At first blush, the thought of having your entire music collection available through iCloud sounded like an amazingly awesome deal. And for those of us who have amassed large record collections outside of the iTunes marketplace, it felt as though we were being pardoned for sins against the $.99 download – whether we came across our mp3s through ripping, legal filesharing, or piracy.
But it’s important to note that Apple’s new offer does not involve music streaming. True, you can have your music collection synced across devices (up to 10 of them). But you will still have to download the music you want to play on to your iPhone or iPad or iPod Touch or Mac. You won’t be able to access your entire collection and randomly shuffle between all the glorious gigabytes.
Even in today’s world of super-convenience, it never ceases to amaze me how often people are disappointed in technological announcements like iCloud. Now I wouldn’t say Apple’s products are ever perfect (even Jobs poked fun at the failure that was MobileMe) and I’m the first to be cautious about putting all your content on remote servers, but it amuses me Audrey Watters at RWW thinks Apple’s music announcement is disappointing.
Ms. Watters, you have a rough life.
It’s not enough that we have have 500 gigabyte hard drives to store our entire music collections on and it’s definitely not enough to have a measly 16 to 32 gigs of space on our iPhones (Ha! I can only fit 30 albums on my phone, it’s bullshit!).
Now it’s not enough to store your entire collection on iCloud, because shit, I can’t stream my entire collection wherever I am, whenever I want. Gimme, gimme, gimme. Now. Bigger. Everywhere. I’m reminded of Umair Haque’s Opulence Bubble I posted earlier this month.
It’s make me wonder if people who are this easy to disappoint also expect relationships with no fighting, cars that never run out of gas and perfect weather everywhere.