iCloud - the biggest innovation you will never use

[Small White Car]

why is an iCloud API a game changer? if this were a universal API that was earmarked as the standard for Cloud computing sure it would be a game changer. but all this is (and i will use the documents as an example) is a way for a dev to integrate iCloud access into an app. which i believe some apps already are able to do with dropbox and boxnet, etc. so nothing new there.

The fact that it will be pretty much built in to all iPhones means that you can design an app that uses it and you'll get FAR more people to use that feature in your app than if you have to tell them to go sign up for a Dropbox account.

I love my dropbox account, but this isn't about me...this is about devs being able to tell people "it just works!" vs. "go sign up with this other company!"

That's a big difference if you're trying to set up a new product.

 

[sporadicMotion]

Give me these options on a home server and I'd be much happier. I'll gladly use iCloud until a Linux server app is written to utilize the protocol for home server use.

 

[tritonj]

The fact that it will be pretty much built in to all iPhones means that you can design an app that uses it and you'll get FAR more people to use that feature in your app than if you have to tell them to go sign up for a Dropbox account.

I love my dropbox account, but this isn't about me...this is about devs being able to tell people "it just works!" vs. "go sign up with this other company!"

That's a big difference if you're trying to set up a new product.

again, i think it is a nice feature

but nothing that is game changing or ground breaking. it is simply the same old stuff that you do can do now but under the apple name.

 

[DDustiNN]

You not reading what iCloud actually does is lame.

I'm just going by what I read in the initial post of this thread. Why don't you actually do something helpful, like point me in the direction of the correct information then? Or are you just here to type out useless posts?

 

[decafjava]

Wait so iCloud is for iTunes-purchased music only?

What about people like myself who prefer to buy physical CDs, and convert them to .mp3 in the preferred format?

Well this is lame...

Nope you can upload your CD ripped stuff too. I still buy both-only buying more itunes cause I can save space in my flat.

 

[Prodo123]

Nope you can upload your CD ripped stuff too. I still buy both-only buying more itunes cause I can save space in my flat.

Yeah, for $25. "Automatically Detecting" was about iTunes Match.

 

[Prodo123]

I'm just going by what I read in the initial post of this thread. Why don't you actually do something helpful, like point me in the direction of the correct information then? Or are you just here to type out useless posts?

DFTT
I'm totally with you. I get CD's, make a lossless backup, and convert the lossless into MP3's that actually sound good. Don't want to pay $25 for what I already paid for.

 

[JazzCollector]

I have about 250 GB of music, most isn't available on iTunes. Will I be able to have a copy of this online for $25 per year? Are my unique tunes available to others or restricted to only my account? Once uploaded, will I be able to download a physical copy of the files at a later time?

 

[Prodo123]

I have about 250 GB of music, most isn't available on iTunes. Will I be able to have a copy of this online for $25 per year? Are my unique tunes available to others or restricted to only my account? Once uploaded, will I be able to download a physical copy of the files at a later time?

As long as it doesn't go over the 25,000 song cap you can do whatever you want. If your songs are unique, then you can upload your own.
Don't know about the physical copy. If not, practically you're paying $25 for streaming music.

 

[Frenchjay]

256 AAC is not good enough quality to listen to music if you are a serious listener. I understand why that is the limitation but it doesn't cut the mustard for me.

The photo feature will be quite handy as i take a lot of snaps with my phone and do not have enough space left to store them on my phone. So yeah the 5gb is nice!

 

[JazzCollector]

I have more than 25,000 songs, now what?

 

[Compile 'em all]

this thread is talking about the iTunes part so that's what i addressed. i know damn well that iCloud is more than just iTunes. but it honestly isn't very innovated either. the idea is over 10 years old that marketing people have been rebranding over the years. and even the iCloud isn't even the "cloud" it is only a portion of what "cloud" computing means

The more you talk the more deeper the hole you dig for yourself. And quite frankly it is an insult to all the Apple engineers who put their best to implement iCloud.

Without going into the details, it is all about the experience. It not the 'what' but the 'how'. making something simple is difficult. Making something seamless is a feat.

 

[tritonj]

256 AAC is not good enough quality to listen to music if you are a serious listener. I understand why that is the limitation but it doesn't cut the mustard for me.

not to nitpick but most serious listeners also aren't using ipods or computers as their primary source for music either. so 256 AAC is probably just fine for the majority of iXXX customers.


and to be honest the term audiphile is just thrown around way too loosely nowadays, seems like everyone and their mother wants to be considered an audiphile if they have nice headphones or a nice set of speakers

 

[JazzCollector]

I bet the likelihood of having a publish folder from Lightroom to iCloud is slim. It would be nice if iCloud could store the raw images along with the catalog files but I'm dreaming at this point. Can anybody say virtual desktop? I know, one step at a time. I'm hyperventilating over here.

 

[tritonj]

The more you talk the more deeper the hole you dig for yourself. And quite frankly it is an insult to all the Apple engineers who put their best to implement iCloud.

Without going into the details, it is all about the experience. It not the 'what' but the 'how'. making something simple is difficult. Making something seamless is a feat.

lol, fanboy in the house here. troll somewhere else. take the kool aid somewhere else. if you want to have a serious discussion you're more than welcome to contribute but the "i'm don't want to explain myself, but believe me when i say this is the a great thing" point of view oozes in fanboy troll crap

 

[Frenchjay]

not to nitpick but most serious listeners also aren't using ipods or computers as their primary source for music either. so 256 AAC is probably just fine for the majority of iXXX customers.


and to be honest the term audiphile is just thrown around way too loosely nowadays, seems like everyone and their mother wants to be considered an audiphile if they have nice headphones or a nice set of speakers

Yeah i agree the Iphone doesn't sound the best which is why i have a dac

I know why they stopped at 256 AAC and most people won't really care about that it's just my personal preference when listening to music. I actually think 25$ is a good deal for the amount of stuff you get, it's just not for me. Although i will definitely use the free 5gb for photos etc.

 

[tritonj]

Yeah i agree the Iphone doesn't sound the best which is why i have a dac

I know why they stopped at 256 AAC and most people won't really care about that it's just my personal preference when listening to music. I actually think 25$ is a good deal for the amount of stuff you get, it's just not for me. Although i will definitely use the free 5gb for photos etc.

i would agree, for those who are using iTunes for music purchases it works out great, it is a nice feature that keeps customers and potentially gets news one who are deciding between music services

 

[iphone1105]

As long as it doesn't go over the 25,000 song cap you can do whatever you want. If your songs are unique, then you can upload your own.
Don't know about the physical copy. If not, practically you're paying $25 for streaming music.

This isn't marketed to the uber geeks like us trolling macrumors, this is marketed towards my mom and girlfriend who have deleted or lost every digital itunes app or song purchased.....

 

[marksman]

iCloud - The thing people are still calling a "music service" even though that's, like, just one little part of what it does.

And the fact is, for that music part, iCloud is just adding a feature to the iTunes Music store. Ok, great...they improved the store! Don't use the store? Well then you don't see the improvement.

This thread is like a Macbook owner complaining that the iMac got a new feature. We get it, it's not for you. So what's the problem? It's not like they're forcing you to pay for something you're not gonna use.

iCloud does a ton of other stuff for free. To complain that this oen feature is not something you need seems very whiny. Enjoy the rest of the totally free parts of iCloud.

Yeah music is not even the most important part of iCloud. The interesting music thing is iTunes Match. iCloud is about being able to have all your data easily synched between all your idevices all the time, with no fuss or muss.

It is a big deal and for the OP to claim nobody will use it, well they are being ridiculous. Almost all capable iOS users will use it on a daily basis.

From this thread it is not clear a lot of people here even understand what iCloud is.

 

[tritonj]

Yeah music is not even the most important part of iCloud. The interesting music thing is iTunes Match. iCloud is about being able to have all your data easily synched between all your idevices all the time, with no fuss or muss.

It is a big deal and for the OP to claim nobody will use it, well they are being ridiculous. Almost all capable iOS users will use it on a daily basis.

From this thread it is not clear a lot of people here even understand what iCloud is.

that syncing was already there was it not with mobile me? as far as data goes anyways

obviously not itunes and apps which is what the poster is referring to

 

[Gen]

I read the title, "iCloud - the biggest innovation you will never use", as an awesome thing. Because, "it just works" and I don't have to set anything up, move anything anywhere, harass my friends to sign up using my referrals, or basically do anything to get it working.

 

[marksman]

that syncing was already there was it not with mobile me? as far as data goes anyways

obviously not itunes and apps which is what the poster is referring to

Mobileme cost $100 a year and had to be set up separately.

People seem to miss the massive value of core integration of features.

 

[tritonj]

Mobileme cost $100 a year and had to be set up separately.

People seem to miss the massive value of core integration of features.

the integration is the same, all they did was remove the cost and a sign up, if a user wanted cloud services they could have signed up. it was all from apple, and they are good at selling you just about anything.

i'm not saying it is a bad feature, but removing the cost and signup for a service that was already available through other channels for free isn't innovative. neither is rehashing a computing paradigm that has been around for over 10 years. don't get me wrong, i like cloud computing and i think it has its uses

but i refuse to let apple try to sell me on this being something that is so damn innovative and new because it isn't. the idea isn't even new

all they did today was rename mobile me and take away the cost and add itunes to it... as far as the cloud parts of the presentation. which is fine, it is a good and necessary step to grow mobile computing but let's call a spade a spade and not try to spin this as apple and Jobs bringing some new innovation

 

[Reach9]

Actually, iCloud is going to be replacing DropBox for me. That itself, will make it the biggest thing, and it's free.

 

[JazzCollector]

We also need to remember that 25,000 songs for $25 a year is a price point well below what Amazon or Google is charging for storage.