Multimedia
Jul 20, 11:27 PM
You don't think Apple would get raked over the coals if they released towers that were slower than the last generation? Conroe is fast, but no way it beats a quad G5. And I don't think a promise of a quad machine later on helps public relations any.
Also, doesn't the kentsfield have the same limitation as conroe? That you can only use it in single processor configs? A woodcrest chipset would have a longer life since you'd use the same one for multiple cloverton configs.
Next gen, conroe gets you 2 cores, woodcrest gives you 2 chips for 4 cores.
Gen after that, kentsfield gets you 4 cores, cloverton gets you 2 chips for 8 cores. There's room for both chipsets for at least the next two generations, and I wouldn't be surprised if it continues beyond that.Maybe I misunderstood your post, I thought you meant releasing conroe machines and not shipping quads until months later. If that were the case, people would inevitably compare the new towers to the G5 quads, regardless if they were intended to replace those models.
I think the reason they haven't announced woodcrest towers is because they want to wait for WWDC, and because the line will be split between woodcrest and conroe. It wouldn't make sense to announce half the tower lineup, people would assume that was it and react accordingly.I believe this is the correct analysis. I am in full agreement with Milo. Good job M. :)
Also, doesn't the kentsfield have the same limitation as conroe? That you can only use it in single processor configs? A woodcrest chipset would have a longer life since you'd use the same one for multiple cloverton configs.
Next gen, conroe gets you 2 cores, woodcrest gives you 2 chips for 4 cores.
Gen after that, kentsfield gets you 4 cores, cloverton gets you 2 chips for 8 cores. There's room for both chipsets for at least the next two generations, and I wouldn't be surprised if it continues beyond that.Maybe I misunderstood your post, I thought you meant releasing conroe machines and not shipping quads until months later. If that were the case, people would inevitably compare the new towers to the G5 quads, regardless if they were intended to replace those models.
I think the reason they haven't announced woodcrest towers is because they want to wait for WWDC, and because the line will be split between woodcrest and conroe. It wouldn't make sense to announce half the tower lineup, people would assume that was it and react accordingly.I believe this is the correct analysis. I am in full agreement with Milo. Good job M. :)
justflie
Sep 14, 10:05 AM
So is this a stevenote or not? i think that might hint at what caliber of goodies are coming
Erwin-Br
Apr 28, 03:35 PM
So, are we supposed to be proud about this? And if so, why has the same 'accomplishment' earned Microsoft the 'M$' reputation? Double morals?
aegisdesign
Sep 10, 08:40 AM
My point as just that if intel doubles the number of cores every 6th month, I believe that lifespan of a Mac is going to be substantially shorter. I doubt that the people who just bought a new MacPro realized that their computer would be as fast as an "entry level" computer within a year. Old Macs, like my own MDD, will be deemed to live in a time-bubble with now means of interacting with newer computers.
Things have certainly changed after the PPC ->x86 transition.
Software will also have to keep up and unless your software becomes massively multithreaded and what you're doing can actually be multi threaded there's no real advantage to multi-core CPUs.
This is already a problem with Quicktime in that it doesn't scale past 2 cores. You'll find half of your computer under utilised for instance when transcoding video in Quicktime.
Things have certainly changed after the PPC ->x86 transition.
Software will also have to keep up and unless your software becomes massively multithreaded and what you're doing can actually be multi threaded there's no real advantage to multi-core CPUs.
This is already a problem with Quicktime in that it doesn't scale past 2 cores. You'll find half of your computer under utilised for instance when transcoding video in Quicktime.
musiclover137
Aug 23, 05:34 PM
It is likely that someone screwed up and delayed in applying for a patent, as such, :eek: Creative got there first. Maybe that is why Steve sounded pissed.
That's what I think could have happened too. I don't know why people think Creative made this up and Apple felt like giving $100 million to charity or something.
Apple was wrong in this one. The End
That's what I think could have happened too. I don't know why people think Creative made this up and Apple felt like giving $100 million to charity or something.
Apple was wrong in this one. The End
oober_freak
Sep 26, 09:09 AM
You're not going anywhere with your market share if you don't launch your phone simultaneously in India and China.
Nokia learnt it, SE learnt it, Motorola learnt it.
Looks like Apple will learn it the hard way as well.
I mean on an average, in India, about 5 million connections are added per month. That's India alone. Add China's figure to this and you'll understand what I'm trying to say.
Nokia learnt it, SE learnt it, Motorola learnt it.
Looks like Apple will learn it the hard way as well.
I mean on an average, in India, about 5 million connections are added per month. That's India alone. Add China's figure to this and you'll understand what I'm trying to say.
jagolden
Sep 16, 07:01 PM
:/why is the US so far behind Europe with this kind of technology? :/
(edit: maybe it isn't i haven't shopped for a phone in nearly a year)
Because US cell phone carriers suck. :/Because US cell phone carriers suck. :/
The real reason many foriegn cell phone providers and services are way ahead of the US is an old one:
The US has had superior LANDLINE service for decades. As foreign countries began to develop worthwhile telephone service (in telephone history, relatively recent), thye opted for more that was not locked in to landlines and the progression of technology gave them a good lead, as opposed to the US which, sure, adopted cell phone use, but the landline service infrastructure that was already in palce held them back-why shell out for new tech when we can plug the old tech and rake in the money. It's funny, the US initial lead actually turned to a disadvantage for them (us).
Europe is so far ahead of the US in what and how cell phone technolgy is used.
(edit: maybe it isn't i haven't shopped for a phone in nearly a year)
Because US cell phone carriers suck. :/Because US cell phone carriers suck. :/
The real reason many foriegn cell phone providers and services are way ahead of the US is an old one:
The US has had superior LANDLINE service for decades. As foreign countries began to develop worthwhile telephone service (in telephone history, relatively recent), thye opted for more that was not locked in to landlines and the progression of technology gave them a good lead, as opposed to the US which, sure, adopted cell phone use, but the landline service infrastructure that was already in palce held them back-why shell out for new tech when we can plug the old tech and rake in the money. It's funny, the US initial lead actually turned to a disadvantage for them (us).
Europe is so far ahead of the US in what and how cell phone technolgy is used.
SBacklin
Apr 22, 11:15 AM
i didn't ignore anything. i stream pandora all the time when i'm on the go and while i'm at the house. my work has wifi so i just connect to that and my house wifi while i'm there. I have a buddy here at work that streams netflix and tons of other stuff but refuses to connect to wifi. he uses close to 10gb of data monthly and has still not received any message from AT&T.
My point is there are a lot of people that just don't connect to wifi when they are around it free, they just rely on their cell service instead. The reason i connect is bc when i'm looking online it's quicker internet wise then the 3g.
I'm not wanting anyone to change. but you're arguing that this service isn't great...when in reality it's just not great for you.
I like to live minimally....so having a dvd collection or cd collection of physical media does not interest me. Apparently, others think the same way or the cloud service would not exist. The service is not for you. Go back to ripping cds to your local storage device and making play list after play list and sync all ur music each time u want a variety.
Many people are the same way with books. My MIL has like 1,500 books in her house and just sees no value in a kindle and all that it provides.
I get it, people enjoy their "stuff".
Its also not great for many many many other people. You still base your ideas and arguments on the flawed notion that people have unlimited data and could still get it. I will also state again, I personally believe this will be some kind of add-on locker and not replacing local storage. I believe replacing local storage at this point would be a major mistake on Apple's part because it would negatively affect so many people...granted, not all.
My point is there are a lot of people that just don't connect to wifi when they are around it free, they just rely on their cell service instead. The reason i connect is bc when i'm looking online it's quicker internet wise then the 3g.
I'm not wanting anyone to change. but you're arguing that this service isn't great...when in reality it's just not great for you.
I like to live minimally....so having a dvd collection or cd collection of physical media does not interest me. Apparently, others think the same way or the cloud service would not exist. The service is not for you. Go back to ripping cds to your local storage device and making play list after play list and sync all ur music each time u want a variety.
Many people are the same way with books. My MIL has like 1,500 books in her house and just sees no value in a kindle and all that it provides.
I get it, people enjoy their "stuff".
Its also not great for many many many other people. You still base your ideas and arguments on the flawed notion that people have unlimited data and could still get it. I will also state again, I personally believe this will be some kind of add-on locker and not replacing local storage. I believe replacing local storage at this point would be a major mistake on Apple's part because it would negatively affect so many people...granted, not all.
coder12
May 3, 11:08 AM
What do people prefer? I've heard quite bad things about the Magic Mouse, the majority of people saying they find it uncomfortable etc?
As I already have a good Logitech wireless mouse, would it be a better combination to use that plus the Trackpad?
I'm personally a big fan of the mighty mouse. I have smaller hands, and also use bettertouchtool. I find certain maneuvers difficult with it still (like 3 finger swipes), but obviously I opt'd in for that ;)
They're both very nice pieces of hardware, with separate purposes. I'll be honest and say that if I had the choice between the two, I'd buy the trackpad:
a. Gestures on Lion feel better with it imho.
b. I use the keyboard for almost everything, and moving over to a mouse which I'll need to move farther away from my keyboard is irritating. The trackpad stays in one spot.
c. You already have a nice mouse ;)
As I already have a good Logitech wireless mouse, would it be a better combination to use that plus the Trackpad?
I'm personally a big fan of the mighty mouse. I have smaller hands, and also use bettertouchtool. I find certain maneuvers difficult with it still (like 3 finger swipes), but obviously I opt'd in for that ;)
They're both very nice pieces of hardware, with separate purposes. I'll be honest and say that if I had the choice between the two, I'd buy the trackpad:
a. Gestures on Lion feel better with it imho.
b. I use the keyboard for almost everything, and moving over to a mouse which I'll need to move farther away from my keyboard is irritating. The trackpad stays in one spot.
c. You already have a nice mouse ;)
toddybody
Apr 14, 12:51 PM
Glad to hear it:D
Im really stoked to see the Ivy Bridge benchmarks...the i72600k blew my mind:eek: I feel bad for the enthusiast folks who bought a 980x :(
Im really stoked to see the Ivy Bridge benchmarks...the i72600k blew my mind:eek: I feel bad for the enthusiast folks who bought a 980x :(
lilo777
Apr 19, 04:08 PM
Yeah cause a contract breach takes just as long to prove a IP suite. They'd get slapped so fast they wont know what hit them, not to mention other companies would see it as samsung being cowboys for mixing their two business up.
I doubt those contracts last longer than one year and this is how long it will probably take for this lawsuit to get to court hearing. Samsung will be in a great bargaining position then.
I doubt those contracts last longer than one year and this is how long it will probably take for this lawsuit to get to court hearing. Samsung will be in a great bargaining position then.
drlunanerd
Sep 2, 04:55 PM
I think it's pointing to Apple not bothering with the Paris Expo anymore. Their disinterest started last year, and unfortunately I was there at the time, altough Mr Jobs did show up for a press conference and checked out the Sony stand, ha.
I had a better time at the London Mac Expo. Apple should make product announcements here from now on :D
I had a better time at the London Mac Expo. Apple should make product announcements here from now on :D
neil1980
Apr 25, 02:29 PM
I love the way so many people say that 'nobody' has a use for the SuperDrive.
Admitedly from when I got my MacBook in 08 till 10 I only used it a few times but this year I've actually used it quite a bit.
I've been doing a spot of photography for a club and at the moment there isnt a cheaper more convenient way of giving a few hundred+ MB worth of images to someone than on a CD/DVD that just took 2 mins to burn.
Without the SuperDrive my only option would be either USB stick (which cost more and you never get given them back anyway) or online via drop box (which takes ages as my ADSL is pretty slow as I pretty much live out in the sticks.
So personally I hope they keep the SuperDrive on the pro... until USB sticks become a few pence each anyway
Admitedly from when I got my MacBook in 08 till 10 I only used it a few times but this year I've actually used it quite a bit.
I've been doing a spot of photography for a club and at the moment there isnt a cheaper more convenient way of giving a few hundred+ MB worth of images to someone than on a CD/DVD that just took 2 mins to burn.
Without the SuperDrive my only option would be either USB stick (which cost more and you never get given them back anyway) or online via drop box (which takes ages as my ADSL is pretty slow as I pretty much live out in the sticks.
So personally I hope they keep the SuperDrive on the pro... until USB sticks become a few pence each anyway
Peace
Sep 1, 10:54 AM
Not sure if it's a typo or not but MacNN is saying Apple has confirmed a special event for Sept. 14th.
http://www.macnn.com/articles/06/08/31/boot.camp.mac.gui/
http://www.macnn.com/articles/06/08/31/boot.camp.mac.gui/
Analog Kid
Aug 31, 05:27 PM
Not keynote at AppleExpo Paris, but a press event that day in the US and streamed to London? So crazy it might be true...
$15 downloads just won't fly with me, nor will $10. As it stands, I can buy a DVD from Amazon for $10, get it the next day, and not have to back it up somewhere... Gotta get it down to $5 or less for me to be interested-- maybe $10 for pre-releases.
I'm all over a video iPod though.
$15 downloads just won't fly with me, nor will $10. As it stands, I can buy a DVD from Amazon for $10, get it the next day, and not have to back it up somewhere... Gotta get it down to $5 or less for me to be interested-- maybe $10 for pre-releases.
I'm all over a video iPod though.
econgeek
Apr 14, 01:03 PM
The "world" isn't going to support ThunderPants as Intel now embraces USB3.
Can you provide any indications that Intel is dropping support for Thunderbolt? Any reason to believe that PC makers won't provide USB ports like they do now but also DisplayPorts like they do now, only in both cases the ports are upgraded to support USB 3 and thunderbolt?
Can you provide any indications that Intel is dropping support for Thunderbolt? Any reason to believe that PC makers won't provide USB ports like they do now but also DisplayPorts like they do now, only in both cases the ports are upgraded to support USB 3 and thunderbolt?
Anonymous Freak
Sep 29, 10:05 PM
Sorry if the question has been answered before, but here goes:
Is any of the film content in iTunes Store in 16x9 encoded? In other words, is it enhanced for widescreen displays (commonly known as anamorphically encoded)?
Being 16x9 encoded is not the same thing as being anaporphically encoded.
Being 16x9 encoded just means that the video is meant to be viewed at a 16x9 ratio. Yes, the movies (that I have bought, anyway,) are 16x9. Specifically, Good Will Hunting is 640x344.
Anamorphically encoded refers to the act of 'stretching' 16x9 source to the height of 4x3; so that you effectively get 33% more 'vertical' data than horizontal. The TV is then supposed to 'squish' the video back to 16x9. So, for example, if you tell your DVD player that you have a '16x9 anamorphic' TV, it will output the widescreen video to fill the entire 720x480 resolution. If you tell it you have a '16x9 non-anamorphic', it will still be outputting 720x480, but will add black bars on the top and bottom, to achive a 'video' resolution of 720x405.
My TV, for example, has a special '16x9 anamorphic' mode where it actually re-aims its electron beam so that it's only drawing in the 16x9 area, but at a higher vertical density than it normally would. Meaning that I no longer have square pixels. Instead, I have pixels that are 1.33 times wider than tall. (More data packed in height-wise.)
If iTunes movies were sold as anamorphic, then Good Will Hunting would be 640x372, and rely on the TV to 'squish' the 372 high into the height that 344 should be. Thereby displaying more vertical information in the same space.
Is any of the film content in iTunes Store in 16x9 encoded? In other words, is it enhanced for widescreen displays (commonly known as anamorphically encoded)?
Being 16x9 encoded is not the same thing as being anaporphically encoded.
Being 16x9 encoded just means that the video is meant to be viewed at a 16x9 ratio. Yes, the movies (that I have bought, anyway,) are 16x9. Specifically, Good Will Hunting is 640x344.
Anamorphically encoded refers to the act of 'stretching' 16x9 source to the height of 4x3; so that you effectively get 33% more 'vertical' data than horizontal. The TV is then supposed to 'squish' the video back to 16x9. So, for example, if you tell your DVD player that you have a '16x9 anamorphic' TV, it will output the widescreen video to fill the entire 720x480 resolution. If you tell it you have a '16x9 non-anamorphic', it will still be outputting 720x480, but will add black bars on the top and bottom, to achive a 'video' resolution of 720x405.
My TV, for example, has a special '16x9 anamorphic' mode where it actually re-aims its electron beam so that it's only drawing in the 16x9 area, but at a higher vertical density than it normally would. Meaning that I no longer have square pixels. Instead, I have pixels that are 1.33 times wider than tall. (More data packed in height-wise.)
If iTunes movies were sold as anamorphic, then Good Will Hunting would be 640x372, and rely on the TV to 'squish' the 372 high into the height that 344 should be. Thereby displaying more vertical information in the same space.
QCassidy352
Oct 12, 01:08 PM
I would love to have a red iPod, but I don't know why we would ever give money to help fight AIDS on a continent where the people take NO precautions to prevent themselves from getting AIDS
Education to teach how to prevent the spread of AIDS costs money too.
Education to teach how to prevent the spread of AIDS costs money too.
mex4eric
Apr 22, 05:09 PM
If Apple has this expectation, they had better at least sell an appropriate adapter/hub. I've long thought a thin, form-matching hub that connects to all of the ports on one side of an Apple portable would be a great idea. If Apple can make a 2- or even 3-port USB hub off of the Thunderbolt port (especially if a Mini Display-Port is also available) for ~$50, that would be golden for this type of MBA plan.
Hey, they could build a little hub with a cord that plugs into the TB port and provide a few USB 1,2,3 ports, maybe a firewire port, plus a glowing Apple logo on top and call it an iHub.
Hey, they could build a little hub with a cord that plugs into the TB port and provide a few USB 1,2,3 ports, maybe a firewire port, plus a glowing Apple logo on top and call it an iHub.
Peace
Sep 5, 10:46 AM
Appleinsider is indeed putting out a lot of info.
Thats the scary part..
Could well be Apple is going after Appleinsider like it did with Thinksecret by "feeding it" tons of misleading info to get the "other rat"..
Thats the scary part..
Could well be Apple is going after Appleinsider like it did with Thinksecret by "feeding it" tons of misleading info to get the "other rat"..
LarryC
Apr 30, 03:53 PM
Besides abolishing the ability of your graphics card, there are other interesting features of the processor. The hardware giant has confirmed that Sandy Bridge was designed with an integrated content protection to prevent piracy of high-end digital quality.
I am not ashamed to admit that I do not understand what Tampa Tom has said. Abolishing the ability of your graphics card? Sandy Bridge was designed with an integrated content protection to prevent piracy of high-end digital quality? What does that mean? It doesn't sound good. What type of content? Thank you, in advance, for any replies.
P.S. There are quite a few comments here regarding USB 3.0 and Blu-Ray. I think that if I go out and buy a brand new computer and it has USB that it really ought to at least offer the newest version. As far as Blu-Ray, I think that it would really be nice if Apple would at least offer it as an option for those that want it and are willing to pay a little extra. Just like extra RAM or a larger HD.
I am not ashamed to admit that I do not understand what Tampa Tom has said. Abolishing the ability of your graphics card? Sandy Bridge was designed with an integrated content protection to prevent piracy of high-end digital quality? What does that mean? It doesn't sound good. What type of content? Thank you, in advance, for any replies.
P.S. There are quite a few comments here regarding USB 3.0 and Blu-Ray. I think that if I go out and buy a brand new computer and it has USB that it really ought to at least offer the newest version. As far as Blu-Ray, I think that it would really be nice if Apple would at least offer it as an option for those that want it and are willing to pay a little extra. Just like extra RAM or a larger HD.
dernhelm
Sep 5, 02:22 PM
Now, if it's simply an updated Airport Express that now allows you to stream movies but you still have to use your computer do send the files through (AirTunes) then I'll pass. I really don't think they would do it this way though, or at least I hope not.
Plan on being dissapointed. That's pretty much what they'll release. The device will front-end your television, and might (if you are lucky) support component video or DVI, but most likely just composite video. It will probably have a front-row like interface and a remote that can work with it, but it will be incapable of storing any content. The mac will store the content, this device will simply make it available to a TV in any room in your house. Pair it up with a mac mini, and you have a pretty inexpensive solution for downloading TV or Movie content and watching it on your TV.
Myself, I think this could be VERY cool. But I don't spend a lot of time watching TV. If they do it right, I could cancel my NetFlix subscription, though. It just depends on the amount of content.
Plan on being dissapointed. That's pretty much what they'll release. The device will front-end your television, and might (if you are lucky) support component video or DVI, but most likely just composite video. It will probably have a front-row like interface and a remote that can work with it, but it will be incapable of storing any content. The mac will store the content, this device will simply make it available to a TV in any room in your house. Pair it up with a mac mini, and you have a pretty inexpensive solution for downloading TV or Movie content and watching it on your TV.
Myself, I think this could be VERY cool. But I don't spend a lot of time watching TV. If they do it right, I could cancel my NetFlix subscription, though. It just depends on the amount of content.
fblack
Sep 10, 06:11 PM
Do you really want to use a monitor from 10 years ago in everyday use? Not likely. I've a 15" CRT from about a decade ago too but it's sitting on a shelf as a spare in case my newer monitor dies.
Most times I've bought a new computer, I've also bought a new monitor. A widescreen 17" monitor back when I bought my iMac was extortionately expensive. I generally figure on spending about �15-1800 every three years on a computer and about 5-6 years of useful life. It's been going up from a G3 iBook to a 17" G5 Mac to a fully kitted out 24" iMac for that money. I can't imagine what it will be in 3 - 6 years time but I guess it'll make a 24" iMac feel just as obsolete as the 500Mhz G3 iBook with a 1024x768 screen feels.
I have to conclude that people who want to use their 10 year old CRT are just incredibly cheap and don't value their screens as much as being able to claim how fast their CPU is. I've been programming for 20+ years professionally and your screen isn't something to skimp on. It's THE most important thing if you value your eyes.
I think you mistook the slant of my post. Notice the big grin face at the end of my sentence in the previous post? I meant it half in jest. It does not mean that as I type I am staring at a 14" screen. As far as my 6 yr old CRT that died it was a 19inch not a tiny screen and certainly hefty at about 60lbs. My 10yr old CRT that has been permanently retired now was in fact used as a backup monitor for my old beige G3. I've had more than one monitor go before and having a backup even if it has small screen real estate can save your bacon if you've got work to do. :p
I would love to have the budget to replace all of my equipment every 3 years like you can but I dont have that luxury. If I can have a piece of equipment last a little longer you may call it cheap from your fancy perch, but I call it frugal. Good budgeting should never be sneered at...:D
Most times I've bought a new computer, I've also bought a new monitor. A widescreen 17" monitor back when I bought my iMac was extortionately expensive. I generally figure on spending about �15-1800 every three years on a computer and about 5-6 years of useful life. It's been going up from a G3 iBook to a 17" G5 Mac to a fully kitted out 24" iMac for that money. I can't imagine what it will be in 3 - 6 years time but I guess it'll make a 24" iMac feel just as obsolete as the 500Mhz G3 iBook with a 1024x768 screen feels.
I have to conclude that people who want to use their 10 year old CRT are just incredibly cheap and don't value their screens as much as being able to claim how fast their CPU is. I've been programming for 20+ years professionally and your screen isn't something to skimp on. It's THE most important thing if you value your eyes.
I think you mistook the slant of my post. Notice the big grin face at the end of my sentence in the previous post? I meant it half in jest. It does not mean that as I type I am staring at a 14" screen. As far as my 6 yr old CRT that died it was a 19inch not a tiny screen and certainly hefty at about 60lbs. My 10yr old CRT that has been permanently retired now was in fact used as a backup monitor for my old beige G3. I've had more than one monitor go before and having a backup even if it has small screen real estate can save your bacon if you've got work to do. :p
I would love to have the budget to replace all of my equipment every 3 years like you can but I dont have that luxury. If I can have a piece of equipment last a little longer you may call it cheap from your fancy perch, but I call it frugal. Good budgeting should never be sneered at...:D
MacRumors
Apr 22, 01:33 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/22/more-details-on-apples-cloud-based-music-locker/)
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2010/07/02/114402-itunes_devices.jpg
Apple seems (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/21/apples-cloud-based-music-service-ready-to-go/) to be getting ready to launch their cloud-based digital music "locker" service that has been rumored for many months. But contrary to an earlier Reuters report, All Things D (http://mediamemo.allthingsd.com/20110421/one-difference-between-apples-music-locker-and-amazons-label-deals/) has heard that Apple has already come to terms with two of the four major record labels about the service, and that Apple's Eddy Cue will be in New York tomorrow to try to finalize the remaining deals.
The negotiating of these deals is in contrast to Amazon's music storage service (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/03/29/amazon-launches-cloud-based-storage-service-and-music-player/) which notably launched last month without any deals in place -- a fact that the record labels were not very happy about (http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/03/29/us-amazon-idUSTRE72S13H20110329). Apple is said to have been "very aggressive and thoughtful about it" and "It feels like they want to go pretty soon", according to an unnamed music executive. All Things D also provides some details about how the service might work from Apple: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.All Things D points out that having official licenses can allow Apple to store a single master copy of a song rather than storing individual copies for every user. Amazon's original argument against needing the licenses was that their service was the same as any upload storage service. This meant that users needed to upload copies of their old music to be able to stream them. With the proper deals, Apple could avoid the need to upload individual copies and simply allow users to stream off of the single master copy. This could save on significant upload time for the user and storage requirements for Apple.
Article Link: More Details on Apple's Cloud-based Music Locker (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/22/more-details-on-apples-cloud-based-music-locker/)
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2010/07/02/114402-itunes_devices.jpg
Apple seems (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/21/apples-cloud-based-music-service-ready-to-go/) to be getting ready to launch their cloud-based digital music "locker" service that has been rumored for many months. But contrary to an earlier Reuters report, All Things D (http://mediamemo.allthingsd.com/20110421/one-difference-between-apples-music-locker-and-amazons-label-deals/) has heard that Apple has already come to terms with two of the four major record labels about the service, and that Apple's Eddy Cue will be in New York tomorrow to try to finalize the remaining deals.
The negotiating of these deals is in contrast to Amazon's music storage service (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/03/29/amazon-launches-cloud-based-storage-service-and-music-player/) which notably launched last month without any deals in place -- a fact that the record labels were not very happy about (http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/03/29/us-amazon-idUSTRE72S13H20110329). Apple is said to have been "very aggressive and thoughtful about it" and "It feels like they want to go pretty soon", according to an unnamed music executive. All Things D also provides some details about how the service might work from Apple: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.All Things D points out that having official licenses can allow Apple to store a single master copy of a song rather than storing individual copies for every user. Amazon's original argument against needing the licenses was that their service was the same as any upload storage service. This meant that users needed to upload copies of their old music to be able to stream them. With the proper deals, Apple could avoid the need to upload individual copies and simply allow users to stream off of the single master copy. This could save on significant upload time for the user and storage requirements for Apple.
Article Link: More Details on Apple's Cloud-based Music Locker (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/22/more-details-on-apples-cloud-based-music-locker/)