Google +. I googled it and didn't find anything with exact results "google +". Why not call it Google tunes? I am thinking that iTunes is like eBay. Original and it just works. I really don't see any company like Google becoming a threat to the MP3 music guru's like Apple's iTunes.
We have about 15,000 songs spread over 6 Macs... About 11,000 matched and the rest were uploaded. Uploading took about 8 hours total. Now, any changes are reflected in the iCloud servers -- after a few seconds.
Now, we have immediate access to all ofthese from our iPhones and iPads and AppleTV...
The first betas were a little buggy... But now it works well and pedictably!
1) I dislike Google's silly use of Google+ making the '+' search parameter ineffective.
2) I'm glad Google finally was able to secure some deals with content owners after their previous attempt to circumvent the record companies.
3) I don't see why this is being paired with Google+ except to prop up Google+ more than be a good vessel for competing with iTunes Store.
4) I wonder if 320Kbps MP3 is really better than 256Kbps AAC.
5) Interesting that Google will transcode all your FLAC and OGG to 320Kbps MP3. At least doesn't make it the dumb locker they tried to push before.
6) In what way will this be more convenient than iTunes Store that will make me use Google's service?
PS: For those complaining about iTunes Match missing Apple's self-imposed launch deadline by two weeks, note that it works differently than a standard data locker. As more users sign up for iTunes Match the more music they will have on file and therefore the less time it will take for each user's music library to be accounted for.
It simple an attempt to copy Apple at every turn as they have been doing since ES took over.
Just as iTunes binds Apple owners closer to their ecosystem, Google Music will be a draw to both Android and Google+, helping keep Android owners in the fold. With the addition of Google Music, there's not a lot of Apple services without a closely matched Android equivalent. A complete bundle of services/ecosystem is advantageous to both platforms.
320kpbs but using MP3. Most people forget that AAC was developed by the same people in Germany who did MP3 and AAC was designed to replace MP3 because it was technically superior. It also had a DRM layer that MP3 lacked and thanks to Steve Jobs has now been abandoned. Apple was the first to widely use it making it a de facto standard.
So 320kpbs is about the same as 256kpbs AAC...only your hard drive will know for sure.
Just as iTunes binds Apple owners closer to their ecosystem, Google Music will be a draw to both Android and Google+, helping keep Android owners in the fold. With the addition of Google Music, there's not a lot of Apple services without a closely matched Android equivalent. A complete bundle of services/ecosystem is advantageous to both platforms.
Bodes well for consumers as the drive will be to make Cloud services and desktop and mobile devices a cohesive platform. This should drive innovation. I wonder if we're going to see 4G LTE become more of a factor in devices even beyond Smartphones.
320kpbs but using MP3. Most people forget that AAC was developed by the same people in Germany who did MP3 and AAC was designed to replace MP3 because it was technically superior. It also had a DRM layer that MP3 lacked and thanks to Steve Jobs has now been abandoned. Apple was the first to widely use it making it a de facto standard.
So 320kpbs is about the same as 256kpbs AAC...only your hard drive will know for sure.
How do you qualify the "roughly equivalent"? File sizes? Audio quality for the average listener?
Ive been using the google music thing for a few moments now and feel the need to share my off teh cuff comparison to what Apple offers:
Software/UI: Google wins
Apple makes me download a clunckey client that is slow as molasys on my wuper fast wuad core PC with 6gb ram, no slouch of a box. The web interface for teh google playwe works nicely in Firefox and Chrome and loads FAST.
Cloud and local storage: Google
All I need to access my music is a browser, not a big fat itunes client or a IOS device.
Format: Google wins
What can I say? AAC is pretty wide spread but MP3 is ubiquitous...pretty much everything plays MP3s and tehy can be used for anything, like making your own ring tones and such.
Quality: Google Wins
320k MP3 sounds almost indistinguishable to my discerning ear from a CD.
Social: Google wins
Ping? really?!? Need I say more?
price: Google wins
$0.99 for everything (as far as I have been able to see)...none of this bullshit of some rejected 20 year old crap that wasnt good enough for am radio at .79 and .99 and the good stuff all at a buck thirty!
Comments
Let's keep on topic and not attempt to generalize here.
Better quality and cheaper than itunes. Nice.
Is Google offering higher than 256Mbps music? I thought they were also at the .99 and $1.29 pricing.
Okay. You think they should just be a search engine?
They need to focus on their core business.
This adds nothing to their core business.
It simple an attempt to copy Apple at every turn as they have been doing since ES took over.
Is Google offering higher than 256Mbps music? I thought they were also at the .99 and $1.29 pricing.
320 and free cloud
Is Google offering higher than 256Mbps music? I thought they were also at the .99 and $1.29 pricing.
Yes, every track is 320kbps
Is iTunes match still a beta feature? Honest question. Seems to have a lot of initial issues.
https://discussions.apple.com/thread...art=0&tstart=0
It is a released product...
We have about 15,000 songs spread over 6 Macs... About 11,000 matched and the rest were uploaded. Uploading took about 8 hours total. Now, any changes are reflected in the iCloud servers -- after a few seconds.
Now, we have immediate access to all ofthese from our iPhones and iPads and AppleTV...
The first betas were a little buggy... But now it works well and pedictably!
deleted
Let's keep on topic and not attempt to generalize here.
Understood.
2) I'm glad Google finally was able to secure some deals with content owners after their previous attempt to circumvent the record companies.
3) I don't see why this is being paired with Google+ except to prop up Google+ more than be a good vessel for competing with iTunes Store.
4) I wonder if 320Kbps MP3 is really better than 256Kbps AAC.
5) Interesting that Google will transcode all your FLAC and OGG to 320Kbps MP3. At least doesn't make it the dumb locker they tried to push before.
6) In what way will this be more convenient than iTunes Store that will make me use Google's service?
PS: For those complaining about iTunes Match missing Apple's self-imposed launch deadline by two weeks, note that it works differently than a standard data locker. As more users sign up for iTunes Match the more music they will have on file and therefore the less time it will take for each user's music library to be accounted for.
Understood.
Thanks for understanding AD. I know you have more to offer.
I'm gonna try out some tracks at 320k and see how much of a difference. Cool thing is
that if I subscribe to iTunes Match it's going to let me upload tracks even if they are
purchased via Amazon or Google.
You could build a library of 320k songs at home and iTunes Match 256k songs for mobile devices.
This could get pretty interesting.
They need to focus on their core business.
This adds nothing to their core business.
It simple an attempt to copy Apple at every turn as they have been doing since ES took over.
Just as iTunes binds Apple owners closer to their ecosystem, Google Music will be a draw to both Android and Google+, helping keep Android owners in the fold. With the addition of Google Music, there's not a lot of Apple services without a closely matched Android equivalent. A complete bundle of services/ecosystem is advantageous to both platforms.
Yes, every track is 320kbps
320kpbs but using MP3. Most people forget that AAC was developed by the same people in Germany who did MP3 and AAC was designed to replace MP3 because it was technically superior. It also had a DRM layer that MP3 lacked and thanks to Steve Jobs has now been abandoned. Apple was the first to widely use it making it a de facto standard.
So 320kpbs is about the same as 256kpbs AAC...only your hard drive will know for sure.
Just as iTunes binds Apple owners closer to their ecosystem, Google Music will be a draw to both Android and Google+, helping keep Android owners in the fold. With the addition of Google Music, there's not a lot of Apple services without a closely matched Android equivalent. A complete bundle of services/ecosystem is advantageous to both platforms.
Bodes well for consumers as the drive will be to make Cloud services and desktop and mobile devices a cohesive platform. This should drive innovation. I wonder if we're going to see 4G LTE become more of a factor in devices even beyond Smartphones.
try disdain
Nice.
320kpbs but using MP3. Most people forget that AAC was developed by the same people in Germany who did MP3 and AAC was designed to replace MP3 because it was technically superior. It also had a DRM layer that MP3 lacked and thanks to Steve Jobs has now been abandoned. Apple was the first to widely use it making it a de facto standard.
So 320kpbs is about the same as 256kpbs AAC...only your hard drive will know for sure.
How do you qualify the "roughly equivalent"? File sizes? Audio quality for the average listener?
http://ipod.about.com/od/introductio..._qual_test.htm
So 320kpbs is about the same as 256kpbs AAC...only your hard drive will know for sure.
One thing is for certain, the same file will take up more storage and more bandwidth than iTunes.
Software/UI: Google wins
Apple makes me download a clunckey client that is slow as molasys on my wuper fast wuad core PC with 6gb ram, no slouch of a box. The web interface for teh google playwe works nicely in Firefox and Chrome and loads FAST.
Cloud and local storage: Google
All I need to access my music is a browser, not a big fat itunes client or a IOS device.
Format: Google wins
What can I say? AAC is pretty wide spread but MP3 is ubiquitous...pretty much everything plays MP3s and tehy can be used for anything, like making your own ring tones and such.
Quality: Google Wins
320k MP3 sounds almost indistinguishable to my discerning ear from a CD.
Social: Google wins
Ping? really?!? Need I say more?
price: Google wins
$0.99 for everything (as far as I have been able to see)...none of this bullshit of some rejected 20 year old crap that wasnt good enough for am radio at .79 and .99 and the good stuff all at a buck thirty!
One thing is for certain, the same file will take up more storage and more bandwidth than iTunes.
mp3 takes up less space than aac
320>256
[320Kbps] mp3 takes up less space than [the same song at 256Kbps] aac
320>256
Don't be crazy!