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.
WWDC 2011 Pre-Keynote Roundup and Coverage Details
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
iTunes Match. $24.99 a year to match songs in my library and get the 'iTunes version.'
Two questions:
1. What if I 'acquire' the song from an online source, get the iTunes version. I have a legal copy...
2. If I quit my subscription do I lose access to those songs?
Two questions:
1. What if I 'acquire' the song from an online source, get the iTunes version. I have a legal copy...
2. If I quit my subscription do I lose access to those songs?
Ok so your ripped music will work too provided they find a match in iTunes.
Nice.
But my rips are better quality than what they offer and I don;t have to pay $24.95 a year to hear them.
Nice.
But my rips are better quality than what they offer and I don;t have to pay $24.95 a year to hear them.
WTF?
The record companies are getting money for nothing. You already paid them when you bought the CD's etc.
Nobody else thinks this is incredibly inefficient? You now take a 5mb song and it takes up 25mb, the 4 devices and the cloud. What a waste of resources. Put it in the cloud and let me stream it, then download if I choose.
I love Apple, but this is so disappointing. Nothing revolutionary here. Nothing magical.
Tabbed browsing? Using an actual button to take pictures? Streaming photos? Letting us re-download music we already bought?
Don't get me wrong. These are all cool features. But nothing that blows my mind.
I love Apple, but this is so disappointing. Nothing revolutionary here. Nothing magical.
Tabbed browsing? Using an actual button to take pictures? Streaming photos? Letting us re-download music we already bought?
Don't get me wrong. These are all cool features. But nothing that blows my mind.
Match is interesting. It effectively lets you wash the sins of your illegal P2P past away for a small fee.
sounds like the music match is DOA. The fact that Apple is charging a Record label Tax compared to Google which 20k is 100% free.
I do not see Amazon or Google agreeing to charge that much money for the same service. They did their way to say FU to the record companies as it gets around their requirement.
I do not see Amazon or Google agreeing to charge that much money for the same service. They did their way to say FU to the record companies as it gets around their requirement.
i have a feeling that registration or something is required up front, which is not unreasonable and a small price to pay for security. if they don't do this, it is just disaster waiting to happen, and then once it does they will have a system like that.
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPad; U; CPU OS 4_3_3 like Mac OS X; en) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8J2 Safari/6533.18.5)
Who says Apple infringed on anyone's IP??
LOL
Anyway, a landmark WWDC. Good show.
ssk2 said:
Who says Apple infringed on anyone's IP??
LOL
Anyway, a landmark WWDC. Good show.
It's implied. The whole idea of their service is to keep a single copy of each song and it's not 320kbps
Does it? If so then hmmm....I may be interested. So would this be like a digital content confession and thusly we are admonished and forgiven of all sins?
I disagree. We're officially in the Post PC era now that the tether has been cut. This is a huge deal. So is the iCloud API. This is the most exciting WWDC I can remember in years.
So if I upgrade (assuming a replacement for front row) and don't use the cloud - I can still sync my ripped music library via cable and save $25?
