New Time Capsules Rather Than Apple's Servers to Act as Hub for iCloud Data Syncing?

[DoogH]

They've had a lot of routers in the past... Apple TV, Time Capsule, and standard Air Port...

I suspect they are going to update the time capsule to serve as an Apple TV as well, except with local storage, rather than streaming only (because it also serves at the time capsule backup). The cloud system would make sense here as well to have duplicate copies of your files from the cloud stored on the time capsule (kinda like your idisk). That way when away from home, you access them via internet, and when home you access them via time capsule. The two stay identical. This makes perfect sense. It helps ease people's fear of data lose via the cloud as well.

I, for one, hate the way idisk works on the mac. You can store a local copy for offline usage, but that takes large amounts of disk space. Also, when you update stuff on the local idisk, you must remain connected for the large files to sync. With this time capsule concept, you copy them to your time capsule and let it finish uploading the files while you are gone. The offline storage also won't eat your local drive's space. Seems genius, but who knows if that is actually the plan.

 

[NightFox]

So where do all the licensing agreements with all the record companies fit in with all of this? Nah, there's more to iCloud than this.

 

[ct2k7]

Never going to happen. The primary purposes is to be a wireless router, and it would kill the signal.

It could go black like the Apple TV though.

One you go black, you never go back.

 

[baryon]

This would be awesome! That way it would be way faster when you're at home at least.

 

[RafaelT]

A "local" cloud is much more appealing to me than having all my stuff "somewhere" available when all components "in the end to end path" from my ? to my Mac are having a "sunny day". Not to mention privacy issues....

That being said it will be interesting to see how "iCloud" evolves with Apple TV and iTunes content and "streaming".

Maybe tomorrow we'll have some answers.....

Yes! If there is truth to this rumor and Apple executes it correctly it will be great!

 

[Diatribe]

So if this is true and I don't need my computer to be on for airplay then Sonos is left with less and less advantages over airplay.

 

[fekimoki]

How about airport extreme base stations with hdd plugged?

 

[radiohead14]

wait, so if your time capsule hardware fails.. will the data be still backed up in apple's storage as well?

 

[ct2k7]

wait, so if your time capsule hardware fails.. will the data be still backed up in apple's storage as well?

One would hope so.

 

[camnchar]

If true and that's all there is to iCloud, I will be massively disappointed yet still buy the new Time Capsule because my first gen is due for replacing.

I like the idea of storing updates locally, but requiring a hardware upgrade to use cloud services is a bad, bad idea and will slow adoption considerably -- think blu-ray/HDTVs.

 

[Moccasin]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8J2 Safari/6533.18.5)

wait, so if your time capsule hardware fails.. will the data be still backed up in apple's storage as well?

I think the assumption is that yes, the local storage will be an option with synching of the son-of-TC with Apple's iCloud servers.

Sounds to me like a good integrated solution for those concerned about having all their eggs in either basket.

 

[Appel]

This sounds perfect! Exactly what i have wanted out of a TC. Optimises for media streaming and synching across devices, perfect storage for my 128 gb ssd macbook, and a highway line for the coming flashbased Macbooks. Now theres no need for massive local storage.

 

[NightFox]

Before cooking up these crackpot theories, has anyone stopped and thought about the fact that maybe Time Capsule is being discontinued as it has been proven to fail easily and with the use of Apple's servers and iCloud, a Time Capsule backup/sync home setup won't be necessary. Apple is into making better and more seamless experiences, not complicating things by forcing their customers to buy and setup a Time Capsule just to get a proper syncing/caching/backingup solution...

Sorry, don't agree. For starters, for many people (especially with ADSL connections) the initial backup would take days if not weeks to complete. A system restore would take days and use up several months allowance for capped users. Even accessing the backup to restore a couple of files would be painfully slow compared to a LAN connection.

 

[Warbrain]

I think this would be a good way to go. It just better support external hard drives though

You know it won't.

It's a stroke of genius for Apple and the worshippers nealt down before Steve.

The plan will sell more time capsules than ever. Brilliant.

No it won't. Normal people don't want to buy an extra piece of equipment to do this.

The catch here is upload speeds... Of which most home ISPs have very little of. My TWC service has 20Mbps down, but only 1.5Mbps up. This will cramp any sort of home cloud service....

Very few people would be able to take advantage of this because of their asymmetrical connections.

wait, so if your time capsule hardware fails.. will the data be still backed up in apple's storage as well?

Probably not. Sure doesn't seem that way. Sounds like a fancy way of using a VPN to interface with AirPlay.

 

[Moccasin]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8J2 Safari/6533.18.5)

If this isn't Apple's plan I'll actually be rather disappointed. I've been wanting an integrated hone server solution that doesn't require all the setup pain for a while.

What would be nice but I think unlikely (not Apple's style) would be a first year's free subscription to iCloud with the new TC.

 

[techwarrior]

Dang...timing again. Just purchased an AirPort Extreme and am using a USB connected drive. Too late to return the AP, been 60+ days.

I am hoping this will be an iCloud/MobileMe update to the AP and TC firmware as well as MacOS and iOS rather than require new HW...

 

[Warbrain]

Dang...timing again. Just purchased an AirPort Extreme and am using a USB connected drive. Too late to return the AP, been 60+ days.

I am hoping this will be an iCloud/MobileMe update to the AP and TC firmware as well as MacOS and iOS rather than require new HW...

It probably won't. They'll treat it like the original Apple TV.

 

[toddybody]

I'm sure well know more tomorrow

 

[theOtherGeoff]

I think this is the rebirth of nearline storage with on disk, on LAN and on WAN storage. The data migrates to where 'you are' and if you have local caching servers (TC), then it negotiates delivery to all devices in your LAN.

Best of Andrew File System, consumer grade.

The patent for fragmentary delivery of content is a hint.

The 2 things common people don't do well are: do backups, and build network shares. Yes, there are those who read manuals, go to college, and even 'enjoy' the intricacies of RAID0+1, NFS, tar, AFS, TCP buffers, performance tuning, and even TLS/AES.

Point is, most people don't. And consumer network equipment Dlink, Linksys/Cisco, are in a race to the bottom, rightfully so, in providing cheap LAN support.

What Apple is (needs to) doing, is building the bridge between 'out there' cloud, and 'in here' cloud (my home, my devices, my entertainment). Yes, there are companies that have done parts of this before, but none have the ITMS at the back end, and the iPad in the fingers of the consumer. Building out a singular system that lets you create a remote backup location, a remote sharing point for all my personal files, encrypted with a filevault sparse bundle dmg file.

a local caching server (any reason why time capsule files for 8 months ago have to be in the same room as me?, in fact, there are lots of reasons why a copy of yesterdays backups should be offsite hours after completion), support for internal multicasting (why send down 3 versions of a rented movie, as it moves from desktop to ipad, to appleTV? send the next 5MB to the local server, and as they switch, it's done at LAN speeds and not WAN speeds).

And, is there any reason why the key server in the sky, can't send keys for you to read DRM'ed data off of my server, if you pay for a right to view. So, If I download IronMan3, and someone on my ISP wants to view it too, why not get some files from the 'neighbor,' as long as the encryption key escrowing is served up by the Apple (who can keep track of rights assignments).... A legal bittorrent.

Finally, as FaceTime goes 'conference' Now, you have a central spot in an org to sync and delivery a single stream (or multicast). Great for SMBs, and extended families. Heck, my wife and I facetime between the basement and 2nd floor now.

I see Apple putting the 'home server' right next to the cable modem/DSL POP. And it coordinates with the mothership in North Carolina. Why share files between my iPad and my desktop via a cloudserver in NC, when I can do it on my LAN with little latency... but if I leave the house... having it seemlessly connect to the icloud services at Apple (no buttons, no switches, it just works), is EXACTLY what everyone who doesn't know the difference between megabytes and megatron.

 

[adammjenkins]

Airport Extreme

Here's to hoping that those of us with existing hardware aren't left completely out of the loop. I like the concept of either paying to use Apple's servers (for offsite backup purposes, as well) or hosting my own for the cost of my hardware and internet connection, but I'm just hoping that I don't have to buy yet another piece of very expensive networking hardware to accomplish it. I am perfectly fine with the functionality of my Airport Extreme and its USB expansion port, I just hope it is capable of receiving an update. I have loved the router thus far, and I don't want to regret my (relatively recent) $180 purchase. I guess we'll all find out exactly what this is and how it will pan out tomorrow. It really feels like Christmas Eve! So much cool stuff coming tomorrow.

 

[shandyman]

To use iCloud i have to buy a time capsule? No thanks.

if this is a necessity then it's gonna fail.

most people are on windows and have no need for a time capsule, so that will alienate most iOS users off the bat.

The more i hear stuff like this, the more i think that i'll stick with dropbox for files/pics/etc and spotify for music as iCloud is not going to do anything better than that combo at the mo.

Edit - i got 3 negatives for this post? really? lol.

 

[UnseenLlama]

The problem with the current NAS devices with an iTunes server (Netgear, Synology, DLink, Qnap, etc) is that you still can not play back restricted material bought from the iTunes store from these devices. Sure, most music is DRM free now and will work fine with those 3rd party solutions, but movies/tv shows purchased thru iTunes are not able to be played back from those NAS devices. The other problem is that you were never able to have AppleTV play things off of these NAS devices.

Now if Apple opens the streaming gates with a TC type device which allows any iOS or Mac OS device to stream off it, that's worth something to me.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

I see this kind of thing as nearly a total win. But to fully get it, you have to put all the pieces together.

Apparently, a big piece of iCloud is streaming media. The owners of that media do not want to allow the "scan my library and then link me to one master copy of every song" option because they'll assume we're all pirates. There's no real way to reasonably prove that all the non-iTunes-store purchased content was genuinely purchased. Yet, iCloud for the iTunes benefit is a bust if ONLY iTunes-purchased content can be stored and streamed.

A digital locker where we upload our own copies of the rest of our media libraries is a situation where an Apple service may be facilitating the use of pirated content. So giving us the space to upload our stuff onto Apple servers may have some legal risk for Apple. I bet Amazon & Google will feel some pain soon for this very thing.

Furthermore, storing everything in the (off site) iCloud comes with the downside of high bandwidth burn when your Internet access gatekeepers are increasingly pinching "unlimited Internet" down into tiers and "per GB" fees.

So how do you solve those 2 problems and still sell us on an iCloud service? A local piece of the iCloud (this TC solution) for non-iTunes-purchased media and non-local storage of the rest on Apple servers seamlessly presented to us users as if all of it was in either place. Do the software right and even the "NOT for dummies" user won't be able to tell exactly where any given bit of iTunes media is coming from.

In this scenario, Apple legal risk is near zero as they aren't hosting any media they can't prove each iCloud user owns. Each user gets to enjoy ALL of their media via iCloud instead of ONLY the content purchased via iTunes. And, potentially, there is a fairly strong reason to buy new hardware for Apple to make it all work.

And with most of your media stored on your local cloud, you don't burn any bandwidth when access it at home. Furthermore, this local cloud gives users the potential for the non-computer access to all iTunes media (such as the popular want of NOT needing to leave a computer running to feed media to an TV).

My guess is that the cost of the local cloud is the cost of a TC plus the $25 or so annual subscription for iCloud services (which would mostly be sync services if you choose to store all of your own content only on this local iCloud). I for one would be very quick to pay up for an Apple-friendly iTunes media server with NO other features than just sharing one media library with all of the devices within the house; for some time now, I've been right on the edge of paying up big for a Drobo or Unraid. And Apple central store with lots of Apple software niceties is a complete win- even at TC prices or more.

If you want to store lots of other files (probably non-media to keep the legals under control) off site, there is probably going to be per GB or tier fees much like iDisk now. That would still give you a way to backup everything off site if you want... but "everything" will come at a pretty good added cost, probably scaling per individual needs. I can't figure out how this model could backup your iTunes media NOT purchased from the store and still be acceptable legal risk, but maybe using iCloud for backup purposes only- NOT streaming- is a way to implement a complete Time Machine OFFSITE backup solution through iCloud (for those that want offsite backup).

Thus, the cheap option for iClouding all of your iTunes content is to buy the new TC device. The more expensive variation is to rent big space on Apple's servers to function as off-site backup. I bet this will be a classic rent vs. buy pricing scheme that will make buying new hardware from Apple seem like a bargain.

I'd also guess that a software upgrade would probably be available to bring this iCloud functionality to existing TC and AEBS users.

Net, I would guess that we can choose NOT to buy TCs and store it all on Apple's servers at a pretty hefty price if "it all" is a lot of storage. I would guess that that rental will look weak vs. buying a TC and storing most of your stuff in the local cloud. Either way, Apple makes lots of money whether you store it on their servers or in a hybrid between their servers and your own personal iCloud (TC).

There is a bandwidth burn downside when the local cloud storage is having to send data to you via Internet (as you are burning it on the upload and the download) when you are away from home, but this will only be a problem for people who are on-the-go streaming more often than at-home streaming. For each person that that describes, they would probably want to choose to rent more iCloud storage on Apple's servers and store less at home.

 

[Warbrain]

To use iCloud i have to buy a time capsule? No thanks.

if this is a necessity then it's gonna fail.

most people are on windows and have no need for a time capsule, so that will alienate most iOS users off the bat.

The more i hear stuff like this, the more i think that i'll stick with dropbox for files/pics/etc and spotify for music as iCloud is not going to do anything better than that combo at the mo.

I don't think Apple is looking at this as a solution that will involve Windows users.

But I'm thinking I'll be sending more money Dropbox's way after Monday.

 

[Morod]

I'm sure well know more tomorrow

Yes.
But if the majority of posters in this thread are correct, I'll be Cloudless in Kansas.