New Apple Lust Objects for 2010 and onward

Or cloud library backup

streaming though yeah. 96% of people don't give a shit about "owning" a music collection.

slightly surprised there's no live hand job event for this one though

Beatles

3G streaming on iPhones is totally going to kill network throughput won't it??

Beatles

― just woke up (lukas), Monday, November 15, 2010 10:43 AM

this better not be it

The beatles are so 2009

nah, audio stream for iphone headphones is like 128kbps = 20KB/s.

apparently iOS 4.2 is out tomorrow too

yeah better not be the beatles.

Cloud storage seems really half-baked unless there's a good way to seamlessly integrate it with the music you have stored locally. I'd also hope they have a way to store or at least cache recently accessed music so that you're not stuck with nothing when your network connection falls over.

fuck a 128kbps stream

That is exactly how Spotify works on the phone.

Twitter+Ping integration = exciting

would be surprised if it's a cloud storage/sync thing. apple have no idea how to do that, and the acquisitions/hiring necessary for them to figure it out would have made the news.

1% of the population notice or care about the difference between 128 and higher bitrates

apparently there's a Paul McCartney song called "Another Day" w/ the lyric "It's just another day" but that better have nothing to do with this

honestly, my gut says that if it were the cloud thing there'd be an actual event that journalists were invited to and not just a message on the homepage but who knows

~welcome to the cloud yall~

MacRumors figures it has something to do with the North Carolina data center Apple's got going.

The massive datacentre I'm sick of hearing about has been on the news, and they've been buying cloud-type people like lala etc, so it's partly plausible I guess. Xp

Wasn't the Lala thing they bought out streaming?

xp etc

i have no idea what year it is, but wtf is a cloud.

Twitter+Ping integration = exciting

I assume this is a joke Ed

yeah, streaming makes sense, and i'm sure they've been pushing the labels for it for years. think their long term goal is to get away from all sales and transition entirely to rentals for all content. easier more profit.

would not be like them to launch something transitional to this like cloud storage of an owned collection. also they already have that back to my mac and shared collections thing.

Yeh but that's how iTunes cloud would work -- Spotify-like streaming when out and about for music you already own (and that is avail on iTunes).

They won't go as far as streaming any music you *want* like Spotify does, I don't think: labels already too scared of their power to agree to that. Rentals could work, though.

(that was to JM)

rentals and streaming are basically the same thing tho, assuming streaming isn't free.

Spotify is all-you-can-eat buffet, rentals are a la carte.

whenever they do their streaming thing, i bet its gonna be a deal where you pay for an album or song once and then always have the ability to listen to it no matter what computer or device youre on

actually renting a song or an album is insane

and they know that

Involvement of Apple in this ensures it will be overpriced and the DRM will be horrible. And it'll only work with iPhones and iPods, natch.

Yeah, music you "own" should be available wherever you are. The rest depends on the pricing. Spotify doesn't pay the labels enough for them to want to do it a) in the US b) at iTunes scale.

Apple has history of fucking iTunes up because it insists on it being about owning music. First version of Ping is best example: you couldn't even talk about music unless you'd bought it from iTunes. Who thought that was a good idea?

You mean other than the fact that the iTunes store is pretty much DRM-free for audio stuff, now?

that was a x-post

yeah, wtf does "the DRM will be horrible" mean?

was about to make the same point

also, pretty much anything i say about twitter is likely to be a joke

i mean i hate apple, but you know they haven't sold music with DRM for a good couple of years, right? and music you buy on itunes works on any music player.

http://i56.tinypic.com/2lieb74.jpg

nitseh otm

oops, its nitesh my bad

I like how he's only pretty sure, not really definite there.

Pretty sure any streaming music operation they come up will require some form of DRM.

I think technically, streaming IS DRM. As in, it's not downloading.

yeah DRM is redundant, especially if the app is on iPhone/iPad, which are already locked down

I think technically, with spotify at least, streaming is downloading

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/08/31/spotify_crypto/

but downloading in a protected format, no?

typical of apple to not let you keep streamed music : (

who lets you keep streamed music? It's always been this way...streamed music is treated like radio, and paid for the same way? Spotify pays labels, whereas streaming radio and similar services (Viva Radio, ie.) deal with publishing.

limewire and soulseek let you keep streamed music. h8 u steve job$$

I believe caek was kidding, but anyway, the "keeping streaming music thing" is a silly discussion. The whole point is that you don't have to keep it. If you own the music and want to have a copy on the device, you just sync.

If you're a dirty thief and want to keep streamed music you don't own, you'd have to jailbreak your iOS device and install some sneaky software to rip it. I doubt Apple would bother to take any DRM effort beyond that.

"today we're launching an app called store. this takes in mp3s, tv shows, apps etc. all of this shitty funcionality is being divested from itunes and with itunes 11 the application now only plays and manages music. merry christmas"