Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Rumored to Build High-Speed Network for Faster Cloud Services
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You are talking to a brick wall at this forum. They can't wrap their head around this concept. Tim Cook standing at the podium saying the same thing doesn't help, either. He should be ashamed.
"you're buying the whole user experience," Let me fix this for you, "you're buying the initial gateway drug."
That's none of my concern. I want to pay as less as possible and those who sell want to charge as much as possible. That's how it works. If you are willing to give your money then they'll take advantage of you. A balance of stresses must exist.
I didn't say there was something wrong with it. I just disagreed with the poster's contention that Google isn't selling our data. Maybe not selling directly, but what they are selling is based on their access to our data. I use gmail, so I know Google knows everything about what I buy and where I buy it from. And since they use my info I get something in return....but we shouldn't fool ourselves and pretend that Google is more generous than Apple in that they "give" us free storage, etc.
I'm sure Apple uses what they know about us to their advantage as well. But I don't believe we are as much of a product to Apple as we are to Google.
And as to seeing ads I'm interested in, I think Google really fails at this. I really hate when I look something up and decide not to buy it for whatever reason and then am bombarded with ads for the product I decided against for what seems like weeks....or until I search for something else they want to sell me!
Ah, the half truth statistics. Statistics can always say whatever you want it to say. How much do they make? Do they have new cars, big houses? What are the payments on said car or house? How often do they go out to eat? How much do they spend on clothes? What about cable? Do they even have a budget?
That statistic is BULLCRAP. Why? Because it's from the person's perspective. There are plenty of people making six figures that live paycheck to paycheck? Why? LIFESTYLE. From my experience, people spend money on what's important to them. Whether I think it's a waste of money or not doesn't matter.
So again, it's a crapshoot statistic because it's so subjective. I could walk in to their house and find they have cable that costs them $150 a month and say.. hey, cut the cable and you'll have a $400 emergency fund in ~2.5 months or just sell that nice car you have in the driveway and pickup a beater.
That's what I was talking about. Americans spend like there is no tomorrow. It amazes me how easy they throw whatever money into whatever useless crap without even worrying.
It's the app store. Those apps are there regardless of your use. It's how it works. And they say, but look we'll host that **** for you at no additional charge, what? You are supposed to do that.
It's not only just Photos -- it's everything on your device. They keep advertising how iCloud seamlessly syncs all your devices, and how, if you get a new Apple device, everything migrates perfectly from the cloud. Well, it used to just work. But now my iPhone keeps telling me I'm out of storage and that I need to buy more (even though I have 3.5 gb of my 5 gb free). I never had that problem until a few months ago.
I'm with ya on that one! (Especially if it would mean that they would provide the type of wireless internet that we can get from our home WiFi connections) -In other words, truly unlimited at WiFi speeds, not the capped/throttled dumbed down versions that are available as cellular data packages currently these days. If they did, they would certainly rule the mobile internet service provider world right from launch. One thing that alot of technology vendors (and also consumers) have felt for a long time is that the data speeds we can get are seriously holding back all the great things we can do with our technology these days. The devices themselves are all capable, just the wireless connections need to catch up in order for us to be able to use them to their full capability.
Sad state of our society.
Worse is that we (general collective) look to the government to solve the problems. We are no longer a society that takes responsibilities for ones actions.
Are you aware that .99 a month is not free? OP said "free" not relatively inexpensive. But reality is, when you consider everything Apple wants users to use iCloud for that was once the domain of roomy hard drives 20GB is really a pittance.
Here is how it should work (similar to how BMW offers free regular maintenance, in addition to warranty, for 4 years):
Buy a Mac - get 20GB free storage for 4 years for each one
Buy an iOS device - get 50% the hard storage on your device for 2 years; i.e., 16GB iPhone gets 8GB, 32GB gets 16GB, etc., etc.
Let's understand one thing: iCloud is meant to serve Apple's interests and products. It's not even a free standing program. It's purpose is to keep people as tied to Apple as possible so it's in Apple's interest to encourage users to actually want to use it.
The cost is baked into the price and gives all users a reasonable amount of starter storage. 5GB is useless and I'm just not interested in another monthly fee. To paraphrase Sen. Everett Dirksen, $120 on cloud storage here, $120 on music service there and pretty soon all those $120 annual fees starts to add up to real money. And lets not forget it's all rented space unlike a personal hard drive and owned music.
Last edited:
Right, but Greeks spend when they actually have no tomorrow and then expect others to bail them out. Lots of other near-bankrupt countries. Let's not single out Americans. It's silly and a stereotype at best. Last time I was in Munich the streets were lined with $100K cars.
I've been around long enough to remember the .Mac days, which is only cool because I have an @mac.com email address. But other than that .Mac was pretty awful and didn't do much. To be fair, most services back then didn't do much, but iDisk was painfully slow. Just copying over small text files would be this whole ordeal. You could forget about transferring simple 8MP image files taken with a dSLR. Dropbox at the time was way faster. Apple was technically a pioneer of cloud services and yet here we are. Yeah, it has gotten better over time but they haven't gotten better fast enough compared to competing platforms that can do so much more and for cheaper. If Apple can fix their cloud and the stability/performance of iOS/Mac OS then they'll be nearly perfect. Unfortunately those are two very difficult tasks.
I want something for nothing like everybody does... & while I do pay for Netflix. That's where I draw the line. I'm too cheap even for $.99 / month, lol... and certainly no music streaming that costs.
However... even I can see the reason to charge for something, when you don't have a data mining fallback to cash in on.
That being said, it is my deepest wish (with regards to cloud services), that... to promote the upsell of more expensive storage options, Apple would offer 64gb iCloud to anyone with a 64g iOS device, 128gb to anyone with a128gb, etc. Then have charge options up from there.
I know Munich very well. Streets are lined with $100+ cars in certain zones because they're filled with people who have 0,5-1M € saved at least. If not, in poor areas, they're probably like 4th hand cars. Those aren't leasing cars.
I've lived in the US too. Car's prices are shown directly via monthly payment?? 100+ k cars leased? That amazed me the first time I was there.
Last edited:
Am I the only one who upon seeing that post#1 image felt like they were in a Borg taken ship?
![]()
vs post#1
vs post#1
Last edited:
To store those cute catpics you take with your iPhone, Apple is using Microsoft's Azure cloudservices which run on Dell hardware and have a Microsoft core and might run Windows Server (but probably Linux).
I was happy to kick out the last Dell and Windows out of our office years ago. Oh the irony.
Disclaimer: above info might not be technical correct. I have no experience whatsoever with Azure.
I can't comment on Google staff computer preferences, but Microsoft data centers are all about Microsoft products. From the physical servers running hypervisors (http://www.informationweek.com/clou...zure-server-design-open-source/d/d-id/1113617) to storage (Storage Spaces), it's as Microsoft-y as they can build it. But that's Microsoft's core business. Apple doesn't make data center systems, so I don't think it's fair to compare them.
Even when Apple sold its beloved X-Serves, they weren't built or priced for scale.
They're different businesses. If not for fierce competition on the end-user stuff (computers, phones, etc) I expect Apple would long ago have found a partner to handle the backend stuff so Apple could focus better on its money makers.
Didn't you buy the hardware because of what it offered intrinsically? I have purchased a fair amount of apple hardware but not under the condition that they offer me some future service at a loss to them.
Demanding something for free is silly. Google makes money off your data, why shouldn't apple?
Meanwhile why don't you do what I do and use neither? Try crashplan for an offsite backup and manage your photos between your devices manually. For me that has been working out a lot better than being upset that someone isn't offering me some free service.