Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apple iCloud

apple.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 47 posts

Re: Apple iCloud

#21

Post by tptacek »

dreamdu5t wrote: post #20

I want more control over my music with the cloud, not less. * iCloud will not offer the ability to access content outside of Apple's devices: No web-based access has been announced or hinted at. * Locked into music formats only Apple wants to support: No lossless format, no advanced tagging, no support for open audio standards, the list goes on. * Forced to use iTunes: Forcing everybody to use iTunes prevents alterna…

The world before iTMS involved me going to tiny record stores and thumbing through physical CDs. In today's world, within 4 minutes of reading a review of a new artist, I can have the track on my phone.

Over the long term, maybe iTMS lock-in is bad for consumers. But when you say that, I personally (just me) think you have to account for the fact that over the short term, it's been a huge win.

Re: Apple iCloud

#22

Post by tptacek »

erikstarck wrote: post #19
siglesias wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's as simple as, consumers don't want to deal with the latency. I pick a song, it plays instantly, within half a second. Online players for now seem naive.

You obviously haven't tried Spotify. It's instantaneous.

Rdio is so fast I don't bother syncing music over to my phone anymore. I think I agree, that normal people aren't going to care about the "latency" here. Price, branding, and integration are huge clubs Apple is wielding here though.

Re: Apple iCloud

#23

Post by mikeknoop »

brosephius wrote: post #12
jasonlotito wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is all just a guess, but... You aren't seeing this the right way. That money? Part of that is going to the labels. That pirate stuff you are adding? Apple will keep track of it, and the labels will get a cut. So yes, the labels know people are going to upload pirate music. At least now, they get some money from it.

which is a pretty progressive decision by music companies. it's like they're accepting that people will pirate music no matter what drm scheme or lawsuit wave they throw out there, so they're trying to find a way to live profitably with it.

I have heard that Grooveshark started under similiar pretenses.

Re: Apple iCloud

#24

Post by siglesias »

tptacek wrote: post #22
erikstarck wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You obviously haven't tried Spotify. It's instantaneous.

Rdio is so fast I don't bother syncing music over to my phone anymore. I think I agree, that normal people aren't going to care about the "latency" here. Price, branding, and integration are huge clubs Apple is wielding here though.

On mobile or on your desktop? I think we need to make a distinction here.

Re: Apple iCloud

#25

Post by telemachos »

tptacek wrote: post #21
dreamdu5t wrote: post #20

I want more control over my music with the cloud, not less. * iCloud will not offer the ability to access content outside of Apple's devices: No web-based access has been announced or hinted at. * Locked into music formats only Apple wants to support: No lossless format, no advanced tagging, no support for open audio standards, the list goes on. * Forced to use iTunes: Forcing everybody to use iTunes prevents alterna…

The world before iTMS involved me going to tiny record stores and thumbing through physical CDs. In today's world, within 4 minutes of reading a review of a new artist, I can have the track on my phone. Over the long term, maybe iTMS lock-in is bad for consumers. But when you say that, I personally (just me) think you have to account for the fact that over the short term, it's been a huge win.

This is tangential. I'm not really agreeing or disagreeing with your main point(s).

I miss browsing. I miss (good) record stores. I miss (good) used bookstores. Some of my favorite memories are of browsing used bookstores in the five boroughs of NYC. Nearly all of them are closed now. The Strand sells mostly new remainders - though I go there anyhow, because I miss browsing. You can sort of browse online, but it's really not the same at all.

I grant that I can search online and get books from all over the world. I do it all the time. So, it's not all bad - not at all. (Nowadays searches for a specific target go much better than in the past at those random used bookstores.) The future is amazing. But I miss browsing.

Re: Apple iCloud

#26

Post by tptacek »

telemachos wrote: post #25
tptacek wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The world before iTMS involved me going to tiny record stores and thumbing through physical CDs. In today's world, within 4 minutes of reading a review of a new artist, I can have the track on my phone. Over the long term, maybe iTMS lock-in is bad for consumers. But when you say that, I personally (just me) think you have to account for the fact that over the short term, it's been a huge win.

This is tangential. I'm not really agreeing or disagreeing with your main point(s). I miss browsing. I miss (good) record stores. I miss (good) used bookstores. Some of my favorite memories are of browsing used bookstores in the five boroughs of NYC. Nearly all of them are closed now. The Strand sells mostly new remainders - though I go there anyhow, because I miss browsing. You can sort of browse online, but it's re…

It was fun hunting for things. It was fun finding out about the best record stores, which were always skillfully camouflaged to look like run-down used record stores. It was fun bumping into people and it was fun to have your cred affirmed by approving comments from the clerk when you bought a CD or asked them to order something from a catalogue.

But it is better this way for everybody but the middlemen.

Re: Apple iCloud

#27

Post by mishmash »

chrisbolt wrote: post #17
jokermatt999 wrote: post #3

Honestly, this is attractive enough for me to consider reinstalling iTunes. I've ranted a number of times on the numerous issues I've had with it, but this service is amazing, especially as someone who doesn't buy their music from iTunes. Why's that? Because for $25, all those older CD rips and music which was certainly acquired legally can now be obtained easily in 256 Apple lossless (edit: not lossless, duh). I don…

I think the only limit is 25,000 songs. Bottom of http://www.apple.com/icloud/features/ : Limit 25,000 songs. iTunes purchases do not count against limit.

Thanks for the link. Taking songs legit for 1,000/$1.00 is incredible. Even with Apple's large downpayment(s), I still can't believe the record companies agreed to this.

Re: Apple iCloud

#28

Post by vault_ »

pistacchio wrote: post #13

wandering what they'll do with those who paid (recently) for mobile.me

They're extending existing users time until June 2012, at which point it will be shut down as all of its features are in iCloud.

Re: Apple iCloud

#30

Post by [deleted] »

dreamdu5t wrote: post #20

I want more control over my music with the cloud, not less. * iCloud will not offer the ability to access content outside of Apple's devices: No web-based access has been announced or hinted at. * Locked into music formats only Apple wants to support: No lossless format, no advanced tagging, no support for open audio standards, the list goes on. * Forced to use iTunes: Forcing everybody to use iTunes prevents alterna…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN