Yes. Isn't competition grand?
Or you can get raw with these strings. Either way, the violin is sweet yet lethal.
Do it!
Posted on 06/06/2011 12:35:21 PM PDT by ctdonath2
Basically, the concept of “the cloud” is a centralized data-storage for documents/databases/media/etc. on the ‘net.
Amazon has been using this concept for some time for Kindle content - with your purchased books being available to all of your internet-enabled devices (not just the Kindle device). They somewhat recently added amazon-purchased music to their version of “cloud” storage.
The general idea is that you can have your music library, video library, ebooks, and whatever documents you want available to you wherever you roam, so long as you have internet access. The logical progression is to have everything that we traditionally have to keep up with (storage) “safely stored” on a server somewhere.
From a convenience viewpoint, this is the coolest, most convenient development in computing in a very long time...
BUT - as others have pointed out - there are concerns with security - both from the ever-present danger of both “private” hackers and data thieves, to government-sponsored cyber-terrorism, as well as the obvious worry about OUR OWN government! Privacy... what privacy?
That's why you do it as a document, then copy/paste it into a new post. That way, if [your favorite pejorative] jacks with the post... you can easily copy/paste a new one!
So, you would only keep what you want to keep on there. My husband has a kindle, in fact, so I guess his kindle stuff is on a cloud somewhere. Does something like Carbonite work like that?
I have a wireless hard drive back up in my house, which I guess is like a little cloud in my house. I wouldn’t trust my own stuff to be flying around in the cyberverse out there, but then, I can’t get to it when I’m not here. If something is REALLY important to me, I wouldn’t just have one copy and it wouldn’t be *out there*.
I haven’t investigated Carbonite all that in-depth, but that is a rather formalized, and controlled version of the cloud concept.
OK, well thank you for the info, I think I sort of understand what it means.
If Apple really wanted to do something innovative and constructive.
They would build their computers in America.
Not China.
Seems they charge enough to cover the wage differential. Just saying...
Nah. No reason at all. Crappy sound quality was good enough for my Diamond Rio in 1996.
It's not streaming. It's every song you own, downloadable to any Apple device or Windows PC you have.
>>>-•Keeps libraries synched among 10 devices (Mac, Windows PC, iPod Touch, iPhone, iPad)
One of the worst parts about Apple products/iTunes gets even worse. Yeah for MORE synching.
Yeah, I like having different parts of my music library in as many different places as possible. I hate it when I think of a song I haven't heard of in a while, and it's right there. I'd much rather check my Amazon Cloud drive, my Dropbox, my desktop and my laptop.
Ummm, I’ve got 20GB w/Amazon and it didn’t cost me a dime and you’re Amazon purchases don’t count against the cap.
Cool. You've got room for 1/5 as many tracks as iCloud, and once the introductory deal expires, you'll get to pay $20 for that space next year.
And unless you work around Wifi 24/7 (and most people don’t)having all that storage capacity is pointless if you can only access a small bit at a time. (You aren’t going to be streaming many 256kb songs over your 3G iPhone with a whole lot of success).
If I want to stream music, I'll fire up Pandora. I don't get the appeal of burning bandwidth every single time I want to listen to a song that I've already paid for.
Never fails, every single move Apple makes gets to made out to be some earth-shattering development.
Never fails, Apple-bashers don't get (or pretend not to get) that Apple has done something really new. The iPod? "No wireless. Less space than a nomad. Lame."
“We’ll see what changes Amazon and Google have to make to their cloud plans when the RIAA gets through with them.”
LOL, if the RIAA what’s to alienate the #1 market of smartphones there is, they do so at their own peril.
The RIAA isn't in business to be liked. If Amazon and Google (and I'm not clear on which of those constitutes "the #1 market of smartphones there is") are distributing music without paying royalties, they aren't going to play nice.
Yes. Isn't competition grand?
Or you can get raw with these strings. Either way, the violin is sweet yet lethal.
Do it!
They use too...
Google is streaming my 320kb files just fine. I guess AT&T’s network might cause problems.
Interesting facts about Lion:
- Availability: July
- Price: $30
- Access: App Store Only - physical disk not available. You buy it, it just installs itself.
Remember when somebody was selling Hackintoshes, and claiming to own OS X because he paid $30 for a Snow Leopard disk? They will have a problem making that argument with Lion!
Also interesting that iOS5 will make its devices independent of Macs/PCs. People who don't have a laptop or a stationary PC at all will be able to get an iPad (or even an iPhone) and use it independently as their sole computer.
“>>>-•Keeps libraries synched among 10 devices (Mac, Windows PC, iPod Touch, iPhone, iPad) “
LOL, iTunes struggles enough even trying to find albums artwork for the stuff I already have. Now I’m supposed to expect them to “upgrade” all these songs that it can’t seem to identify to 256kb? Sure.
“Cool. You’ve got room for 1/5 as many tracks as iCloud, and once the introductory deal expires, you’ll get to pay $20 for that space next year.”
Yeah, we’ll see, won’t we? And anyone that can’t seem to fit enough music in 20GB, which doesn’t even count stuff from Amazon, has serious issues. And no worries, I’m sure Google will be close by with their own, considering Google has already had seamless syncing between phone and PC’s for quite sometime now. It’s not a big feat to add music to the list.
“Never fails, Apple-bashers don’t get (or pretend not to get) that Apple has done something really new.”
Nope, sorry...maybe if iFans weren’t making utter fools of themselves every time Apple releases some incremental update to something as being godlike, you wouldn’t get the reaction that you get. I swear, IFans are on the same level as Obama worshipers sometimes.
“that Apple has done something really new” Statements like that are exactly what I’m talking about. Storing, streaming, and being able to download music from a cloud drive is NOT a new idea, but listening you iFans, you would think that a life-changing event just occurred.
“The RIAA isn’t in business to be liked. If Amazon and Google (and I’m not clear on which of those constitutes “the #1 market of smartphones there is”) are distributing music without paying royalties, they aren’t going to play nice.”
That would be Google, which now has 36.4% (and growing) of smartphones running its O/S. And don’t you worry about Google...I’m sure they can afford it.
http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2011/06/hgfjhg.jpg
That’s what I’m saying. Unless your on Wifi, a 3G connection is going to have a hard time streaming that bitrate.
Which would be relevant if iCloud did streaming. And 256K isn't at all unreasonable to expect from a 3G connection; on AT&T, I routinely pull 4Mbit, and rarely less than 2.
Google's problem is not a lack of cash, it's a lack of trust, and the fact that the labels and publishers won't sign any agreements with them to ALLOW them to stream content to Android devices. That's a big problem... And Amazon has a similar problem. Apple on the other hand has just inked contracts with all of the big labels and publishers outlining how they will be paid and protected. Apple established trust through years of keeping agreements and DRM in iTunes.
“Google’s problem is not a lack of cash, it’s a lack of trust, and the fact that the labels and publishers won’t sign any agreements with them to ALLOW them to stream content to Android devices. That’s a big problem... And Amazon has a similar problem. Apple on the other hand has just inked contracts with all of the big labels and publishers outlining how they will be paid and protected. Apple established trust through years of keeping agreements and DRM in iTunes.”
You REALLY think they aren’t going to get it done with Google in some way shape or form and miss out on that cash cow?
Not even Apple insiders including Steve Jobs think that. You, of the Apple PR department, paid or not (and we all hope you get some cold cash for it, otherwise why do it), like the Microsoft promoter fanatic who preceded you on this forum, invented this ridiculous fan song that you sing every time something related and positive to Apple happens. It is not credible, not persuasive, and turning off potential customers, sanely skeptical of such fanaticism.
I say it all as a longtime Apple investor, who, despite your recent assertion to deny it without any proof whatsoever, knows well more than one Apple insider, for all it serves me, and truthfully it is not much.
Chill out, Apple is good without buttboys promoting it.
All of the Android growth shown in the first section seems to be at the expense of losses to RIM and Microsoft phones... But the second section shows that the ONLY maker of phones with significant market growth in the same period was APPLE(!) . . . and the big three leading Android phone makers, Samsung, LG, and Motorola showed significant market loss or, in the case of LG, only anemic growth! There's a data disconnect occurring! So what and where are the Android phones that are causing that amazing growth during that period??? What unknown maker builds them? The only analisys that makes sense is that these companies are canabalizing their own markets of feature phones and that they are counting lesser feature phones that run Android. Later statistics show Android is stalling now that the iPhone4 is available in more markets. In fact the iPhone 4 and iPhone 3Gs are the #1 and #2 best selling handsets in the world, not any of the hundreds of the Android models.
My iTunes library (music alone) is 31GB. Just the jazz is 5GB, and Louis Armstrong and Billie Holiday add up to a gig.
Storing, streaming, and being able to download music from a cloud drive is NOT a new idea, but listening you iFans, you would think that a life-changing event just occurred.
How many times do I have to explain that iCloud is not streaming? Give me a ballpark figure here.
This is the crux of the Apple-bashing, reducing Apple's products to the sum of their parts. The iPod is just an expensive walkman. The iPhone is just a pretty Treo.
iCloud isn't just "downloading from a cloud drive." It's every song I own anywhere I am. Up to about 100GB of them, completely legit. Most of them get a bump in quality without my having to rip dozens if not hundreds of CDs again. For two bucks a month.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.