iCloud storage relative to amount of devices

Every iCloud user is given 5GB of free storage, and that can be upgraded to 20GB of storage for $40.00 a year or to 50GB of storage for $100.00 a year. ​I currently have my account upgraded to the 20GB of storage, as I was pushing the limit of the free 5GB of storage that was given to me. 

Recently someone I know made the switch from the Microsoft world to a Mac. The transition slowly starting with an iPad, then an iPod touch, and then eventually he bought a Mac for home use. A conversation about iCloud came up between the two of us, and he was complaining about the amount of storage that Apple offers for free. He voiced his concern that he has these multiple devices and only 5GB of free iCloud space. His thought was that if he buys multiple devices then he should get an extra 5GB of storage on iCloud for no extra charge. My response was, you only get 5GB and that is just the way it is. If Apple gave away 5GB for every device then almost no one would pay to upgrade their iCloud, and Apple wouldn't make money off of the service. (I assume that Apple doesn't really make money off of iCloud as much as it probably turns whatever profit they receive from iCloud upgrades into maintaining the infrastructure.)

Since having the the discussion I have started giving it some thought and I have started to change my feelings towards the subject. ​I still feel that 5GB per device is an excessive amount for Apple to give away for free, and that it would never happen. However I do think that Apple could compensate multi device users with additional storage space to a point.

In my case I have two mobile devices, and two computers. OS X does not fully utilize iCloud for storage, but I would guess at WWDC this year it will be revealed that the Mac is getting more iCloud integration and therefore it will take up more of that storage footprint. I don't really now what a reasonable amount of storage would be for Apple to give out, but even another 5GB for free would be welcomed. The problem however with this whole philosophy is how does Apple determine how much space to give someone, and what happens if that person sells their device, should they be able to keep their upgraded storage since they have one less device?

If I look at my iCloud usage the only OS X apps that are using iCloud storage are Pages, Keynote, and Pixelmator. ​I had recently considered purchasing Together 3 which I would chosen to use iCloud to keep all of my stuff in sync between all of my devices. Something like that would use a significant amount of storage over time. If I go to my iCloud settings and look at my total storage used is, it is 8 GB, so I don't even need the full 25 GB that I currently have, but I need more than the 5GB that was given to me. 

Since developers have such a hard time trying to implement Core Data syncing I don't think that this is such an issue right now. This is because a lot of developers choose to provide access to Dropbox, or they build their own syncing services for their apps. The majority of an iCloud users storage is taken up by iOS backups, but if Apple finally gets Core Data right and developers start using iCloud more for their app data, then I think people are are going to start finding the need to require more iCloud storage for their devices. ​

Whenever Apple decides to make iCloud functional for developers to use the service to sync their app data I think that they are going to have to either give storage increases for people who buy multiple devices or offer a wider selection of upgrades for storage, such as more tiers than their current offerings.

Pixelmator 2.2 Blueberry: Paint Selection Tool→

The developers over at Pixelmator keep teasing the features of what they are calling a major update to the software. Can't wait until it comes out!!

∞

Capitalizing on the death of Google Reader?

I have seen a few articles over the last couple of days on the issue of Google Reader shuttering it's doors. ​ There are a lot of people who still use the service, regardless of Google stating the user base is declining and using that as one of the reasons they are closing it down.

There are all sorts of reactions to the closing of that service such as petitions to save it, hope that the closing of it will bring about an innovation in RSS, suggestions on alternative services to replace Reader, are just a handful of the many reactions in response. 

I currently use Reader myself, and use it multiple times a day, everyday. I do so mostly on my iPhone using the app Reeder. ​This app's lifeblood today is Google Reader, but the developer posted a tweet stating that the app would be fine without Reader. Currently though until the folks who develop Reeder announce what their plans are, I was wondering what to do in the meantime as a possible alternative.

I started to think about how I use to consume the web before the iPhone, and remembered that I use to use an app called NewsFire by Dave Watanabe. I was curious if NewsFire still existed and wondered, as I haven't used it in quite a while, if it could load RSS feeds directly into the app instead of being dependent on loading your Google login and password to filter Google Reader RSS feeds through the app, as Reeder does. 

I went to the NewsFire website and was pretty excited when I clicked on the download button, and it opened the Mac Appstore. ​I was a little disappointed that the price was $9.99. I love to support developers, but at the same time I am mindful that I already paid for Reeder on my Mac, iPad, and iPhone. So to pay another $10.00 for an RSS app was not something I was looking to do. I regularly use the website appshopper.com, and it's companion iOS app, to be notified when software goes on sale. A quick search brought up NewsFire and I clicked on the name of the app which brings you to a page (NewsFire on Appshopper) that displays all of the same information that the Mac Appstore does such as a description of the app, screenshots, the price and a buy button.

The site is also useful, because it displays the price history of an app from the time it debuted on the App Store to the present. What I found interesting is that the app became a Mac Appstore app on February 3, 2011 and was priced at $4.99. Coincidentally the only time that there has been a price change was on March, 14 2013, the day after the announcement that Google was shutting Reader down.

Some back story on what my experience with seeing this developers name on the web. Around 2004 or 2005 when NewsFire was released, anytime there was a story about it or any of the developer's other software there was always a huge uproar about the developer's practices. Claims that he was using code that was not his (I do not know if this is true and I am not accusing. I just know what I have read many people say), among all sorts of other rants in the comment sections. I used the software and quite liked it, but it was hard to look past how much discontent everyone had for the guy.

A quick search on MacUpdate for NewsFire brought me to a disgruntled user on the very first page in the comments section. User younkint posted a comment on February 18, 2009: This comment was posted four years ago, but also four or five years after NewsFire was released. ​

Before you consider installing ANY software concocted by David Watanabe on your computer, please do a decent Google search of "David Watanabe" first. Especially do this if, for some reason, you are contemplating actually sending him your hard earned money.

It will not take you long to come to a conclusion. Even a simple search here on macupdate should suffice.

​I did a Google search and came up with a whole page dedicated to complaints about Watanabe. 

I know that developers make their living from selling their product, but this to me seems so unlike what most developers would do today. I would expect most developers would try and help users out by running a short sale to try and get people an app with which they can load all of their feeds into, and give the user a way to migrate away from Reader now. By helping people out it would only boost their sales, because those types of discounts tend to circulate tech websites that cater to people who would use their software. The dip in price would certainly make up for itself in the volume of sales that would be generated.

The biggest problem I have with this is, that knowing the public opinion of the developer from years past, and the fact that the only price change to this app since it was accepted into the App Store was a $5.00 increase the day after Google announced that they were doing away with their RSS solution, just doesn't seem right to me.