Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Google Unifies Media, Apps Into Google Play

Unknown Lamer posted more than 2 years ago | from the enslavement-was-never-so-much-fun dept.

Books 146

eldavojohn writes "Google has just announced Google Play to merge their existing solutions for music, movies, books and apps in the new cloud based storage system promising that you will never have to worry about losing or moving them across devices ever again. You'll be able to store 20,000 songs for free. The region breakdown is: 'In the U.S., music, movies, books and Android apps are available in Google Play. In Canada and the U.K., we'll offer movies, books and Android apps; in Australia, books and apps; and in Japan, movies and apps. Everywhere else, Google Play will be the new home for Android apps.'"

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Will Apple file a lawsuit? (4, Funny)

walterbyrd (182728) | more than 2 years ago | (#39266391)

Seems like it might infringe on the idea behind iTunes, or App Store, or something.

Re:Will Apple file a lawsuit? (2, Insightful)

imamac (1083405) | more than 2 years ago | (#39266425)

I don't think it would infringe, but it is certainly Google's "me too" moment of the day.

Re:Will Apple file a lawsuit? (3, Insightful)

oakgrove (845019) | more than 2 years ago | (#39267755)

It's called business. Apple makes a lot of money and is in a sector ripe for real competition. It's the war of the ecosystems and with MS and Apple playing for keeps you better believe Google is going to step in the mix.

Re:Will Apple file a lawsuit? (1)

imamac (1083405) | more than 2 years ago | (#39268085)

Oh don't interpret my comment (as some mods did) as negative or attacking Google. I'm completely for this. Competition is good. I hope they continue this type of relationship (without the lawsuits) to spur competition and keep making better products and services.

Re:Will Apple file a lawsuit? (1)

shutdown -p now (807394) | more than 2 years ago | (#39268207)

Google Music has been out before Apple's equivalent cloud offering. And they had a web interface to Android market long before iOS got one.

This thing is really just an aggregation of existing Google cloud services under a single brand.

Re:Will Apple file a lawsuit? (-1, Redundant)

tripleevenfall (1990004) | more than 2 years ago | (#39266431)

I'm sure they are looking at their patent-trolling options... this is the same as apple's iCloud service which has been around since October of last year....

Sadly, this doesn't give any evidence to counter the fanboy argument that most of what Google is doing these days is copying Apple.

Re:Will Apple file a lawsuit? (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39266477)

What everyone is forgetting, is that iCloud is the same as many other services long before it. Bah, even Ubuntu One was there first.

Re:Will Apple file a lawsuit? (4, Interesting)

Nadir (805) | more than 2 years ago | (#39266499)

Actually, the "cloud" experience on Android was there long before Apple. Buy an Android phone, insert your google account, and a few moments later you have all your contacts, calendars and apps.

Re:Will Apple file a lawsuit? (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39266629)

Actually, the "cloud" experience on Android was there long before Apple. Buy an Android phone, insert your google account, and a few moments later you have all your contacts, calendars and apps.

Thats funny because the original iPhone did that too

Re:Will Apple file a lawsuit? (0)

ganjadude (952775) | more than 2 years ago | (#39266843)

really? a windows user with an iPhone would have all their contacts synced with the iPhone?

Re:Will Apple file a lawsuit? (4, Informative)

rsborg (111459) | more than 2 years ago | (#39267319)

really? a windows user with an iPhone would have all their contacts synced with the iPhone?

As of iOS 2.0, yes. Using either CalDav+IMAP or Exchange ActiveSync you could sync your calendar and email fine with an original iPhone in 2008.

Re:Will Apple file a lawsuit? (3, Interesting)

geekoid (135745) | more than 2 years ago | (#39268181)

so.. after Android than? And with additional 3rd party programs?

For certain values of fine.

Re:Will Apple file a lawsuit? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39268547)

The OS Doesn't matter. When you sign into your GMail account on the iphone it automatically synced your Gmail, Gmail contacts, and calendar events.

Re:Will Apple file a lawsuit? (1)

morgauxo (974071) | more than 2 years ago | (#39266973)

which came out after the original android

Re:Will Apple file a lawsuit? (4, Informative)

Cyberllama (113628) | more than 2 years ago | (#39267049)

Yes, but that's hardly the same thing. It did that by getting them from the corresponding apps on your Mac when you synced the phone. It didn't pull them out of thin air, which is what "Cloud" is all about. It also didn't work unless you had a Mac. You used to need a computer to make your smartphone work. Now the Smarthphone IS the computer--or it least it can be if you're the minimalist sort.

Re:Will Apple file a lawsuit? (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39267059)

SHENANIGANS!

The original iphone 2G required you to connect it to itunes to
#1) activate (couldn't get past lock screen without initial itunes activation)
#2) sync contacts/calendar/photos/music etc. etc.

The cloud functionality for ios came MUCH later (measured in years)!

In contrast, my first android handset pretty much *never* touched a computer USB port.

Re:Will Apple file a lawsuit? (4, Insightful)

rhook (943951) | more than 2 years ago | (#39267169)

Until recently the iPhone required iTunes in order to sync your contacts/calendar/apps. Android devices have never required a computer in order to sync this stuff.

Re:Will Apple file a lawsuit? (1)

SadButTrue (848439) | more than 2 years ago | (#39268205)

That's pretty amazing since the original iPhone didn't have apps at all. The apple app store its self didn't exist until mid 2008.

Re:Will Apple file a lawsuit? (1)

interval1066 (668936) | more than 2 years ago | (#39267433)

The world is divided in two categories: those with a loaded gun and those who dig. You dig.

The Good, The Bad, and the Ugly?

Re:Will Apple file a lawsuit? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39266559)

or SkyDrive which has been around several years. Or Dropbox. Apple iCloud is a late comer to this,and with the insane limitation that you can only use it for files created by Apple programs, and not share files.

Re:Will Apple file a lawsuit? (1)

geekoid (135745) | more than 2 years ago | (#39266875)

yes, also they use computers, and apple use computers..so the are clearly copying apple.

sheeesh.

Re:Will Apple file a lawsuit? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39267465)

uhm

You do realize that with nothing more than your google account and internet access:
1) Contacts were always in the "cloud" from the get go
2) Music sync was available at least in the US mid last year.
3) Picasa photo sync was available for ages
4) Apps always reinstalled themselves automatically.
5) Movie and book rentals were always available to be downloaded from the android market since mid-to-late last year. Movies at least, where available on any devices with a web browser able to play a certain codec (i.e. in the cloud)

The only thing that Google's done here is to unify several services that never had a "name" into one banner. So at the very most, you can only say that Google is copying by giving these features almost all Android devices had available for around early-to-mid last year.

Re:Will Apple file a lawsuit? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39267193)

I think apple tried this already - turns out a store, even an electronic one, is not a patentable idea - too generic

Re:Will Apple file a lawsuit? (5, Informative)

Americano (920576) | more than 2 years ago | (#39267521)

No, they sued Amazon for trademark infringement when Amazon opened the Android Appstore, claiming that "App Store" was trademarked by Apple, and complaining that Amazon's use of the mark was infringing.

There was no patent on "having an electronic store." There was no suit over "having an electronic store." It was a trademark dispute, in which Apple basically said "They should have to call it something else without using the phrase "App Store." Amazon went live with their Android Appstore anyway, and Microsoft has also filed a challenge on the trademark, claiming it was too generic to be a legitimate trademark.

The most recent I've heard, a few months back, the case is still working it's way through the federal courts.

Silly lawsuit? Probably. But the USPTO granted them the trademark in the first place, so I'm inclined to believe that the USPTO deserves a fair share of the blame for the waste of the lawsuit, also.

Re:Will Apple file a lawsuit? (1)

Threni (635302) | more than 2 years ago | (#39267263)

Something, yes. Obviously, the cloud - that is, another computer connected to your computer over a network - was invented by Apple. I'm surprised Google has the front to try and rip them off so blatantly. This will not end well.

Why store songs? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39266393)

When I get almost the entire catalog via Pandora or Spotify?

Re:Why store songs? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39266521)

There's still something about actually having the mp3's that gives less of a temporal feel than streaming. Same sort of thing as having the cd's as opposed to the mp3's only..

Re:Why store songs? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39266837)

You have to pay to get Spotify on Android.

Re:Why store songs? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39267559)

Or modify your user agent string. [useragentstring.com]

Re:Why store songs? (1)

TheInternetGuy (2006682) | more than 2 years ago | (#39267893)

Shush.....

Yay! (4, Funny)

MightyMartian (840721) | more than 2 years ago | (#39266395)

At last, somewhere to store all my pirated music and movies!!!!!

Go rock a cock! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39266545)

Homo.

--Rush

Re:Yay! (1)

KiloByte (825081) | more than 2 years ago | (#39267273)

Just use archive.org for that. It may take half a year for new files to show up, though.

Re:Yay! (1)

reub2000 (705806) | more than 2 years ago | (#39267329)

And get caught!

Re:Yay! (1)

aaaaaaargh! (1150173) | more than 2 years ago | (#39267677)

Exactly! That's why I'm planning to buy 20000 copies of Madonna's Like a Virgin at a discount price of 15000 USD and store them in my Google account. That way, since elsewhere a song costs 99 cent each, I'll save 4800 bucks. A bargain, if you ask me.

I don't want my cloud provider to know type of med (1, Informative)

gl4ss (559668) | more than 2 years ago | (#39266407)

I don't want my cloud provider to know type of media that's on there - if they know they'll pull it down at request or in case of apps possibly if the publisher just doesn't renew.

also a little birdie told me thet bitcasa beta is open.

Re:I don't want my cloud provider to know type of (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39266769)

Encryption.

Re:I don't want my cloud provider to know type of (4, Insightful)

Americano (920576) | more than 2 years ago | (#39266963)

If security, confidentiality, and permanent ownership of the stuff stored are such overriding concerns, then it's likely that a cloud service isn't for you, and you should avoid using one.

Re:I don't want my cloud provider to know type of (4, Informative)

Ihmhi (1206036) | more than 2 years ago | (#39267235)

Then go with a zero-knowledge provider like SpiderOak [spideroak.com] . All of the data is encrypted on their servers. Your password is encrypted before it even leaves your computer. (If you lose your password, your recovery option is "I'm fucked".)

Moreover, even if the feds came knocking on their door, all they could say is that you have x gigs of data on this particular server. The company can't even view your files, no matter how much they (or law enforcement, or a court) might want to.

Re:I don't want my cloud provider to know type of (2)

Brannoncyll (894648) | more than 2 years ago | (#39267871)

Then go with a zero-knowledge provider like SpiderOak [spideroak.com] . All of the data is encrypted on their servers. Your password is encrypted before it even leaves your computer. (If you lose your password, your recovery option is "I'm fucked".)

Moreover, even if the feds came knocking on their door, all they could say is that you have x gigs of data on this particular server. The company can't even view your files, no matter how much they (or law enforcement, or a court) might want to.

Unfortunately many countries [wikipedia.org] have laws under which you can be forced to give up your encryption keys to law enforcement. God only knows how the US has resisted implementing laws like this so far, although I don't see this situation lasting long considering how the government lately seems hell bent on eliminating the human rights of its citizens.

Re:I don't want my cloud provider to know type of (2)

geekoid (135745) | more than 2 years ago | (#39268193)

And every country has a guy willing to wield a lead pipe.

Re:I don't want my cloud provider to know type of (4, Insightful)

JohnFen (1641097) | more than 2 years ago | (#39268737)

Then don't use cloud-based services. That's the route I take -- I just don't use them. I do use an Android phone and apparently will be using the cloud for apps, but that's all.

If you want cloud services, then use encryption -- but understand, if you're truly concerned, that encryption will not guarantee that your stuff stays private. All public key encryption is breakable without difficulty to someone who has access to a large sampling of your encrypted data and lots of CPU cycles to throw at the problem. Such as cloud providers do.

Here's an idea (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39266417)

Host it on a global network so everybody can benefit, region locking services is bullshit and stands for everything thats wrong with the web/media

this shit is global, treat it as such

Re:Here's an idea (1)

Skapare (16644) | more than 2 years ago | (#39266471)

Proxy through international servers so you are coming from different IP addresses.

Re:Here's an idea (1)

oldwindways (934421) | more than 2 years ago | (#39266525)

Hey, someone needs to protect American jobs with tariffs, because that worked so well in the 1930's [wikipedia.org] .

Re:Here's an idea (1)

Americano (920576) | more than 2 years ago | (#39266703)

Unfortunately for this argument, laws vary from country to country, and so terms and conditions for any service must comply with relevant local laws in each country, and the wishes of the rights-holders regarding distribution of their product to those countries.

Did you really think that companies *prefer* having to build a different storefront with a different set of products, for every country they operate in? This isn't google forcing the restrictions, it's the content owners not granting google the rights to sell/distribute those products in the relevant markets, or the local laws preventing them from doing it for some reason.

Some background (4, Informative)

DeathFromSomewhere (940915) | more than 2 years ago | (#39266447)

It's worth pointing out that all of this functionality is already available. There is nothing new here except the name and an icon. Not even an interface change. Much ado about nothing.

Re:Some background (0, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39266947)

It's worth pointing out that all of this functionality is already available. There is nothing new here except the name and an icon. Not even an interface change. Much ado about nothing.

Yes, but this IS Slashdot. The frothing masses need to whip themselves into a frenzy over Google doing something vaguely evil every day, or they risk calming down and realizing they don't have any talents besides inventing problems to bitch about. You remember how worked up they got when Google said they were going to simplify their privacy policies with all the data they already collect from you, right? And how they actually weren't collecting anything new?

Re:Some background (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39267013)

Yup, slashdot can be downright silly sometimes.

Re:Some background (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39267139)

Also a sale on apps, which is nice. Not really Slashdot worthy though.

Re:Some background (2)

ArhcAngel (247594) | more than 2 years ago | (#39267709)

It's even more worth pointing out that good re-branding can increase sales and bad re-branding can bankrupt companies ( Qwickster anyone? )

Re:Some background (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39268433)

Not that I disagree, but Netflix isn't bankrupt [latimes.com] .

Jesus (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39266527)

Jesus is a Porridge-Wog
Jesus is a Jew
Jesus is a Ngger
With a very low IQ

Jesus is a Frenchie
Jesus is a Yank
Jesus is a Peeping tom
Who likes to have a Wnk

Re:Jesus (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39266683)

Jew
Nagger

That's racist, man.

All my stuff in the cloud... (4, Insightful)

Picass0 (147474) | more than 2 years ago | (#39266577)

...until I wake up one day and it's not.

Re:All my stuff in the cloud... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39266857)

That is the same experience as storing it on your local storage device - until it fails.

Re:All my stuff in the cloud... (2)

geekoid (135745) | more than 2 years ago | (#39267203)

I have moved a lot to the cloud.

I recently set up a computer.
Install Steam,
get games,
install Chrome
Done.
No buying software,. no installing office like tools, no looking for game disks, no copying over music, no duplicating the file structure.

Easy, peasy.

If you back up now, then you can back up your docs from the cloud. If you don't back up now, then stop being an idiot and do so.

*Any browser, but I use chrome.

WHY? (4, Insightful)

DarthVain (724186) | more than 2 years ago | (#39266621)

USA: Music, Movies, Books, Apps
CAN: Movies, Books, Apps
UK: Movies, Books, Apps
Au: Books, Apps
Japan: Movies, Apps

Um, does this not seem odd? Only the US can store Music in Google Cloud? Is this because the RIAA can sue people there? Why the mashup of various media in various places. I wonder does this have more to do with law in the country in question, or the county of origin? Considering the stellar privacy stuff lately, I think I would rather figure out how to host my own server to take my stuff anywhere I like.

Oh and Books? Really? I mean you can fit like what a million on a micro SD card these days. Hell even music, unless you have a 20,000 song library, you can fit more music than you could ever really want on a 16GB smartphone... 32GB even more.

Video is intriguing. I can just imagine what is going to be uploaded there.

Re:WHY? (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39266709)

Each of these industries are entrenched in more than a hundred years of business law and protect their regional fiefdoms viciously. They do so because they all know the internet makes them completely obsolete. They know that without the anchor of a physical pretense some small company anywhere in the world can beat them.

Re:WHY? (3, Informative)

rsborg (111459) | more than 2 years ago | (#39268083)

Each of these industries are entrenched in more than a hundred years of business law and protect their regional fiefdoms viciously. They do so because they all know the internet makes them completely obsolete. They know that without the anchor of a physical pretense some small company anywhere in the world can beat them.

Yet, with Apple, you can do all of this and more with iCloud + iTunes Match in 19+ countries. What it means is that Apple figured out there is no winning against the MAFIAA, and have paid their cut. Google is slowly starting to get with the program.

It's unfortunate, but it does appear that the media industry is going to win vs. the internet by balkanizing or eliminating it entirely.

Re:WHY? (1)

Threni (635302) | more than 2 years ago | (#39267227)

> I wonder does this have more to do with law in the country in question, or the county of origin?
> Considering the stellar privacy stuff lately, I think I would rather figure out how to host my own server
> to take my stuff anywhere I like.

I'm guessing it's to do with licensing.

Oh, and some of us have much, much more music than will even begin to fit onto a 32GB `smartphone`.

Re:WHY? (1)

nurb432 (527695) | more than 2 years ago | (#39268203)

Oh, and some of us have much, much more music than will even begin to fit onto a 32GB `smartphone`.

Right, and we stream the files from home, where we don't have to worry about someone searching thru them on some public server, to see what we have that they can nail us to the wall with.

Re:WHY? (1)

geekoid (135745) | more than 2 years ago | (#39268215)

when do you plan on listening to it all?

Re:WHY? (2)

cmiller173 (641510) | more than 2 years ago | (#39267733)

...

Video is intriguing. I can just imagine what is going to be uploaded there.

Not the generic "Video" it's "Movies" and it is Google's movie rental service. Near as I can tell there is no uploading, although you would think they would wrap YouTube in there somehow.

Re:WHY? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39267853)

"you can fit like what a million" -- Yeah, yeah I know. We know because we're old geeks. Google's drive is about complete device independence. You can use your phone, your roommate's netbook, your work laptop, your school terminal, the tablet of that guy you're having coffee with, your aunt's desktop -- wherever the heck you are, your Nest of files and apps is always there. And always in the same interface.

If you don't want to use that (I don't) that's fine, but don't misunderstand that this is going to be extremely normal.

What's kinda sortof ironic, is I remember when having your own *nix server that you could tunnel to from anywhere was cool geekdom. This is just that gone commercial and easy-to-use.

As usual, we don't like the band after they go mainstream.

Re:WHY? (2)

JohnFen (1641097) | more than 2 years ago | (#39268779)

As usual, we don't like the band after they go mainstream.

No, that's not it. It's that we're being asked to trust third parties with the bulk of our personal data. Running your own server is better because you only have to trust yourself (and it can be just as -- if not more -- easy-to-use as any commercial offering). It has nothing to do with popularity.

In other news... (-1, Troll)

PessimysticRaven (1864010) | more than 2 years ago | (#39266661)

Google has announced that they have recently acquired Fisher-Price, and shall be re-branding ALL Android phones as "Google Playphones" in keeping with their re-branding of the Android Market.

Why no movies in Australia? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39266695)

Why no movies in Australia?

Re:Why no movies in Australia? (2)

Desler (1608317) | more than 2 years ago | (#39266773)

Because the dingo ate your baby.

Re:Why no movies in Australia? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39267489)

Because your breath stinks.

Re:Why no movies in Australia? (3, Funny)

Adriax (746043) | more than 2 years ago | (#39267549)

They're having problems with the australian correction algorithm. It's actually quite hard to rotate the video stream 180 degrees in real time so they can view it down there.

The problem with clouds (3, Insightful)

kawabago (551139) | more than 2 years ago | (#39266741)

is dissipation.

Re:The problem with clouds (1)

slinches (1540051) | more than 2 years ago | (#39267741)

I thought the problem with clouds is precipitation.

Dumb move. (4, Insightful)

__Paul__ (1570) | more than 2 years ago | (#39266905)

"Google Play" sounds like an environment for children. Why would people look there for serious applications?

Re:Dumb move. (0, Troll)

TheGratefulNet (143330) | more than 2 years ago | (#39267153)

think: who WORKS at google.

there's your answer.

that's how google sees the world. thru a twentysomething's eyes (essentially).

the 'you have no privacy' is a 20something thing. I know of no one in their 30's or older who truly believes this; yet the school graduates seem perfectly fine with this.

to google, the internet is a 'playground'. THEIR playground (important detail, btw).

Re:Dumb move. (4, Interesting)

geekoid (135745) | more than 2 years ago | (#39267417)

I'm far past my 20s and love the name. And Google has one of the best privacy policies. read it.
Google plays too well with others to give the impression they think it's their playground.

SO stop projecting what ever pops into you head onto others.

Re:Dumb move. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39268637)

Dude, get a clue. With google YOU are the product. No other company of their size operates like this.
It all stems from their core bussiness being advertising. They are an advertising company. Think about it.

Re:Dumb move. (1)

JohnFen (1641097) | more than 2 years ago | (#39268811)

I have read it. That it's one of the best privacy policies around doesn't mean it's a good privacy policy. Personally, I chafe at it.

Re:Dumb move. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39267785)

+1, Unfortunate nugget of truth.

Don't forget that Google also employs a lot of FOSS types: the people who brought you such delightful product branding as the GIMP, The SPERM Report, Gaim, pidgin, iceweasel, all of the Ubuntu release names, all of the K-named KDE apps, and a host of "cute" recursive project names like GNU.

The FOSS community's ability to "name things in a way that people will take seriously" is just about as strong as RMS' ability to "make you want to snuggle up in bed with him."

Re:Dumb move. (1)

shutdown -p now (807394) | more than 2 years ago | (#39268245)

It makes more sense when you look at how individual services are named - it's "Google Play Music", "Google Play Movies" etc.

Wow thats.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39267005)

absolute garbage. It just has apps in my jurisdiction.

Oh well, gotta go check on how my torrents are doing...

Fisher Price? (1)

Grizzley9 (1407005) | more than 2 years ago | (#39267047)

I can't be the only one that thinks the new name, Play Store, sounds a lot like something that would come from a children's toy mfg. Not the image you want to brand on your serious apps. Should've kept it Market.

Re:Fisher Price? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39267277)

Agreed... it's an awful name to use as an umbrella for books, movies, apps, etc. Market was way better, IMO.

Re:Fisher Price? (1)

VortexCortex (1117377) | more than 2 years ago | (#39268701)

Play Store, sounds a lot like something that would come from a children's toy mfg. Not the image you want to brand on your serious apps. Should've kept it Market.

Ah, "Market Play", indeed.

play books? (1)

rodenti (878760) | more than 2 years ago | (#39267205)

Looks like RIM is going to have to find a new name for their tablet now that Google is using the "play" prefix.

This new Google Play thing even has a Play Books section!

First test (5, Interesting)

jeti (105266) | more than 2 years ago | (#39267303)

I just tested the new Google Play apps. Here's what I found:

Google Play Books: This item cannot be installed in your device's coutry
Google Play Music: This item cannot be installed in your device's coutry
Google Play Movies: This item cannot be installed in your device's coutry

(German user)

Re:First test (1)

M0j0_j0j0 (1250800) | more than 2 years ago | (#39267415)

Again, all is broken, i am still waiting for my google voice in portugal..... google looks like my ex always changing the shitty furniture around the house to look the same in the end.

Re:First test (1)

houghi (78078) | more than 2 years ago | (#39268441)

Same here in Belgium. So it is basically a new website for Android Market.

Wacky World (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39267321)

I think it is odd that Canada and U.K. don't get the music, Australia doesn't get music nor movies, and Japan doesn't get the books nor the music.

What is Google saying here? Are Canadian's tone-deaf... Japanese can't read?

I think it is a wacky world if where you live determines what you can buy.

A little rhyme for the 'Play Store" (1)

wbr1 (2538558) | more than 2 years ago | (#39267393)

Google Search taught me what my life was worth. Google Docs lets me write at home in my socks. Google Mail, I get so much I want to wail. Google Maps led me into a criminals trap. Google Play, another way to make me Google Prey.

Vetted Apps (2)

WindBourne (631190) | more than 2 years ago | (#39267407)

It would actually be better if they would create a secured server in which only vetted apps are in it. My parents and in-laws are now on Android, and I worry about their downloading apps. Basically, it would be better for them to pay $.99-5 / app KNOWING that it is safe, rather than have access to so many apps of which a small number of them are insecure.

Re:Vetted Apps (2)

oakgrove (845019) | more than 2 years ago | (#39267743)

If you're that paranoid, word has it Amazon is running some kind of Android app store. If the rumors are to be believed you can even go to their website on your Android device and install the installer.

Re:Vetted Apps (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39267925)

It would actually be better if they would create a secured server in which only vetted apps are in it. My parents and in-laws are now on Android, and I worry about their downloading apps. Basically, it would be better for them to pay $.99-5 / app KNOWING that it is safe, rather than have access to so many apps of which a small number of them are insecure.

If you like trading freedom for security and allowing some corporation with questionable motives to decide what you can and cannot buy, get an iPhone. Just remember the fact that no software is ever "safe", even if Apple says so.

moD up (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39267545)

available tO IRRECOVERABLE

So, they still don't want my money... (3, Interesting)

gshegosh (1587463) | more than 2 years ago | (#39268141)

...just because I live in Poland or some other "obscure" country. I say fuck you and go back to piratebay.

Maybe you should blame your country? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39268733)

Do you know your country's laws about this sort of thing? Maybe you should look them up before you blame Google?

Congrats Google (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39268165)

You just ruined a decent Cloud service idea we have still been waiting on for years now.

I will continue to use Gmail it seems.

Eh, I guess I could video-crypt truecrypt data in to frames or some other useless nonsense for fun.
Static is best film.

Promises, promises (2)

fusiongyro (55524) | more than 2 years ago | (#39268201)

promising that you will never have to worry about losing or moving them across devices ever again.

You know, until they shut down the service in 18 months because it isn't popular enough...

Great! (1)

miltonw (892065) | more than 2 years ago | (#39268607)

As if finding something in Apps Market wasn't hard enough!

The only video I ever lost access to was from Goog (2)

SuperKendall (25149) | more than 2 years ago | (#39268645)

A few years ago I downloaded some test video from Google Video... doesn't work anymore since they shut things down.

So it's kind of amusing that Google is trying to solve a problem they themselves took part in at one point.

In contrast any video downloaded from iTunes still works - even if it's not in the store anymore.

However, given the nature of DRM video I still think of all DRM protected video as a rental. It might be a long term rental, it's great if it still works but I'm not silly enough to expect it always will. Until the video content providers managed to get their eyelids forced open Clockwork Orange style and made to see the same light the music industry saw, very little will change about online video as much as Google (or Apple) might claim you can access it "forever".

Here's to hoping whatever Apple comes up with un regards to a newer version of AppleTV is a step towards the video industry seeing that light.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?