iOS 5 Likely Pushed To The Fall After A Cloud Unveiling At WWDC | Hacker News Reader

iOS 5 Likely Pushed To The Fall After A Cloud Unveiling At WWDC

techcrunch.com

Can't do it yet. The bandwidth isn't there.

When the iPad 1 arrived, one of the biggest selling points was the "no contract $30/mo unlimited 3G". Only took about 30 days for AT&T to realize that wasn't going to work out. As one of the few who got and still has that plan, I can assure you the very same reason it's awesome is the reason the "cloud tablet" won't happen (at least to the degree pundits expect) without a major breakthrough in wireless bandwidth: data traffic will be enormous.

I'm sure someone could better run the numbers than I, and I expect it would quantify the intuition. Upshot is: to get thru the cloud computing barrier requires bandwidth not just available, but in use, to an astounding degree. Oh, I'd like a real cloud experience, as my 64GB iPad is getting a bit cramped for want of instant access to my entire music, movie, book, photo, and video collection, along with remote desktops to four computers, high res videophone the norm, and at some point real 3D teleconferencing. All this demands a user experience buttery smooth, which requires significant buffering orders of magnitude more data than anyone will in fact use (it's just there if they want it). Times millions of users, you don't run this over 3G, what passes for 4G, and maybe not even what most assume 5G will be.

Now, Apple is smart folks with lots of connections and clout and cash. Maybe they can do it. They almost had it with the iPad 1 launch, but then the unlimited plan was capped at 2GB - and that makes all the difference. I'm thankful I can throw around gigabytes of data without worry ... and then remind myself most tablet users can't. I wish this freedom was available to all, but it's not and I don't see it showing up by 2012.

They can "solve" the bandwidth problem by having the cloud services only enabled if the user is on WiFi. Kinda defeats the purpose of the "cloud", but it is a start.

Since, the US, they are now on two carriers, they just need either Verizon or AT&T to start touting they are the carrier of choice to provide the cloud for iPhone that the other carrier will have to increase their data usage tier. Now, this is a long shot scenario, but Apple has shown a history of doing things without consulting the carriers before.

So? Apple hasn't been shy about making bandwidth-intensive features Wifi-only. Not having to sync with a computer would be a huge improvement to both iPhones and iPads.

You know, it sort of baffles me that we don't yet have a functional music locker. From 2005 to 2007 I worked for MP3tunes, who built a damn solid music locker. Despite a complete lack of tech budget, marketing budget, etc we managed to build a great service. In late 2005, after our massive push to pull this off, I was able to sync in all my music and play it all from "the cloud". Why, in 2011, do we not have this?

It's odd, but we spoke of Amazon and Google in hushed voices, as we saw them as our biggest competitors -- we figured that both of them would have services shortly, and we saw our early mover status as our predominant advantage. Yet nearly 6 years later, neither of them have anything comparable.

The tech was there then, and it's here in massive force now. Why does this not exist?

It's all about licensing agreements between the record labels and the distributors (Apple and Amazon).

Apple is trying to get a repeat-download license for songs sold on iTunes. http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/11/03/04/apple_negotiat...

My guess is the RIAA/rest of the biz just wouldn't allow it on favorable terms.

From a hardware perspective, now that they have the iPad and iPhone versions of iOS synced up, I wouldn't be surprised if they had a fall release of version 5. As the iPhone 5's hardware is probably nearly identical to the iPad 2's, it wouldn't be hard to release it with iOS 4 and a promised upgrade as was done with the original iPad.

Add into this that they're probably in crunch time to get Lion out the door, and a fall release seems even more likely.

For me it doesn't really matter "when" it's coming out but rather that it will kick some serious ass. The previous updates do iOS where all great and introduced a lot of great new features but the all look and feel stayed the same. I'm not criticizing, just an observation. It is great to keep everyone in the same boat and to provide some universal user experience. But it's time to something new and i'm hoping that this news are really true. iOS is 'almost' perfect but innovation can't stop just because they got it right the first time. I'm looking forward to see what the guys in cupertino came up with!

It is easier to use iOS devices untethered once you stop using Apple's rather poor cloud services. I unsubscribed to MobileMe a while back and no longer use iTunes except for software updates.

I use Spotify for music now, use Google calendar synced via the exchange integration, Plaintext for dropbox synced notes, etc.

A few months after that I didnt buy another Mac and switched to Ubuntu...

Apple are so far behind on cloud services and still charge $99 for mobile me. Switched that spend to spotify instead... They need to come up with some very compelling services to compete.

Hopefully they'll be able to fit in their "radically improved" Maps and location services. http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/11/03/25/apple_looking_...

The iPhone 4 is a solid device that easily beats the competition on price, performance, quality and ease of use. Apple could probably hold off another year before releasing a new device, but I'll bet they stick to pretty much the same schedule as always.

There will ve plenty of us that would buy whatever they release in June and the new thing released in September.

Why do sites like TechCrunch use "cloud" in place of "internet?" Is it another buzzword to make old things seem new in order to make money?

The "Cloud" concept is much more profit-friendly than that of the general "Internet". Whereas the latter emphasizes decentralized control and is, in the most fundamental sense, a product of the cooperation of all participating network operators, the former largely subverts that concept in the name of walled-gardens, rented software, massive centralized server farms, and pervasive, coordinated surveillance. More specifically, the "Cloud" represents a great achievement in deploying open-source software (which was otherwise built for anyone to use) in closed server-based environments such that its users: 1) lose the freedom to run that software in any way they choose, 2) lose the freedom to modify that software, and 3) even lose control of their own information that they produced with the software.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com