geoffrey rush young
gugy
Sep 26, 12:23 PM
Well, it looks like I wont be getting this phone now. Sorry, I'm Verizon and so are all the people I talk to, so I'm not gonna switch for this.
Yeah, I am in the same boat.
For me Cingular is the worst because I can't get it to work at my home and work. I have Verizon, is OK. but at least work. The truth is every carrier has a problem. I am still waiting to find somebody that says their carrier is 100% great and they are satisfied.
I hope iphone will work on other carriers. If not I'll wait until it comes with Verizon or any other carrier other than Cingular.
What good is to have an amazing phone if you can talk or get coverage?
Yeah, I am in the same boat.
For me Cingular is the worst because I can't get it to work at my home and work. I have Verizon, is OK. but at least work. The truth is every carrier has a problem. I am still waiting to find somebody that says their carrier is 100% great and they are satisfied.
I hope iphone will work on other carriers. If not I'll wait until it comes with Verizon or any other carrier other than Cingular.
What good is to have an amazing phone if you can talk or get coverage?
mambodancer
Aug 24, 10:44 AM
Sorry folks, but you act as if the Patent office was some kind of arbiter for what makes sense. It's not. The US patent office has granted patents for all kinds of nonsense: perpetual motion machines, exercise equipment of dubious value, healthcare devices that certainly don't work and...the peanut butter and jelly sandwich and toast (patent #6,080,436)!
The PB&J patent was finally rejected. Here's a link to the story.
http://patentlaw.typepad.com/patent/2005/04/children_rejoic.html
Bottom line is that patents are in no way any indication of a first, new, original, worthwhile, creative idea at all. It is simply a method of establishing some kind of legal protection and as such is probably outdated as a tool or should be.
The PB&J patent was finally rejected. Here's a link to the story.
http://patentlaw.typepad.com/patent/2005/04/children_rejoic.html
Bottom line is that patents are in no way any indication of a first, new, original, worthwhile, creative idea at all. It is simply a method of establishing some kind of legal protection and as such is probably outdated as a tool or should be.
BRLawyer
Mar 29, 11:59 AM
Don't believe it!
It's easy to believe it...when they say Windows Phone is a "differentiated" platform, they simply mean "inferior"...move along, citizens :rolleyes:
It's easy to believe it...when they say Windows Phone is a "differentiated" platform, they simply mean "inferior"...move along, citizens :rolleyes:
Eidorian
Jul 14, 12:36 PM
I believe only Rev. As and Rev. Bs are blast furnaces, Rev. C iMac G5 was supposedly much quieter thanks to the bulged case.Yeah, I had a friend who got a Rev. C iMac G5 20". It was whisper quiet compared to my 17" Rev. B. I don't have any experience with the Rev. C 17" mode though.
The Rev. C design really changed things around inside. They moved the CPU and power supply toward the top of the case instead of the bottom as in preview models. They might just be able to get a Conroe in there.
I know the image you're talking about. Meroms on the inside, Conroes on the outside ring, Celerons furthest out.Yeah, that's the one.
If you notice. Nowhere on the Apple store does it say "Yonah". It says Core Duo.
So all Apple has to do is say Core 2 Duo. There will be no "Merom" or "Conroe" differentation. Yeah, they average consumer won't notice but BlizzardBomb has the answer.
What's missing to me is the uniform marketing scheme to help sell potential customers. Intel has Centrino Duo currently, presumably Centrino 2 Duo (terrible name, in my opinion) for Merom, Core 2 Duo/Extreme (equally terrible) for Conroe, but I haven't heard anything for Woodcrest. Xeon Duo? Xeon Core 2? I have no idea.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Xeon#Dual-Core_Xeon_.2865_nm_Intel_Core_Microarchitecture.29
Looks like a number game.
The Rev. C design really changed things around inside. They moved the CPU and power supply toward the top of the case instead of the bottom as in preview models. They might just be able to get a Conroe in there.
I know the image you're talking about. Meroms on the inside, Conroes on the outside ring, Celerons furthest out.Yeah, that's the one.
If you notice. Nowhere on the Apple store does it say "Yonah". It says Core Duo.
So all Apple has to do is say Core 2 Duo. There will be no "Merom" or "Conroe" differentation. Yeah, they average consumer won't notice but BlizzardBomb has the answer.
What's missing to me is the uniform marketing scheme to help sell potential customers. Intel has Centrino Duo currently, presumably Centrino 2 Duo (terrible name, in my opinion) for Merom, Core 2 Duo/Extreme (equally terrible) for Conroe, but I haven't heard anything for Woodcrest. Xeon Duo? Xeon Core 2? I have no idea.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Xeon#Dual-Core_Xeon_.2865_nm_Intel_Core_Microarchitecture.29
Looks like a number game.
cube
Mar 30, 01:21 PM
Apple popularized the term "App" instead of "Application" (ugh!).
How come they don't have a trademark on the word "App"? (That would solve the problem.)
How come they don't have a trademark on the word "App"? (That would solve the problem.)
cube
Apr 23, 01:47 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8H7 Safari/6533.18.5)
Aren't intel in the process on implementing Open CL?
Geoffrey Rush in Shine
Geoffrey Rush to voice
Geoffrey Rush in #39;The King#39;s
Geoffrey Rush Lionel Logue
Geoffrey Rush in The King#39;s
Geoffrey Rush
Geoffrey Rush
Geoffrey Rush Santa Barbara
Efron quot;Geoffrey Rush seems
EXIT THE KING star Geoffrey Rush will star next year in a revival of Gogol#39;s DIARY OF A MADMAN at Sydney#39;s Belvoir St. Theater. Produced by Company B,
Geoffrey Rush
Geoffrey Rush#39;s Antic
Aren't intel in the process on implementing Open CL?
vouder17
Sep 15, 05:31 PM
I don't really see this happening, if apple is going to take the risk of entering this competitive market, I see them doing it with a very innovative 'new' product.
Steve121178
Apr 15, 07:07 AM
There is absolutely no advantage whatsoever in having USB survive past 2.0 at this point. With 3.0 barely entering the market, there is no value in letting it get a foothold. It is pathetically obsolete compared to TB.
What is with the comments about wanting USB 3.0 on Macs? What a huge waste of time and money - you should be wanting TB on more peripherals. Even if Intel is going to be dumb enough to keep USB 3.0 around, hopefully Apple will hold the line and refuse to put it in Macs. With Apple's resurgent strength in the computer market while everyone else is tanking, that would be enough incentive to get the peripheral makers to adopt TB.
What are you talking about? Practically all SB motherboards for PC's support USB 3.0. I'm enjoying USB 3.0 speeds on my new PC, plus the ports are backwards compatible with USB 2.0.
Don't get me wrong, I can see what TB offers & I like what I see, but USB 3.0 is here to stay. Intel's support just emphasises how important a standard USB 3.0 is.
What is with the comments about wanting USB 3.0 on Macs? What a huge waste of time and money - you should be wanting TB on more peripherals. Even if Intel is going to be dumb enough to keep USB 3.0 around, hopefully Apple will hold the line and refuse to put it in Macs. With Apple's resurgent strength in the computer market while everyone else is tanking, that would be enough incentive to get the peripheral makers to adopt TB.
What are you talking about? Practically all SB motherboards for PC's support USB 3.0. I'm enjoying USB 3.0 speeds on my new PC, plus the ports are backwards compatible with USB 2.0.
Don't get me wrong, I can see what TB offers & I like what I see, but USB 3.0 is here to stay. Intel's support just emphasises how important a standard USB 3.0 is.
vitaboy
Aug 24, 04:37 AM
You have to wonder how tenuous Apple's position was considering that they have settled so early (in huge lawsuit time). 100 million dollars is a lot of money to spend to get Creative off their back.
Hardly any at all. Apple has $10 billion in cash in the bank.
Even at a measily 3% interest, Apple will make $300 million in interest alone, not accounting for the fact that they are adding about $3 billion to their cash horde per year.
To look at it another way, iPod will generate tens of billions of dollars in revenue going forward for Apple. For Creative to settle for a measily $100 million out of tens of billions means they were desperate/forced to settle. Considering Creative all but accused Apple of stealing their design to make the iPod, settling for pennies on the dollar is not a sign that Creative was bargaining from a position of strength.
Rather, it was Apple probably dictating the terms.
Look at it another way. RIM - the makers of Blackberry - settled with NTP for $450 million after spending tens of millions of dollars and years fighting NTP in court. NTP, like Creative, claimed RIM infringed on important patents in making the popular Blackberry device.
During fiscal RIM made $2 billion total revenue. That's about as much iPod makes each quarter.
In other words, NTP was able to extract 4.5 times the licensing fee for a product that generates just 1/4 of the iPod's revenue.
I don't think it was Creative who won here. Creative, most likely, was desperate to settle so it could move onto other, more important battles, like figuring how it can survive the Zune onslaught (which is why becoming a paying member of the "Made for iPod" club is suddenly significant).
Hardly any at all. Apple has $10 billion in cash in the bank.
Even at a measily 3% interest, Apple will make $300 million in interest alone, not accounting for the fact that they are adding about $3 billion to their cash horde per year.
To look at it another way, iPod will generate tens of billions of dollars in revenue going forward for Apple. For Creative to settle for a measily $100 million out of tens of billions means they were desperate/forced to settle. Considering Creative all but accused Apple of stealing their design to make the iPod, settling for pennies on the dollar is not a sign that Creative was bargaining from a position of strength.
Rather, it was Apple probably dictating the terms.
Look at it another way. RIM - the makers of Blackberry - settled with NTP for $450 million after spending tens of millions of dollars and years fighting NTP in court. NTP, like Creative, claimed RIM infringed on important patents in making the popular Blackberry device.
During fiscal RIM made $2 billion total revenue. That's about as much iPod makes each quarter.
In other words, NTP was able to extract 4.5 times the licensing fee for a product that generates just 1/4 of the iPod's revenue.
I don't think it was Creative who won here. Creative, most likely, was desperate to settle so it could move onto other, more important battles, like figuring how it can survive the Zune onslaught (which is why becoming a paying member of the "Made for iPod" club is suddenly significant).
braddouglass
Apr 19, 12:57 PM
Yep, he's the only iPhone user in the world who wants a better notication system, and a built in radio so he doesnt have to stream it over the internet. :rolleyes:
+1 on the notifications
Who would want to have a s*itty radio tuner on their iphone? that's why I download music So I can listen to the music I want at good quality. with no commercials? And you can multi task any ways so what the big deal of streaming music? at least streaming is the genre you like haha
+1 on the notifications
Who would want to have a s*itty radio tuner on their iphone? that's why I download music So I can listen to the music I want at good quality. with no commercials? And you can multi task any ways so what the big deal of streaming music? at least streaming is the genre you like haha
anim8or
Aug 28, 01:15 PM
It makes more sense for Apple to wait for tomorrow, anyway. This way, they can avoid being drowned out by the other manufacturer's announcements and simultaneously steel their fanfare. They'll probably do something like "New, with Merom, and more..." and add on another fancy feature or two to each thing to outdo the other laptop guys.
Though, I still think they're coming on the 18th of sept.
Every time i read a post like this i cringe a little!
There are so many rumors about a new ipod coming in the next few weeks/months/etc, most likely announced at Paris (maybe).
Therefor if apple were to release a new ipod they would want to try and get rid of some older models! Thus i conclude that even if the new MBPs are announced or even shipping tomorrow then more people would buy one with the ipod offer... ...getting rid of sed older models!
So why would they wait til after the promotion?
Apple dont needhelp shifting notebooks but if they announce a new ipod you would bet that not many people would want the original ipod video over a new improved one!?
Though, I still think they're coming on the 18th of sept.
Every time i read a post like this i cringe a little!
There are so many rumors about a new ipod coming in the next few weeks/months/etc, most likely announced at Paris (maybe).
Therefor if apple were to release a new ipod they would want to try and get rid of some older models! Thus i conclude that even if the new MBPs are announced or even shipping tomorrow then more people would buy one with the ipod offer... ...getting rid of sed older models!
So why would they wait til after the promotion?
Apple dont needhelp shifting notebooks but if they announce a new ipod you would bet that not many people would want the original ipod video over a new improved one!?
Warbrain
Apr 20, 10:20 AM
Is this true?
I though that an in car GPS just receives the signals from the satellites and works out your position. How can that be tracked? :confused:
Has to have some back and forth that could be tracked.
I though that an in car GPS just receives the signals from the satellites and works out your position. How can that be tracked? :confused:
Has to have some back and forth that could be tracked.
Number 41
Mar 23, 05:11 PM
Hopefully DWI checkpoints yield such low benefits from these apps that they become extinct although I doubt it. Hassling thousands of honest, sober citizens to catch the 1-2% legally intoxicated drivers isn't worth the price we all pay. I question our freedom in America each time I drive up to a checkpoint. If you're wondering, no I've never received a DWI nor driven intoxicated and I still hate these checkpoints. They don't make me feel safer on the road.
Lobbying money from MADD and SADD pretty much ensures that random OVI checkpoints will never go away.
There's no political capital in being perceived as "not tough enough" on drunk drivers.
Lobbying money from MADD and SADD pretty much ensures that random OVI checkpoints will never go away.
There's no political capital in being perceived as "not tough enough" on drunk drivers.
MacCheetah3
Apr 11, 02:21 PM
Hi
Not completely on topic but...
Is it possible to stream audio and video from a mac to the iPad? If so, is the feature included or does it require an app?
Refer to my post just before yours. Both solutions will work for streaming videos to your iDevice from iTunes. My previous post had a link to the iTunes instructions for Home Sharing, but here are the iOS instructions (http://support.apple.com/kb/ht4557).
It isn't 100% free, but not too pricey. Air Video (iOS app) (http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/air-video-watch-your-videos/id306550020?mt=8) will allow you to watch movies, in nearly any format, that are stored anywhere on your computer -- not just iTunes. Air Video Host software for Mac OS X and Windows (http://www.inmethod.com/air-video/download.html)
Not completely on topic but...
Is it possible to stream audio and video from a mac to the iPad? If so, is the feature included or does it require an app?
Refer to my post just before yours. Both solutions will work for streaming videos to your iDevice from iTunes. My previous post had a link to the iTunes instructions for Home Sharing, but here are the iOS instructions (http://support.apple.com/kb/ht4557).
It isn't 100% free, but not too pricey. Air Video (iOS app) (http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/air-video-watch-your-videos/id306550020?mt=8) will allow you to watch movies, in nearly any format, that are stored anywhere on your computer -- not just iTunes. Air Video Host software for Mac OS X and Windows (http://www.inmethod.com/air-video/download.html)
Full of Win
Mar 22, 08:26 PM
Still rockin' the 2008 24" Core2 Duo 3.06 Ghz iMac. Best Mac I've ever owned. Next Mac will be whatever the largest screen they make and fastest chip they have whenever this one dies. 100% sold on the iMac.
I'm still rockin on a 20 inch late 06 iMac. It's been relegated to email checker and emergency C4D node...the thing will not die.
I'm still rockin on a 20 inch late 06 iMac. It's been relegated to email checker and emergency C4D node...the thing will not die.
sinsin07
Mar 23, 05:08 PM
Drunk driver checkpoints are the biggest law enforcement scam being perpetrated on the public at large. These checkpoints do no better than roving patrols but cops do them because they can hassle the public without probable cause and bust them for other minor infractions. They also more likely to have them in poor neighborhoods where people may be late paying their insurance or vehicle fees. They make big money from impounding poor people's cars.
They pad the bottom line of the Law Enforcement Industrial Complex and so that's why they have them. It has NOTHING to do with justice.
LOL You sound bitter. How many times have you been busted?
They pad the bottom line of the Law Enforcement Industrial Complex and so that's why they have them. It has NOTHING to do with justice.
LOL You sound bitter. How many times have you been busted?
prady16
Sep 15, 10:01 PM
I was just watching the Bill Gates interview on 'The Big Idea with Donny Deutsch' on CNBC and when asked by Donny "What do you carry in your wallet and whats on your ipod?", he replied:
"I don't carry an ipod. I think carrying music on my mobile phone is much better. Some people might be doing that in the future." (chuckles)
Indicating the iPhone or the rumored mobile phone capabilities in Zune?
"I don't carry an ipod. I think carrying music on my mobile phone is much better. Some people might be doing that in the future." (chuckles)
Indicating the iPhone or the rumored mobile phone capabilities in Zune?
MagnusVonMagnum
Apr 13, 07:05 PM
MagnusVonMagnum -
Unless you've purchased / converted music in Apple lossless format it IS way better quality.
95% of my music is from my massive CD collection and it has been ripped to Apple Lossless. Does Sonos sell lossless music? If not, WTF are you talking about? You're then comparing apples to oranges. You can just as easily make an Apple lossless library on iTunes as a Flac one for Sonos or XBMC or whatever the heck you prefer to use. One review of Sonos I read says it does not support WMA Lossless (which IS sold online via Music Giants) so that is moot as well.
As for the whole "AAC versus Lossless (of any kind)" thing, I will not even bother arguing about the sonic transparency of 256kbit VBR AAC (Lets just say I've never heard about anyone proving they could tell the difference in a double blind test. I'm well aware of "audiophile" tendencies as I used to be one until I realized 80% of it is snake-oil BS. I now buy what actually makes a difference (high quality speakers and room treatments) and I've never had anyone complain about either of my two systems). I did my own extensive testing between my lossless rips and 256 AAC and I could never tell the difference. For convenience sake, my own lossless library is archive only now. iTunes lets me handle mobile/home in a seamless manner by using only one library for both (something that would be useless with Sonos as it is clearly only home use. You can't play most lossless formats in the car whereas my old JVC and my new factory Subaru WRX player's USB ports handle AAC (as well as MP3 and WMA) just fine. There's nothing quite like taking up to 64GB of music on a USB stick with you on the road. It's like having a 1000 disc CD changer in the car.
Colin Firth (and Geoffrey Rush
Unless you've purchased / converted music in Apple lossless format it IS way better quality.
95% of my music is from my massive CD collection and it has been ripped to Apple Lossless. Does Sonos sell lossless music? If not, WTF are you talking about? You're then comparing apples to oranges. You can just as easily make an Apple lossless library on iTunes as a Flac one for Sonos or XBMC or whatever the heck you prefer to use. One review of Sonos I read says it does not support WMA Lossless (which IS sold online via Music Giants) so that is moot as well.
As for the whole "AAC versus Lossless (of any kind)" thing, I will not even bother arguing about the sonic transparency of 256kbit VBR AAC (Lets just say I've never heard about anyone proving they could tell the difference in a double blind test. I'm well aware of "audiophile" tendencies as I used to be one until I realized 80% of it is snake-oil BS. I now buy what actually makes a difference (high quality speakers and room treatments) and I've never had anyone complain about either of my two systems). I did my own extensive testing between my lossless rips and 256 AAC and I could never tell the difference. For convenience sake, my own lossless library is archive only now. iTunes lets me handle mobile/home in a seamless manner by using only one library for both (something that would be useless with Sonos as it is clearly only home use. You can't play most lossless formats in the car whereas my old JVC and my new factory Subaru WRX player's USB ports handle AAC (as well as MP3 and WMA) just fine. There's nothing quite like taking up to 64GB of music on a USB stick with you on the road. It's like having a 1000 disc CD changer in the car.
theelysium
May 3, 01:11 PM
So which options are worth it with these new models?
shecky
Sep 14, 10:20 AM
I already did that (explain myself) and you said I was ignorant for doing so - didn't leave me many options, really. :)
mmmmmmmmmmm i just went thru the whole thread and you most certainly have not explained any of your statements, other than saying aperture needed new towers to run properly.
and i want to be clear that i am not neccesarily disagreeing with you, i just want to know why you seem so decisive in your statements with no explantion to them. if you are so sure, i want to know why so i can either agree with you and stop waiting for this ^%$$%#$@#!ing MBP that never seems to get here, or i can disagree and wait until the 24th.
if you are not willing to explain yourself then you are just trolling
mmmmmmmmmmm i just went thru the whole thread and you most certainly have not explained any of your statements, other than saying aperture needed new towers to run properly.
and i want to be clear that i am not neccesarily disagreeing with you, i just want to know why you seem so decisive in your statements with no explantion to them. if you are so sure, i want to know why so i can either agree with you and stop waiting for this ^%$$%#$@#!ing MBP that never seems to get here, or i can disagree and wait until the 24th.
if you are not willing to explain yourself then you are just trolling
MrSmith
Apr 22, 02:51 AM
I have no idea how this would be useful. Buffer times, connection loss, no WiFi around, these are all problems that will prevent this from working.
What's wrong with storing music on hard drives locally?
They'll be able to remove the Flash drive from iPhones and use the extra space for wizardry.
What's wrong with storing music on hard drives locally?
They'll be able to remove the Flash drive from iPhones and use the extra space for wizardry.
manu chao
Sep 10, 05:25 PM
I have to conclude that people who want to use their 10 year old CRT are just incredibly cheap and don't value their screens as much as being able to claim how fast their CPU is.
Maybe, with the current pace at which CPUs are improving, I would want to upgrade my CPU every 18 months but my screen only every 36 months?
Maybe, with the current pace at which CPUs are improving, I would want to upgrade my CPU every 18 months but my screen only every 36 months?
adnoh
Mar 22, 02:15 PM
a quiet spec bump with no external changes sans thunderpants would not surprise me.
MacRumors
Apr 22, 01:33 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/22/more-details-on-apples-cloud-based-music-locker/)
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2010/07/02/114402-itunes_devices.jpg
Apple seems (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/21/apples-cloud-based-music-service-ready-to-go/) to be getting ready to launch their cloud-based digital music "locker" service that has been rumored for many months. But contrary to an earlier Reuters report, All Things D (http://mediamemo.allthingsd.com/20110421/one-difference-between-apples-music-locker-and-amazons-label-deals/) has heard that Apple has already come to terms with two of the four major record labels about the service, and that Apple's Eddy Cue will be in New York tomorrow to try to finalize the remaining deals.
The negotiating of these deals is in contrast to Amazon's music storage service (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/03/29/amazon-launches-cloud-based-storage-service-and-music-player/) which notably launched last month without any deals in place -- a fact that the record labels were not very happy about (http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/03/29/us-amazon-idUSTRE72S13H20110329). Apple is said to have been "very aggressive and thoughtful about it" and "It feels like they want to go pretty soon", according to an unnamed music executive. All Things D also provides some details about how the service might work from Apple:The industry executives I've talked to haven't seen Apple’s service themselves, but say they're aware of the broad strokes. The idea is that Apple will let users store songs they’ve purchased from its iTunes store, as well as others songs stored on their hard drives, and listen to them on multiple devices.All Things D points out that having official licenses can allow Apple to store a single master copy of a song rather than storing individual copies for every user. Amazon's original argument against needing the licenses was that their service was the same as any upload storage service. This meant that users needed to upload copies of their old music to be able to stream them. With the proper deals, Apple could avoid the need to upload individual copies and simply allow users to stream off of the single master copy. This could save on significant upload time for the user and storage requirements for Apple.
Article Link: More Details on Apple's Cloud-based Music Locker (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/22/more-details-on-apples-cloud-based-music-locker/)
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2010/07/02/114402-itunes_devices.jpg
Apple seems (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/21/apples-cloud-based-music-service-ready-to-go/) to be getting ready to launch their cloud-based digital music "locker" service that has been rumored for many months. But contrary to an earlier Reuters report, All Things D (http://mediamemo.allthingsd.com/20110421/one-difference-between-apples-music-locker-and-amazons-label-deals/) has heard that Apple has already come to terms with two of the four major record labels about the service, and that Apple's Eddy Cue will be in New York tomorrow to try to finalize the remaining deals.
The negotiating of these deals is in contrast to Amazon's music storage service (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/03/29/amazon-launches-cloud-based-storage-service-and-music-player/) which notably launched last month without any deals in place -- a fact that the record labels were not very happy about (http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/03/29/us-amazon-idUSTRE72S13H20110329). Apple is said to have been "very aggressive and thoughtful about it" and "It feels like they want to go pretty soon", according to an unnamed music executive. All Things D also provides some details about how the service might work from Apple:The industry executives I've talked to haven't seen Apple’s service themselves, but say they're aware of the broad strokes. The idea is that Apple will let users store songs they’ve purchased from its iTunes store, as well as others songs stored on their hard drives, and listen to them on multiple devices.All Things D points out that having official licenses can allow Apple to store a single master copy of a song rather than storing individual copies for every user. Amazon's original argument against needing the licenses was that their service was the same as any upload storage service. This meant that users needed to upload copies of their old music to be able to stream them. With the proper deals, Apple could avoid the need to upload individual copies and simply allow users to stream off of the single master copy. This could save on significant upload time for the user and storage requirements for Apple.
Article Link: More Details on Apple's Cloud-based Music Locker (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/22/more-details-on-apples-cloud-based-music-locker/)
