You don't own anything you download from the iTunes store now. You hold a license and are allowed to play or view it, but you do not own it.
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.
More Details on Apple's Cloud-based Music Locker
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You don't own anything you download from the iTunes store now. You hold a license and are allowed to play or view it, but you do not own it.
You're being alarmist. Besides what does it matter to you if you "own" a copy of a song, just as long as the overall cost of use is the same or less? Competition will always moderate costs. I suggest you get more sleep and relax.
could this possibly be why apple discontinued the MobileMe boxes and discount things. maybe if he is finalizing deals tomorrow there will be possibly be a special event or something soon. if not wwdc is only a little over a month away!!!!
They would do it just like they find album art. That seems to work reasonably well.
Its also not great for many many many other people. You still base your ideas and arguments on the flawed notion that people have unlimited data and could still get it. I will also state again, I personally believe this will be some kind of add-on locker and not replacing local storage. I believe replacing local storage at this point would be a major mistake on Apple's part because it would negatively affect so many people...granted, not all.
Well no, not in the true sense of the word, but you do have the data and can use the data elsewhere.
In the same way technically you don't own the music on a record, or cassette or CD, but you do have the ability to use/listen to the music elsewhere.
I can just see this ability, which we have taken for granted since the 1st every records were sold to the public in around 1894 will soon, if big companies get there way and the public buy into it without thinking, will be coming to an end.
Well it's not like you've ever owned anything you've purchsed earlier, when you buy a CD you buy a physical object as well but what you're paying for is the right to play it in a private setting.
After using Spotify as my primary source of music for a couple of years now I can say that I prefer this renting method. Spotify has virtually any song I'd care to listen to and I can listen to them all instantly, and by using a premium subscription I can store up 3333 songs offline per device (very handy when traveling/commuting).
I was just pointing this out, but I agree that it could be something that was easier to take away if there was no physical media.
I am stuck between the two worlds of physical and digital media. I prefer to hold something in my hand since it makes me feel like I own something. As soon as I get the disk home I rip it in lossless into iTunes and put it in a box after tagging it meticulously. I enjoy the convenience, but not ready to take that full leap.
I think the debate here is people who prefer local storage vs those who want cloud based storage. Those who want cloud based storage are saying that this will nor replace local storage but just be an OPTION, so why all the fuss?
Well, the DANGER is that with the initiation of cloud based storage, Apple will no longer feel the NEED to increase local storage and might even reduce it. Heck, we've been sitting on 32 GB iPhone and 64 GB touch for almost 3 years now (and 64 GB iPad for 2 years) with no real hope that this will increase next generation. Remember that it's been over 5 years ago when 160GB was the norm on iPod Classics and local storage was increasing every single cycle and people were dying to have it. Who would have thought at that time that it would top out there and suddenly decline dramatically in newer devices. It's scary really.
We again need increases in on-device capacity! My library is never going to get smaller, for christ sake, only larger. Cloud based storage gives us the danger of again stagnant or decreases in local storage as an Apple PHILOSOPHY, which would totally suck.
Tony
Well, the DANGER is that with the initiation of cloud based storage, Apple will no longer feel the NEED to increase local storage and might even reduce it. Heck, we've been sitting on 32 GB iPhone and 64 GB touch for almost 3 years now (and 64 GB iPad for 2 years) with no real hope that this will increase next generation. Remember that it's been over 5 years ago when 160GB was the norm on iPod Classics and local storage was increasing every single cycle and people were dying to have it. Who would have thought at that time that it would top out there and suddenly decline dramatically in newer devices. It's scary really.
We again need increases in on-device capacity! My library is never going to get smaller, for christ sake, only larger. Cloud based storage gives us the danger of again stagnant or decreases in local storage as an Apple PHILOSOPHY, which would totally suck.
Tony
all these streaming services (itunes cloud, netflix, etc.) make me glad that i still have my unlimited data on iphone...i wonder when at&t will cap the "unlimited" accts.?
seems smart what apple's doing, though...it's what dropbox does for files it knows are duplicates. just keep one copy of it but make it available to all the accounts that have saved it. just need to log the hash...makes uploading, syncing, etc. much faster. and i'm sure it'll save both apple and the end user a lot of bandwidth and storage fees...
seems smart what apple's doing, though...it's what dropbox does for files it knows are duplicates. just keep one copy of it but make it available to all the accounts that have saved it. just need to log the hash...makes uploading, syncing, etc. much faster. and i'm sure it'll save both apple and the end user a lot of bandwidth and storage fees...
The All Things D article did a bit of speculation on whether or not it would be more efficient, and they got it wrong. Amazon (like many other enterprises) uses Data De-Duplication to minimize data duplication. I can guarantee they are using such technology for their cloud storage offering.
i'm not ignoring any facts. u are being too technical. i have unlimited data but i use less than 2gb. my point is if u are places and it has free wifi, CONNECT to it...which is what i do at work and at home. streaming does not use a lot of data like you think.
look at the MBA. obviously it's not a computer for you. Doesn't mean it's not a great option for someone else. Storage is minimal and doesn't have a cd drive at all. This is all my wife and i use for a computer. It works great for us.
do you see now where the future is going with minimal hard drive space and no cd drive???
I hope this service will be free or else it is really pointless just saying. Great idea but I worry there will be a price for using a Cloud service and probably only available for only the purchases you made on iTunes not CDs you have ripped. I am assuming in few days if this Cloud service comes to live there will be a iOS update again and hopefully this will work with 4th Gen iPod Touch I do not see why it will not work.
Cloud is a awful idea, and I hate streaming video technology too because you never can "own" or store the items on YOUR computer in the event something happens.
I can't believe so many people are following this cloud crap like its a good thing.
Essentially you'd be paying for items that run on the companies servers in which they pretty much can hold the data hostage.
2nd, servers do go down and most broadband companies employ caps now (which is ridiculous since internet use is increasing) so that is another issue.
3rd, if becoming hugely popular, storage space on devices is no longer going to be a priority. (though really hasn't been the last few years for apple anyway)
If I pay for something it should be on MY computer not some company that can change their policies at any time for any reason. Including boosting prices.
Now cloud based services would make a nice side kick to storage but it definitely should not kill the current module of downloading stuff to your computer and allowing you to "own" the content and move it how you please.
Unfortunately the general population don't have the brains to really see the negatives to any apple ideas.
I can't believe so many people are following this cloud crap like its a good thing.
Essentially you'd be paying for items that run on the companies servers in which they pretty much can hold the data hostage.
2nd, servers do go down and most broadband companies employ caps now (which is ridiculous since internet use is increasing) so that is another issue.
3rd, if becoming hugely popular, storage space on devices is no longer going to be a priority. (though really hasn't been the last few years for apple anyway)
If I pay for something it should be on MY computer not some company that can change their policies at any time for any reason. Including boosting prices.
Now cloud based services would make a nice side kick to storage but it definitely should not kill the current module of downloading stuff to your computer and allowing you to "own" the content and move it how you please.
Unfortunately the general population don't have the brains to really see the negatives to any apple ideas.
The funny part is, no matter what Apple does to make this work, whether its really usable, or totally locked-in-worthless, it doesn't matter.
Streaming will never be as good as audio stored on your device. Not. Ever.
Not on 3G, not on 4G, and not even over WiFi. The software and streaming protocols are way too slow to offer even comparable performance.
I'll stick with syncing/file storage.
Streaming will never be as good as audio stored on your device. Not. Ever.
Not on 3G, not on 4G, and not even over WiFi. The software and streaming protocols are way too slow to offer even comparable performance.
I'll stick with syncing/file storage.
apple is not the first ones to do this so not sure about your last comment. if you USE itunes, do you REALLY own anything???
why is there a limit to how many computers you can play a song on? hmmm yeah u don't really own it now do you?
Look at netflix and hulu plus. if you can get access to TONS of content through a subscription what is the point of owning an actual physical copy if you can watch it from your queue online on your device?
Have you ever actually watched Netflix or Hulu on a iPhone or iPad over 3G? It totally sucks - not even close to what it looks like when stored locally, especially on the iPad.
Tony
my point is that they stream from a location and aren't stored locally....
they stream fine for me.
because you are beholden to the content people for how long they want that content to be streamable. See loss of Dexter on Netflix as an example (or even the rolling expiration of movies).
This isn't 2007, the content of music on iTunes isn't DRM protected, furthermore I still own the content (even the DRM) as I can do exactly what I want with it. I can back it up, move it between devices, and have absolutely no dependence on sustainable bandwidth, company's servers, and policy changes revolving around the use of the server.
As for your netflix comment, there have been plenty of times that Netflix has removed content from their servers that was previously available, if I actually own the content I don't even have to worry about the company removing availability of item <x>.
Streaming content is inferior to downloaded content, it depends on a reliable connection, it depends on your bandwidth not being capped or being regulated to a lower setting because you went over (it'd be pretty easy to stream videos and go over your limit especially in HD).
With the recent iPhone privacy fiasco, APPLE would be the LAST company on earth that I would want to depend on.
As a backup option I think its great, as a primary service that eliminates the concept of downloading and owning your content, its complete bull. I'm not paying money for content that essentially stays in someone else's computer that they could do what they want with it at ANY time. Forget it.
speed, quality and reliability through internet connections is absolutely INFERIOR than when it is run from a hard drive (avg transfer for a hard drive in 2007 was 1030 MBits (128MB/sec) or flash memory (even the lowest class runs at 2MB/sec, which is more than most people can get in their internet connection).
If it goes further to where computers start using cloud services just to run and store their computer it becomes a) a privacy issue, b) a security issue. People like their privacy and like to own stuff they pay for.
Last edited:
who is to say you can't do the same with the cloud service? why can't you download ur music from the cloud to your computer?
Why is it now OK to be a backup service? they are still going to have your data....why does it matter if it's your primary version or a backup?
There is a reason why this has come about. if it was so stupid it wouldn't be happening. People can be really weird about "owning" things. I have friends who collect thousands of dvds. wow, to view 1-2 times. what a waste.
I guess the music and documents i have in idisk i don't own either right?
I was referring to netflix bc the content one may like is there. maybe not all of it, but with the apple option on the cloud you'd have that option to load what you want to listen to.....aka you would choose the playlist.
If netflix had that option for movies. Why would you spend thousands of dollars buying dvds when you can have it at a subscription price in the cloud?
right and that was just as an example. if you have the option to choose your playlist in the cloud and it won't ever go away bc it's your playlist.....why pay tons of money buying physical media?
check out grooveshark......