iCloud - No Music Streaming! Wow...

[Tones2]

Unbelievable that Apple can make a music cloud service that you have to actually DOWNLOAD the songs onto your device to play instead of streaming it. What the heck is the advantage of THAT? What am I missing here?

The good news is that there is now still a need for on-device storage - even more so. Maybe this means a 64 GB iPhone in the fall.

Tony

 

[shenfrey]

Unbelievable that Apple can make a music cloud service that you have to actually DOWNLOAD the songs onto your device to play instead of streaming it. What the heck is the advantage of THAT? What am I missing here?

The good news is that there is now still a need for on-device storage - even more so. Maybe this means a 64 GB iPhone in the fall.

Tony

True say. All this talk about file storage problems, they are just making it worst.

 

[kicko]

that was my impression too, i guess to appease the carrier gods supporting this data usage.

Personally I think i still like google music better being able to stream 20,000 songs at this point.

 

[iApples]

Unbelievable that Apple can make a music cloud service that you have to actually DOWNLOAD the songs onto your device to play instead of streaming it. What the heck is the advantage of THAT? What am I missing here?

The good news is that there is now still a need for on-device storage - even more so. Maybe this means a 64 GB iPhone in the fall.

Tony

Streaming it would use data. This would KILL a lot of data plans, and considering 95% of users on the Rogers network in Canada (Can't speak for other networks) have the lowest data plan - 500MB... It would be pointless. Apple looks at the big picture of things, and not target users who have unlimited data.

 

[OttawaGuy]

Streaming it would use data. This would KILL a lot of data plans, and considering 95% of users on the Rogers network in Canada (Can't speak for other networks) have the lowest data plan - 500MB... It would be pointless. Apple looks at the big picture of things, and not target users who have unlimited data.

UBB isn't Apple friendly

 

[simply stunning]

I'm very excited about this. See, in my house we have 2 iphones, an ipad (my night time TV buddy), a macbook (wifes machine), a macbook air (my work machine), and a mac mini (media server). We use all of these on a daily bases, and looking to pick up another Ipad this year for my wife, and an ipod at some point, as I'm starting to go to the gym. At the moment it is SUCH a pain to get everything updated on all of these machines/devises. This will make it so much easier, to the point that I don't need to think about it!!!

 

[MisterDisney]

Exactly. I was very relieved to find out it was syncing service and not a streaming one.

 

[vincenz]

Eh, I never saw it happening anyway. Not over 3G at least.

 

[lifeguard]

plus what happens when you are not in range of wifi or have no cell service? then you wouldn't be able to listen to anything... I think it is pretty well thought out

 

[Small White Car]

Funny, I just went through a week of posts by people around here explaining why a music streaming service was a terrible idea.

So now it's really the opposite of that and that's bad too, apparently.

 

[hexonxonx]

Exactly. I was very relieved to find out it was syncing service and not a streaming one.

Same.

 

[Tones2]

Streaming it would use data. This would KILL a lot of data plans, and considering 95% of users on the Rogers network in Canada (Can't speak for other networks) have the lowest data plan - 500MB... It would be pointless. Apple looks at the big picture of things, and not target users who have unlimited data.

Dude, if you are downloading you are also eating into your data plan.

Tony

plus what happens when you are not in range of wifi or have no cell service? then you wouldn't be able to listen to anything... I think it is pretty well thought out

Huh - You wouldn't be able to download the song EITHER. So what's the advantage - you won;t be able to stream OR download? Why not just sync over iTunes at home then?

Tony

 

[jav6454]

Seeing as they offer you the chance to download the song again for free, I fail to see (except if your device is full) a reason why to stream the song...

Streaming isn't up for it if you don't have a good connection. For now, Apple's solution works....

 

[g35]

Dude, if you are downloading you are also eating into your data plan.

Tony

Download happens once per song, and that's only when you purchase on your phone, no downloading is required for songs that are synced over. Streaming downloads the song every time you play it.

Personally I would love the option to choose for music, stream or download. If you kill your data plan then switch to download.

 

[RafaelT]

I'd rather have a copy of the song then have to have a good connection so I can stream it.

 

[iApples]

Dude, if you are downloading you are also eating into your data plan.

Tony

And that's why you don't download on 3G... You wait until you are on WiFi. What's the point of streaming music only on WiFi? I have $400 speakers that I'll gladly play over my iPhone any day.

 

[kicko]

I'm very excited about this. See, in my house we have 2 iphones, an ipad (my night time TV buddy), a macbook (wifes machine), a macbook air (my work machine), and a mac mini (media server). We use all of these on a daily bases, and looking to pick up another Ipad this year for my wife, and an ipod at some point, as I'm starting to go to the gym. At the moment it is SUCH a pain to get everything updated on all of these machines/devises. This will make it so much easier, to the point that I don't need to think about it!!!

do you and your wife have seperate itunes accounts? We currently "share" using the same itunes account, so all this clund sync stuff kind of gets tossed out the window.

 

[Tones2]

Download happens once per song, and that's only when you purchase on your phone, no downloading is required for songs that are synced over. Streaming downloads the song every time you play it.

Personally I would love the option to choose for music, stream or download. If you kill your data plan then switch to download.

You can then just sync at home via iTunes if you want to store it on your device. What the heck is the advantage here? The point was not having the need for local storage. Why even call it a "cloud" then - just a different way to sync.

Tony

And that's why you don't download on 3G... You wait until you are on WiFi. What's the point of streaming music only on WiFi? I have $400 speakers that I'll gladly play over my iPhone any day.

THEN WHY NOT JUST DO THIS FROM ITUNES AT HOME!!

Boy, you fanboys are completely insane.

Tony

 

[iApples]

You can then just sync at home via iTunes if you want to store it on your device. What the heck is the advantage here? The point was not having the need for local storage. Why even call it a "cloud" then - just a different way to sync.

Tony

For a FREE service, you really can't complain. Servers are expensive, and if it was a streaming service, YOU would be paying for it. I rather not pay to listen to music which I have already paid for.

 

[Tones2]

For a FREE service, you really can't complain. Servers are expensive, and if it was a streaming service, YOU would be paying for it. I rather not pay to listen to music which I have already paid for.

Sorry - but iTunes match is $25 a year. It's not expensive, but it's not free. But you are paying for something that you can already do by just syncing to iTunes at home for free.

Tony

 

[Cod3rror]

Should've offered both options IMO, streaming and downloading.

 

[Rodimus Prime]

Streaming it would use data. This would KILL a lot of data plans, and considering 95% of users on the Rogers network in Canada (Can't speak for other networks) have the lowest data plan - 500MB... It would be pointless. Apple looks at the big picture of things, and not target users who have unlimited data.

you forget that a lot of people spend a fair amount of time in WiFi.

Take for example when I am up at campus I use the campus WiFi and it does not hurt my data plan and I get to stream.
Star bucks again free streaming.

Stream over cell network is more of a battery killer than data plan killer.

 

[Goldinboy17]

THEN WHY NOT JUST DO THIS FROM ITUNES AT HOME!!

Boy, you fanboys are completely insane.

Tony

If you're so obsessed with a streaming cloud service download ZumoDrive or one of the dozen other similar apps from the App Store. The thing sucks compared to it's predecessor ZumoCast. With cast, my computer acts as the server and allows me to stream any music, video or file directly from it. Plus it allows transcoding, can't do that over the cloud. Best part? It's completely free.

 

[iApples]

Sorry - but iTunes match is $25 a year. It's not expensive, but it's not free. But you are paying for something that you can already do by just syncing to iTunes at home for free.

Tony

iTunes Match is basically syncing your pirated music to iTunes. It's completely different. iTunes Match is a failure in my opinion.

 

[Tones2]

Look guys, my point is that the whole purpose of a music storage cloud is so that you don't have to store as much music locally on your device. If you DO want to store it on your device, just sync to iTunes, which you can soon do through WiFi anyway.

For those with large libraries where everything might not fit onto the iPhone and we are stuggling to manage our libraries, a streaming service would have had SOME value (although not extraordinarily valuable). But paying just to avoid syncing your device at home seems useless t me, or of a very small benefit.

Ultimately I don't care, as I probably wouldn't do either. I just want a 64 GB iPhone, and to the extent the cloud does not renove the need for storage, I guess it makes the chances of this more likely.

Tony