Music Storage Rant

Before I begin this tirade, I would like to point out that the idea of music storage online is an excellent one.  Hard drives inevitably crash and it's nice to have music, or anything you purchased, backed up somewhere so that it can easily be accessed in the event of failure.
At this year's WWDC, Apple announced its iCloud service, its answer to competing services from Google and Amazon.  Now, these services all offer options for files beyond music, but for the scope of this post I would like to confine myself strictly to music.
Apple starts out well by offering automatic cloud backup of any music you bought from the iTunes store, including its DRM protected M4P format.  I'm of two minds about this.  The cynic in me wants to say that Apple has used its own artificial limitation to create a feature that only it can provide.  After all, legally, Amazon and Google cannot break the DRM and therefore cannot play M4P files.  Sure, you can argue that music publishers require a DRM system.  Let's face it though.  The iTunes store is the world's biggest seller of music.  With such a cash cow, the music industry has no choice but to go along if Apple really wants to put the screws to them.  If Steve Jobs forced the issue of MP3s, we would have them.  What are they going to do, not be on iTunes?  It would be a business killer given the market proliferation of iPods.  I'll come back to that.
Apple also announced its $25 a year music match service.  Basically, this will allow iTunes to scan your computer for music not purchased on iTunes.  Sounds like a fair deal seeing as that music could be pirated.  The problem with that is you can also get music legally from CDs or other stores such as Amazon.  So in effect, the music industry, who I have no doubt was behind this idiocy, has in effect legalized piracy for those that have been doing it wrong at the expense of those that have done it right.  I'm all for any provision that puts money in the hands of the artist-they do provide a needed source of entertainment-but not at the expense of the consumer.  It's like double taxation.  Now in this area, Google and Amazon theoretically have you covered as they can handle regular MP3s.  Honestly though, do we really want our music library in two or three different places?
That said, I'll continue to be happy as my download of Tub Thumping by Chumbawamba magically gets beamed to both my iPod and my computer.

Windows 8 a sophisticated iOS?

Windows 8 demo interface

I was quite shocked when I saw the above image.  It represents the newly designed UI for the just announced Windows 8.  Based on the video released, which features the new interface along with the traditional interface for older apps, it seems Microsoft is making a big bet on touch being the technology of the future. 

The thing most surprising to me was how much comparison you could make between this and similar operating systems on Apple's mobile prospects.  The icons, while bigger are similar.  The technology is different, yes.  The icons will change to show whatever website or document you're working on, a cool feature.  The snapping features begun in Windows 7 look great in a touch interface.  However, Microsoft may still have a fight on its hands. 

They are going to have to market this thing like crazy.  Much like Windows has owned the climate among PCs for businesses and most people outside graphic artists and film editors until recently, Apple's devices have a firm hold on the market for touch-based interfaces.  Regardless of how different-and sometimes superior-Windows Phone may be in terms of its features, I don't think anyone would argue the point that it hasn't attained the prime real estate in the minds of consumers that is enjoyed by the iCompany (getting tired of constantly writing Apple).

In addition, I question the point of upgrading to Windows 8 for those dead set on sticking to the traditional Windows interface, as Microsoft has already described this is a straight port of Windows 7.  There will  presumably be no significant performance upgrades because Microsoft has said  Windows 8 will be able to run on any machine currently compatible with 7.

Now it could be that this will lead to a blurring of the lines with the two companies next-generation offerings similar to what has happened in the current generation.  In case you haven't noticed, I would make the argument that Windows 7 and Snow Leopard on the Mac side are not as different interface wise as the companies might like you to believe. 

I guess I'm just thinking out loud.  On another note, I miss my goal of posting daily already.  Life intervenes.  I may do a blitz on the weekends in order to make up for days I miss.  I haven't decided yet.