apple consumers but would be a very big deal for Apple itself. If Apple finds it to be a big deal for their company there's absolutely no reason why they wouldn't feel justified in celebrating the fact by taking down the MacBook Air ad for 24 hours.

Brinkman said:
I don't need an accurate census that Beatles fans already have their songs in their iTunes library. It's just common knowledge. Unless you're saying that these Beatle fans refuse to listen to the albums unless they're purchasable on iTunes. Now you're grasping for straws.
Click to expand...

Oh, it's common knowledge? From where I sit that translates to "I can't prove it so I'm just going to resort to insulting you to make my point."
 
SteveKnobs said:
One of the dumbest comments I have ever seen on Macrumors. First, the Beatles on iTunes would be a HUGE event- I imagine there would be millions of songs sold in the first few days. Secondly, the Beatles are only irrelevant in terms of "digital" music, precisely because they aren't on iTunes, yet. But if you are suggesting they are irrelavent to the music industry in general, well that's like saying Apple isn't relevant to the computer, cellphone industries. Come on man, they're the f**cking Beatles!
Click to expand...

Who cares about the damn beatles. I mean.......they were cool and all but...... not enough to take up the entire front page of APPLE.COM. O would definitely forget this if it's the beatles.
 
SockRolid said:
Looks more and more like Apple will enable cloud storage of media you have already purchased from Apple. But only if it's OK with the movie/TV studios and recording labels.

Apple has probably already tested their NC data center, most likely by streaming the MacBook Air media event. So now it's time to go live with streaming users' media catalogs.
Click to expand...

Not buying that. That wasn't Lala's terms or tech, which most likely Apple inherited, definitely the tech and likely the existing contract terms. And it's too restrictive. It's too much of a lock-in when they already have a pretty nice lock-in on music and a total lock-in on video.

I'm confused as to why anyone thinks Apple would automatically have to make separate agreements for iTunes. Unless contractually stipulated terms of Lala's contracts with labels wouldn't just vanish if Lala was sold. Companies often buy other companies not for product or tech but for the agreements they already have in place with content providers and other sorts of suppliers.
 
SteveKnobs said:
One of the dumbest comments I have ever seen on Macrumors. First, the Beatles on iTunes would be a HUGE event- I imagine there would be millions of songs sold in the first few days. Secondly, the Beatles are only irrelevant in terms of "digital" music, precisely because they aren't on iTunes, yet. But if you are suggesting they are irrelavent to the music industry in general, well that's like saying Apple isn't relevant to the computer, cellphone industries. Come on man, they're the f**cking Beatles!
Click to expand...

Are you slow or just lack reading comprehension? I said Beatles are irrelevant in the digital music arena.. and their stance on whether they "agree" or "disagree" to sell their music on iTunes makes no difference to vast majority of people who listen to their music. NOT that the Beatles music is irrelevant in the larger sense of music scene or rock-n-roll history.

Beatles iTunes release would be a lot of PR, but it would not result in huge sales of their music.. simply because - there is no "pent up demand" for their music in MP3 format. Mark my word on that.
 
SteveKnobs said:
One of the dumbest comments I have ever seen on Macrumors. First, the Beatles on iTunes would be a HUGE event- I imagine there would be millions of songs sold in the first few days. Secondly, the Beatles are only irrelevant in terms of "digital" music, precisely because they aren't on iTunes, yet. But if you are suggesting they are irrelavent to the music industry in general, well that's like saying Apple isn't relevant to the computer, cellphone industries. Come on man, they're the f**cking Beatles!
Click to expand...

Surf Monkey said:
Far more people than you think, evidently.
Click to expand...

Those people need to get a life.
 
iTunes Syncing - No Wires Required

I believe that Steve may have already told us what this is going to be. During the D8 Conference this year, Steve was asked why Apple required a physical connection to sync with the user's iTunes content. His response was surprisingly forthcoming and he stated that "We are working on it". I wrote about this in June of this year and have been waiting for his comments to bear fruit.

This is how I see this happening. Similar to how you connect to a device with the iPhone/iPad Remote application you will be able to connect to your iTunes library with your iOS device via WIFI. You might even see your device appear in the iTunes Device section as if you had physically connected your device to your Mac (or PC). It could either work as an automatic process or it could be kicked off manually. Either way, you will no longer need a physical connection to your Mac to sync. All syncing will be over WIFI.
 
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_0_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/532.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0.5 Mobile/8A306 Safari/6531.22.7)

Beatles.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back