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

Apple to Overhaul iTunes Service?

They better had do something... I haven't used iTunes in about 8 months since AmazonMP3 has better quality DRM free music and is generally $5 less than iTunes.... and often times on release days (tuesdays) a whole brand-new album is offered sometimes for as low as $2.99 (not all new releases but they choose one).
 
ziggyonice said:
^^^
Way to force your opinion. 🙄


I absolutely love this idea. Obviously, iTunes wouldn't be "stream only" — because there's plenty of people with Classics, Nanos, and Touches who would be without music. But what if it meant that you didn’t have to store everything on your computer. What if it meant you could save all that space on your hard drive (or on your iPhone) by putting stuff into the "cloud"? How about being able to store your music online, and download a copy of a song onto your device if you really want it?

I would love to have music streamed to my iPhone over 3G — saves space on my device for other things. I would love to have music streamed to my Mac via the Internet — once again, it saves space for other things.

Imagine if you could take all the gigabytes of music stored on your hard drive, and suddenly get it all back. Plus, because the music wouldn't actually be stored on any of your devices, backing it up becomes a thing of the past (provided that Apple keeps it safe and sound on their servers, which I'm sure they would).

Perhaps this means that if I actually want to "own" the track on my physical hardware, I could just download a copy off the server… to use in my iMovie, or iPhoto slideshow, etc.

I would jump on this in a heartbeat. Now, will they do the same for movies?
Click to expand...

in this day and age, storage space is hardly a concern

heck external 1 tb dries go for 100 bucks
 
r.j.s said:
Most of the Europeans here refer to their little part of their country as Europe, and EVERYTHING is better than the US.

Speaking of reception ... how's the reception in the middle of nowhere Russia? It's still in Europe. 😉
Click to expand...

Except your forums it seems....
 
I rather own, but...

But if I could also have my library accessible over the web; that would be awesome!
 
M!M!C said:
But if I could also have my library accessible over the web; that would be awesome!
Click to expand...

I don't see how having my library on the web would mean anything to me, since I already have it in my pocket. My pocket is a lot more accessible to me than the web.
 
Eric S. said:
I don't see how having my library on the web would mean anything to me, since I already have it in my pocket. My pocket is a lot more accessible to me than the web.
Click to expand...

And when the thing in your pocket gets lost, stolen, or damaged?

Then you've got it on a server some where (whether that server is in your home, or somewhere else). If it's in your server, then you have to maintain it, hope that whatever event cost you the pocket device didn't also take your home station, etc. Plus, you have to actually go home to get it ... if you're travelling, then it's of no use to you. And, you have to jump through the hoops related to upgrading it, when it's time to upgrade it.

All of that is moot if the server in question isn't one you maintain.
 
Eric S. said:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't you need a "thing" to listen to cloud-based music too?
Click to expand...

No.

I don't need the thing that is in my pocket, in order to listen to cloud music.

The thing that is in my pocket is a complete commodity in that regard. If my music player is lost, stolen, or damaged, I can immediately use any computer to listen to my cloud music. Including my netbook, my work workstation, my home workstation, or, really, any random web-cafe computer. Or I can borrow my friend's similar device, authenticate on it, and start listening to my cloud music on theirs ... until they need it back, in which case I log out and give it back. Then they pick up right where they left off.

And when I replace that player in my pocket, it will immediately have access to my cloud music ... without syncing. All I have to do is authenticate on it.

Your non-cloud music player doesn't have those advantages. Until you replace your music player, you're not going to be able to use any/every random computer for which you have access to play that music. It's going to only be the machine you store that music upon. At most, you may have it mirrored to a few other isolated computers ... but, again, not "any/every random computer". And, when you get your replacement player, you wont be able to immediately, in the store, start using it. You'll have to wait until you get home.

And, as I said earlier, if you're on a vacation ... that might be a while. In the mean time, I'll be listening to my music while you're waiting.
 
For me, this falls under the category of "do not want."

I would rather they overhaul iTunes.app itself, and rewrite it in 64-bit Cocoa like they should have done in time for the Snow Leopard launch.

This whole "streaming" and "cloud" business reminds me of those experimental cars that run on natural gas. That's all well and good, but how do you refuel? How many gas stations sell natural gas? The Internet is simply not yet ubiquitous enough, and besides that, many people would prefer to own their music. Like me.
 
Terminal.app said:
This whole "streaming" and "cloud" business reminds me of those experimental cars that run on natural gas. That's all well and good, but how do you refuel? How many gas stations sell natural gas? The Internet is simply not yet ubiquitous enough, and besides that, many people would prefer to own their music. Like me.
Click to expand...

You mean like the internet isn't ubiquitous enough for businesses and corporations and major institutions to use cloud computing for email*? calendar*? or storage*?

(* google apps for enterprise/education)
(** amazon s3)

It's not ubiquitous enough for a music service like Rhapsody to thrive? or for Pandora to be popular?

It's ubiquitous enough to work. As for it being ubiquitous enough for Apple to rest their iTunes strategy on it ... no one has said that. What's being suggested is that it MIGHT be one part of a multi-part music delivery strategy for iTunes. Keep the old, add this new component. They're more than capable of co-existing. Sort of like streaming media is one delivery component for Netflix, along side their more traditional physical media delivery component.

Or, like how Rhapsody now has two components. It's "traditional" streaming media delivery ... and now they sell MP3s. Both components co-exist, and work together.

Why _shouldn't_ Apple have both components, as well?
 
iOrlando said:
i say thumbs down to you.

1) Burn CDs? I stopped doing that in 2004. Come on...really?
2) Where are you getting this whole rent thing? You buy a song and you then can get it from any internet connection. What is with this need of wanting to hold the song in your hand in order to feel like you own it. Who cares you dont have the CD. Everyone then says oh what if I lose my music...yet that doesnt happen (of course someone will respond..well it happened to me in 2005 at camp and blah blah blah). The appeal of this new form is heads and shoulders above the notion of buying a cd...buring the song...etc. etc.
3) You need to embrace the change and accept it. Buying CDs and then having to transfer a particular song from device to device to listen to it is absurd and very old school.
4) I'm not saying apple is or isnt going to do this, but the idea is not out of left field and makes sense.
Click to expand...

I don't care digital music crap. I don't need "squeezed files ". Vinyl is the best medium for me. Thanks to people like me, viny will live forever 😎.
 
I'm sure their ideas are some sort of hybrid. I know that I would NEVER have my music just in the cloud. And I am sure others wouldn't want that either. If your internet goes down, then so would your music. And if you are talking iPhone, well....they drop enough phone calls as it is. I don't want them dropping my music too while I am driving down the road somewhere. My iPod will still work in a tunnel or parking garage. Can't say the same thing about phone service all the time.

As for CDs, I still like them. Why? Two reasons. One, I like the liner notes. Electronic versions just don't cut it for me. And reason 2 is that I like being able to buy cheap music in a used record store or sell something should I get bored or need the extra cash. Try selling your cloud based music in a used record store sometime and see how that works out for you.
 
ssspinball said:
So burning thousands of CDs is cheaper than owning an iPod/iPhone that you can reuse over and over? I think not. Those costs add up, and also, it's only cheaper if your time is free because burning CDs takes a LOT more hands-on time than syncing a PMP. I know this because I used to burn CD-RWs for my car with mp3 files and finally gave up on this because it was so time intensive compared to connecting my iPhone to the auxiliary in.

There's no reason it would necessarily be better quality. It can be as good as the source file on either destination.

The backup is a nice option, but it's WAY cheaper and simpler to buy a 1+ TB external drive and backup files that way. CD's (and even DVD's) are WAY TOO SMALL to do any serious backup, especially if you're concerned about quality which equals much larger file sizes.

Just about every car in every price range includes auxiliary in. Some cars even have hard drives now. CD players are still included as well, but the younger generation has already given up on CDs. Their time has passed, and I for one won't miss them.
Click to expand...

Sorry I misunderstood your post after reading it again. My fault for skim reading! I was were referring to ripping a cd into itunes. Totally agree re burning CD’s - I haven't burnt a CD for music in years!
 
At the end of the day, if Apple adopt this then we and a lot of other businesses will all go along with it. Why pretend otherwise?

We all probably had similar feelings at the advent of downloading music, now look at it!

I'm still very cautious about the idea though... and I'd much prefer things stay how they are currently.
 
BJMRamage said:
PulpTunes allows me to stream my iTunes Library anywhere in the world with an internet connection! (FREE)

I cannot access it at work due to a firewall blockage-though i can see that happening to Apple's streaming service, as it is with all/most other streaming services.


I dislike the idea of not owning songs/videos/whatever from iTunes. I like the idea of possibly accessing my songs from anywhere, but NOT with paying an extra fee/monthly fee. to some renting music is great, not to me. i grew up in a different time where buying things meant more than having things briefly and paying for the brevity.
Click to expand...

Where I work we are blocked from any site that has streaming anything. No You Tube, no music, no facebook, no twitter, etc.

I would really hope that iTunes will allow for both streaming and current practices. I will not pay another subscription fee for services. Let's see: DirecTv, Verizon FIOS telephone and internet, security service fees (ADT or whatever), OnStar, AT&T wireless, satellite radio (which I don't have, but almost bought). I can't see CDs going away anytime soon. Someone mentioned about the millions of iPod owners well, how about the mega mega millions of cars with CD players?

BTW, cloud computing has been around since the '60s. This is just a new name for the newer technologies that are available. With the newer more robust networks and internet, "cloud" is becoming more widespread. Kind of reminds me of a song; "Hey, hey, you, you, get off of my cloud"😀
 
im not sure how i feel about this idea. i can see the good and the bad.i guess... i mean u can already stream mussic for free. the advantage here is u choose it. the bad would be u cant keep it. why pay for radio? why pay for whats already free.

i mean surely u can find the song u want to stream online as it is already...
 
Macintosh.Ninja said:
im not sure how i feel about this idea. i can see the good and the bad.i guess... i mean u can already stream mussic for free. the advantage here is u choose it. the bad would be u cant keep it. why pay for radio? why pay for whats already free.

i mean surely u can find the song u want to stream online as it is already...
Click to expand...

It also may have something to do with Microsoft since several months ago Microsoft had a TV commercial jabbing at the iPod and how much it would cost to fill an iPod with purchased music. So, I assume there is rental music for the Zune, you know, that famous iPod killer😱. Apple probably wants to cover all market areas. Can't blame them for that, after all, its all about money🙁.
 
"No. Not interested in streaming. Not interested in cloud. Not interested in subscription.
Add options if you must but leave my library alone!"

Hear! Hear!

A guy who says it all in two sentences.

Do any participants of this forum own gold?

Do you actually _own_ it (i.e., have it in your possession), or perhaps just belong to an account that says you "own gold"?

Big difference.

As they say, "possession is nine-tenths of the law...."
 
I use iTunes to manage my library and play music. I don't buy that much music from the iTunes store though, because I prefer to rip lossless from CDs. Storage is not a concern, big hard drives are dirt cheap these days. I don't want my music in the "cloud", or highly compressed, I want to be able to purchase lossless music from iTunes! I'm probably in the minority...

Folks have been fed a steady diet of highly compressed MP3s for so long, I don't think they'd know high quality music if it hit em in the head.
 
kzin said:
Your non-cloud music player doesn't have those advantages. Until you replace your music player, you're not going to be able to use any/every random computer for which you have access to play that music. It's going to only be the machine you store that music upon.
Click to expand...

A restriction that I lose literally no sleep worrying about.

And, as I said earlier, if you're on a vacation ... that might be a while. In the mean time, I'll be listening to my music while you're waiting.
Click to expand...

On vacation or not, I am never without at least two devices that contain all or part of my music database. I'm fairly sure that in 99% of possible scenarios I'd be listening to music again before you would be. And I'll be listening to music anywhere I go, without need for wifi or data plan access, or worrying about network outages or other unavailability.
 
I think it's funny that you're all scared Apple is going to change iTunes when I'm personally more afraid they're going to change LaLa.

I've been using LaLa for the last 9 months and it is a fantastic service. You get the choice of either paying 10 cents to have unlimited plays online or 89 cents to purchase the mp3. Plus, they upload your entire collection so it is available to you EVERYWHERE at ANYTIME. Not only that you can listen to complete tracks 1 time free. How can iTunes compete with that?

Compared to iTunes, LaLa is light years ahead in terms of the future of digital music distribution. Apple probably knew this so they bought it. Simple as that.

iTunes was old hat. Let's just hope they don't mess with the LaLa model so much that they kill what makes it so great.
 
wmurch3 said:
I think it's funny that you're all scared Apple is going to change iTunes when I'm personally more afraid they're going to change LaLa.

I've been using LaLa for the last 9 months and it is a fantastic service. You get the choice of either paying 10 cents to have unlimited plays online or 89 cents to purchase the mp3. Plus, they upload your entire collection so it is available to you EVERYWHERE at ANYTIME. Not only that you can listen to complete tracks 1 time free. How can iTunes compete with that?

Compared to iTunes, LaLa is light years ahead in terms of the future of digital music distribution. Apple probably knew this so they bought it. Simple as that.

iTunes was old hat. Let's just hope they don't mess with the LaLa model so much that they kill what makes it so great.
Click to expand...

Except that Lala couldn't make a profit with their model, hence their looking for a buyer.
 
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