Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

> This is a great example of why I don't move all my data to the cloud

Music is a great use-case for keeping data in the cloud. You can have a consistent music library and can use any player client-side. Personally I prefer the spotify "all-you-can-listen" model, but I have a bunch of MP3s that aren't on spotify that I seamlessly stream from dropbox (either to winamp or the spotify client, which allows you to sync local files).

There is so much lost when moving to the cloud.

Off the top of my head: You tie your data to one provider instead of simply physical media, you lose discoverability (will your kids browse your album choices 30 years from now?), exporting/importing quality is at the mercy of the provider (for example Amazon dropped several dozen mp3s when I migrated a few gigs to Google), and of course you place your data at the mercy of a business, (is any tech company eternal and/or always interested in providing cloud services?)

The cloud is way overdone, after giving a variety of services a go over the last few years, I'm actually pulling back.

That's why you run your own "cloud" music service. Personally I use Subsonic, and it is amazing.


I used to run Subsonic, now I'm loving http://plexapp.com and the (paid) iOS app.

I'm also an Rdio and Netflix subscriber, but running Plex on my server allows me to 'roll my own Netflix' and stream movies and music to my iPad or other computers, or even from my server to any computer in the web browser. I'm happy.

Man, I can't get Plex to run. It looks so excellent but whenever I try and play anything I get "Media player error! Resetting" and then nothing happens.

Edit: Rebooted phone and it works now. Holy shit this is cool, and I can even share my media library with friends!

so, all that gets you is a interface and some search?

i just have an apache serving all my videos and a bookmark on any device browser. click and play. for android i use mx player.

Plex is the only solution that I have found that seamlessly plays video on my flatscreen through my mobile with the content being served from my laptop.

Before you ask - yes I used to be running xbmc, minidlna, etc. previously. No, they are nowhere as good (actually, to rephrase, the client-server model is not xbmc's focus, which is completely wrong IMHO).

So you can set up apache to host movies on a home network, then stream them with VLC? That sounds like a fantastic solution. Is there a solution for playing music this way on something resembling a stereo that supports playlists?

Also there's Ampache.




Within the last year the project ditched their website in favor of just using github. However, strangely they didn't migrate any the content from their website to it.

I also use subsonic and love it. It's unfortunate that the author moved to a monthly/yearly subscription model. Luckily, I am grandfathered into a lifetime premium membership with a free dynamic DNS address, which is really nice.

Or you can use Supersonic or Madsonic, which are forks without the "forced donation for open source software" problem.

MPD ftw

Sounded really good until I got to the part about needing to pay a subscription fee.

It's ONE DOLLAR per month. ONE DOLLAR! And it's only if you want the extra features. Would you rather have ads be inserted between your songs or something? The development of the app needs to be paid for one way or the other.

One dollar is too much for something that was a solved problem (media sync).

How is that a solved problem?

How is it not?

Plug shit into PC, two way sync. WinPhone and iOS do this fine.

Ah yes, the old "sync 600GB of MP3s onto a 32GB device" trick.

Yes because you really need 600GB of mp3s which on the back of an envelope calculation is over 1000 days of listening for 8 hours a day at a reasonable bitrate with no repeats...

I'm sure, at amazon prices which is a fair approximation including CDs, you didn't spend $100,000 on them either.

This is really not a problem. Well it is but only greed created it.

You miss the point. The idea is not to be able to listen to all music, but any music from one's collection.

Putting this down to greed? What an incredibly short sighted, ignorant thing to say. Perhaps we should have stopped at black & white feature phones because only greed could mean we wanted to access the whole internet on the move?

It isn't a "solved problem" because there are still issues with the solution.

You don't understand: All music must be in FLAC because MP3/AAC/WMP just "doesn't sound right".

I just copy it all over the internet. I can't countenance making multiple trips with a usb key, or even worse lugging around an external hard drive.

Which has to be reason #2 or #3 why I hate iTunes with passion.

You don't need to. Since subsonic is Open Source, there's naturally multiple forks with the licensing code removed. The best fork, which also adds features, is madsonic[0]. I recommend it. In addition, if you already have subsonic, the license code is simply a check if your password = the md5 of your email. So using "example@example.com" and "23463b99b62a72f26ed677cc556c44e8" will make it think you're a valid subscriber and give you all features.

[0]: http://www.madsonic.org/

> the license code is simply a check if your password = the md5 of your email

That used to be the case, but the newer versions actually phone home and verify the license.

Thanks for the information. It was true the last time I used subsonic, but that isn't all that recently. Still, I have no doubt it wouldn't be hard to remove it from the code.

echo " subsonic.org" | sudo tee -a /etc/hosts

Sorry but the front of that page made me throw up a bit in my mouth and just close it back down again...

I like how they used a massive picture and then scaled it down in the IMG tag instead of just resizing the picture and putting it on the page. Very entertaining...!

You don't need to. It's a freemium model - paying a subscription gets you some extra features, like apps for mobile.

We all need to eat.

But it seems those music listeners in this thread are the type that prefer a single up-front cost over a recurring subscription.

From the site: Based on Java technology

Ugh.. lost me. I don't run Java anything anymore.

I hear a lot of people claim that, but the reality is that many people run applications they don't realize are Java, and a lot of the infrastructure you rely on runs Java behind it.

As a JavaEE architect/developer, I whole-heartedly agree that you shouldn't run Applets in your browser anymore. In fact, unsigned applets will no longer run after January of 2014, which will break a lot of the banking infrastructure and a couple important client applications at my day job.

This isn't even a java applet. It's java server side code. There is absolutely no reason for the former poster to boycott this aside from ignorant pig-headedness (and this is coming from someone who isn't exactly a fan of java himself)

what is that?

Well then, I guess you're going to miss out on some great technology for a pretty dumb reason.

Java may not be amazing, but it's hardly "so bad I literally won't ever use it."

not really... there are better alternatives that don't use java.

Thanks for the worthless comment!

I think he has a tiny point actually: I saw a number of people around me removing Java (or not installing it on new computers) after the numerous vulnerabilities reported recently. Just a data point but well - I wonder if this could affect sales of java-based product etc.

This is why. The never ending stream of security issues. The installer hijacking my browser search bar. The never ending nags about new versions, which hijack my browser all over again. It's just not worth it. I have removed Java from all my computers and will never install it again.

I fully realize many web sites and services are implemented in Java, that's not what I was talking about. I will not install or run anything that needs Java. Period.

You can run Java applications and secure them from the web. Just disable Java applets from your browser (most have an option in the browser itself; those that don't will have extensions to do the same - like you would to block Flash plugins)

Just don't install a java plugin for the browser. Simple.

I've never ever had this problem, but I also run OpenJDK, so...

right, you don't run Java. Java is everywhere so unless you live in the jungle I'm quite sure you use it everyday.

One can very easily not run any desktop Java apps, and not run any applets. That's what he meant, and that's what matters.

Who cares if he still uses some website that is build on servlets server side, or if his tv/car/fridge has a Java running CPU? That's totally besides the point.

Java is not "everywhere". In fact it's getting nowhere fast (including it's use on microcontrollers and devices). The only exception is server side, where it's also not what it used to be these days...

Java may be going nowhere fast as a language, but the JVM isn't going away anytime soon.

If you combine Scala, Clojure and Groovy, you still don't have enough momentum on the scape of what Java had or even Python.

Scala is more popular now than Python was at the same age, and it is used for much more serious stuff than currently Python is.

What does "serious" mean in this context? Is it another way of saying high load? Enterprise? Is scientific computing serious? How can you say that one platform is used for "much more serious stuff" when you almost certainly have no idea what 99.9% of all python (or Scala) installations are being used for.

Do you happen to have a source for this (genuinely interested) :)

You're really missing out. Subsonic is amazing. You should at least look at it a little bit.

Serious question: why?

Well, I wouldn't let Java stop me from using something, but to play devil's advocate :

"Because I have a resource limited platform in which I cannot handle many dependencies."

Subsonic on a Cubieboard is a dreary task.

That sounds reasonable enough, but doesn't really explain the statement "I don't run Java anything anymore."

Limited resource platforms can run java just fine - but large software with many dependencies, sure, that's a valid concern.

All my iTunes Match content came from my computer, can be copied to my computer, and can be backed up independently.

There's no reason that The Cloud and Owning Your Files has to be a binary choice. The Cloud can be a great compliment to your local file storage, rather than a replacement for it.

Another example: store your music in Dropbox, which clones it to all your devices (where applicable), and then use Tunebox (https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/tunebox-dropbox-music-player...) as your frontend. Now you have a 'cloud' music service where you control the content, someone else handles the distribution, and everything is cloned locally on all your machines (for your other players to use). Then you can trivially back up your music files from Dropbox to a local backup (or a third-party backup service if all you want is some form of company-independent redundancy.

Or you could use the new free webapp I just launched (shameless plug) http://Streamboxr.com - responsive webapp that can play your dropbox music on any device.... no install needed, free.

Cool idea!

I use ownCloud[1] . A bit of a hassle to install, and not as streamlined as e.g. Dropbox to use, but well worth it if you wish to have your own, free and open source cloud solution.

[1]: http://owncloud.org

Try Mopidy [1], it's a version of mpd that plays all your music - local files, Spotify, Soundcloud, Rdio, etc. It's awesome.

[1]: http://www.mopidy.com/

Agree. I'm doing the same with everything related to "the cloud". The current international political climate doesn't support this model.

Also with music, I point blank refuse to let music turn into a subscription based service. I still buy CDs when something agrees with my ears and listen to them.

I also quite happily transcribe things to sheet music and play it breaking many a royalty and public performance law. Fuck 'em.

Hurray for the CD purchasers! I thought I was the only one left doing this! I too cannot abide a cloud based service for listening to music. I understand the merits of Google's music service but given the fleeting nature of cloud based services, I would rather have a physical copy of something that I can rerip if necessary (and look at the sleeve notes). Having to download music over my limited mobile connection whilst out and about doesn't sound like fun, particularly when the cost of an iPod Classic (with sufficient storage for all of my music, unlike the Touch) is negligible, and the dodgy nature of coverage in hilly areas in the UK. I am chuffed that CD buyers still exist!

I live in London and coverage here is pretty bad at times. My phone barely manages GPRS at times.

There are plenty of us CD buyers left :). We're just not as noisy.

Isn't this true of data in general. Not just specific to music. It's unfortunate that Amazon dropped some mp3s but that is more of an exception than the norm right ? If we are talking about data integrity, there are several ways in which this can be mitigated. I think it's worthwhile to have all your music stored in a location that is accessible from anywhere and from any player

you're only making the case for improvements to cloud data providers, not making the case that physical media is still worth using.

physical media has enormous problems for anything besides long term archival use.

I glad my music collection was on physical media when tornadoes knocked power out to just about the entire county. I had something to cure the boredom besides drinking and rioting! (Well, once the weather stopped trying to kill us all.)

I'm also glad my music is on physical media every time I don't have to pay insane rates for a couple hours of wifi on a flight just to listen to my music, or when I'm killing time somewhere where cell service is spotty at best.

I don't yet live in the future where access to the cloud is a given, and I prefer my devices don't become completely useless without a data connection.

Edit: My primary physical media isn't a pile of CDs—I have plenty of those too, but stopped carrying them the moment I got an MP3 player. Now I carry almost my entire collection on my phone and a whole lot more than that on my laptop. I see nothing wrong with having copies of things in the cloud (remote backup FTW), but I'm not about to take a shotgun to my local disks.

"physical media has enormous problems for anything besides long term archival use"

for those of us that consider music as art that is precisely the point, especially re: children browsing their parents collections

All my iTunes Match content came/comes from CDs. I still buy physical media from Amazon when it makes sense (most of the time).

i agree. however i wouldn't worry about your kids wanting to browse your music choices

That's such a tired cliché. Plenty of us share some music tastes with our parents.

Put your data in more than one cloud and keep a local backup.

You can check out our personal cloud software Tonido (http://www.tonido.com). It organizes all your music, video collection and makes it available from anywhere. We have very good mobile apps for iOS, Android and even for Windows 8. You don't need to take our word. Just check the app ratings and reviews in app stores.

Tonido sucks. Nothing but issues and problems with it and support is non-existent. Stay away!

I wanted a free TonidoPlug but no one read my mind and sent it to me for free, so they're just awful.

you don't even need tonidoplug for it. If you have an old PC or Linux box and you can mount your NAS containing your music, you can just install the free version of Tonido Desktop and stream all of it.

you just created an account to say this :). Looks like we are getting popular. Please check our forum, our community and make an informed decision.

@team tonido: just tried the newer v4.* version and it totally rocks, like 10x better than previous one, good jobs !

I think they complement each other rather than directly compete with each other. I have all my files stored locally, but I also have them all uploaded to Google Music so I can listen to them on my phone. Even if Google Music shuts down, I have local copies.

This is the smart strategy. If you're that concerned about the hands you're putting your music in, then all or nothing isn't a good plan.

Instead, diversify and maintain. I use iTunes Match, Google Music and keep everything locally as well as a backup on my server. It all happens automatically when music is added to the local library. Nothing is lost, and redundant access is gained.

>Music is a great use-case for keeping data in the cloud.

Yes, but ideally, when it's your cloud. Just because all these major cloud players can just stop their service on their whim.

Server. Cloud. If it's your personal music it's not going to matter whether you have a cluster of servers or your single VPS with a service running on it. This cloud buzz is like ajax of 5 years ago. Can we use the terms 'online' and 'hosted' rather than this vague cloud buzzwordry? It's a plague upon tech sites and tech marketing.

Thanks for reminding me to set up OwnCloud [1]. :)

[1] http://owncloud.org

I prefer Seafile, owncloud didn't work properly. As in, failed at syncing files.

Noted, I'll try that too. Thank you!

>all these major cloud player can just stop their service on their whim

If you are concerned with minimizing monetary loss rather than preserving working copies of your media [1] you can treat that as an argument for choosing a media provider that allows you to pay a monthly fee. If (when) their service gets discontinued you switch to another one; the only problem you would face is migrating your favorites, bookmark, playlists and the like [2].

[1] Which makes sense when the specific things you want to access (watch, listen to, read, play, etc.) are not rare and can be found elsewhere.

[2] Incidentally, this is something you could offer as SaaS. Edit: See http://resp.in/, http://www.getunify.com/, the FOSS project https://github.com/mauimauer/portify, etc.

If (when) their service gets discontinued you switch to another one; the only problem you would face is migrating your favorites, bookmark, playlists and the like [2].

I don't think this is a good strategy, you are putting yourself at the mercy of content license negotiations that are done by a bunch of idiots with their heads up their asses that you have absolutely no control over. There is no guarantee that the music you "rent" from one service will be available for you to "rent" on another service.

> Music is a great use-case for keeping data in the cloud

Since when? For start it drains battery much faster. Oh and you know, it does not work offline!

Plenty of cloud/online music services allow you to cache music offline to avoid those problems.

So to copy album into phone I have to upload to web, than download it to phone? I could also use USB 1.0 or serial port with similar speed.

Until network will be more reliable and faster than my hdd, there is not much to discus.

What's the USB speed when you're three miles from home?

20 MB/s, my phone has USB Host :-)

For those who are shaking their heads at the idea of their collection fitting on dropbox, or listening to single tracks of whatever is on Spotify, I recommend Subsonic. I stream my whole collection from my home connection to my phone.


No thanks to the cloud regarding my music. Even though I use the crap out of Google Music, it sucks at keeping track of diffs between locally and the cloud. I change album art and other metadata all the time. Real pain in the pass. And then there's always the case of where one won't have Internet access, especially when driving.

Can we just say online instead of 'the cloud'? That's what you mean, does it matter if it's only a single server or a virtualized XEN cluster? No.

I strongly agree with this comment. I still wish there is an easy solution for hosting all my music in different original format without a high cost, but also playable through a cloud player. Music is something that I need it constantly but don't really mind if it is lost in a few years. I used to run Subsonic on beagleboard but it barely keeps up with converting flac to mp3 at stream time. I am looking at http://meetlima.com/ but I don't think that is what I want. iTune integration will become a huge issue unless it pops up as a Shared music.

I'm somewhere in between. I stream my music from a server that I own and control. Virtually unlimited storage + full control of the data = :)

Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact