iTunes’ cloudy forecast

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.

World [wide web] War III: Google v. Facebook

I have concluded that I will witness World War III in my lifetime. Before coming upon this realization, I was always scared to witness the third World War. I was certain none of us would get out alive. But now that I’ve realized it will in fact be almost completely virtual and involve a minimal number of nuclear bombs, I’ve decided to sit back and enjoy the show.

In one corner, we have the veteran champion, Google. From its search engine to its e-mail to its incredible mapping system and documentation of our ENTIRE GLOBE, Google has consistently out-performed itself in the past decade.

Not only that, Google never shows its flaws. Google doesn’t pump the internet full of rumors for months, make a big fancy announcement of a product and then wait a few months to release it. (I’m looking at you, ya goofy iPad-releasing Apple execs!) Instead Google makes a small chink in the internet, and slowly trickles the information down just the way it wants the information trickled, from the utmost elite nerds down to the educated tech-savvys down to, oh, let’s say the tech-savvy people’s parents and friends. For the moment Google doesn’t need lowly AOL or Hotmail users. Not a good target market.

Google not only knows how to market, Google knows how to deliver. Apart from Google Wave, I’ve found most Google services to run flawlessly. The tone behind Google’s minimalist style and cutesy comments keep the company always friendly, always helpful, and always striving to provide the best of the best. For example, after Gmail chat is disconnected it returns by triumphantly announcing, “…And we’re back!” These little details win the hearts of users like myself.

In the other corner, there’s Facebook. Once a hero, the company has turned sinister and has unleashed its “Good guy gone bad” scheme into the world with striking terror. Facebook slowly gained a userbase among American college students, soon broadening the base to include high schoolers. I remember the outcry against such a move, and since that change Facebook’s objectives in staking claim in the social media world have morphed into an unidentifiable, power-hungry beast. The small online community (even in a campus of 60,000) created by my Texas network on Facebook really did work charmingly during my beginning years of college. Facebook helped us plan parties, organize photos of our friends, create groups for our dorm floor, create groups to perpetuate inside jokes and most importantly, post drunken wall notes after a night of bonding over jungle juice. Facebook was a community.

Now with more than 400 million users, Facebook is the internet. It’s the most common topic I overhear being discussed in my workplace. But the networking has changed — it’s almost non-existent. Groups are no longer a friendly spot with a few message threads and wall posts, they’re now formatted like a Fan Page that makes announcement after announcement with no real interaction — just announcements, related comments, and a number of thumbs up given to the post.

Facebook has become a one-stop shop for most of its users. It’s the shop around the corner that has everything — addictive games, information about every human being you deem to be an acquaintance, and even updates about products, businesses and public figures you adore. The problem? It’s cluttered with trash and the interface is buggy and, well, if you’re not careful your religious great auntie might see a post you wrote about women’s reproductive rights. I want all Facebook users to get this because I’m only going to type it once: in two years you won’t even want to speak Facebook’s name. It’s the Myspace of tomorrow and that’s final.

It’s only a matter or time before the anti-tweeters come around. They all came around to Facebook. They’ll come around to Twitter. And they will almost certainly find refuge in Google Buzz. I must admit Facebook’s foray into e-mail is a bit worrisome to me, but I don’t believe it will take off. Facebook can’t get chatting right and after the 12th redesign or so I just don’t care to relearn the navigation.

Facebook has turned into a public announcement fest — some say it has turned into Twitter, but I think that’s false. To me, Twitter is truly a conversation, a network with natural niches and webs built in. Facebook’s not cut out to defeat Google and it never will, because it just can’t deliver. So come on, Google Buzz, knock out Facebook so I can just delete that account already and move on with my life of buzzing and tweeting.