'iTunes Match' Allows Both Streaming and Downloading of Music

[milo]

I agree, people could down-sample, people could change tags, people could do a lot of things. But most of them won't. Simple as that.

How apple will check, and how users would work around those checks if they did happen is all speculation at this point. I guess we'll see as the new feature is rolled out.

I'd argue that making sure that people don't use iTunes Match to match stolen files would be a lot more important that album art, but I guess people prioritize different.

If they can't get a good hit rate on something as simple as album art on files that are tagged properly, it's not a good sign that they'll necessarily do much better when they have to add the challenge of examining the content itself. The priority isn't getting album art right, it's getting matches of legal files right. And that definitely seems to be a problem so far with a very small percentage of files getting matched properly. In theory it may not be hard to reject tracks that match a blacklist, but at this point they don't seem to be doing well at recognizing legal non-iTunes tracks. And that should be their priority since the service will bomb if they can't get that right.

I've already paid Apple $10 for an album. They should want to deliver the music to my device.

For songs you bought from apple, they do deliver that song again to any device you own. The feature exists already, it appeared weeks ago. This service is only needed to deliver songs you did not buy from apple. Not to mention that any songs lower than 256 bitrate are upgraded to that - I'm sure there will be plenty of people who will get it for at least one year just for that (and once they have it, I'll bet most stick with it).

 

[Eric S.]

What category? People who use iOS devices? This is a small percentage of users?

The category of people whose music library will not fit on an iPod Classic.

So all the people using iOS devices should recognize how silly iTunes Match is and just buy an iPod Classic instead, because that's what some guy does and he's fine with it.

Other people can do what they want, I don't care. Where did I say that's what everyone should do? I said that for me iTunes Match makes no sense and I won't be using it. In fact I have no plans to use iCloud at all. I do my own syncing, I do my own backups, I want my data under my control and not in a cloud where it potentially may be compromised and/or lost.

 

[Carouser]

Not at all; if I buy something I may pay for delivery once. From then on I do whatever I want with the goods; I don't continue to pay the delivery company for every use.

What you describe is more like, say, I buy a hammer and the hardware store holds it for me. Then whenever I want to pound a nail they charge me to use the hammer, when I could just be keeping it at my house.

No, this is like the hardware store going to your house and bringing you your hammer whenever you want them to, wherever you are. Since iTunes Match isn't obligatory, you can access your music as you see fit, but that doesn't mean people who use it are paying multiple times for the same thing.

The category of people whose music library will not fit on an iPod Classic.

Yes, that's a relatively small category, but I was talking about the set of users who are on iOS devices as well as those with very large libraries. It's no good to argue against one part of that set as being small and then simply ignore the substantive part of what I'm saying.

As for how iTunes Match doesn't make sense for you individually, who cares? This isn't 'Mac Survey' or 'Eric S' livejournal', I was making a point about how there is a reasonable demand for iTunes Match given the user base and that the service is non-negligible. The fact that you personally can get by without it is of no consequence to that point.

Yes, but the difference is I don't need to have my music locked up in the cloud. I need a product that I paid for to be shipped to my house.

What? Yes, you don't see the need for you personally to subscribe to iTunes Match. That doesn't mean that it is 'smoke and mirrors' or providing something negligible, which is what you began with.

 

[Dcuellar]

Yes, but the difference is I don't need to have my music locked up in the cloud. I need a product that I paid for to be shipped to my house.

----------

Yes, I've noticed my error.

Still, I won't pay to listen to my own music. It can be delivered on a silver platter. Wouldn't make a bit of difference.

To each his own then. In my case I see value in the service. A heck of a lot more than 25 bucks per year.

 

[monoskier]

And my point still stand, iTunes Match is great for pirates. For people who pay for their music, not so much.

How is it greater for pirates? They already had a copy of the song, just obtained via different means. Much of the time the version of the song they torrented is the same version a legit downloader has, and both users could just have easily put the same song on their iDevice.

Suddenly having a laundered copy of the song doesn't provide any more proof of legit rights to it. Where is the original CD they rip'd from? Where is the iTunes "receipt" that shows proof of your rights to it?

 

[Dcuellar]

The category of people whose music library will not fit on an iPod Classic.



Other people can do what they want, I don't care. Where did I say that's what everyone should do? I said that for me iTunes Match makes no sense and I won't be using it. In fact I have no plans to use iCloud at all. I do my own syncing, I do my own backups, I want my data under my control and not in a cloud where it potentially may be compromised and/or lost.

Eric, I don't want to carry another piece of hardware. I like having an iPhone that does it all.

 

[iSingandiDance]

To each his own then. In my case I see value in the service. A heck of a lot more than 25 bucks per year.

That's really all that matters.

 

[milo]

What you describe is more like, say, I buy a hammer and the hardware store holds it for me. Then whenever I want to pound a nail they charge me to use the hammer, when I could just be keeping it at my house.

And if you had twenty five thousand hammers, you might actually want to do that. Not to mention that in this particular case the analogy would be that they bring you that hammer whether you're at a friend's house or the other side of the country.

The category of people whose music library will not fit on an iPod Classic.

Actually the category would be people whose music library doesn't fit on whatever mobile device they happen to have. Or more specifically, people whose music library doesn't fit along with all the apps, movies, photos, and other content they want to have on that device.

 

[Carouser]

That's really all that matters.

Do you still think the following is true?

While on the surface iTunes Match looks like a great service with a lot of promise, it's really nothing but smoke and mirrors.

[people will be] seeing the service for what it really is - worthless to most

The interest [in iTunes Match] will undoubtedly wane as an acclimation to iOS 5 is acheived.

 

[Sdevante]

Lovin' all these analogies. Are there lawyers in the room?

 

[iSingandiDance]

Do you still think the following is true?

Yes, wholeheartedly.

It's not for me now and it won't be in the future. It may be for others - good for them. Others will pay it no mind.

 

[Azzin]

3 Three UK ALL IN ONE plan gives you free unlimited use of Spotify premium for the length of your contract which seems much better than this effort from Apple.

I'm on the One Plan, but have never heard of the Spotify option.

Any link?

Cheers.

 

[Eric S.]

No, this is like the hardware store going to your house and bringing you your hammer whenever you want them to, wherever you are. Since iTunes Match isn't obligatory, you can access your music as you see fit, but that doesn't mean people who use it are paying multiple times for the same thing.

We'll just have to disagree on that point.

Yes, that's a relatively small category, but I was talking about the set of users who are on iOS devices as well as those with very large libraries. It's no good to argue against one part of that set as being small and then simply ignore the substantive part of what I'm saying.

Sorry, I misread an "or" for an "and". My bad on that one.

As for how iTunes Match doesn't make sense for you individually, who cares? This isn't 'Mac Survey' or 'Eric S' livejournal',

It's not "Carouser's blog" either. If you make an assertion, others are allowed to state an alternate opinion.

I was making a point about how there is a reasonable demand for iTunes Match given the user base and that the service is non-negligible. The fact that you personally can get by without it is of no consequence to that point.

But that's not what you said. You said that for people who leave their houses (a group that includes me), iTunes Match "makes sense." I am stating that that is not universally true.

Eric, I don't want to carry another piece of hardware. I like having an iPhone that does it all.

Go for it.

 

[rick98761]

I'm still in the process of uploading, so I have yet to see the finished product. Hopefully they fix some of the matching to work a bit better. Few questions for those who have finished:

1. As an example, I currently have a lot of radiohead music. Instead of leaving the tons of b-sides organized by the single it came with, I just bunched them all into groups of what album era they came from. For instance I have the album ok computer, then an album called ok computer b-sides. If I wanted to change how those are organized how would I do that on iCloud? Just change it in my library and it will sync the changes, or will I end up with 2 copies in my iCloud library?

2.has anyone found a way to remove stuff from your iCloud? I have some kids music on my home iTunes library, what if I don't want that showing up on my iOS devices?

3. Is there a way to see which songs were matched and which ones were not. I can see it is uploading a ton of stuff that is on iTunes.

 

[SirHaakon]

Still, I won't pay to listen to my own music. It can be delivered on a silver platter. Wouldn't make a bit of difference.

You're paying for a service and for the convenience. Do you ever use an ATM? That's paying to get your own money. Sounds ridiculous, and yet there are billions of transactions like that every day. $25 a year for access to your entire music library wherever you go, instantly, sounds like a pretty amazing deal to me.

 

[Carouser]

It's not "Carouser's blog" either. If you make an assertion, others are allowed to state an alternate opinion.

I asserted general claims about how iTunes Match could be useful to many people. I fail to see how an individual who has decided it is not useful to him contradicts this point.

But that's not what you said. You said that for people who leave their houses (a group that includes me), iTune Match "makes sense." I am stating that that is not universally true.

I qualified that statement and said iTunes Match does make sense for people who 'go outside, travel, etc., and would like to access any of their music library from anywhere'. I submit it still makes sense for you, in the sense that that it is not a scam or irrelevant, that if you subscribed to it you would not be, on the face of it, throwing away money. While you do not see the need for it, that is not because the service is worthless, as others have asserted. Not everyone who might use a service buys it. The service is still something which they could conceivably find some value in. This is against iSing who continues to assert the service is worthless to most and I submit he or she is wrong.

I have no idea where I said anything like "smoke and mirrors."

You didn't, I was replying to someone else.

You're paying for a service and for the convenience. Do you ever use an ATM? That's paying to get your own money. Sounds ridiculous, and yet there are billions of transactions like that every day.

pfft every time I leave the house I spend 2 minutes to put my entire balance in my wallet, it's no probs

 

[Azzin]

Which carrier offers free tethering and unlimited data?
I know Tesco offer unlimited data, but "Personal Hotspot" is not available on my iPhone 4 on Tesco mobile.

Three (One Plan).

 

[kurosov]

To those with access stating they have had issues with matching songs, How accurate is your metadata?

Do they use enough information for iTunes to grab album artwork via grace note? Is it even having trouble matching albums that where ripped using iTunes itself or are your libraries more the messy kind?

If it is matching well on correctly tagged files then that knowledge would give those planning to use the service to run one of the many metadata fixing apps available.

 

[iSingandiDance]

You're paying for a service and for the convenience. Do you ever use an ATM? That's paying to get your own money. Sounds ridiculous, and yet there are billions of transactions like that every day. $25 a year for access to your entire music library wherever you go, instantly, sounds like a pretty amazing deal to me.

Glad you feel that way.

 

[AaronEdwards]

How is it greater for pirates? They already had a copy of the song, just obtained via different means. Much of the time the version of the song they torrented is the same version a legit downloader has, and both users could just have easily put the same song on their iDevice.

Suddenly having a laundered copy of the song doesn't provide any more proof of legit rights to it. Where is the original CD they rip'd from? Where is the iTunes "receipt" that shows proof of your rights to it?

I've never written that the iTunes version they get for their stolen mp3 is proof for legit rights.
But why would they worry about legit rights, if their pirated files won't be checked when they match them, then when will they be checked?

Why it is better for pirates? They get their version, which could be a crappy version, replaced by a better version. Whenever they show their music to other people it will be a consistent collection and people won't distinguish it from legal files, unless people start to think of iTunes files as being pirated in general.

 

[milo]

Do they use enough information for iTunes to grab album artwork via grace note? Is it even having trouble matching albums that where ripped using iTunes itself or are your libraries more the messy kind?

Heck, getting album art doesn't even work for many of my albums with correct metadata, including CDs ripped with iTunes. Including things sold by iTunes, art is either not found or completely wrong.

 

[kurosov]

Heck, getting album art doesn't even work for many of my albums with correct metadata, including CDs ripped with iTunes. Including things sold by iTunes, art is either not found or completely wrong.

That is surprising. The only music i have trouble in finding artwork for via iTunes are those not found in the UK store, A selection of german, japanese and other non english language artists.

 

[milo]

Why it is better for pirates? They get their version, which could be a crappy version, replaced by a better version.

I don't see what is unique about that to pirates. Anyone can have a crappy version, either ripped from CD at lower bitrate or even purchased (including iTunes while they were at 128, hopefully those files will be upgraded considering that everything else will) and get that same benefit. Not to mention the whole point of the service, downloading and streaming on the go.

 

[rick98761]

To those with access stating they have had issues with matching songs, How accurate is your metadata?

Do they use enough information for iTunes to grab album artwork via grace note? Is it even having trouble matching albums that where ripped using iTunes itself or are your libraries more the messy kind?

If it is matching well on correctly tagged files then that knowledge would give those planning to use the service to run one of the many metadata fixing apps available.

It matched less then half for me. All mine were ripped from CDs, iTunes, or amazon music store. I do have some torrented, from when I wanted to upgrade the quality of my cd rips but didn't want to drag out the CDs. I would say iTunes found artwork for over 95% of it.

 

[kurosov]

It matched less then half for me. All mine were ripped from CDs, iTunes, or amazon music store. I do have some torrented, from when I wanted to upgrade the quality of my cd rips but didn't want to drag out the CDs. I would say iTunes found artwork for over 95% of it.

I guess this algorithm really does need work then. Well at least this beta will give them time to shape it up.