If this were the case, I'd have no use for this service, except as a backup. I use DOTTUNES, which is free, and allows me to do for myself what Apple wants to do. My terabyte of music and video are served up from my computer at home using Dottunes. Full quality, not this Pandora/Simplify/Lala nonsense. Music and Video.
Free. Private. Encrypted. Reliable. Last thing I want to do is get out on the road and see a "We'll be back soon!" stickie when I try to log on to my "iTunes Cloud"
So if you use your own computer as a server, you don't need Apples? I don't think most people fit into that category. Just because you don't have any use for this service doesn't make it a bad idea. Also, I don't know why people think this wouldn't apply to video as well...
Thanks for the information on Dottunes, I hadn't heard about it before. I think you are likely wrong on the reliability argument though, I doubt Apple would take down their streaming site when they update the online store, but I would see their servers as more impervious to things like power outages than yours would be. I'd also rather not leave my computer on all day just in case I want to access my iTunes library. Dottunes may be free, but power isn't.
I want complete control of my library whenever, wherever and with whatever device I choose. There are so many reasons not to use a service like this and only a few minor advantages offered to even consider changing to it. At least for me.
No thanks, I'll keep my stuff on my own machine. I hope we will have an opt out available.
I think this is the biggest misconception about this potential service. It would be designed to supplement the current purchase and download system, not replace it.
What about people with massive catalogs like 500gb?
they aren't actually going to copy everyone's music to their cloud. they will have a copy of everything and you will get access to whatever is in your iTunes. Probably for a price to take piracy into account.
Couldn't a person cheat that by just making up sound files of a certain length and changing the title of the file or tags in order to gain privileges to a real music file. I'm only asking since I'm sure some people would try that.
I think this is the biggest misconception about this potential service. It would be designed to supplement the current purchase and download system, not replace it.
I am baffled how this is being so widely perceived as a backup or an alternative for maintaining a local music library.
Wouldn't a service like this in some ways obsolete the iPod? I mean a lot of times i will take my iPod to work with me and use the speakers there to listen to my music, or use it a friends house to listen to music, if I can stream it why would I need to keep investing in an iPod? Seems like this would eat away at one of Apples flagship products.
Also, I am not a big fan of the whole cloud computing thing, I prefer to keep my info in my control and not let some techie hit the wrong button and eliminate it (ala T-Modbile sidekick).
And yes this is my first post after months of lurking so please don't beat me up to bad.
They can't even get the cover art right. I wouldn't expect them to get the track right every time either.
That had nothing to do with the statement you quoted me on, but I would suggest fixing your tags. I don't check cover art too often, so they could be getting some stuff wrong, but most often it would probably have to do with the tags, or alternate covers for the same album.
The thing I'd find cool about this is that if I rip my CDs in lossless, if it was indexed in 'the cloud' I could have the lossless version at home where I actually use it, and a 128kb version on the go, which is all I need in my iPod or car or whatever. Saves space on my iPod.
The thing I don't know is how they'll handle items not associated with iTunes. Even more, items not associated with anything. As a musician, I have some of my own stuff on my iPod. I wouldn't want it automatically downloaded to Apple's farm just because it's unique.
Something feels a little 'big brother' about this, and I don't like the smell of it. I think I'd opt out too.
Those can be faked without providing the correct data. Piracy seems much easier. I don't thinknot's going to be your entire library specifically because of the possibility of giving away streaming to pirates. Remember, Lala wasn't able to turn a profit so doing things differntly may be in order.
While this sounds logical it would have to be for Mobile Me users only and even then it's sketch. Think about this - how many GB's is the average users library? If this service was completely free think of the exabytes this would use up for 100 million users. I cannot see this being free and even then it could be more along the lines of this:
I purchased a song/movie/audiobook etc from iTunes, it downloads to my computer & a file is created then on the iTunes Cloud saying I purchased certain files, then when I try to access it from any other device it verifies that I did purchase that from that file and streams the file to me from their typical storage location. This way it would eliminate Apple storing users files that may have been pirated and then it would also eliminate thousands of duplicates of the same files on iTunes Servers.
Apple then would be providing you access to all your legally purchased content and then end user then would be able to take advantage of this new service they purchased with Lala and stream it to any browser or Internet-connected device.
Hope this makes sense.
I was thinking the same thing. I can't see sending my 1.5TB catalogue of video and music to Apple, especially when 2/3 of it was purchased from them in the first place.
Even if it was only music, I'm still looking at almost 300GB. Sadly, only a small amount of that came from iTunes.
use any of the above and you will def be much better off...
OPERA is my FAV at the moment because of the LIVE STREAMING itunes feature from ANY desktop to your Itunes Library- and the 'insert personal' feature button as well- saves me a lot of time when filling out web forms-
just don't use THAT HORRID PC CRAP Of an excuse for a web experience IE- urrrrrrgghh!!
MICRO$hit because that's what it really is ... MICRO$hit!!!!
That had nothing to do with the statement you quoted me on, but I would suggest fixing your tags. I don't check cover art too often, so they could be getting some stuff wrong, but most often it would probably have to do with the tags, or alternate covers for the same album.
...good to know, however I don't recall quoting a previous statement of yours, if I misquoted you my apologies.
I think this is the biggest misconception about this potential service. It would be designed to supplement the current purchase and download system, not replace it.
I guess I misunderstood this paragraph:
""An upcoming major revision of iTunes will copy each user's catalog to the net making it available from any browser or net connected ipod/touch/tablet," he wrote. "The Lala upload technology will be bundled into a future iTunes upgrade which will automatically be installed for the 100+ million itunes users with a simple 'An upgrade is available?' notification dialog box."
Honest question here (and no doubt I'm getting distracted from the real point of the article by getting stuck on the headlines but please bear with me): Why doesn't iTunes already count as a cloud service? It seems like every now and then I see someone getting frustrated about the over-use of that particular buzzword, who then points out that services like iTunes have been doing cloud computing for ages, and no one noticed. It seems a little artificial to say that we don't call something 'cloud' unless it's browser-accessible.
Maybe so. I just don't think that there's a workable model, and I worry about the possible ramifications. Case in point:
I used to do a radio show. I archived all my shows to MP3. All are handles by iTunes. These are 2 hours a pop. They would not be recognized by iTunes 'cloud'. What happens?
Well, first off, if they were downloaded we'd be talking multiple gigs of information that would be shared with no one but me. Seems a lot to store just for little 'ol me.
If it IS out there and accessible to others somehow, who's to blame if it is 'rebroadcast' somehow? Under the umbrella of the CRTC I could do it, not outside the radio show though.
All I'm saying is there's situations where this could be a problem.
Comments
If this were the case, I'd have no use for this service, except as a backup. I use DOTTUNES, which is free, and allows me to do for myself what Apple wants to do. My terabyte of music and video are served up from my computer at home using Dottunes. Full quality, not this Pandora/Simplify/Lala nonsense. Music and Video.
Free. Private. Encrypted. Reliable. Last thing I want to do is get out on the road and see a "We'll be back soon!" stickie when I try to log on to my "iTunes Cloud"
So if you use your own computer as a server, you don't need Apples? I don't think most people fit into that category. Just because you don't have any use for this service doesn't make it a bad idea. Also, I don't know why people think this wouldn't apply to video as well...
Thanks for the information on Dottunes, I hadn't heard about it before. I think you are likely wrong on the reliability argument though, I doubt Apple would take down their streaming site when they update the online store, but I would see their servers as more impervious to things like power outages than yours would be. I'd also rather not leave my computer on all day just in case I want to access my iTunes library. Dottunes may be free, but power isn't.
What about people with massive catalogs like 500gb?
It doesn't copy them, it views them and gives you access to the same tracks.
Sounds like a terrible idea.
I want complete control of my library whenever, wherever and with whatever device I choose.
You can download them like before, this would be an additional option.
Sounds like a terrible idea.
I want complete control of my library whenever, wherever and with whatever device I choose. There are so many reasons not to use a service like this and only a few minor advantages offered to even consider changing to it. At least for me.
No thanks, I'll keep my stuff on my own machine. I hope we will have an opt out available.
I think this is the biggest misconception about this potential service. It would be designed to supplement the current purchase and download system, not replace it.
You can download them like before, this would be an additional option.
They can't even get the cover art right. I wouldn't expect them to get the track right every time either.
What about people with massive catalogs like 500gb?
they aren't actually going to copy everyone's music to their cloud. they will have a copy of everything and you will get access to whatever is in your iTunes. Probably for a price to take piracy into account.
it's like the old mp3.com from 15 years ago
Couldn't a person cheat that by just making up sound files of a certain length and changing the title of the file or tags in order to gain privileges to a real music file. I'm only asking since I'm sure some people would try that.
MD5 checksums
I think this is the biggest misconception about this potential service. It would be designed to supplement the current purchase and download system, not replace it.
I am baffled how this is being so widely perceived as a backup or an alternative for maintaining a local music library.
Also, I am not a big fan of the whole cloud computing thing, I prefer to keep my info in my control and not let some techie hit the wrong button and eliminate it (ala T-Modbile sidekick).
And yes this is my first post after months of lurking so please don't beat me up to bad.
They can't even get the cover art right. I wouldn't expect them to get the track right every time either.
That had nothing to do with the statement you quoted me on, but I would suggest fixing your tags. I don't check cover art too often, so they could be getting some stuff wrong, but most often it would probably have to do with the tags, or alternate covers for the same album.
The thing I'd find cool about this is that if I rip my CDs in lossless, if it was indexed in 'the cloud' I could have the lossless version at home where I actually use it, and a 128kb version on the go, which is all I need in my iPod or car or whatever. Saves space on my iPod.
The thing I don't know is how they'll handle items not associated with iTunes. Even more, items not associated with anything. As a musician, I have some of my own stuff on my iPod. I wouldn't want it automatically downloaded to Apple's farm just because it's unique.
Something feels a little 'big brother' about this, and I don't like the smell of it. I think I'd opt out too.
MD5 checksums
Those can be faked without providing the correct data. Piracy seems much easier. I don't thinknot's going to be your entire library specifically because of the possibility of giving away streaming to pirates. Remember, Lala wasn't able to turn a profit so doing things differntly may be in order.
Something feels a little 'big brother' about this, and I don't like the smell of it. I think I'd opt out too.
That is more paranoia than anything else.
While this sounds logical it would have to be for Mobile Me users only and even then it's sketch. Think about this - how many GB's is the average users library? If this service was completely free think of the exabytes this would use up for 100 million users. I cannot see this being free and even then it could be more along the lines of this:
I purchased a song/movie/audiobook etc from iTunes, it downloads to my computer & a file is created then on the iTunes Cloud saying I purchased certain files, then when I try to access it from any other device it verifies that I did purchase that from that file and streams the file to me from their typical storage location. This way it would eliminate Apple storing users files that may have been pirated and then it would also eliminate thousands of duplicates of the same files on iTunes Servers.
Apple then would be providing you access to all your legally purchased content and then end user then would be able to take advantage of this new service they purchased with Lala and stream it to any browser or Internet-connected device.
Hope this makes sense.
I was thinking the same thing. I can't see sending my 1.5TB catalogue of video and music to Apple, especially when 2/3 of it was purchased from them in the first place.
Even if it was only music, I'm still looking at almost 300GB. Sadly, only a small amount of that came from iTunes.
This seems a logical way to go although I doubt IE will be supported
oh get a grip, WHO CARES about 'Old' Internept Exploder??!!
(I'm a PC Consultant/Tech in the NYC area and I always ADVISE my people to AVOID using Internept Exploder and just download:
http://www.apple.com/safari/
http://www.FIREFOX.com
http://www.OPERA.com
http://www.google.com/chrome
http://www.CAMINOBROWSER.org
use any of the above and you will def be much better off...
OPERA is my FAV at the moment because of the LIVE STREAMING itunes feature from ANY desktop to your Itunes Library- and the 'insert personal' feature button as well- saves me a lot of time when filling out web forms-
just don't use THAT HORRID PC CRAP Of an excuse for a web experience IE- urrrrrrgghh!!
MICRO$hit because that's what it really is ... MICRO$hit!!!!
HAPPY 2010 everyone!!!
That had nothing to do with the statement you quoted me on, but I would suggest fixing your tags. I don't check cover art too often, so they could be getting some stuff wrong, but most often it would probably have to do with the tags, or alternate covers for the same album.
...good to know, however I don't recall quoting a previous statement of yours, if I misquoted you my apologies.
...good to know, however I don't recall quoting a previous statement of yours, if I misquoted you my apologies.
hmm looks like i misquoted you
I think this is the biggest misconception about this potential service. It would be designed to supplement the current purchase and download system, not replace it.
I guess I misunderstood this paragraph:
""An upcoming major revision of iTunes will copy each user's catalog to the net making it available from any browser or net connected ipod/touch/tablet," he wrote. "The Lala upload technology will be bundled into a future iTunes upgrade which will automatically be installed for the 100+ million itunes users with a simple 'An upgrade is available?' notification dialog box."
That is more paranoia than anything else.
Maybe so. I just don't think that there's a workable model, and I worry about the possible ramifications. Case in point:
I used to do a radio show. I archived all my shows to MP3. All are handles by iTunes. These are 2 hours a pop. They would not be recognized by iTunes 'cloud'. What happens?
Well, first off, if they were downloaded we'd be talking multiple gigs of information that would be shared with no one but me. Seems a lot to store just for little 'ol me.
If it IS out there and accessible to others somehow, who's to blame if it is 'rebroadcast' somehow? Under the umbrella of the CRTC I could do it, not outside the radio show though.
All I'm saying is there's situations where this could be a problem.