Then you pay $80/year for your storage (among other things through Prime) but it's definitely not free.

The same applies to iTunes Match. Music you add to your library, by any means, is uploaded automatically. And it doesn't take the initial weekend to upload.

Amazon and Google Music have already said they will charge for the services, and they have limited storage as well (google music is actually less than iTunes Match). And, account for the bandwidth cost of having to upload your library (for me, we're talking weeks to upload everything, nearly no time to just match and…

Why do you need FLAC, MP3 and wav versions of everything...that seems like a waste of time. I mean, FLAC is intended as an archival format anyway, so at the very least, the WAV format is needless. I understand the mp3 step for saving space on mobile devices though.

"Just create their own music service where you buy music and they register you as owning it. "

Not really. Match isn't for streaming. They've specifically avoided that label and/or functionality. It's creating a central repository for your music, so your library on your desktop, laptop, and mobile device can all be fed from one place, as opposed to having to manually sync them all up anytime you add new music.

Discovery and maintaining a library are two totally different issues, to me at least. Ultimately you would want your library centralized, at the very least to be accessible, even if it's not on your HDD or something. But discovering new music doesn't happen within your already existing library, it happens outside of…

If you ever want it back, you just redownload it.

That's Apple's idea. That your music should go with you. It's services like Spotify, Rdio, etc. that make your music stationary. The integration of hardware/software is what Apple hopes is attractive and keeps people returning, not the music itself.

HAHA, Apple is only for starbucking.

There it is, the good ol' "there's only so many ways to do something" laziness angle.

Why does everyone keep going back to the whole "Apple didn't invent it" line?

"different" "modern" and "beautiful" are some of the best reasons to buy technology. It's not as if they're buying something that doesn't function. All of these things, by Apple or anyone else, will do their job as advertised, buying something for those above stated reasons are as good as buying one because it's blue,…

They looked better when Voodoo was making them. Now HP is just making Apple knockoffs.

nuh uh YOU ARE

Garbagemen get paid after doing work and proving value to their work.

It wasn't apologetic, because I had no reason to apologize, except for where you thought it was a personal attack, as opposed to a criticism of your post/project. Mostly though, where it falls apart, is that the established ways of doing interactive panoramas and VR images are far superior to photosynth, in usability…

First, let me say I'm sorry if you were offended by my post. I did not mean it as an attack or anything, just an observation that, in my opinion, you used this post simply as a platform to beg for money. By shamelessly posting your link, you were asking for money. It's relevance as a comment to the post was just that…

This "Hey, it's a kickstarter post, I'm going to beg for money here at Gizmodo where there's a huge audience" is actually part of the "Terrible" part of Kickstarter. You want 16K for something of questionable value. Traditionally, you would do your idea, and then sell it to to someone who finds value in it, not get…

Those warnings are the same as the surgeon general warnings on cigarette packages. We already have warnings on cigarettes and alcohol and other similar products. The real question should be; would you be ok if those simple textual warnings were replaced with graphic images of people with their heads smashed against…