They'll get right on it. After increasing the base storage on the iPhone to 32Gb.
...
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 Working to Create its Own Cloud Storage Infrastructure
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
They'll get right on it. After increasing the base storage on the iPhone to 32Gb.
...
I'd LOVE to use iCloud if ... 1. I could use my spinning disk for the storage location of files for iCloud on Mac. 2. Could easily share links to folders/files to anyone. 3. The thousands of photos I take a month (hobbyist) didn't ALL have to be both on my iPhone and my Mac if I used iCloud Photo. 4. Selective Sync folders to my Macbook Air (128gb).
Always thought those data centers were iMessage servers... Doesn't bother me that Apple is using Google Cloud Servers... I just wish Apple would add more features.
Always thought those data centers were iMessage servers... Doesn't bother me that Apple is using Google Cloud Servers... I just wish Apple would add more features.
I never liked the idea of "the cloud" anyway. Just a lot of hype as it boils down to your stuff on someone else's hard drive. I had assumed they at least used Apple's OWN hard drives. Wrong!!! Amazon, MS, and Google!!! GOOGLE???!!!
GOOGLE???!!! I never liked the idea of "the cloud" anyway. Just a lot of hype as it boils down to your stuff on someone else's hard drive. I assumed they used Apple's OWN hard drives. Wrong!!! Amazon, MS, and Google!!!
Amazon and Google's core business is server based, it's not surprising they'd have an expertise there.
MS expertise comes from its long experience with serving business clients.
Apple's core business was selling hardware with Itunes being a side business, so initially it made sense to contract out the cloud. But, with those added services gaining importance and the huge number of phones Apple must now serve, sending this business to a competitor doesn't make much sense long term.
That's why I think they'll everything in house within 3-4 years.
Hmm... No. That's ground technology, we're talking cloud technology. What do you think the mothership is for?
"Because Google is evil and **** and bad and because they aren't a fruit or named Apple" - typical MR Apple fanboy
Actually, this cloudy stuff is kinda hard to implement, which is why they're currently using AWS/Azure. The assets that you mention can be updated at any time by any device, which would involve at least an element of time synchronisation.
I've had dealings interfacing to AWS and Azure storage programmatically myself (mainly Azure), and it's pretty awesome technology. When you write an image to Azure, for example, it will almost certainly be put into BLOB storage. When this happens, three copies of the image will be created automatically behind the scenes in a data centre at a particular location. Because Apple are cautious, they will have gone for Azure's geo-replication feature, which means that your image will also be sent to an additional data centre in a different country in case there's a major disaster somewhere. Again, three copies of your image will be stored in the alternate data centre. So, the single photo you took with your phone will be stored at least six times in a couple of different countries. And, since Apple are super-cautious, it's quite likely that they're doing this in parallel with writes to AWS so their eggs aren't all in one basket, i.e. your original photo may exist a dozen times in various parts of the globe. And that's before you start thinking about content delivery and caching networks.
This stuff isn't easy to build. It will be quite a challenge to implement all that functionality yourself, playing catch up with the big boys who've been doing it for years.
I've never understood how folk can pay top whack for Apple kit and then complain about handing over pocket change for 200GB of data.
The basic. You can't build global cloud coverage into one single geographical location. It wouldn't be robust and service offered would be horrible due to crazy ping and slow transfer rates. Therefore, you need world wide coverage. With world wide server grid coverage you can nuke North Carolina server farm and the end users wouldn't most likely even notice it.
Yes, I will admit, I thought the same as you.
We Had iCloud and then around the same time all the stories and photo's of these brand new GIANT data centers that were build/being built and I thought that was what Apple used.
Until now I had no idea they could not do it, and were renting space from the likes of Amazon, Google etc to use their hardware in their data centers.
I'm totally surprised by this story.
I'm truly surprised that this biggest provider of paid for/ streaming music across the Internet is only now thinking of building its own content delivery system.
I can only imagine that it has taken so long to count the revenue that it hasn't had a chance to think about how to spend it wisely.
I can only imagine that it has taken so long to count the revenue that it hasn't had a chance to think about how to spend it wisely.
Or 5G
Or 5GB per connected device on your AppleID. Got an iPhone, thats 5GB free iCloud. Got an iPad as well, that gives you 10GB. If you have a Mac and an Apple Watch too your entitlement is 20GB free
Apple is working on building its own cloud infrastructure to reduce its dependence on services like Amazon Web Services, Microsoft Azure, and Google Cloud Platform, according to information shared by Re/code and VentureBeat. A project called "McQueen" is underway at Apple, with a team of employees working to create an in-house cloud storage system.According to VentureBeat, Apple is unhappy with AWS's inability to quickly load photos and videos onto iOS devices, something its own cloud system could fix. Apple executives reportedly believe that creating a full cloud infrastructure could pay for itself within three years. Estimates suggest Apple spends upwards of $1 billion on cloud services each year.Apple is already investing significant money into building new data centers around the world and is said to be planning for data centers in China and Hong Kong. Data centers are in the works in Ireland, Denmark, Reno, and Arizona, plus Apple is expanding its existing data center in Prineville, Oregon. Apple's Arizona data center, located in the former GT Advanced sapphire plant, is positioned as a "command center" for Apple's global data network. Apple has described the Arizona location is "one of the largest investments" the company has made.
While Apple carries out plans to build its own cloud computing service, it will continue to rely on Amazon Web Services (AWS), Microsoft Azure, and Google Cloud Platform. Apple has long used AWS and Microsoft Azure, while Google Cloud Platform is a new partner that inked a deal with Apple late last year.
VentureBeat cautions Apple's plan to create its own cloud infrastructure is still in the early stages, while Re/code says it is not clear if and when the project could materialize. Apple could abandon the plan and stick with its current providers or instead acquire a cloud infrastructure product in the future.
Article Link: Apple Working to Create its Own Cloud Storage Infrastructure
What the ! does Steve McQueen have to do with any of this ?
And why store data in the cloud at all ? My stuff is all on hard drives and discs in my house separate, isolated and totally under my control nowhere near Cook, Ive or any other particle of the Axis of Bue Shirts.
I pissed Apple doesn't have their storage as I thought it did until today. This is why their is always problems with my iCloud not working all that well
So every time you buy a device and sell it on eBay, you end up with a free cloud storage for life? Nice thinking, only if Apple were stupid.
According to VentureBeat, Apple is unhappy with AWS's inability to quickly load photos and videos onto iOS devices, something its own cloud system could fix.
This is a real problem for me. I pay 10$ a month for iCloud Photo Library yet I can barely stream video. It buffers and stutters like crazy. Can't wait for this to be resolved.
By your logic, Apple should just give everything away for free because they will always be in a better financial position to do this than the majority of their customers.
News flash - Apple didn't become as profitable as they are today by being a charity. I want something, I pay for it. At least the relationship between Apple and myself is very clear-cut - that of buyer and seller. Apple takes my money and in return, I get what I paid for. No conflict of interest, no ambiguity, no caveats.
Not at all. By my logic, the no brakes, 0-100mph hyperbole in your comment is silly. There's a world of difference between offering more cloud storage and giving away everything for free.
News flash - Again, hyperbole does you no favors. There's no implication of charity in my quote.
[doublepost=1458306912][/doublepost]
Good ol' ad hominem. The refuge of a weak argument.
My job's immaterial. I don't use iCloud. Too many other options that offer better value. My stance is purely academic.You are right that some people believe it's reasonable to price to pay for 20TB. I'm one of those people. Since I'm not binary, I'm also one of the people who believe that 5GB shared data is pretty chintzy for a company that has the massive profitability that Apple has. It looks especially chintzy when compared to their contemporaries.
Last edited: