The cellular networks are pretty decent in many countries around the world. I don't see why iCloud, Facetime shouldn't work over 3G, should the user prefer. Both Skype, Bambuser, Spotify etc. works over 3G.
The thing is, it DOES work.. if you've got two iPhones, or one iPhone and an iPad you could just set up one of them to share wifi to the other.. and then it works.. Perhaps the real reason is Apple is afraid users without flat rate will get upset?
Nothing you stated is the issue. Being able to technically work in most markets or being able to JB and get it to work does not mean it's the experience that Apple wants to portray for a "just works" service. You can technically use FaceTime on EDGE, too.
Imagine you try to use FaceTime and your carrier doesn't support all the carriers that FaceTime needs or your FaceTime audio and video gets sent in a choppy packets, not because there network is saturated, but because your carriers isn't doing proper QoS on the protocols. How will the end user know that the carrier is at fault and not instead blame Apple for making a crappy VoIP system?
Makes no sense. iCloud doesn?t replace your local storage (Google-style), it complements it. All that data you have still resides locally for instant access. And the runaway success of flash-based Macs will drive demand too.
The analysts are wrong. People are still going to store stuff locally, even when the "cloud" comes along. It's not like Apple is giving everybody terrabytes of free storage space where they can do what they want. And even if somebody does upload something to the "cloud", they'll still keep the originals on their local drives.
And, you can't just store whatever you want and upload it to iCloud. What about movies, videos, porn and stuff that really takes a lot of data? People will still have to store that kind of stuff locally.
As new iPhones, iPads, iPod touches and stuff like Macbook Airs get released, then these will be using plenty of flash memory. And as flash memory gets cheaper, then Apple will be putting more memory in their hardware. There are already reports of the Macbook Airs coming with 128 gb of flash. So to sum it up, this is just some analyst speculating and making shit up. The only difference between the analyst and any random person posting here is that they get paid for making shit up.
Wasn't it the Apple fans saying companies no longer need servers or datacenters because Apple's cloud will serve all their needs?
I agree 100%. I see Apple using more not less NAND in the coming years.
If anything the ability to spill data off to the cloud would drive most local storage requirements into the sub 256GB range, right into SSD territory. Roll on MacBook Airs!
That said, Apple's media cloud strategy is incomplete - where's video? A local, thunderbolt/802.11n timecapsule would make sense.
Apple's iCloud service is not ment as long-term storage option, rather it is a sync service where many items are removed after 30 days; ie photos. So this shouldn't have any affect on NAND or optical or hard drive usage
Cheers !
Quote:
Originally Posted by robmel
Using a cloud for primary storage might work ok on a corporate intranet or from a fixed high-speed broadband link. But from an iPhone subject to the vagaries of the mobile network or a typically rubbish non-metropolitan Internet link you'd have to be mad to consider it. In any case, I like to keep my data where I can see it.
I surely hope that Apple doesn't go for this in a gung-ho fashion. I'd hate to be forced back onto Windows.
Must have been someone with a small music selection. At 5 GB, that's not enough to hold a small selection of my music, plus other files. Besides, Apple's iCloud is really a sync service, not a long term storage option
Cheers !
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haggar
Wasn't it the Apple fans saying companies no longer need servers or datacenters because Apple's cloud will serve all their needs?
...How will the end user know that the carrier is at fault and not instead blame Apple for making a crappy VoIP system?
It doesn't matter who they blame for not making their dreams come true, the important thing is to connect people. I believe most users would understand the concept of choppy performance due to reception issues and network performance etc.
Voice calling too is pretty choppy sometimes due to unforeseen reception issues.. I think FaceTime should be set free too. When using it over a 3G connection it performs pretty decent. Better than Skype in my opinion. Definitely useful.
Comments
The cellular networks are pretty decent in many countries around the world. I don't see why iCloud, Facetime shouldn't work over 3G, should the user prefer. Both Skype, Bambuser, Spotify etc. works over 3G.
The thing is, it DOES work.. if you've got two iPhones, or one iPhone and an iPad you could just set up one of them to share wifi to the other.. and then it works.. Perhaps the real reason is Apple is afraid users without flat rate will get upset?
Nothing you stated is the issue. Being able to technically work in most markets or being able to JB and get it to work does not mean it's the experience that Apple wants to portray for a "just works" service. You can technically use FaceTime on EDGE, too.
Imagine you try to use FaceTime and your carrier doesn't support all the carriers that FaceTime needs or your FaceTime audio and video gets sent in a choppy packets, not because there network is saturated, but because your carriers isn't doing proper QoS on the protocols. How will the end user know that the carrier is at fault and not instead blame Apple for making a crappy VoIP system?
The analysts are wrong. People are still going to store stuff locally, even when the "cloud" comes along. It's not like Apple is giving everybody terrabytes of free storage space where they can do what they want. And even if somebody does upload something to the "cloud", they'll still keep the originals on their local drives.
And, you can't just store whatever you want and upload it to iCloud. What about movies, videos, porn and stuff that really takes a lot of data? People will still have to store that kind of stuff locally.
As new iPhones, iPads, iPod touches and stuff like Macbook Airs get released, then these will be using plenty of flash memory. And as flash memory gets cheaper, then Apple will be putting more memory in their hardware. There are already reports of the Macbook Airs coming with 128 gb of flash. So to sum it up, this is just some analyst speculating and making shit up. The only difference between the analyst and any random person posting here is that they get paid for making shit up.
Wasn't it the Apple fans saying companies no longer need servers or datacenters because Apple's cloud will serve all their needs?
Wasn't it the Apple fans saying companies no longer need servers or datacenters because Apple's cloud will serve all their needs?
...Yes. It was "the Apple fans" who said that.
Those emoticons barely even begin to cover the range of emotions I felt simultaneously when reading that.
I agree 100%. I see Apple using more not less NAND in the coming years.
If anything the ability to spill data off to the cloud would drive most local storage requirements into the sub 256GB range, right into SSD territory. Roll on MacBook Airs!
That said, Apple's media cloud strategy is incomplete - where's video? A local, thunderbolt/802.11n timecapsule would make sense.
McD
Cheers !
Using a cloud for primary storage might work ok on a corporate intranet or from a fixed high-speed broadband link. But from an iPhone subject to the vagaries of the mobile network or a typically rubbish non-metropolitan Internet link you'd have to be mad to consider it. In any case, I like to keep my data where I can see it.
I surely hope that Apple doesn't go for this in a gung-ho fashion. I'd hate to be forced back onto Windows.
Cheers !
Wasn't it the Apple fans saying companies no longer need servers or datacenters because Apple's cloud will serve all their needs?
...How will the end user know that the carrier is at fault and not instead blame Apple for making a crappy VoIP system?
It doesn't matter who they blame for not making their dreams come true, the important thing is to connect people. I believe most users would understand the concept of choppy performance due to reception issues and network performance etc.
Voice calling too is pretty choppy sometimes due to unforeseen reception issues.. I think FaceTime should be set free too. When using it over a 3G connection it performs pretty decent. Better than Skype in my opinion. Definitely useful.
It's definitely going to be more use.