Reuters: Apple to beat Google on cloud music

Status
Not open for further replies.
MThanded said:
I stream my music library from my apartment because its not going to fit on a phone any time soon. Also I can access it from my android phone, ipad or desktop. I use substreamer. When I first started I was very apprehensive but streaming is the way to go because you don't have to remember to sync new songs and you can choose to listen to anything you have at any time.

Also smart streaming employs queuing so if you listen to the same things all the time those songs will already be queued on your device.
Click to expand...

Hmmm ... so you mean you have to keep your PC on all day?

Hmmm ... I think I'll wait for a few more jumps in this technology before trying it. Besides I only really listen to music through my iPod ... which with 160gig and 30+ hours of battery I can happily drain without worrying about killing my phone ...
 
I don't really have much of an interest in uploading my own music to a locker for listening anywhere; I've got my whole music collection stored right now anyway. Maybe if it's free.

Now, if Apple were to offer a service like Pandora, but with the entire iTunes library behind it, and with one-click purchasing for every song, we'd really be talking.
 
Casp0r said:
Hmmm ... so you mean you have to keep your PC on all day?

Hmmm ... I think I'll wait for a few more jumps in this technology before trying it. Besides I only really listen to music through my iPod ... which with 160gig and 30+ hours of battery I can happily drain without worrying about killing my phone ...
Click to expand...
Yeah I do. Currently its an old macbook pro.

dream said:
Wow, I never knew there was a local storage defense force.
Click to expand...
The more you know.
 
Casp0r said:
As if playing music on my smartphone didn't drain the battery enough ... now you want me to stream it through 3G or Wi-Fi ...
Thanks but with memory so cheap and abundant ... the last thing I want is to have my whole music collection stuck on the reliability of my Internet connection ... which is workable at best.
... whole thing ... doesn't sit right with me. Mobile internet needs to be way way way more reliable for me to believe in this stuff.
Click to expand...

With Amazon, you can do both. Convenience!
 
julls said:
Amazon is only "beating" this if you're American. You can't use the mp3 store if you're not.
Click to expand...
Exactly. As I said in the amazon thread, I expect apple to be able to launch this in the countries where they have iTunes stores before anyone else. Their international head start is a big deal.
 
LCfiner said:
Exactly. As I said in the amazon thread, I expect apple to be able to launch this in the countries where they have iTunes stores before anyone else. Their international head start is a big deal.
Click to expand...
Lets see I am betting its going to be US only at the onset.
 
Some more details from WSJ: http://mediamemo.allthingsd.com/201...-apples-music-locker-and-amazons-label-deals/

Yep. Apple is planning a cloud-based music locker service, which will let users stream their music, over the Web, to different devices.

Which may sound a lot like what Amazon rolled out last month.

From the music industry’s perspective, however, there’s a big difference: Amazon started its service without getting approval from the big music labels. But Apple is actively seeking licenses for its service, and will pay the labels for the privilege.

And sources tell me that Apple has already procured deals from at least two of the big four labels (Universal Music Group, Warner Music Group, Sony and EMI) within the last two months. One source tells me Apple content boss Eddy Cue will be in New York tomorrow to try to finalize remaining deals.

“They’ve been very aggressive and thoughtful about it,” says an industry executive. “It feels like they want to go pretty soon.”

Reuters reported earlier today that Apple has “completed work on an online music storage service,” but said the company had not obtained licenses from any labels so far. I’ve asked all four labels for comment; an Apple rep declined to comment.

The industry executives I’ve talked to haven’t seen Apple’s service themselves, but say they’re aware of the broad strokes. The idea is that Apple will let users store songs they’ve purchased from its iTunes store, as well as others songs stored on their hard drives, and listen to them on multiple devices.

Amazon’s service does the same thing, but label executives have argued that a license would allow Apple (or Google, if it moves forward on similar, but stalled, plans) to create a more “robust service” with better user interfaces, sound quality, and other features.

I’ve never understood how a license would affect things like product design, but there’s at least one practical benefit from Apple’s perspective: The deals it is signing will allow it to store a single master copy of a song on its servers, and share that with multiple users.
Click to expand...
 
I tried doing this with Winamp Remote with my iPod Touch a few years ago.

Might as well go back to CDs that constantly skip.
 
I seriously can't wait. I would have given Amazon's service a try, but sadly it doesn't work on my iPhone or iPad. Their service just doesn't sound appealing enough for me to downgrade to an Android phone.

No iOS access = Amazon can go take a long walk for all I care.
 
louis89 said:
What's the actual point of this?

Why wouldn't I just sync my iPod and have all my music in portable form without requiring an Internet connection?
Click to expand...
Don't want an iPod.

Don't like iTunes.

I'd much rather have DRM free music I can access anywhere, any time, on any other computer or device. And my experience with Apple is that nothing Apple works unless it's on other Apple crap and I don't feel like buying into all of Apple's nonsense.

Also the cloud is not just for music.
 
As long as Google still delivers targeted ads while people are typing in the name of the torrent they are looking for, they will be just fine.
 
I agree that cloud based music sounds kind of dumb today, but it will be the backbone of how you play music in the future on everything from your computer to your phone to your game console. As soon as the kinks get worked out, it will be really nice to put in a code once and listen to everything you have where ever you are.

You know, as long as your internet/wifi/4G signal is strong.
 
SimleuqiR said:
So how you like them apples Google?
Click to expand...

apple has no room to get cocky until they stop sucking at cloud anything.

As if playing music on my smartphone didn't drain the battery enough ... now you want me to stream it through 3G or Wi-Fi ...
Click to expand...

one day we will live in a future where you don't even notice where your media is, local or internets. that will be a great day.
 
catfish said:
apple has no room to get cocky until they stop sucking at cloud anything.
Click to expand...

As a MobileMe subscriber, I can assure you it is quite robust and pleasant to use, however I do understand that the cost is rather high compared to the free services Google provides. Just because their service charges money doesn't make it suck.
 
Casp0r said:
As if playing music on my smartphone didn't drain the battery enough ... now you want me to stream it through 3G or Wi-Fi ...

Thanks but with memory so cheap and abundant ... the last thing I want is to have my whole music collection stuck on the reliability of my Internet connection ... which is workable at best.


... whole thing ... doesn't sit right with me. Mobile internet needs to be way way way more reliable for me to believe in this stuff.
Click to expand...
LTE...

SN: This makes the LTE iPhone rumors more plausible.
 
This isn't for our benefit. They're getting us adjusted to the idea of not handling our media so they can control our access and stop pirating. We can already reliably stream our music from our homes in any format we want.
 
ivedoneyourmom said:
I vehemently disagree. ;) Everyone knows Scholar is.
Click to expand...
When i see an article that might be useful I get re-directed to a site i have to pay subscription to. *shrug

edit btw

all you fighting about music services just need to subscribe to zune pass. end
 
spotify-logo-1.png


I already use this on my phone, and I can stream my own content from home using other apps if I want. Not a single shit was given on this day.
 
AmazonMP3 > iTunes

Not to mention about 30% of my library isn't on either store.

I don't care about Cloud music. How about a iOS cloud service that comes with every iOS device...that would be killer.
 
We don't even know what the service actually is.

I use Rhapsody which gives me access to any song I want at any time on my phone. The service Apple offers would have to at least be comparable to that for me to take special notice of it.
 
Yeah, larger bandwidth caps mean I stream a lot of music now, until we get some competition for iTunes in Australia I am not buying shit. I still buy cd's though, but I hate the iTunes interface so much I can't even make myself buy music on there.

Any new service will probably not include Australia for a long, long time.
 
Dead Man said:
Yeah, larger bandwidth caps mean I stream a lot of music now, until we get some competition for iTunes in Australia I am not buying shit. I still buy cd's though, but I hate the iTunes interface so much I can't even make myself buy music on there.

Any new service will probably not include Australia for a long, long time.
Click to expand...
That really annoys me. The internet is global and personally, I can't help but look at mobile phones and mobile devices as "globally-minded" devices because you can theoretically take and use them anywhere. And yet for some reason copyright law is so backwards that simply crossing from one territory to the next becomes an issue even though, in terms of technology, it's entirely feasible. It's actually funny to think that it's gotten progressively worse as time has gone on (YouTube and 3DS region locking).
 
radioheadrule83 said:
spotify-logo-1.png


I already use this on my phone, and I can stream my own content from home using other apps if I want. Not a single shit was given on this day.
Click to expand...

Let's start to give a shit then?

http://news.cnet.com/8301-31001_3-20056446-261.html

Rather than launch its own digital music service, Google is considering whether to partner with an existing service, including the likes of Spotify, to power Google Music.

According to a source with knowledge of the talks, Google has told the labels that it has begun discussions with Spotify in recent weeks, though no agreement is in place. Spotify is the European streaming-music service that also has ambitions of launching in the United States.

The talks with Google and Spotify have coincided with an inability by Google to reach agreements with the four top record labels on licensing a cloud music service, the source told CNET. Google had originally hoped to launch a new music service by the end of the year, and then was aiming for March, but now it's indefinite on when it might debut.
Click to expand...

Someone here on GAF mentioned that Google should just wait until Spotify got their shit together in the USA, and then just scoop them.
 
You don't get to keep a company's licensing agreements when you buy them. It's the same reason Apple or Google haven't bought Netflix already; those agreements would be dissolved and would have to be renegotiated.
 
badcrumble said:
You don't get to keep a company's licensing agreements when you buy them. It's the same reason Apple or Google haven't bought Netflix already; those agreements would be dissolved and would have to be renegotiated.
Click to expand...

Well obviously but buying such companies still yields the technology, talent, and core product. Not to mention gaining those people who initially worked out the deals and thus have a sort of inroads.
 
Andrex said:
Well obviously but buying such companies still yields the technology, talent, and core product. Not to mention gaining those people who initially worked out the deals and thus have a sort of inroads.
Click to expand...
Right, but in the case of something like Netflix or Spotify, the technology is something that large companies can do very easily on their own and/or already have, and in Apple or Google's case their branding has better penetration than these companies in the first place. It really would just be buying the company to get those people who worked out the deals - and it's probably easier just to hire those specific people away rather than buy the whole company. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if some of those people had been hired away - we wouldn't necessarily hear about it because they're likely not particularly glamorous or well-known individuals.
 
badcrumble said:
Right, but in the case of something like Netflix or Spotify, the technology is something that large companies can do very easily on their own and/or already have, and in Apple or Google's case their branding has better penetration than these companies in the first place. It really would just be buying the company to get those people who worked out the deals - and it's probably easier just to hire those specific people away rather than buy the whole company. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if some of those people had been hired away - we wouldn't necessarily hear about it because they're likely not particularly glamorous or well-known individuals.
Click to expand...

That's definitely a possibility too. I was just saying buying a company isn't usually worthless.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

TikTok is back on the Apple and Google app stores
8
583
Jinzo Prime replied
[Reuters] Disney tweaks DEI programs to focus on business outcomes, memo says
News Business 
4
728
jason10mm replied
Apple is losing more than $1 billion a year on streamer Apple TV+ according to a new report
News  2
69
3K
clarky replied
Can you create a playlist in apple music without a sub ?
2
377
thefool replied
Recommended Smart Watches (not Apple)
5
310
N0S replied
Top Bottom