I'm surprised by the lack of imagination of some posters on here. This is Apple we're talking about and if there's one thing Apple tend to do very well it's innovation.
I don't honestly believe Apple would charge $25 for what would essentially be an online dropbox for music files only - especially only iTunes-purchased music files. It's just not their style. Furthermore, I see no reason why Apple would need to negotiate with the music labels if this is all they were doing. God knows none of the other online-storage companies have deals with them.
Apple also know that the vast majority of users can fit their entire music library on their iPods, iPads and iPhones. Of course there will always be some of us who can't, but then it becomes a simple case of choosing to sync the music you're most likely to want to listen to.
Apple know that many, many people listen to music on their iDevices while commuting or travelling. Generally, if you're in a place with a good, solid WiFi signal you're likely doing something that would preclude you listening to music anyway. Either in the office, or at home where you can listen to your music from your computer. It wouldn't make sense for them to launch a service which requires you to have a decent 3G connection to listen to music because the time most users want to listen to music is the time they're least likely to have a decent, stable, signal.
Personally I believe Apple will use iCloud as an online-syncing service. For example, I will purchase music on my computer and have it download as happens now. This will also be synced into my 'iCloud', from which my iPhone and iPad (if I choose them to) will also sync - so when I want to listen to a particular song, it'll just be there, on my phone, without having to resync with my computer.
Of course that's only the beginning of what's possible and I'm sure Apple will have some surprises in store.
I don't honestly believe Apple would charge $25 for what would essentially be an online dropbox for music files only - especially only iTunes-purchased music files. It's just not their style. Furthermore, I see no reason why Apple would need to negotiate with the music labels if this is all they were doing. God knows none of the other online-storage companies have deals with them.
Apple also know that the vast majority of users can fit their entire music library on their iPods, iPads and iPhones. Of course there will always be some of us who can't, but then it becomes a simple case of choosing to sync the music you're most likely to want to listen to.
Apple know that many, many people listen to music on their iDevices while commuting or travelling. Generally, if you're in a place with a good, solid WiFi signal you're likely doing something that would preclude you listening to music anyway. Either in the office, or at home where you can listen to your music from your computer. It wouldn't make sense for them to launch a service which requires you to have a decent 3G connection to listen to music because the time most users want to listen to music is the time they're least likely to have a decent, stable, signal.
Personally I believe Apple will use iCloud as an online-syncing service. For example, I will purchase music on my computer and have it download as happens now. This will also be synced into my 'iCloud', from which my iPhone and iPad (if I choose them to) will also sync - so when I want to listen to a particular song, it'll just be there, on my phone, without having to resync with my computer.
Of course that's only the beginning of what's possible and I'm sure Apple will have some surprises in store.
