If there’s one company with the clout and potential to beat Apple and Google when it comes to cloud storage, it’s Amazon.com -- and as it turns out, a new report reveals that the company is talking to the music and film industries about doing just that.
Cnet News is reporting that e-tailer giant Amazon.com has been in talks with “major record companies and Hollywood film studios” to create a digital “locker” service for their libraries -- and that an announcement about a deal could come as early as next week, according to sources.
The concept is a popular one floating around right now -- cloud-based server storage to hold a user’s music, movies, e-books and other digital media, accessible from anywhere you have an internet connection. Apple is widely rumored to have a similar offering on deck, presumably as part of a major MobileMe upgrade coming as early as next month.
Amazon may strike first, even though “the online merchant has yet to obtain all the necessary licenses,” according to Cnet. Search giant Google is also said to be moving in the same direction, specifically with their music service which is said to be testing internally already.
The real question is, will consumers want these services? Streaming your digital media from anywhere sounds great, but the reality is that carriers have been doing everything they can to cap data usage -- a trend now spreading to wired broadband connections as well. That seems to run contrary to the plans companies like Amazon, Apple and Google may have for our cloud-based futures.
At any rate, if anyone can best Apple and Google when it comes to cloud storage, it’s Amazon -- the company is already running several such services, including Amazon Kindle (which hosts e-books that are downloaded to users’ devices as needed) and their latest attempt at streaming movies and TV shows, Amazon Instant Video, where 5,000 titles are being streamed to Amazon Prime members for absolutely free.
Follow this article’s author, J.R. Bookwalter on Twitter
leicaman
March 28, 2011 at 8:25am
Have you actually check the price of S3? Amazon has no idea how to charge a reasonable amount for online storage. I took a look at S3 once, and could not believe anyone in their right mind would pay that kind of money.
On the other hand, the descriptions of charges was so complex and poorly written, I could have simply not been able to figure out exactly what it was they were charging for the amount of storage the average user would use. It seems like they intentionally make it so complex that people can't figure out the exact cost of the monthly service.
Either way, consumer-friendly it is not. And I doubt somehow they will make this one any easier to understand. And considering their hostile attitude towards those who tie their applications into Amazon services is hardly commendable.
Remember Delicious Library for iPhone? You probably don't if you didn't catch it in the small window of time it existed before Amazon axed it for using information the desktop application uses for populating metadata for items in the library. And last week it was Lendle. No thanks Amazon. I'll go with a less greedy company - Apple. :)
