Maybe I’m less visionary on this, but I’ve never thought “Boy, I wish I didn’t need to use my local storage for more music.” Could be I just don’t have a huge music library, but more likely, it’s nice to cloud-store content and not need to keep managing what’s synced or downloaded locally.

Maybe it’ll be nice to stream my library from anywhere, freeing up local storage for apps, but being someone who lives in a data-capped world, usage needs to be watched. I imagine Verizon will join the capped data world soon, but for now, unlimited plans are a nice benefit they offer if more content moves to the cloud.

It’s interesting that Amazon just decided to launch their cloud music system and were confident enough that the music labels wouldn’t destroy them in court, because I imagine they’re pretty bitter. It’s amazing that Google tried to talk to them first, and the labels tried the old nickel and dime licensing thing, so they’re just letting users do it, so labels lost a new distributer in Google. It’s an iTunes vs Amazon world in music. Meanwhile, Apple’s in talks to get labels on board for their cloud music for June.

What’s amazing is that this system is already in place for apps and you don’t see software developers bitching and whining about consumers being able to redownload stuff they already bought. Both Apple and Google devices know what you bought and let you redownload. Only the music industry thinks every outlet is an opportunity to reach in your wallet for the same content. Well, I guess Hollywood does it too. They’re probably paranoid that cloud storage for licensed content could be hacked to share. The genie’s out of the bottle, though, and they’re spending tons on lawyers to keep pushing him back in.

This music will still wind up in iPods/iPhones when CD buyers Import to iTunes. This seems like a weird sort of timing. Are the Beatles (and estates) looking for more money from an iTunes distribution deal than Apple Inc was willing to give? Is it the opposite, and there’s actually a super secret digital exclusivity deal with Apple Inc? It’s not like Amazon’s MP3 store announced that it’s digitally distributing this music tomorrow.

Or maybe the Rock Band deal has a timed exclusivity? I still don’t see how an MP3 competes with a Rock Band download. People already buy music licenses for different devices twice (or for cell phone ring tones, THRICE).

If Apple Inc doesn’t announce Beatles on iTunes tomorrow, it’s a weird bit of timing, and will probably result in whispered conversation wondering why that isn’t happening, and that hasn’t worked out so well for AT&T’s reputation, with them delaying MMS and tethering on iPhone.

http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/09/09/08/despite_date_beatles_not_coming_to_itunes_wednesday_report.html

UPDATE: Just a weird bit of timing, I suppose.