That's never stopped big corporations. So they get their lobbyists, their Congressmen, and their Senators to change the law. Or they simply stop the free iCloud service, citing whatever excuse is convenient, and launch a new and improved, but paid service, to which they will transfer all your data for free (aren't they nice?) and without any hassles if you opt-in. If you don't you'll have to shell out for a (couple of) big SSD(s) or HD(s), and download your 10 Petabytes of data to it/them.
It's an old scenario.
Every drug dealer uses it.
This won't happen. Are you a shill for the spinning hard drive lobby? You seem irrationally against absolutely every future technology that looks to supplant it.
This won't happen. Are you a shill for the spinning hard drive lobby? You seem irrationally against absolutely every future technology that looks to supplant it.
No, not against "every technology that looks to supplant it", but against this technology that looks to supplant it. Because this technology puts our data ? us ? at the mercy of the cloud operators. And the cloud operators are businesses, not charities. They need to make a profit! So they'll bleed the market ? us ? for whatever it's worth. And let me tell you: our data is worth trillions. And they know it!
No, not against "every technology that looks to supplant it", but against this technology that looks to supplant it. Because this technology puts our data ? us ? at the mercy of the cloud operators.
SSDs – as that article points out – won't be able to deliver after 2024.
You say that is no problem, because we (will) have (i)Cloud storage.
I say you're selling your soul to the devil if you rely on the cloud as your primary storage solution. The devil will collect on that.
But if neither HDs nor SSDs, or an as yet to be developed alternative technology, will be (sufficiently) available after 2024, we – the market – won't have a realistic choice anymore. We will have to use cloud storage. Their cloud storage.
SSDs ? as that article points out ? won't be able to deliver after 2024.
And with that I disagree on the face of it.
Quote:
You say that is no problem, because we (will) have (i)Cloud storage.
I say you're selling your soul to the devil if you rely on the cloud as your premier storage solution.
By 'premier', do you mean primary? I agree with that. But again, it's moot since SSDs will be fine.
Quote:
The devil will collect on that.
Google already does. Their stuff is free, but they steal your information "legally" in accordance with your terms of service. Apple doesn't. Neither have any intention to monetize their stuff. Google because they already steal your information and sell you ads based on it. Apple because you're already giving them money for hardware and they actually have a design team.
Claiming that iCloud will go paid with zero proof to back that up is nonsense.
By 'premier', do you mean primary? I agree with that.
Yes, primary. My bad.
Quote:
But again, it's moot since SSDs will be fine.
That's circular reasoning!
You sound like a Jehovah's Witness!
Quote:
Google already does. Their stuff is free, but they steal your information "legally" in accordance with your terms of service. Apple doesn't. Neither have any intention to monetize their stuff. Google because they already steal your information and sell you ads based on it. Apple because you're already giving them money for hardware and they actually have a design team.
Claiming that iCloud will go paid with zero proof to back that up is nonsense.
You didn't read my post well. Free iCloud will sadly succumb to its success. Is what it will probably be sold as. It will never be a paid service as long as the law forbids that. It will perish first. 'Under the weight of its own success'.
You need to knock off the knocks toward religion. And no, it's not circular reasoning. I do not believe SSDs are a failure, nor are they doomed. Therefore there is no need to worry about expanding local storage in the future.
Quote:
Free iCloud will sadly succumb to its success.
You do not and can not know this. It won't go paid without tens of millions of lost accounts and huge controversy that irreparably damages Apple. It can easily stay free with minimal issue.
iCloud is free if you use an Apple device/OS with it. That means the maintenance of it is considered an advertising expense for the devices. Apple is selling so many devices the cost amortizes out quite small per device/OS.
iCloud is free if you use an Apple device/OS with it.
You can use it with any device, even a PC, and not have an iOS device at all. You can't upload iWork documents without having paid for iWork, but if you have a PC, you're not going to be doing that anyway.
Are you seriously going to listen to a graduate STUDENT who probably hasnt worked in the industry for long ( or none at all)?
Dont you think the people in the industry knows about the future limits?
This lady obviously wants her name out in the field for a prospective job offer from a company or is looking for a faculty position ( if not a PhD program).
You can use it with any device, even a PC, and not have an iOS device at all. You can't upload iWork documents without having paid for iWork, but if you have a PC, you're not going to be doing that anyway.
Corner cases that do almost nothing. iCloud connected to iTunes on a PC, what then if you don't have an iOS device? nada...
The point of my post wasn't that though, it was that iCloud isn't "free". It is an explicit part of the overall Apple marketing scheme and funded as such via sales of devices and software. When you buy Apple, you are paying for iCloud access whether you use it or not.
Comments
That's never stopped big corporations. So they get their lobbyists, their Congressmen, and their Senators to change the law. Or they simply stop the free iCloud service, citing whatever excuse is convenient, and launch a new and improved, but paid service, to which they will transfer all your data for free (aren't they nice?) and without any hassles if you opt-in. If you don't you'll have to shell out for a (couple of) big SSD(s) or HD(s), and download your 10 Petabytes of data to it/them.
It's an old scenario.
Every drug dealer uses it.
This won't happen. Are you a shill for the spinning hard drive lobby? You seem irrationally against absolutely every future technology that looks to supplant it.
This won't happen. Are you a shill for the spinning hard drive lobby? You seem irrationally against absolutely every future technology that looks to supplant it.
No, not against "every technology that looks to supplant it", but against this technology that looks to supplant it. Because this technology puts our data ? us ? at the mercy of the cloud operators. And the cloud operators are businesses, not charities. They need to make a profit! So they'll bleed the market ? us ? for whatever it's worth. And let me tell you: our data is worth trillions. And they know it!
No, not against "every technology that looks to supplant it", but against this technology that looks to supplant it. Because this technology puts our data ? us ? at the mercy of the cloud operators.
SSDs put us at the mercy of cloud operators?
SSDs put us at the mercy of cloud operators?
No.
SSDs – as that article points out – won't be able to deliver after 2024.
You say that is no problem, because we (will) have (i)Cloud storage.
I say you're selling your soul to the devil if you rely on the cloud as your primary storage solution. The devil will collect on that.
But if neither HDs nor SSDs, or an as yet to be developed alternative technology, will be (sufficiently) available after 2024, we – the market – won't have a realistic choice anymore. We will have to use cloud storage. Their cloud storage.
And then we're hooked.
No.
SSDs ? as that article points out ? won't be able to deliver after 2024.
And with that I disagree on the face of it.
You say that is no problem, because we (will) have (i)Cloud storage.
I say you're selling your soul to the devil if you rely on the cloud as your premier storage solution.
By 'premier', do you mean primary? I agree with that. But again, it's moot since SSDs will be fine.
The devil will collect on that.
Google already does. Their stuff is free, but they steal your information "legally" in accordance with your terms of service. Apple doesn't. Neither have any intention to monetize their stuff. Google because they already steal your information and sell you ads based on it. Apple because you're already giving them money for hardware and they actually have a design team.
Claiming that iCloud will go paid with zero proof to back that up is nonsense.
And with that I disagree on the face of it.
By 'premier', do you mean primary? I agree with that.
Yes, primary. My bad.
But again, it's moot since SSDs will be fine.
That's circular reasoning!
You sound like a Jehovah's Witness!
Google already does. Their stuff is free, but they steal your information "legally" in accordance with your terms of service. Apple doesn't. Neither have any intention to monetize their stuff. Google because they already steal your information and sell you ads based on it. Apple because you're already giving them money for hardware and they actually have a design team.
Claiming that iCloud will go paid with zero proof to back that up is nonsense.
You didn't read my post well. Free iCloud will sadly succumb to its success. Is what it will probably be sold as. It will never be a paid service as long as the law forbids that. It will perish first. 'Under the weight of its own success'.
That's circular reasoning!
You need to knock off the knocks toward religion. And no, it's not circular reasoning. I do not believe SSDs are a failure, nor are they doomed. Therefore there is no need to worry about expanding local storage in the future.
Free iCloud will sadly succumb to its success.
You do not and can not know this. It won't go paid without tens of millions of lost accounts and huge controversy that irreparably damages Apple. It can easily stay free with minimal issue.
Free iCloud will sadly succumb to its success.
iCloud is free if you use an Apple device/OS with it. That means the maintenance of it is considered an advertising expense for the devices. Apple is selling so many devices the cost amortizes out quite small per device/OS.
iCloud is free if you use an Apple device/OS with it.
You can use it with any device, even a PC, and not have an iOS device at all. You can't upload iWork documents without having paid for iWork, but if you have a PC, you're not going to be doing that anyway.
Dont you think the people in the industry knows about the future limits?
This lady obviously wants her name out in the field for a prospective job offer from a company or is looking for a faculty position ( if not a PhD program).
Again, people move by self-interest only.
You can use it with any device, even a PC, and not have an iOS device at all. You can't upload iWork documents without having paid for iWork, but if you have a PC, you're not going to be doing that anyway.
Corner cases that do almost nothing. iCloud connected to iTunes on a PC, what then if you don't have an iOS device? nada...
The point of my post wasn't that though, it was that iCloud isn't "free". It is an explicit part of the overall Apple marketing scheme and funded as such via sales of devices and software. When you buy Apple, you are paying for iCloud access whether you use it or not.