Apple iCloud ( ICLOUD| iCloud.com ) review

[placebo]

Steve Jobs Apple has acquired the iCloud.com domain and on the upcoming international fair Apple will introduce their new music streaming service. While Apple iTunes is still a place to pay for music song tracks and download them, Apple iCloud will be more like Thumbplay Music or Simfy -- a streaming music service (with subscription) mainly for mobile devices. Similar to Amazon Cloud Drive and Google Music (Music Beta) users can upload their own music files on large servers ("the cloud") from which they can stream the songs to their mobile devices in online (and semi-offline) mode. In principle there is no huge difference between GOOM (Google Music), AMAZON CLOUD PLAYER, APPLE ICLOUD, RAPIDSHARE or MEGAUPLOAD: what you do is, you login to your online account (login/pass) and upload your music files. Then you can clear the hdd space (or space on your memory card) and use it for something else (games, torrents, kelby videos). Finally, when you're on the road and want to listen to your music, you connect to the inet with your mobile device (blackberry, android, iphone), start the little application and it will stream your songs from the online location ("the cloud") where they are physically stored.

So why pay for it?

Good question. Well the point is, both GOOM and ICLOUD aim at offering, eventually, audio contents directly delivered by the content publishers (labels, record companies). Their service will be in the end something like a mixture between AMAZON CLOUD PLAYER (which is just a storage space like RAPIDSHARE) and RHAPSODY (which is a pure music streaming subscription service (with download purchase option); you cannot upload songs!). Then again i am asking, why pay for it? I guess if you are stupid enough, you will pay. Because you want to support Steve Job's new venture and you buy whatever he releases on the market: iphone, iphone 2, iphone 3G, iPhone 4, iphone 5. You will pay for it simply because it is branded with "Apple" logo and it says "Made by Steve Jobs". Okay so, question answered.

Is ICLOUD or GOOM exciting or interesting?

Well not really. So what about out-of-print music albums (OOP's). It is clear that neither ITUNES nor ICLOUD nor RHAPSODY nor EMUSIC nor AMAZON MP3 sell OOP's. So what's the process? You use GOOGLE to find the rare TORRENT. Then it takes 2-3 days to download the torrent (few seeders, few leechers), it is a lossless album (FLAC/APE), or even better: you download the CD image from RAPIDSHARE. Then you try to upload the FLAC to GOOM and/or ICLOUD. If you're lucky, your material is recognized in the music database prior to the upload: someone else had already uploaded the same OOP. But if you're not so lucky, you would have to upload the FLAC (or convert them to MP3 and then upload) to ICLOUD. Finally.. when you're on the road, say on the public bus riding from A to B, you would stream your OOP. And you know what streaming means? It's a type of downloading.. because data packages (packets) are transferred from the internet to your handheld device.

Download, then upload, then again download? Wow, that sounds like much much fun!!



In any case, this SRF thread will be used to investigate the essential streaming features (properties) of the new Apple service, on PC's, Windows machines, from a stream recorder's point of view (That's why you are reading my crap, arent you?). If ICLOUD allows for streaming music (e.g. new Michael Jackson albums published by UMG Universal Music Group) similar to Spotify, Rhapsody or Deezer, this thread will show how their streams can be recorded/captured/pirated and if it's worth the efforts. Although SRF is not interested in reviewing (and showing how to..) each and every existing music service out there --we do respect some quality music services unmentioned on SRF-- we do show how to.. for such stupid services such as ICLOUD and GOOM. Easy targets.

FREE THE MUSICS!

[any ANONYMOUS forum user]

It's perverse, but true. If the last ten years have taught us anything, it's that proper licensing carries serious disadvantages, and oftentimes, invites failure. Doing the right thing just hasn't paid.

It's why Spotify is begging to get into the US, why Pandora still can't cross into the black, and why hundreds of startups have perished trying to satisfy inane label demands. They've either been saddled with ridiculous cost structures, unbearable and uncompetitive usage limitations, or unimaginable negotiation delays. Or, pursued illegal or gray routes, in the hopes of securing licenses later (ie, Grooveshark).

Which is why it's great to see a huge, multi-billion dollar company - Apple - secure label licenses and actually come out on top. Amazon and Google went the middle-finger route, for various reasons, though their products are clearly inferior to the iCloud as a result. Apple waited, they paid the $150 million (or whatever the ransom), they're launching a high-quality file 'Match' with 18 million songs, and they managed NOT to piss major content owners off!

What a concept!

But there are other reasons why Apple won, including patience. Because who really cares whether Amazon beat Google, or who was there first? Yeah, it's a hype-fueled news cycle, it's a blowup on TechCrunch, but it carries no importance outside of the tech-bubble. It means little to the typical music fan, especially in beta phases.

And make no mistake, the race for first came at an enormous cost. By moving forward without licenses - legally justified or not - Google and Amazon essentially issued a giant f-you to major labels and the content community. They reinforced an insidious tendency among technology giants to devalue content, while masking theft in the name of free speech, open platforms, or technological progress. And that unfairly piggybacks off of artists, labels, and anyone else involved in the creative process.

But it's funny how the game is playing out. Can Amazon and Google now go back to the labels, trumped by Apple, and seek licensing? Can they work something out, even though their ultra-aggressive strategy didn't really work? It turns out that interminable upload times matter, we want our music now! And labels suddenly have some newfound power, and even more reason to be difficult - and expensive.

Check out the entire Apple presentation stream here:
http://events.apple.com.edgesuite.ne...iqubf06/event/

[placebo]

Originally Posted by any ANONYMOUS forum user

Check out the entire Apple presentation stream here:
http://events.apple.com.edgesuite.ne...iqubf06/event/

thanks Anonymous
people who dont have QuickTime (like myself) can watch the stream with the following URL:

rtsp://a2047.v1413b.c1413.g.vq.akamaistream.net/5/2047/1413/1_h264_110/1a1a1ae656c632970267e04ebd3196c428970e7ce857b81c4aab1677e445aedc3fae1b4a7bafe013/11piunpaiubsdvadibvas06_1_220.mov
rtsp://a2047.v1412b.c1412.g.vq.akamaistream.net/5/2047/1412/1_h264_350/1a1a1ae555c531960166df4dbc3095c327960d7be756b71b49aa1576e344addb3ead1a497aaedf11/11piunpaiubsdvadibvas06_1_350.mov

pretty boring presentation. and already in wikipedia.

[placebo]

Here some reviews:

• Apple’s Music iCloud Is Nice, Not Revolutionary / June 6, 2011 | Written by Eliot Van Buskirk