PDA

View Full Version : Rumor - Apple's Online Storage fix



Lutze
22nd April 2011, 09:16 PM
We've all heard the rumors about what apple are going to provide us with to enable us to access our entire music library on all our connected devices.

The meat the rumors say that with Apples solution you won't need to upload all your tunes to do it. The info being pushed is that Apple will host your library and let you connect to it with them holding just one copy of the song for everyone, worldwide. You'll get access to it because you have it on your iTunes.

There is, of course, some grey areas. If you have stuff Apple doesn't. Will it only be music or will it include movies and tv shows?

Guess we will find out soon (I hope!)


AppleInsider | Apple reportedly signs licenses with major music labels for iTunes streaming (http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/11/04/22/apple_has_reportedly_signed_licenses_with_two_majo r_music_labels_for_itunes_streaming.html)

iGobbleoff
23rd April 2011, 02:34 AM
I would have thought the same, rather than have 50 kazillion songs all the same, just the one copy of the song serves 50 kazillion people.

Lutze
23rd April 2011, 11:47 AM
I would have thought the same, rather than have 50 kazillion songs all the same, just the one copy of the song serves 50 kazillion people.

It's a very smart move if they are doing it this way. But it doesn't really explain the sheer size of the new data centre that Apple have made. It's also going to be a huge challenge for Apple to convince people that they will not be sharing your library details with the record labels.

I can imagine that there would have been significant pressure from them to get Apple to use the songs meta data records to find the sources for your collection.

stewiesno1
23rd April 2011, 12:42 PM
500,000 feet is certainly a lot of storage space !
It will be interesting to see what the final purpose of this place is.

Stewie

MarkW
23rd April 2011, 04:54 PM
I don't quite get this "locker" for music:confused:

My 1Tb external HDD stores all my music, my iPad stores the vast majority of what I like to listen to on the go, my iphone has the most popular of what i listen to and I have the CDs sitting on the shelf in case something happens. BTW i don't buy music unless its on CD, downloads are nice for "I want it now" but the quality is terrible outside of a portable device. Give me my Yamaha sound system and Wharfedales over a portable any day.

Where in my life does this locker fit in, why do I need it??

iGobbleoff
23rd April 2011, 04:58 PM
I think the idea is that you don't need the storage space anymore, it will stream your whole library, and then any iDevice will access it.

rav3n
23rd April 2011, 05:03 PM
I dont like this "streaming" idea, simply for the fact that it will require alot of internet data usage, which will no doubt come with a fairly large bill for said data.

mac_man_luke
23rd April 2011, 05:28 PM
Id imagine if this happens it will only be music you have bought from apple

Lutze
23rd April 2011, 05:34 PM
Id imagine if this happens it will only be music you have bought from apple

All of the latest rumour info seems to be saying otherwise. Most of us have huge collections of CD's that we've ripped into our iTunes library - in the US at least this is perfectly legal. I believe that in the UK and Australia it's a very, very grey area - mostly pointing to it being illegal.

Update: It seems that Australia allows private use copy. (Of course, this is a wikipedia article so do so at your own risk).

Ripping - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ripping#Other_countries)

the8thark
24th April 2011, 09:03 AM
Yes this is exactly what I do. Get the cd, rip it once to itunes and forever play the digital files over and over. And thus most of my almost 1000 strong CD collection has only seen one actual use. For the initial itunes rip. Yes it's a really grey area. But as long as we don't try to sell the digital copies we're fine.

And what does the law say about this?
Everytime I buy a song from itunes, I convert it to another format. To play. To remove the DRM. Yes I keep the original DRM encoded AAC. But I just usually play the converted DRM free mp3 I make. Would they consider this illegal? But I did buy the file in the first place.

mjankor
24th April 2011, 10:00 AM
Please let it work like dropbox!

Lutze
24th April 2011, 11:04 AM
Yes this is exactly what I do. Get the cd, rip it once to itunes and forever play the digital files over and over. And thus most of my almost 1000 strong CD collection has only seen one actual use. For the initial itunes rip. Yes it's a really grey area. But as long as we don't try to sell the digital copies we're fine.

And what does the law say about this?
Everytime I buy a song from itunes, I convert it to another format. To play. To remove the DRM. Yes I keep the original DRM encoded AAC. But I just usually play the converted DRM free mp3 I make. Would they consider this illegal? But I did buy the file in the first place.

1. Apple do not sell DRM'd music via iTunes anymore. They have not done so for a fair time.

2. Removing DRM is illegal. There are no bones about this.

3. As I stated earlier: Australian copyright law allows you to convert a cd to mp3 format.

mattequalsmatt
24th April 2011, 09:56 PM
It's a very smart move if they are doing it this way. But it doesn't really explain the sheer size of the new data centre that Apple have made. It's also going to be a huge challenge for Apple to convince people that they will not be sharing your library details with the record labels.

I can imagine that there would have been significant pressure from them to get Apple to use the songs meta data records to find the sources for your collection.The 'streaming' music issue is different. If you buy a song and download the song onto your computer, and then play it locally, you're doing everything from your end and the device limitations mean that you're (likely) using it in a single-user environment, as per the licence you've paid for. Once you stop having the song on the computer and relying on that device-level single-download protection and licence it to an account, the way the record companies can totally miss out.

So this is probably more about convincing the record companies that streaming is a business model they want to allow iTunes to provide, and determining if the cost of a song needs to go up to cover any increased usage seen.


500,000 feet is certainly a lot of storage space !
It will be interesting to see what the final purpose of this place is.

StewieThe reason that the data centre is so huge is because of scale of economies, and the fact that they're expecting a massive uptake with iTunes video. Wouldn't surprise me if they're also looking into 1080p and higher streaming.


All of the latest rumour info seems to be saying otherwise. Most of us have huge collections of CD's that we've ripped into our iTunes library - in the US at least this is perfectly legal. I believe that in the UK and Australia it's a very, very grey area - mostly pointing to it being illegal.

Update: It seems that Australia allows private use copy. (Of course, this is a wikipedia article so do so at your own risk).

Ripping - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ripping#Other_countries)Exactly right. Australia has some silly laws, and there's a lot of grey areas. Like, you're allowed to tape a program on TV and keep it as long as you watch it once. Watch it again and you're breaking the law.

Australia protects the copyright holder in a lot of ways and it's up to the copyright holder to determine what's what in a lot of cases. In this case, it might just be that the copyright holders have demanded this info and apple don't have any other options.

yagankiely
25th April 2011, 01:43 AM
All of the latest rumour info seems to be saying otherwise. Most of us have huge collections of CD's that we've ripped into our iTunes library - in the US at least this is perfectly legal. I believe that in the UK and Australia it's a very, very grey area - mostly pointing to it being illegal.

Update: It seems that Australia allows private use copy. (Of course, this is a wikipedia article so do so at your own risk).Format shifting.


Exactly right. Australia has some silly laws, and there's a lot of grey areas. Like, you're allowed to tape a program on TV and keep it as long as you watch it once. Watch it again and you're breaking the law.Time shifting.

Both of these were added to our legislature in 2006 effectively meaning that prior to this, both were illegal. The addendum also increased (but not retroactively) our copyright laws to 70 years (from 50 years) after death. It's like: Oh yay, iPods are legal; oh wait, that score of Sibelius' symphony now won't be PD for students for another 20 years.

MarkW
25th April 2011, 09:45 AM
The concept I see from what all have explained is that a device I would listen to my music would need to be connected to the net where I would have the music streamed live to the device (not downloaded). To connect to the net would either be through 3G such as my iPad/iPhone or through the wifi connection which is really only avaialable at home - or eat in at McDonalds - a price I'm really not willing to pay.

So now the music that I already own, I would pay through internet fees for the privilege of hearing elsewhere on a crappy sounding portable device. Granted that in my 120Gb net service, the music would probably be an insignificant cost but the service I get on my iPad is not what I call acceptable for this purpose (Optus prepaid). My iPhone is worse but I accept that as its on "3" network and you only get what you pay for.

I work at Homebush in an office (brick and concrete building) and can't get a constant 3G signal at my desk. From what I have seen, wireless net is piss poor at the best and generally at it limits for service provision and now there will be plans for maybe half a million extra people on the system wanting to listen to music? What happens when I am outside of the wireless network such as driving in the country? (this could be the F3 as phone service is not consistant between Sydney and Newcastle) or on a train in the city underground area. Maybe this might work in the US in LaLa land but frankly I can't see a quality system here.

Would I consider this system - not in a million years

Lutze
25th April 2011, 10:24 AM
Right, you know that sticks have two ends? You appear to have completely the wrong end of this one.

Yes - you *may* be able to stream your content using this
Yes - you would need to be connected to the internet to do this
Yes - it will eat a boat load of bandwidth

No - this is not entirely the point of this service

For *most* people this system sounds arse about face until you add the part that appears to be one of the main reasons for it:

Your media backup is now looked after by Apple

Some of the folks here probably don't backup any of their computers so when a failure happens it's all gone.

This method would be the big step towards never worrying about losing your iTunes library again.

MarkW
25th April 2011, 10:47 AM
So this is really aimed at Gen Y who don't own CDs and just download their music?

teej
25th April 2011, 11:03 AM
It's a very smart move if they are doing it this way.
Data deduplication is the norm for this sort of application.

But it doesn't really explain the sheer size of the new data centre that Apple have made.
I think Apple are going to be the first to exploit the internet for machine management at, for want of a better adjective, internet-scale.

mjankor
25th April 2011, 11:39 AM
So this is really aimed at Gen Y who don't own CDs and just download their music?

I suspect it's more to do with having iTunes syncing across multiple computers and devices. (Hopefully the rest of iLife too). Backup is also a good reason.

the8thark
25th April 2011, 05:32 PM
Yes - it will eat a boat load of bandwidth

Yes - it will eat up a whole load of time. With my POS internet service (I blame Telstra for not making my local exchange ADSL2 compatible), it'll take ages to upload anything of a decent size.
Yes - it will be expansive. The cost to get enough bandwidth per month here for something like this would be disgusting.

iGobbleoff
25th April 2011, 05:42 PM
Maybe some sort of 'premium' MobileMe service? Perhaps what is offered now would be free (cheaper?) and this 'cloud serving' would be a premium service?

Lutze
25th April 2011, 05:46 PM
Yes - it will eat up a whole load of time. With my POS internet service (I blame Telstra for not making my local exchange ADSL2 compatible), it'll take ages to upload anything of a decent size.
Yes - it will be expansive. The cost to get enough bandwidth per month here for something like this would be disgusting.

No - you are not reading the whole thread before posting are you?

The main meat of the rumour is that you will NOT need to upload your music to this service. The info is that Apple will use your iTunes db file to provide you with what you've already got.

the8thark
25th April 2011, 09:23 PM
No - you are not reading the whole thread before posting are you?
I did :).

And my comment still stands. For music it might work but for video that's a lot of bandwidth people would need.
And secondly how would Apple differentiate songs on your itunes DB you ripped from a bought CD or songs that were pirated? But I'm sure Apple will work these things out.

[edit] The new rumour is this online storage fix will not be free.

Apple's iTunes cloud could be free at first, but will eventually require a fee
AppleInsider | Apple's iTunes cloud could be free at first, but will eventually require a fee (http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/11/04/26/apples_itunes_cloud_could_be_free_at_first_but_wil l_eventually_require_a_fee.html)

iGobbleoff
20th May 2011, 12:43 PM
Just to bring this thread up again, I wonder if they would make the ability to have our own iTunes library's be able to be 'published' and identifyable by the mobileme/app store account, sort of like home sharing, but on a grand (internet) scale.

So if you're out and about, you have your own library on the iDevice, and if you feel like a change of pace with your music, you can stream to your iDevice your own library from back home?

Lutze
20th May 2011, 02:12 PM
Just to bring this thread up again, I wonder if they would make the ability to have our own iTunes library's be able to be 'published' and identifyable by the mobileme/app store account, sort of like home sharing, but on a grand (internet) scale.

So if you're out and about, you have your own library on the iDevice, and if you feel like a change of pace with your music, you can stream to your iDevice your own library from back home?

Everything is pointing to ALL of your library being available this way - to any Apple gear.

The problem I see, and I know others have seen as well, is that this will only work for songs, movies and tv shows that are available in the iTunes store. The question will be if it works with stuff that you didn't BUY from the iTunes store.

example 1. you have a ripped dvd of The Office - will it work as you can buy The Office via iTunes - UNSURE
example 2. you have a ripped cd of AC/DC music - not available in iTunes - will not show up in your online locker
example 3. you have a ripped live cd of The Pixies - not available in iTunes - will not show up in your online locker
example 4. you have a downloaded copy of Red - it's not from iTunes but shows up like it might be... UNSURE - probably not.
example 5. you only have iTunes content in iTunes. Aren't you a good human, here - have a cookie. Will share any content purchased through iTunes.

Steve_D
20th May 2011, 03:09 PM
Heres a spanner in the works then.

What if this Data centre is not for the ideas that these rumours are touting?

I understand that the space is massive. And it is possibly linked to iTunes. These parts i completely agree with.

But what if.... these deals we are hearing about are deals that just allow Apple to sell more EMI or similar content? What if they are actually going to house back catalogues of ALL of the product that EMI (using for example only) has released to date and any future releases will be saved in this data centre on release?

Take that idea and now multiply that by the number of Full Albums, Singles, Random Songs, Music Videos, Movies, Tv Shows that have been released over the decades, ALL of it not just selected/sanctioned releases. Thats a MASSIVE amount of data.

All would have to be stored somewhere.

As for the Apple Locker thing. It just sounds like its a combination of upgraded MobileMe and iTunes access. Doesn't necessarily mean you can stream music to it, thats just what the blogs are making up to get page hits.

idiesel
27th May 2011, 10:54 PM
Apple's iCloud music service will automatically mirror your iTunes library using 'high-quality' tracks? (http://www.engadget.com/2011/05/27/apples-icloud-music-service-will-automatically-mirror-your-itun/)


One revelation, sourced from three people in the know, claims that Apple will scan customers' iTunes libraries (hello, LaLa) and quickly mirror the contents on Apple's own servers -- no massive DSL-choking upload required. And Apple will do you the solid of "replacing" any low bitrate tracks with the "high-quality" versions it stores in its fully licensed music locker for streaming to your connected devices.

Of course, this value-add won't come free and will certainly require a subscription fee. The cost to the consumer, though, is still very much unclear as is the service's integration with Apple's $99 per year MobileMe sham. And you know those rumors about MobileMe being offered as a free service? We wouldn't be surprised if it stays at $99 with iCloud being announced as a "free" feature update; aka, an $8.25 per month music subscription that also provides web access to your synced bookmarks, contacts, email, and calendar. Regardless, it's this subscription model that has the major labels so enthusiastic as it will finally allow them to extort fees for all that pirated audio you may have stumbled upon since Napster was loosed on an unprepared music industry a decade ago.
I believe the last post is possibly why Apple have been able to get the recording labels to agree on their offering over Amazon and Google.

Steve_D
27th May 2011, 11:12 PM
I may be in the minority here but i really like the sound of that.

Plus there is none of this "renting" tracks from someone like Google (lets face it, thats all Google's service is because you don't have physical copies).
You can keep adding to your personal library and then still be able to take it with you wherever you go.

It seems like a win - win all round.

busterblues
4th June 2011, 04:15 PM
Its an extremely smart idea from Apple that they simply host one copy of every song, rather than hundreads of thousands of copies of the same song. Less storage cost, cheaper to run the service, means cheaper prices for everyone. And it means that it is (hopefully) going to be great quality content as well!

nibbles
4th June 2011, 06:53 PM
but does that mean if I rip a song at 320kbps and then want to play back the high quality song via the cloud on an iDevice other than the original that it wouldn't be possible because it's only be 192kbps?

Lutze
4th June 2011, 06:56 PM
but does that mean if I rip a song at 320kbps and then want to play back the high quality song via the cloud on an iDevice other than the original that it wouldn't be possible because it's only be 192kbps?

Six of one, half a dozen of the other. My gut feeling is that "all" you'll get from icloud is the best version iTunes sells it at.