Amazon Announces Cloud Player and Cloud Drive

[mr ploppy]

Originally Posted by tubemonkey

I'll stick with my MP3 player and mSD cards.

I'll stick with my vinyl.

[pilotbob]

Originally Posted by kjk

Love Dropbox. I actually have iDisk, SugarSync, and Box.net, but Dropbox is just the easiest, most convenient system for me, by far.

Dropbox is a fantastic way to make files available locally on more than one PC. But, for storage of large files and backups it is quite expensive. Dropbox is basically where I keep the stuff I would keep in "My Documents" so I have it on all my PCs (and Mac's which is a PC).

Of course the irony is that Dropbox uses Amazon S3 storage in the background and it one of their biggest customers. If you notice the price of space for Amazon Cloud Drive is 50% of dropbox's prices. The Cloud Drive storage price is about 33% less than even S3 storage prices, assuming you are using the full capacity of what you are paying for on your Cloud Drive since you only pay for what you store on S3. Also, S3 has transfer costs while Cloud Drive doesn't.

The best storage/cost ratio I have found is with CrashPlan+... unlimited storage for up to 10 computers on their family plan for about $6 a month (if you pay for 4years up front).

BOb

[tubemonkey]

Originally Posted by mr ploppy

I'll stick with my vinyl.

...then I'll have to go with my wax cylinders.

[Joonbug1]

Can anyone give a simple explanation of what this "Cloud" business is? Thanks in advance.

[HarryT]

It simply means storing files on an Internet site rather than your own local storage.

[Joonbug1]

Thank you, Harry. I don't see how this could be a big selling point for Amazon, since people can find ways to do this type of service on their own -- if they even wanted to in the first place.

[kjk]

Originally Posted by Joonbug1

Thank you, Harry. I don't see how this could be a big selling point for Amazon, since people can find ways to do this type of service on their own -- if they even wanted to in the first place.

For now maybe. I think Amazon has much bigger plans than just MP3s though. I think they intend to put all their music, books, TV shows, and movies in the cloud, for their Amazon customers to have access to at any time, any where.

I think while people *can* find ways to do this type of service on their own, that Amazon has the opportunity to make sure their service is the most convenient, cheapest, and reliable way to do it.

[Graham]

Originally Posted by Joonbug1

Thank you, Harry. I don't see how this could be a big selling point for Amazon, since people can find ways to do this type of service on their own -- if they even wanted to in the first place.

Because of the lock-in effect. They make it easy to use; your Amazon purchases get stored there automatically, and you can play all your music from your phone or PC, whatever you're carrying, wherever you've got an internet connection. Without having to configure each device yourself.

So you upload the rest of your music. Now it makes sense to always buy from Amazon so that your new music gets added automatically.

Now, I love new music and so use a subscription service (Napster) rather than make a lot of new purchases, but I can see how this could be very attractive to a lot of people who don't want to fiddle with Dropbox and the like and just want to have their music on their phone as well as their netbook or tablet.

Graham

[pilotbob]

Originally Posted by kjk

For now maybe. I think Amazon has much bigger plans than just MP3s though. I think they intend to put all their music, books, TV shows, and movies in the cloud, for their Amazon customers to have access to at any time, any where.

The funny thing is, I thought they already did this. I had a few videos (tv shows) I had bought (for free) that I always could see. Strange thing is I can't see them now. I can always see all the Kindle ebooks I bought, etc.

Ah.. (now I remember) I know why they are gone... because this is my "new" Amazon account. They couldn't re-open the one the Audible accidentally closed when I didn't want them to close it.

BOb

[RockdaMan]

Originally Posted by Shaggy

Google announced their music service about a year ago, but they're still trying to get the licenses in place. I guess it depends on how you define "first".

I doubt that the record companies are very interested in helping anyone to get the licenses in place.

I think that Amazon is going to push this, legally, all the way to a clear legal precedent, and I'd bet that that is something that is giving the record companies pause.

[RockdaMan]

Note that none of the big labels has actually come out and said, on the record, that Amazon is breaking the law. The complaints, on and off the record, are that Amazon hasn’t asked for permission.

Instead, Amazon has told the labels that it wants to use today’s launch as a starting point for a more advanced service, which would require licenses–and, presumably, a new revenue stream for the labels.

Amazon appears to be betting that the big music companies will end up coming around instead of going to court. If I had to bet, I’d wager that Amazon is right.

http://mediamemo.allthingsd.com/2011...-here-to-stay/

[murraypaul]

Originally Posted by HarryT

If that was indeed the case, then I would be guilty, and in response to the warning letter that I would be sent, I would remove the infringing files from the Cloud service. That is the purpose of the warning, after all.

So if they said you were guilty, you would think that you must be?
If they say the files are infringing, then they must be?
Even if you had bought these files perfectly legally, and you think you have the right to do what you are doing, there mere fact that someone else says that you don't would make you roll over?

In 2001, Paramount, Disney, NCS and CBS sued a PVR manufacturer claiming that allowing users to skip commercials was enabling copyright infringement of their works.
In 2002, the Chairman and CEO of Turner said: "Because of the ad skips.... It's theft. Your contract with the network when you get the show is you're going to watch the spots. Otherwise you couldn't get the show on an ad-supported basis. Any time you skip a commercial or watch the button you're actually stealing the programming."

These are the same people who are going to be calling your ISP saying what actions of yours they think are infringing. Are you happy taking their word for it?

[Shaggy]

Originally Posted by Joonbug1

Can anyone give a simple explanation of what this "Cloud" business is? Thanks in advance.

Basically the latest buzz word craze, after "web 2.0" was the "cool" thing.

It's just "re-inventing" the mainframe/terminal concept that was the norm decades ago, before PCs became popular. Slap a cool name on it though, and all the marketing guys start salivating.

Once people start realizing there were reasons we stopped doing that in the first place, the next popular thing will be this new "personal cloud" concept... called a "PC". Then some company will have the bright idea that instead of selling software as a product, they can make more money selling it as a service, and convince people that central storage is the way to go. Then...

[Shaggy]

Originally Posted by RockdaMan

Amazon appears to be betting that the big music companies will end up coming around instead of going to court. If I had to bet, I’d wager that Amazon is right.

I'd be very careful betting on the music companies using common sense. They've certainly shown few signs of it in the past.

[pilotbob]

Originally Posted by Shaggy

It's just "re-inventing" the mainframe/terminal concept that was the norm decades ago, before PCs became popular. Slap a cool name on it though, and all the marketing guys start salivating.

Yes and no. There are differences between mainframe and cloud. Although, many have clouded (see what I did there) the issue by calling pretty much anything online as "cloud".

BOb