$0.00 - $25.00/year starting to get closer to the actual value of the service, IMHO, than the $100.00/year of MobileMe. Although even at $0.00 I won't be using it due to it's security issues and lack of utility.
According to my sources:
The $25 a year is just for the music streaming. It is actually part of iCloud (which is MobileMe 2.0) but you can subscribe to just that tier of the service. Or pay for the whole thing, which has been rewritten from the bottom up to improve performance. It has all the stuff that mobile me has now and over time more features will be added.
The free service is restricted to the tracks you bought from itunes as a kind of trial. If you want anything else you have to pay the fee which is used to pay broadcast fees to the labels for the tracks since they didn't get their cut from an itunes sale.
If you have data plans that are capped, even worse. How can you stream with a cap?
The first time you stream a song the file is cached so all subsequent times you listen to the song it is simply playing from your device rather than streaming.
I'm not going to say too much about this right now, because nobody knows any details yet.
I will admit that I'm not too excited about it though. Maybe that's a good thing, and I can be surprised come monday if it turns out to be something different than I'm expecting. Streaming music from a damn cloud ? bleh ...........Last I checked, ipods and iphones can hold plenty of music on them and they're pretty small and you can bring them anywhere.
And if it's only going to work with stuff that's bought from the itunes store, then that's two thumbs down from me. I wouldn't even bother to sign up, even if it's free, if that's the case. I do hope that I am wrong though. We'll see........
The $25 a year is just for the music streaming. It is actually part of iCloud (which is MobileMe 2.0) but you can subscribe to just that tier of the service. Or pay for the whole thing, which has been rewritten from the bottom up to improve performance. It has all the stuff that mobile me has now and over time more features will be added.
The free service is restricted to the tracks you bought from itunes as a kind of trial. If you want anything else you have to pay the fee which is used to pay broadcast fees to the labels for the tracks since they didn't get their cut from an itunes sale.
Not sure what your sources are, but that sounds pretty spot-on to me.
No, more like the $2B - $3B check Apple signed to build the service, plus the recurring operating expenses. The latter will probably be paid for from the 18%).
(I know where you're going with this question, but I don't wish to go there).
Sorry, but you already did go there. Would it help if I apologized for noticing?
Reality: Apple didn't need a penny of their cash reserves for this. At most it would have consumed 5% of the current cash reserve, but at worst the entire operation could easily be funded out of a couple of weeks of cash flow. I suppose the immensity of Apple's cash reserves and cash flow may not be apparent to everyone. Perhaps now it is a little more apparent.
The Cupertino, Calif., company is said to have pushed up the release of the iCloud service because rivals Amazon and Google have launched their own cloud-based music storage solutions
Apple work on things for year and get them ready. It's Amazon and Google who rushed to create one because they heard Apple was working on one. And that's why they're half baked.
Yeah, you're right. I heard that it's going to come with a self cleaning, super duper, 256 bit retina display that is fingerprint proof. Also included free of charge in the box is a special tin foil hat with an Apple logo on it.
The free service is restricted to the tracks you bought from itunes as a kind of trial. If you want anything else you have to pay the fee which is used to pay broadcast fees to the labels for the tracks since they didn't get their cut from an itunes sale.
Didn't get their cut??? They got their cut from the CD sale.
Okay, so I have a question (sorry if it's been asked and answered previously - I am just too lazy to flip through 70+ threads to see if it's already been asked) - one that has bothered me since the reported advent of iCloud, and now rings even more true given a recent report stating something to the effect that iCloud will store all "purchased" music (and whatever else Apple offers to host).
Based on that interesting little revelation, what do iTunes and iCloud do with music or video currently in my library that was not purchased through iTunes (i.e., Amazon, etc)? Do I maintain two libraries but only have access to onevia iCloud?
I am also a little concerned about the integrity of my existing library given recent faux pax's where data was lost as a result of various upgrades - I do NOT want to lose a large percentage of an 80K+ library, ya know?
Maybe you and all others should wait until Apple ACTUALLY and formally announces the service with details next week before asking questions.
Although even at $0.00 I won't be using it due to it's security issues and lack of utility.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris_CA
Since details have not been announced, what "security issues" and what " lack of utility" do you write about Mr. FUD?
I have to agree w/Chris. We don't even know what the service is going to be, let alone how it will be delivered, so what kind of security and utility are you talking about. I'm generally on board with your privacy concerns (because I'm on board with ALL of EVERYONE'S privacy concerns), but I have no idea what you're talking about here.
FWIW, I'm not personally interested in the slightest. My iPodTouch has more than enough room for all the high-quality music I care to listen to. Always with me, no data xfer caps, no streaming delays, no searching for WiFi. It just works. And I don't do "cloud" stuff in general, so it sounds pretty Meh to me, but I suspect there will be some surprising aspect we'll find out on Monday.
$99 a year ad not being able to use your own @.com (I don't want to forward, it all gets messy)
At 25 a year I'd use it for sync, but I doubt Apple will let you use your own domain for email which will be disappointing.
audio and all, as someone else said. Cap data and drop outs make that all seem useless. If you can't upload your library that's pretty useless. If your purchases on iTunes are no longer susceptible to being "lost" with no recourse to get them back, that's excellent.
Not messy at all IMO, but you do have go through gmail and I agree in principle that MobileMe should handle this internally. I am using this method under the assumption that it will be possible through MobileMe in the future. I really dislike any of my data with google.
As for the $99 cost, I think it depends on how you use the service. If it's for syncing contacts, cals, bookmarks, etc, yeah, maybe it's pricey. But if you add the 20 gigs data, push email, and website hosting, it's a pretty great deal in my book because it all works so seamlessly and you actually get a lot for your money. Plus, nobody pays $99. The going rate on amazon and eBay has been like $55 for years now.
But this all moot now. We await the news of the revamping. I certainly hope it's not just music streaming because that is of the least interest to me.
$25 (which will probably translate to £25) sounds reasonable to me. Any more and your then moving to comparisons which subscription music services. But it has to be able to store you're whole music collection.
For it to work (for me anyway) this has to be a service that lets you download your music to your phone rather than stream, to solve the issue of not being able to store your entire collection on your phone to begin with. Streaming services arn't that great as it uses more power and if your in a slow data connection area they just don't work.
The "security". They already have your credit card. They know what you bought in iTunes. They know what else you have in Genius. What new security issue?
Uploading contacts (names, addresses, phone numbers) and calendar to their servers. If it gets stolen, Apple won't tell you about it.
If your credit card number gets stolen from Apple's servers, your bank will tell you even though Apple won't.
Quote:
Originally Posted by asdasd
As for the utility - if you don't get it you don't get the iPhone or iPad.
Sure. Which is why Apple has managed to sell 100 million iPhones and 50 million iPads without this service. Because it is so fundamental to the basic concepts of these machines.
I already have all my music on both my iPad and iPhone. I don't need the ability to sync it up over a slow as hell public wi-fi or to use up data minutes.
I also have no need to pay an annual subscription to use music I already own.
Comments
$0.00 - $25.00/year starting to get closer to the actual value of the service, IMHO, than the $100.00/year of MobileMe. Although even at $0.00 I won't be using it due to it's security issues and lack of utility.
According to my sources:
The $25 a year is just for the music streaming. It is actually part of iCloud (which is MobileMe 2.0) but you can subscribe to just that tier of the service. Or pay for the whole thing, which has been rewritten from the bottom up to improve performance. It has all the stuff that mobile me has now and over time more features will be added.
The free service is restricted to the tracks you bought from itunes as a kind of trial. If you want anything else you have to pay the fee which is used to pay broadcast fees to the labels for the tracks since they didn't get their cut from an itunes sale.
If you have data plans that are capped, even worse. How can you stream with a cap?
The first time you stream a song the file is cached so all subsequent times you listen to the song it is simply playing from your device rather than streaming.
I will admit that I'm not too excited about it though. Maybe that's a good thing, and I can be surprised come monday if it turns out to be something different than I'm expecting. Streaming music from a damn cloud ? bleh
And if it's only going to work with stuff that's bought from the itunes store, then that's two thumbs down from me. I wouldn't even bother to sign up, even if it's free, if that's the case. I do hope that I am wrong though. We'll see........
According to my sources:
The $25 a year is just for the music streaming. It is actually part of iCloud (which is MobileMe 2.0) but you can subscribe to just that tier of the service. Or pay for the whole thing, which has been rewritten from the bottom up to improve performance. It has all the stuff that mobile me has now and over time more features will be added.
The free service is restricted to the tracks you bought from itunes as a kind of trial. If you want anything else you have to pay the fee which is used to pay broadcast fees to the labels for the tracks since they didn't get their cut from an itunes sale.
Not sure what your sources are, but that sounds pretty spot-on to me.
No, more like the $2B - $3B check Apple signed to build the service, plus the recurring operating expenses. The latter will probably be paid for from the 18%).
(I know where you're going with this question, but I don't wish to go there).
Sorry, but you already did go there. Would it help if I apologized for noticing?
Reality: Apple didn't need a penny of their cash reserves for this. At most it would have consumed 5% of the current cash reserve, but at worst the entire operation could easily be funded out of a couple of weeks of cash flow. I suppose the immensity of Apple's cash reserves and cash flow may not be apparent to everyone. Perhaps now it is a little more apparent.
The Cupertino, Calif., company is said to have pushed up the release of the iCloud service because rivals Amazon and Google have launched their own cloud-based music storage solutions
Apple work on things for year and get them ready. It's Amazon and Google who rushed to create one because they heard Apple was working on one. And that's why they're half baked.
iPad 3.
On monday?
Yeah, you're right. I heard that it's going to come with a self cleaning, super duper, 256 bit retina display that is fingerprint proof. Also included free of charge in the box is a special tin foil hat with an Apple logo on it.
On monday?
special tin foil hat with an Apple logo on it.
I'd sport one
Loyal customers should get a little freebie love though.
The free service is restricted to the tracks you bought from itunes as a kind of trial. If you want anything else you have to pay the fee which is used to pay broadcast fees to the labels for the tracks since they didn't get their cut from an itunes sale.
Didn't get their cut??? They got their cut from the CD sale.
Didn't get their cut??? They got their cut from the CD sale.
You are missing the "label" speak. Meaning they (the labels) didn't get their cut of the "digital" sale through iTunes.
Okay, so I have a question (sorry if it's been asked and answered previously - I am just too lazy to flip through 70+ threads to see if it's already been asked) - one that has bothered me since the reported advent of iCloud, and now rings even more true given a recent report stating something to the effect that iCloud will store all "purchased" music (and whatever else Apple offers to host).
Based on that interesting little revelation, what do iTunes and iCloud do with music or video currently in my library that was not purchased through iTunes (i.e., Amazon, etc)? Do I maintain two libraries but only have access to onevia iCloud?
I am also a little concerned about the integrity of my existing library given recent faux pax's where data was lost as a result of various upgrades - I do NOT want to lose a large percentage of an 80K+ library, ya know?
Maybe you and all others should wait until Apple ACTUALLY and formally announces the service with details next week before asking questions.
iPad 3.
Mac mid-tower?
Although even at $0.00 I won't be using it due to it's security issues and lack of utility.
Since details have not been announced, what "security issues" and what " lack of utility" do you write about Mr. FUD?
I have to agree w/Chris. We don't even know what the service is going to be, let alone how it will be delivered, so what kind of security and utility are you talking about. I'm generally on board with your privacy concerns (because I'm on board with ALL of EVERYONE'S privacy concerns), but I have no idea what you're talking about here.
FWIW, I'm not personally interested in the slightest. My iPodTouch has more than enough room for all the high-quality music I care to listen to. Always with me, no data xfer caps, no streaming delays, no searching for WiFi. It just works. And I don't do "cloud" stuff in general, so it sounds pretty Meh to me, but I suspect there will be some surprising aspect we'll find out on Monday.
Two things have always stopped me using MobileMe.
$99 a year ad not being able to use your own @.com (I don't want to forward, it all gets messy)
At 25 a year I'd use it for sync, but I doubt Apple will let you use your own domain for email which will be disappointing.
audio and all, as someone else said. Cap data and drop outs make that all seem useless. If you can't upload your library that's pretty useless. If your purchases on iTunes are no longer susceptible to being "lost" with no recourse to get them back, that's excellent.
Soon we shall know.
I assume this is the forwarding you refer to?
https://discussions.apple.com/thread...3449&tstart=90
Not messy at all IMO, but you do have go through gmail and I agree in principle that MobileMe should handle this internally. I am using this method under the assumption that it will be possible through MobileMe in the future. I really dislike any of my data with google.
As for the $99 cost, I think it depends on how you use the service. If it's for syncing contacts, cals, bookmarks, etc, yeah, maybe it's pricey. But if you add the 20 gigs data, push email, and website hosting, it's a pretty great deal in my book because it all works so seamlessly and you actually get a lot for your money. Plus, nobody pays $99. The going rate on amazon and eBay has been like $55 for years now.
But this all moot now. We await the news of the revamping. I certainly hope it's not just music streaming because that is of the least interest to me.
For it to work (for me anyway) this has to be a service that lets you download your music to your phone rather than stream, to solve the issue of not being able to store your entire collection on your phone to begin with. Streaming services arn't that great as it uses more power and if your in a slow data connection area they just don't work.
The "security". They already have your credit card. They know what you bought in iTunes. They know what else you have in Genius. What new security issue?
Uploading contacts (names, addresses, phone numbers) and calendar to their servers. If it gets stolen, Apple won't tell you about it.
If your credit card number gets stolen from Apple's servers, your bank will tell you even though Apple won't.
As for the utility - if you don't get it you don't get the iPhone or iPad.
Sure. Which is why Apple has managed to sell 100 million iPhones and 50 million iPads without this service. Because it is so fundamental to the basic concepts of these machines.
I already have all my music on both my iPad and iPhone. I don't need the ability to sync it up over a slow as hell public wi-fi or to use up data minutes.
I also have no need to pay an annual subscription to use music I already own.
ios 5 + icloud better give iphone, ipod touch and ipad ball and chain-less local out-of-the-box activation.
+1 .