Rss feedTweeter buttonFacebook buttonTechnorati buttonReddit buttonMyspace buttonDelicious buttonLinkedin button
tasty media consumption for you, created by me. satisfaction guaranteed.

iTunes’ cloudy forecast

Posted: August 3rd, 2010 | Author: Laura | Filed under: cloudy, commercial space, cyberspace debris | Tags: , , , , , , | 1 Comment »

It’s been eight months since Apple’s acquisition of Lala, and today CNET reported more disappointing news from the monster tech company: its plans for launching any cloud-based music services in the coming months will not only be “modest in scope,” but will lack key functionality the company had promised to music labels in past meetings. I’ll give you one guess as to what that functionality is — well, actually, I’ll just tell you — users will not be able to store their music on Apple servers. So basically, the service won’t be functional at all.

My question for Apple is simple: WHAT IS THE FREAKING HOLD UP? Apple users are patient people to be sure. Patient and masochistic. I admit I tend to gravitate toward using Apple products over its competitors. This is especially true when it comes to laptops. My seemingly retro MacBook (circa 2007) worked flawlessly for three years, but I was in desperate need of a new hard drive. I got that taken care of a few months back and the laptop works like new.

Then came the iPhone. When I switched from a Sprint Instinct to an iPhone I was undeniably blown away by the functionality. But I mean, come on, you gotta admit that was quite the upgrade. Twelve months later and I have grown quite self conscious to be carrying a piece of hardware that’s so unjustifiably proud of its place in the market. In four words: I have Droid envy. My stupid 3G doesn’t have video capabilities and the camera can’t even zoom or flash. My freakin’ Sprint flip phones could do that. Why must Apple keep functionality from its customers?

I believe that Apple has no excuse for keeping cloud-based music services from the public. Not only did they commit a huge burglary of thousands of users’ music libraries by shutting down Lala, but they are preventing the public from technologies that are current, achievable and that should be standard.

Why is there no hope for an Apple music cloud eight months after the Lala acquisition? And why would Apple take away existing growing technology and then stunt its growth? Because Apple’s interest in selling hardware is too high. Why do you think their iPads, iPods and iPhones come in sizes? To get true value out of their products you have to super size your product, because I mean come on, who wants a phone with only 8 gigs of space when you could have 32? And why would Apple take away its own ability to super size its customers?

I think it’s a super-sized travesty. How dare a company call itself innovative and cutting edge when it keeps innovation away from the market just so profits can run higher? Apple’s loyalty is already faltering, and I wouldn’t be surprised if their hold on the phone market is slowly sabotaged by companies who are willing to keep an open perspective and freedom for developers and customers. Oh, and p.s., Google is developing some musical cloud plans of its own. Good for you, Google. May the cloud be with you.


New York Times + Apple Tablet = Love?

Posted: January 17th, 2010 | Author: Laura | Filed under: cyberspace debris, media politics | Tags: , , , , , | 1 Comment »

Online sources are reporting that on January 27 the New York Times will begin charging its readers for access to online content. This change in accessibility is coming the same day Apple’s much-anticipated tablet (well, it looks like we may be calling it the iSlate) is rumored to launch. New York Magazine reported that NYT Chairman Arthur Sulzberger Jr. may “strike a content partnership for the new device, which could dovetail with the paid strategy.”

The exact details of how the pay wall system haven’t been announced yet. Times spokesperson Diane McNulty said: “We’ll announce a decision when we believe that we have crafted the best possible business approach. No details till then.”

Journalists crafting a business approach? Aye, this could take quite a while. With 10 days to go until the rumored pay wall is raised high, we won’t have to wait long to see what the final approach will entail. Sulzberger needs to have quite a few conversations with Jobs pronto.

The Telegraph reports, “Mr. Sulzberger is believed to favor a metered use policy similar to The Financial Times, which allows readers to access some articles for free before they are forced to subscribe.”

Personally I’m completely comfortable with supporting the dying art of journalism (it feels a bit like supporting your local community theatre). I’m also happy to pay for quality news and reporting. But I do hope the Times gives some sort of mix’n'match deal. No Dowd for me, please.

Also… DO WANT THE TABLET. Holy jeez it looks amazing.