Is anyone actually using it? You can't listen to albums, if certain sings on an album are duplicates from other albums, Apple Music does not play them. Pathetic.
"You can't listen to albums." You're doing it wrong.
And you gathered that because I proactively protect my content? :no:
Yes, I accept A) the reality of companies making mistakes, companies doing as little as possible to correct those mistakes based of an actuarial formula that determines both my value as as a customer and potential fall out from a lawsuit, and C) that if I don't do the shear minimum to protect my own content then I am at more to blame than some 1) internal cloud glitch, 2) some tragic data center destruction by nature, 3) a hacker group destroying an entire company's cloud data, 4) a hacker socially engineering a hack against my system, or anything else possible within cloud-based computing.
Every single reader of this forum should be proactive in protecting their own data instead of blindly assuming that it's someone else's responsibility.
Fortune favours the prepared. Your data! Your responsibility!
Um...no. One because you didn't respond to that reference in my post, and two, if you had 10,000 songs you'd realize that it takes hours to sync it to a device. I have an iPad, iPhone, and iPod touch (for the car) that, at a minimum, I'd have to re-sync. Also, I'd have to re-upload to the cloud if I want to have the convenience of using my AppleTV as a multimedia device. Many people do not have that kind of time.
----
The second part of your post is both condescending and beside-the-point, since -- to repeat-- I back up (just the same as you apparently do).
On a larger point: (1) If I could manage with my backups, why do I need Match at all (other than for AppleTV)? (2) Do you seriously think that for everything from home to corporate and for much of their data and media files, the cloud is NOT the future? If it IS the future, what do you think Apple's role should be in it?
(Edited: Took out a poorly worded double-negative).
Um...no. One because you didn't respond to that reference in my post,
Which reference are you saying I didn't respond to?
and two, if you had 10,000 songs you'd realize that it takes hours to sync it to a device. I have an iPad, iPhone, and iPod touch (for the car) that, at a minimum, I'd have to re-sync.
AGAIN, it takes much longer to re-download from any cloud-based service than from a local service so the larger and more valuable the library one wishes to protect the more likely a reasonable person would have a local backup in wish to protect the time and effort they've put into collecting and arranging their media.
Also, I'd have to re-upload to the cloud if I want to have the convenience of using my AppleTV as a multimedia device. Many people do not have that kind of time.
That's just stupid talk. Your Apple TV can pull from local storage so there is no traversing the cloud, requiring a network connection, or anything else foolishly complex added to the mix. Furthermore, having a local backup does not mean you still can't use a cloud-based system for syncing, storage or even for backup, as previously stated, all it means is that you are not dependent solely on one and only one system in which you have no control in order to make sure your content is safe and secure.
The second part of your post is both condescending and beside-the-point, since -- to repeat-- I back up (just the same as you apparently do).
Your comments about how Apple should be a savior of all our media without question, as well as comment about how "The Cloud" is somehow more efficient as an hourly backup solution than a local backup over GigE tells me that you don't not back up (same as I do).
On a larger point: (1) If I could manage with my backups, why do I need Match at all (other than for AppleTV)? (2) Do you seriously not think that for everything from home to corporate and for much of their data and media files, the cloud is NOT the future? If it IS the future, what do you think Apple's role should be in it?
You think iTunes Match was designed as a backup solution? No! :no: It's so you can access your music from all your devices and listen to your entire library wherever you are. I've used iTM for years because $25 per year is less than the extra $200 per year I'd spend on additional iPhone storage to hold all my music (which even then it wouldn't come close to holding), so I don't have to plan ahead for wanting some music that I don't listen to often, save for a trip I know I'll be without a data connection.
I can't reiterate enough that anyone that uses these non-backup services as their sole backup solution are being irresponsible and foolish in this day and age, especially if they frequent this site.
I know a lot of people that just kept Spotify going even whilst giving Apple Music their full attention. I don't get this. Is stopping Spotify really that difficult that it's worth saving up to $45? I'm not the streaming music demographic (much prefer to own it), but if I was paying for one service and wanted to try another to see if it's better, I think I'd plan it around when my Spotify subscription ended so I could get the most bang for my buck.
Overtime, this number will increase at a faster rate as Apple music service will get mature, differentiate from others. In three months trial period, more will sign up so if some drops out and more added than net will still go up.
What happens after the free trial if you haven't turned auto renewal off? Do you get an email from Apple saying you're going to be charged? Turning it off is buried in settings so it wouldn't surprise me if a lot of people have it on and don't even know it.
Probably the same thing that happens with almost 100%of subscription services after a free trial. You'll get charged.
If they want to hit 100,000,000 subscribers that would be easy... Howard Stern's contract is expiring at the end of this year. Bring him onboard with a Howard Stern Channel (live of course) and he will have a much larger audience than he does at SiriusXM. I'm certain there are far more iTunes/iOS users out there than people that own SiriusXM radios. Fan of him or not, he would be EXCELLENT for business!!!
If they want to hit 100,000,000 subscribers that would be easy... Howard Stern's contract is expiring at the end of this year. Bring him onboard with a Howard Stern Channel (live of course) and he will have a much larger audience than he does at SiriusXM. I'm certain there are far more iTunes/iOS users out there than people that own SiriusXM radios. Fan of him or not, he would be EXCELLENT for business!!!
Dalrymple should have had his own local backups so he can easily fix his local iTunes library issue with a simple drag and drop of a single folder. The fact that he didn't even do the very minimal in proactive measures means he is not someone whose word in tech I will consider as expert, insightful, or in any other way worthwhile.
Totally agree with this. He has always been touted as having this mystical credibility.
As Inspector Clouseau said when informed the piano he had just destroyed was a priceless Steinway,
"not any more".
Which reference are you saying I didn't respond to?
--
AGAIN, it takes much longer to re-download from any cloud-based service than from a local service so the larger and more valuable the library one wishes to protect the more likely a reasonable person would have a local backup in wish to protect the time and effort they've put into collecting and arranging their media.
--
That's just stupid talk. Your Apple TV can pull from local storage so there is no traversing the cloud, requiring a network connection, or anything else foolishly complex added to the mix. Furthermore, having a local backup does not mean you still can't use a cloud-based system for syncing, storage or even for backup, as previously stated, all it means is that you are not dependent solely on one and only one system in which you have no control in order to make sure your content is safe and secure.
--
Your comments about how Apple should be a savior of all our media without question, as well as comment about how "The Cloud" is somehow more efficient as an hourly backup solution than a local backup over GigE tells me that you don't not back up (same as I do).
--
You think iTunes Match was designed as a backup solution? No! It's so you can access your music from all your devices and listen to your entire library wherever you are. I've used iTM for years because $25 per year is less than the extra $200 per year I'd spend on additional iPhone storage to hold all my music (which even then it wouldn't come close to holding), so I don't have to plan ahead for wanting some music that I don't listen to often, save for a trip I know I'll be without a data connection.
--
I can't reiterate enough that anyone that uses these non-backup services as their sole backup solution are being irresponsible and foolish in this day and age, especially if they frequent this site.
For a person who accuses others of 'stupid talk,' the level of obtuseness/moronicity in your response is surprisingly distressing.
--
The reference to how many songs you may or may not have..
--
Moronicity #1: My posts, contrary to a false choice you've set up in your own mind, have nothing whosoever to do with cloud versus backup, whether one takes less/more time, etc.
--
Moronicity #2: If the AppleTV was about the fact that it "could pull from local storage" there would be no need for an AppleTV, would there. Moreover, where would 10,000 songs be magically stored on an AppleTV. Oh wait...
--
Moronicity #3: "Savior of all media"? Care to cut and paste where I said that, or did you pull that out of your, you know..." src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies//lol.gif" />
--
Moronicity #4: No, indeed! (Actually, you got that one right. Yea!!)
--
Moronicity #5: I have no idea who you're referring about "anyone that uses it as their sole backup solution." I think you mean Dalrymple, but as I said before, I couldn't care less.
The reference to how many songs you may or may not have..
The relevance, since I may or may not have them? Not to mention the number of songs is not the only metric to be used when referencing how long it takes to restore from a backup. Mean average of track length, codec, and bit rate are very important to determining how much data one will need, not just the number of tracks.
Moronicity #1: My posts, contrary to a false choice you've set up in your own mind, have nothing whosoever to do with cloud versus backup, whether one takes less/more time, etc.
It has everything to do with when you argue that a local backup takes too long if and when you need to access it when you're only other option is a cloud-based.
Moronicity #2: If the AppleTV was about the fact that it "could pull from local storage" there would be no need for an AppleTV, would there. Moreover, where would 10,000 songs be magically stored on an AppleTV. Oh wait…
Local to your home network, not to a cloud. That should be self evidence in my comment when you mentioned that you NEEDED to have iTunes Match in order to get music on your Apple TV. Have you even used an Apple TV before?
Moronicity #3: "Savior of all media"? Care to cut and paste where I said that, or did you pull that out of your, you know...
When you're attacking me for having a local backup of my content and saying that the "richest tech company in the world, with its incredible software heritage spanning many decades [should be] capable to producing a reliable cloud-based products" without every having an issue and with your next argument being that a local backup retrieval would "take too long" even though a complete cloud-based solution would take considerably longer, then, YES, you are foolishly seeing Apple as some ridiculous savior to all your backup needs. And that's before I realized you didn't know Apple TV could pull from local iTunes Libraries.
Moronicity #5: I have no idea who you're referring about "anyone that uses it as their sole backup solution." I think you mean Dalrymple, but as I said before, I couldn't care less.
You said it yourself. If you can't trust iTunes Match then why should you be able to trust any other storage solution. A local backup is another storge solution and you have a huge problem with me not blindly trusting Apple's solutions and wanting to have alternative backup solutions so, yes, I am referring to you. If you have a local backup then there is no reason why you should have attacked me for saying we should put all our eggs in one basket with some company that wants to store all our data online.
I am one of those 10 million but I won't keep it once it expires because it is a complete mess and is basically a downgrade from what I had before. Sadly it has been so integrated into the apps that I can't get back what I used to have.
I don't know how many songs you have in your collection, but I have over 10,000. I have at least two external backups. But my worst nightmare would be to have to reconstruct everything, across multiple devices.
Incidentally, if I can't trust Apple to manage Match, why should I trust any of their other storage/download/sync services, such as, say iCloud?
With that much music, you really should also take advantage of the free online storage offered by Google Music. More backups in different places is always better.
As hard as Steve worked to rid iTunes of DRM'ed music, my major objection to Apple Music is the way it's hell bent on co-mingling its DRM music with my non-DRM'ed tracks. There really is no reason Apple couldn't have put their DRM'ed tracks in a separate, parallel set of folders and left my iTunes library alone.
Totally agree with this. He has always been touted as having this mystical credibility.
As Inspector Clouseau said when informed the piano he had just destroyed was a priceless Steinway,
"not any more".
Agreed. Started reading his rant waiting to hear that his backup got fried or somethng, nope. NO Back Up !@?!$#? Not even a slightly older one? I can't take that kind of negligent laziness, as well as foolishness seriously.
My library is well over 20,000 songs. I have multiple backups. I had to import a backup once (when my music library was even larger, because I had not weeded out crap from my cousin's library which I had previously downloaded in it's entirety) because my power went out in the middle of an install. ARG! Ya, it took a while... but I just let it run while doing errands, housework and watching TV. No big deal. Everything came back painlessly, aside from the time it took to upload. But again, just do other stuff while it runs
For Apple Music, I have several backups. Didn't need. Apple Music loaded without incident, all songs came through fine. At first I was perturbed that it isn't as social as Spotify. What about following friends and their playlist? But after using Apple Music, and really liking and loving their curated playlists, as well as liking Beats 1 and some of the radio stations, I didn't miss following friends playlists one bit.
I would like Apple Music to be more social though. Why not add the following friends feature? You can follow Artists, so why not? Also, the shared playlist on Spotify is great, where anyone on the playlist can ado the playlist. Its a nice feature. Overall though, Apple Music really impressed and I feel immersed in music, like there is a culture and environment there, rather than just having a lot of music available and being able to follow friend's playlist like on Spotify. The social maturation may come, but as of now, I don't miss it. The problems, like inconsistency and the right options being available everywhere on the App, will be polished out. There are also oddities, like why is there zero use of space on the Mac iTunes Apple music app? Also, Apple Radio used to allow you to ban specific songs and artists as a whole, why not now? I feel that these are things that can and will be added.
http://www.marco.org/2015/07/26/dont-order-the-fish
I don't expect the iTunes app to get better because as Jason Snell says, its too big to fail at this point. But hopefully some of the specific issues people are having will be resolved by the time the free trial is over.
Comments
Is anyone actually using it? You can't listen to albums, if certain sings on an album are duplicates from other albums, Apple Music does not play them. Pathetic.
"You can't listen to albums." You're doing it wrong.
Um...no. One because you didn't respond to that reference in my post, and two, if you had 10,000 songs you'd realize that it takes hours to sync it to a device. I have an iPad, iPhone, and iPod touch (for the car) that, at a minimum, I'd have to re-sync. Also, I'd have to re-upload to the cloud if I want to have the convenience of using my AppleTV as a multimedia device. Many people do not have that kind of time.
----
The second part of your post is both condescending and beside-the-point, since -- to repeat-- I back up (just the same as you apparently do).
On a larger point: (1) If I could manage with my backups, why do I need Match at all (other than for AppleTV)? (2) Do you seriously think that for everything from home to corporate and for much of their data and media files, the cloud is NOT the future? If it IS the future, what do you think Apple's role should be in it?
(Edited: Took out a poorly worded double-negative).
Which reference are you saying I didn't respond to?
AGAIN, it takes much longer to re-download from any cloud-based service than from a local service so the larger and more valuable the library one wishes to protect the more likely a reasonable person would have a local backup in wish to protect the time and effort they've put into collecting and arranging their media.
That's just stupid talk. Your Apple TV can pull from local storage so there is no traversing the cloud, requiring a network connection, or anything else foolishly complex added to the mix. Furthermore, having a local backup does not mean you still can't use a cloud-based system for syncing, storage or even for backup, as previously stated, all it means is that you are not dependent solely on one and only one system in which you have no control in order to make sure your content is safe and secure.
Your comments about how Apple should be a savior of all our media without question, as well as comment about how "The Cloud" is somehow more efficient as an hourly backup solution than a local backup over GigE tells me that you don't not back up (same as I do).
You think iTunes Match was designed as a backup solution? No! :no: It's so you can access your music from all your devices and listen to your entire library wherever you are. I've used iTM for years because $25 per year is less than the extra $200 per year I'd spend on additional iPhone storage to hold all my music (which even then it wouldn't come close to holding), so I don't have to plan ahead for wanting some music that I don't listen to often, save for a trip I know I'll be without a data connection.
I can't reiterate enough that anyone that uses these non-backup services as their sole backup solution are being irresponsible and foolish in this day and age, especially if they frequent this site.
Super happy with Apple Music. Especially its integration into iOS and OS X.
Canceled Spotify. Not looking back.
I know a lot of people that just kept Spotify going even whilst giving Apple Music their full attention. I don't get this. Is stopping Spotify really that difficult that it's worth saving up to $45? I'm not the streaming music demographic (much prefer to own it), but if I was paying for one service and wanted to try another to see if it's better, I think I'd plan it around when my Spotify subscription ended so I could get the most bang for my buck.
Probably the same thing that happens with almost 100%of subscription services after a free trial. You'll get charged.
Fan of him or not, he would be EXCELLENT for business!!!
Fan of him or not, he would be EXCELLENT for business!!!
Totally agree with this. He has always been touted as having this mystical credibility.
As Inspector Clouseau said when informed the piano he had just destroyed was a priceless Steinway,
"not any more".
Originally Posted by SolipsismY
Which reference are you saying I didn't respond to?
--
AGAIN, it takes much longer to re-download from any cloud-based service than from a local service so the larger and more valuable the library one wishes to protect the more likely a reasonable person would have a local backup in wish to protect the time and effort they've put into collecting and arranging their media.
--
That's just stupid talk. Your Apple TV can pull from local storage so there is no traversing the cloud, requiring a network connection, or anything else foolishly complex added to the mix. Furthermore, having a local backup does not mean you still can't use a cloud-based system for syncing, storage or even for backup, as previously stated, all it means is that you are not dependent solely on one and only one system in which you have no control in order to make sure your content is safe and secure.
--
Your comments about how Apple should be a savior of all our media without question, as well as comment about how "The Cloud" is somehow more efficient as an hourly backup solution than a local backup over GigE tells me that you don't not back up (same as I do).
You think iTunes Match was designed as a backup solution? No!
--
I can't reiterate enough that anyone that uses these non-backup services as their sole backup solution are being irresponsible and foolish in this day and age, especially if they frequent this site.
For a person who accuses others of 'stupid talk,' the level of obtuseness/moronicity in your response is surprisingly distressing.
--
The reference to how many songs you may or may not have..
--
Moronicity #1: My posts, contrary to a false choice you've set up in your own mind, have nothing whosoever to do with cloud versus backup, whether one takes less/more time, etc.
--
Moronicity #2: If the AppleTV was about the fact that it "could pull from local storage" there would be no need for an AppleTV, would there. Moreover, where would 10,000 songs be magically stored on an AppleTV. Oh wait...
--
Moronicity #3: "Savior of all media"? Care to cut and paste where I said that, or did you pull that out of your, you know...
" src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies//lol.gif" />
--
Moronicity #4: No, indeed! (Actually, you got that one right. Yea!!)
--
Moronicity #5: I have no idea who you're referring about "anyone that uses it as their sole backup solution." I think you mean Dalrymple, but as I said before, I couldn't care less.
The relevance, since I may or may not have them? Not to mention the number of songs is not the only metric to be used when referencing how long it takes to restore from a backup. Mean average of track length, codec, and bit rate are very important to determining how much data one will need, not just the number of tracks.
It has everything to do with when you argue that a local backup takes too long if and when you need to access it when you're only other option is a cloud-based.
Local to your home network, not to a cloud. That should be self evidence in my comment when you mentioned that you NEEDED to have iTunes Match in order to get music on your Apple TV. Have you even used an Apple TV before?
When you're attacking me for having a local backup of my content and saying that the "richest tech company in the world, with its incredible software heritage spanning many decades [should be] capable to producing a reliable cloud-based products" without every having an issue and with your next argument being that a local backup retrieval would "take too long" even though a complete cloud-based solution would take considerably longer, then, YES, you are foolishly seeing Apple as some ridiculous savior to all your backup needs. And that's before I realized you didn't know Apple TV could pull from local iTunes Libraries.
You said it yourself. If you can't trust iTunes Match then why should you be able to trust any other storage solution. A local backup is another storge solution and you have a huge problem with me not blindly trusting Apple's solutions and wanting to have alternative backup solutions so, yes, I am referring to you. If you have a local backup then there is no reason why you should have attacked me for saying we should put all our eggs in one basket with some company that wants to store all our data online.
With that much music, you really should also take advantage of the free online storage offered by Google Music. More backups in different places is always better.
10 million free subscribers. Just sayin'...
As hard as Steve worked to rid iTunes of DRM'ed music, my major objection to Apple Music is the way it's hell bent on co-mingling its DRM music with my non-DRM'ed tracks. There really is no reason Apple couldn't have put their DRM'ed tracks in a separate, parallel set of folders and left my iTunes library alone.
Totally agree with this. He has always been touted as having this mystical credibility.
As Inspector Clouseau said when informed the piano he had just destroyed was a priceless Steinway,
"not any more".
Agreed. Started reading his rant waiting to hear that his backup got fried or somethng, nope. NO Back Up !@?!$#? Not even a slightly older one? I can't take that kind of negligent laziness, as well as foolishness seriously.
My library is well over 20,000 songs. I have multiple backups. I had to import a backup once (when my music library was even larger, because I had not weeded out crap from my cousin's library which I had previously downloaded in it's entirety) because my power went out in the middle of an install. ARG! Ya, it took a while... but I just let it run while doing errands, housework and watching TV. No big deal. Everything came back painlessly, aside from the time it took to upload. But again, just do other stuff while it runs
For Apple Music, I have several backups. Didn't need. Apple Music loaded without incident, all songs came through fine. At first I was perturbed that it isn't as social as Spotify. What about following friends and their playlist? But after using Apple Music, and really liking and loving their curated playlists, as well as liking Beats 1 and some of the radio stations, I didn't miss following friends playlists one bit.
I would like Apple Music to be more social though. Why not add the following friends feature? You can follow Artists, so why not? Also, the shared playlist on Spotify is great, where anyone on the playlist can ado the playlist. Its a nice feature. Overall though, Apple Music really impressed and I feel immersed in music, like there is a culture and environment there, rather than just having a lot of music available and being able to follow friend's playlist like on Spotify. The social maturation may come, but as of now, I don't miss it. The problems, like inconsistency and the right options being available everywhere on the App, will be polished out. There are also oddities, like why is there zero use of space on the Mac iTunes Apple music app? Also, Apple Radio used to allow you to ban specific songs and artists as a whole, why not now? I feel that these are things that can and will be added.
Out of 800 million iTunes users, 10 million subscribed for the free Beta.
Out of those 10 million, how many use the service - excluding their music library - regularly?
And out of those recurring users, how many are willing to subscribe for a monthly fee?
I subscribed to the service, but I am not a recurring user. I am also not willing to pay for the service.
Toxic hellstew??
Not even close.