Discussion on:

Apple cloud vs. Google cloud: The philosophical differences

Link to original post:
http://www.techrepublic.com/blog/hiner/apple-cloud-vs-google-cloud-the-philosophical-differences/8492

I definitely prefer Apple's approach. As anyone who uses trains or works in less populace areas can tell you, it's easy to lose cell tower signal, have spotty coverage or super slow GPRS.

When that happens and you're trying to access data through the cloud alone, you're in trouble, because you won't be able to access it.

With Apple's model you always have a copy of the data on your device so if you lose connectivity, no problem (I'm thinking of documents or photos as an example). When you're online, the updates or changes you made will be pushed to the other devices.

Obviously this doesn't apply to things like email which have to have an internet connection to be used.

As far as streaming music is concerned, I'd recommend always having a selection of music actually on the device so that when you have little or no connectivity to stream, you can still listen to music.

Maybe I'm just old fashioned, but I like having a device in my hand with apps that can do things.

There is an app called SyncDocs that lets you sync or backup documents from your PC to GoogleDocs and vice-versa, plus you also get the same docs on your smartphone if it is an Android device; so your data and docs can always be with you where you are on whatever platform you are operating on.

There are apps like this, but as the article points out, it's definitely an afterthought. It works for some things, but you're out in the cold for others. Sync is definitely not a top priority for Google. I know it because I'm a Google cloud user...

clearly suguar sync and dropbox are the stem cell of this idea for Apple.Not sure what apart from brand Apple is offering?

What Apple has figured out is that people don't want their phone or their computer or their tablet or any device to be the center of the universe. They don't want to be a slave to anything, including the internet. With the philosophy they are pushing, which I think speaks volumes about Steve's insight, they are allowing the user to be the center of the universe REGARDLESS of the devices they are using. Whether they are sitting in front of an iMac, lounging on the couch with an iPad, running errands with an iPhone, the user is always in sync and ready with the apps and data they need. Welcome to the future. (if all works as advertised...They learned alot from past mistakes.)

being a slave to the "i" world.

What if I want to sync with a non-Apple, non-i device. I have several Apple devices, but I also have several PCs, with both Microsoft OSs and Linux Distros. I love them all. My complaint with Apple is that they are very exclusionary. They have gotten away with this in the past, but at some point, this will be their downfall. Microsoft has been singled out many times over the years as being monopolistic, but Apple is every bit as bad.

If I remember correctly, it was announced that Windows machines would be able to use Photo Stream and "Documents In the Cloud".
For all other purposes, you could simply use Dropbox, which works on iOS as well.

"REGARDLESS of the device" is not true with Apple as they make the user use only their products. Be it Google or be it Apple or anyone else, customer/user still does not seem to be the "primary" focus. Have cloud with all these great capabilities talked about and let consumers select and access it from ANY Device ANY platform.

I have several apple devices and I do love them. However, the customer is not the center of Apple's Universe, $$$$$ is! It is only a matter of time before they change their rules or adjust their pricing schemes so that they are making money from this. I do not begrudge a company from making money, I realize that is what they are in business to do, but Apple is one of the worst about this. People like to badmouth Microsoft, and they do deserve some of the criticism, but Apple is just as bad. They want to control every aspect of every apple device and exclude anyone that is unwilling to give them a cut. As a result, many companies refuse to participate in their arena. This may be to their detriment, as Apple is a hot commodity, but it does not change the fact that Apple is every bit of a monopoly as Microsoft was ever accused of being.

Hi! tried to agree (+) with your comment but it wouldn't tally it! so pls know you have at least "one" + out there! AGREED!!

Google doesn't charge for these things, and yet, they make money. So will Apple.

Apple's big win is and will remain user loyalty... if you have a Mac or iOS device today, you probably buy one tomorrow. Much of what they do is just to reinforce this. Some that is lock-in, once music on iPods, today it's apps and books and video.

But it's also the user experience. A that's a huge key. Happy users don't jump ship. And a superior user experience brings in new users. Macs sold, initially very expensive and underpowered, because they delivered a superior user experience. Same with the iPhone.

If Apple's use of net store and sync works better than others' (Android does this already, but not for all data, just the stuff Google worries about), they will make money simply by delivering a superior product experience.

apple's ux design in products and software shows concern for the customer, true. but ridiculous, hypocritical rants against flash and the desire to completely control every aspect of your experience show that apple feels like its products are the center of the universe and you the lowly serf are lucky if you realize that.

reality is apple has traditionally never carried market share for anything until the iphone/ipad and those haven't been around long enough to actually report significant dominance. being dominant for a short time, at the start of a new tech, does not mean you are actually dominant. with google on many different devices, they have their own unique set of problems to deal with, but ubiquity isn't one of them. android is catching up, so there's still a lot of market watching left to do before declaring anyone dominant. customers love ease of use as much as they love customizing, but they love having their egos stroked even more. so far that's the only thing apple seems to be doing more of with their iphone/ipad than anything they've done yet. what you are left with is a bi-polar benevolent/malicious despot (Jobs) who cradles you in his arms one moment then smothers you in the crib the next.

the sociopaths at google at least seem medicated.

Apple's ux IS tightly controlled. And that is one reason why ALL programs on Apple's platforms are easy to work with. I'm sick to death of all the different user interfaces in Windows. Even MS is not consistent about how some of their programs present options!

Is Apple's interface the best? Probably not.
Is it consistent no matter who's software you are using? Yes!

As for Google owning my data versus my having multiple copies? I'll take multiple copies! I'm on the move a lot and often do not have internet access. So I'd much rather deal with with synchronization of data then all access via the internet. And I suspect that, just like iTunes, Apple will supply software for Windows to allow that synchronization. I just hope they see some light and add support for Linux!

As the extremely disappointed user of an iMac 24, purchased in Jakarta at a high price and with no training / backup available, I must say that I have become extremely wary of this company's approach and products, so much so that I've joined the 'Anything But Apple' group on Facebook. One of my most poisoning suspicions is that I hear time and again that a marvelous attractive whiz-bang design for an Apple product ends up with the cheapest, flimsiest and most barely-reliable components they can squeeze out of the Chinese. I began to research this when my HDD died two weeks after the warranty ran out on the iMac 24. Time and again I read "Apple sources cheap components" various places on the web. Is this a fact?

iCloud is merely fodder for the cult to chew on so they feel special about integrating their lives with yet another iDevice. To me, Apple is like communist China.

You get what I give you, and you will like it. You want more power? TO BAD! You want flexibilty? TOO BAD! You want freedom to choose between component A and component B? TOO BAD. You take what the machine feeds you and you LIKE IT!

Your insights are appreciated. I'm still trying to asses just how important the cloud is and how important it will become. It means little to me now. But I will eventually treasure the freedom of not having to plug my iPhone into my Mac.

Is the iCloud storage optional, or is its integration seamless and mandatory? The reason this is significant is that my company's service area covers areas untouched by broadband with the exception of VSAT, and in some cases even telephone and Cell. Unfortunately, no, I'm not kidding and yes, this is in the US.

If the storage to the cloud is mandatory, this would make it difficult for the new apps to synch and store when all you have is a dodgy 11.4kbps modem signal. Even the fastest residential service out here only has a 364k uplink. Will my client's utilization go through the roof every time they save a document?

Which approach to the cloud do I prefer? In truth both and neither. Both have their strengths and weaknesses and there are some situations where neither is a good choice.

I think this is a great article , that helps us understand the the differences between the two. Thank you, Jason.

First is loss of privacy and security so the whole Cloud leaves me cold. Let me have my apps and data at home and provide a service to let me get back to my apps and data. Then its free or low cost now, but that won't last for long. Apple is notorious for changing the rules just look at history of iTunes. Then notice all the wireless companies are talking about end of unlimited accounts, they see all this app's and data in the cloud is going to be BIG business for them.

People don't need a cloud (return of the mainframe) they want a Conduit in the sky to make keeping their devices in sync easily.

The beauty of a capitalist economy is that consumers can always "vote with their feet." In other words, if you don't like the pricing, just don't use the service. That said, there has to be a price for a service that improves your life - it's just a matter of what value are you willing to pay for that improvement.

you mean a market economy

@docbop
What like dropping DRM on all their music?

Or maybe you mean Apple changing the rules on the pricing of software, dropping the price on all of their apps like WebObjects going from $10,000 to free a few years ago or Aperture dropping 60% in price or Final Cut Pro plunging to $299 or Lion coming in at $29 or iCloud being free compared to $99 annually for MobileMe.

Come on, give Apple some credit for actually making so many things *more* affordable for users.

-Mart

Is their OS pricing scheme correct? Yes.
But what about actually getting a Mac in the first place...

I bought the lowest end Macbook in december of last year. It cost $999 (before taxes) for a 2GHz Core 2 Duo with 2GB of RAM, and a 250GB HDD.
Newegg currently has a lenovo with a 2.2GHz C2D, 2GB RAM, 250GB HDD for $399. So a $600 surcharge to be able to run OSX... Sounds great to me, apple.

Oh, and the apple software released for windows is terrible. (Looking at you, iTunes)

don't use it

Smells like rain. I will avoid all of these technologies for anything serious until after the headline grabbing data loss occurs.

Has anyone looked at Citrix? The new GoTo Meeting stuff looks really good but they aren't getting any media play.

Citrix, yes, bloody useless

Oh, ok. Thanks.

Great article and is spot on with my opinion of the two different types of cloud services. I'd love to see Googles work and I think it is the future but unfortunately for Google I don't see that future coming anytime soon. Apples cloud is great for today but for Apples sack it better operate 10 times better than MobileMe does. Unfortunately, for as much as privacy and security is hyped nowadays, there is no such thing as privacy and security (at least for personal users). So IMO it's time to embrace the cloud...

In the same way they are dumping (sorry migrating) the MobileMe customers they could do the same with iCloud.

How long before Apple remove any way to get media data (music, books, videos) onto their products other than buying through iTunes, e.g. anything not purchased through iTunes will not get sync'd via the iCloud. Oh, and you have exceeded the 5GB we provide for free, that'll be $50 per year for an additional xxGB.

1. They're not dumping MobileMe users
2. How can you complain about going from $99 per year to FREE? And, have you looked at the price of everything Apple is selling lately. They are selling software and services for pennies! Lion will cost $29 vs. $129 for previous OS versions. Their actions are NOT consistent with charging $50 for an extra 5 Gb. I think they are well aware of what Google is charging its customers.. I just paid $5 to Google to increase my Gmail capacity to 20Gb for the year. I suspect Apple will come close to a similar pricing scheme.

Price your product at the level the customer values, and is willing to pay. If Apple is trying to keep prices down, sell your stock. They are some of the smartest product marketers on the planet, and they will price their products and services at a level of value the customer is willing to pay for.

I always see that (you) kind of apple fans that they think spending money to apple is a must and everyone must pay this kind of fees to get service from apple.

BE AWARE THAT IF GOOGLE DONT GIVE THIS SERVICE $5 PER YEAR , YOU WOULD PAY 200$ FOR PER GB something else.

All apple fans , enjoy your lovely toys , enjoy your extra bills that you pay to apple but dont forget to respect GOOGLE.

With Apples Cloud working much better on a faster internet, the demand that apple creates for a faster internet will also promote the growth of internet speed and volume to achieve an internet infrastructure that Google requires.

Since I don't and wil never use a Mac, this is a mute point with me ...however I would not want my porn stash held in somewher like Ulan Bator, Mubai or Alsaka. It needs to be safe on MY computer , not some unreliable system storage elswhere, with other unknow people looking after it.

It is that simple . With Apple iTunes having been hacked recently, and just prior to that the Sony PSP network , there is no way I would even bother looking at this rather sad and over proprietary technology.

I will keep my stuff on my pc , thank you very much ...

regards

Fitvideo

I disagree with point #2 mostly - I have a ReadyNAS running XRaid-2, which is an expandable RAID with 2 drives of redundancy in a 6-bay enclosure. As long as I don't have more than 2 drives catastrophically fail, I'm golden (and I can always use NetGear's online backup service if I so choose). That, coupled with the CHEAP storage (WD Green 2TB for $80) make a home storage solution viable AND secure, and keeps all your data at home, rather than on someone else's server.

baronfunke: You could have a house fire that winds up destroying all the drives, in which case you lose everything. If you had a backup on the Cloud, you'd be able to restore your data.

Netgear's online backup service if he so chooses.

I agree with your comments about the need for a backup service that would not be destroyed by fire, theft, flood, etc... BUT . . . ever tried to see how long it would take for Terabytes of data? I have three full 1.5 TB drives with three 2TB drives to back them all up. It takes a long time even over gigabit LAN. Upload speeds for my lame DSL are pathetic and would require months. With storage as ubiquitous & cheap, the online bandwidth has not kept up in a way that allows affordable online backup of large quantities of data. Plus, most services liky Mozy, SugarSync, Microslop's iDrive, & even Dropbox become WAY too expensive for large data backups.

keep blasting the public network and BT may just lay the fibre.