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

[Cjm1]

I do think that a cloud based solution would be good, but the reliability of mobile Me is not 100%. i hope it doesn't rub off on to cloud based music storage. And behaving like mobile Me by duplicating every song twice on your iPhone. Like it would on your notes and contacts

 

[George Knighton]

It'd be a huge step forward if we could retrieve music and applications that are associated with an Apple ID. Not sure I care about the Beatles as much as I care about being able to more easily retrieve and transfer previous purchases of music and applications.

 

[George Knighton]

I do think that a cloud based solution would be good, but the reliability of mobile Me is not 100%. i hope it doesn't rub off on to cloud based music storage. And behaving like mobile Me by duplicating every song twice on your iPhone. Like it would on your notes and contacts

Ahhhh-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha!!

How many of us have just given up fixing the issue, and have six or eight calendars on our iPad, iPhone, Macbook and iMac?

 

[milo]

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.

Your word has been marked, let's see how you and the other doubters are faring so far.

All albums in the iTunes top 50 allready (highest are number 8, 12, 14, 15 (the $149 box set), 16 so far). And 27 singles in the top 200. That's just in the first few hours of release, and most of the world probably hasn't even heard they are available yet. We'll see how high they go, but so far I wouldn't be surprised if they end up being the fastest selling artist on iTunes. The only other time I've seen this many songs and albums on the charts was after Michael Jackson passed away.

Keep an eye on those charts and see where they go in the next few days. And I'm sure Apple will be sure to send out a press release before long to make it perfectly clear how well they're selling.

Seriously, it's just common sense. When you have a band that has been one of the top sellers for decades, what kind of logic makes you think that when a new format comes along, they're not going to sell well in it?

 

[dgree03]

Your word has been marked, let's see how you and the other doubters are faring so far.

All albums in the iTunes top 50 allready (highest are number 8, 12, 14, 15 (the $149 box set), 16 so far). And 27 singles in the top 200. That's just in the first few hours of release, and most of the world probably hasn't even heard they are available yet. We'll see how high they go, but so far I wouldn't be surprised if they end up being the fastest selling artist on iTunes. The only other time I've seen this many songs and albums on the charts was after Michael Jackson passed away.

Keep an eye on those charts and see where they go in the next few days. And I'm sure Apple will be sure to send out a press release before long to make it perfectly clear how well they're selling.

Seriously, it's just common sense. When you have a band that has been one of the top sellers for decades, what kind of logic makes you think that when a new format comes along, they're not going to sell well in it?

If Itunes rankings work anything like Amazon rankings, then it dont mean jack *****.