My iTunes library (music alone) is 31GB. Just the jazz is 5GB, and Louis Armstrong and Billie Holiday add up to a gig.
Storing, streaming, and being able to download music from a cloud drive is NOT a new idea, but listening you iFans, you would think that a life-changing event just occurred.
How many times do I have to explain that iCloud is not streaming? Give me a ballpark figure here.
This is the crux of the Apple-bashing, reducing Apple's products to the sum of their parts. The iPod is just an expensive walkman. The iPhone is just a pretty Treo.
iCloud isn't just "downloading from a cloud drive." It's every song I own anywhere I am. Up to about 100GB of them, completely legit. Most of them get a bump in quality without my having to rip dozens if not hundreds of CDs again. For two bucks a month.
And in a year from now, all these “cloud” services will all be doing the same thing in one form or another.
As I said, the “cloud” idea is nothing new. The only “twist” is you can have your entire 100GB (or whatever it is) available to you, which I’m sure is probably nowhere near what the average user has.
Why is it that when Apple comes out with this “revolutionary” stuff, the only people calling it that were already Apple zombies to begin with? Everyone else just sits back and laughs at you guys while saying “Yeah, that’s nice, but I don’t see what all the fuss is about”.
Sounds like a sickness.
So what does iCloud do exactly? What happens if you are somewhere without service, are all of your songs still available to you?
Most of my music is ripped 160 kb AAC because I wanted a lot of songs to fit on my 4 GB iPod Nano. It would be nice to get the quality upgrade. If you think in terms of payoff, $25 a year will take a very long time to eat into the time investment of re-ripping over a thousand CDs.