Ableton Forum

shadx312 wrote:There's a little more info at the end of the last keynote. Iirc, he mentioned "scanning" so I don't know if that means you can just scan the UPC with the device or have to put a cd in. Imagine how many people will be sharing cd's again. Seriously, how are they ever going to know which cd's aren't yours? I think it's 24.99 a month for up to 20,000 songs...

A couple years ago I got paid about a couple grand to convert this guys cd collection to itunes; by ripping each cd individually and then tagging each one with the Discography plug-in for foobar (cddb sucks). Ugh, and there were tons of Grateful Dead and Phish bootlegs I had to manually tag Easy, but tedious. Oh how this would've been nice...if he didn't know about it

Edit: N/M, my memory fails at the streaming vs downloading part.

Match scans your iTunes library. If the track is available in the iTunes store you’ll be able to download (or stream I hope) regardless of if you bought it from iTunes or not. If the track isn’t available in the iTunes store then it will upload the track to your storage in the cloud from which you can download (or stream I hope). If it exists on iTunes it doesn't count against your cloud storage.

Another bonus is you might have tracks in your library that are low quality but if they exist in the iTunes store you can download the 256-kbps AAC versions.

It’s a real no brainer for $25 a year.

So, people who have a ton of illegally downloaded music can have legal versions for $25 a year....
Seeing how Apple is doing monumentally awesome things....just maybe it isn't too good to be true, but I'm guessing there's a few caveats for having it like that.

Perhaps there's wealthy information for them to obtain?, like if they read the tags from the library, one of those tags may have the address of the site the album was downloaded from, so they would be able to shut down a ton of music blogs, or redirect links to itunes:p (nah, can't see them doing that). If that happened, hopefully they would leave posts alone to albums Itunes doesn't have...hypothetically.

shadx312 wrote:So, people who have a ton of illegally downloaded music can have legal versions for $25 a year....
Seeing how Apple is doing monumentally awesome things....just maybe it isn't too good to be true, but I'm guessing there's a few caveats for having it like that.

Perhaps there's wealthy information for them to obtain?, like if they read the tags from the library, one of those tags may have the address of the site the album was downloaded from, so they would be able to shut down a ton of music blogs, or redirect links to itunes:p (nah, can't see them doing that). If that happened, hopefully they would leave posts alone to albums Itunes doesn't have...hypothetically.

What method they will use remains to be seen but I'm sure there will be all kinds of reporting on it along with loop holes being exploited and fixed along the way.

I think whatever happens it will be a good thing. It may stir up some controversy but turn out to not really be a big deal, except it ending up to be really awesome either way.

Here's a little about the current state of Match.

http://appadvice.com/appnn/2011/08/itun ... ed-to-know

I just thought of something scary. It says after you sync your iTunes library to the cloud you then sycn your idevices and it deletes all the tracks on your idevice and than downloads them again (why? wtf?) POTENTIALLY SCARY PART: Will it autmatically replace your mp3s (or whatever) with the AAC versions?!? That would be fucked for those of us who use music software that doesn't read AAC files, which is any program other than iTunes.

H2Only needs to chime in on this possibility.

^ i'll let Appletunes speak for itself on this one

H20nly wrote:^ i'll let Appletunes speak for itself on this one

This from the man who inspired LSZ’s signature. Twice. ?!?

I read another report that says it automatically replaces a track with the AAC version if the version you have is inferior quality. Not good. At the very least I hope this is an option you can disable in the preferences.

That’s a level of Apple arrogance even I won’t celebrate. “Here’s a better quality file. You’re welcome. But you can only play it in iTunes and on idevices. Again, you’re welcome.”

But I wonder what the issue is with these files not playing in other apps like Live and Traktor. Is it that third party developers don’t want to bother? Will Apple not let them? Will Apple let them but charge them a licensing fee?

just because I already too many times in this post.

WOZ WOULD CONSIDER RETURNING TO APPLE!

http://macdailynews.com/2011/08/30/woz- ... e-at-apple

beats me wrote:Another bonus is you might have tracks in your library that are low quality but if they exist in the iTunes store you can download the 256-kbps AAC versions.

It’s a real no brainer for $25 a year.

Giving Apple $25 a year is a no-brainer? For what, to give strangers complete control of your music library?

Maybe this appeals more to people who walk around all day going from computer to computer, listening to an iPad in the backseat of a car, and wondering around aimlessly with various Apple gadgets stuffed in their ears.

For me, my music collection is a very personal thing, and I find it relatively easy to listen to music when I want to. Storage is really cheap. Big hard drives are dirt cheap these days.

It appears that Apple has been keeping the larger flash drives out of their iPhones to intentionally make you think you need to pay for iCloud.

I mean, I get the cloud thing, and I'm really glad I'm getting 5GB of free storage from Apple. I'm sure I'll use it, and appreciate it. But $25 a year? That's a no go. That's one of the reasons Ableton wised up and canceled Share. You're asking people to spend a bunch of money for something they can do for free with slightly more effort. Free always wins.

FUCK STREAMING.

you guys are gonna love this...

i heard on NPR this morning that HP reduced it price to sell the remaining slate inventory... to 99 bucks. consumers apparently thought this was a good price (even though that means no support ) so they flew off the shelves. now, HP is going to make more to accomadate the demand... BUT they supposedly cost 300 to make so the big quesion is... how much will they sell them for??

consider it a mercy killing

LoopStationZebra wrote:consider it a mercy killing

did you ever get your hands on a HP tablet (i don't recall at this point)??