What a waste. So glad I avoided buying a $4 album off lala because they were then owned by apple. Lala used to be a good site with some cool ideas, but they suck for letting Apple buy them.
God forbid some entrepreneurs start up a business to make some money. PS I'm sure Apple is dying for your $4. Quick, everyone sell their stock now, Apple didn't get Kite Tree's $4. They're doomed!!
@High haha so true. It was the principle though. I don't have a problem with them selling the company. It's just,couldn't they find a company who actually wanted to do something with the site they put so much hard work into?
@The Kite Eating Tree how do you know that Apple doesn't. Seriously, with all the stuff like the itunes preview web site and timing this so that Lala.com shuts down within 10 days of WWDC. how do you know that Apple hasn't been working behind the scenes on a major conversion, while letting the existing lala stay up. And now they are ready to go. and in typical Apple style they like to close the doors for a spell to do the final bits and reopen with a big TA-DA
@Charlik Well mainly the assumption comes from web songs turning into itunes credits. If apple does the cloud music service that would be cool though, and wouldn't be too shocking. It just doesn't seem likely to be done right because they seem to want people to use the itunes program which ruins it on public machines. I kind of doubt they'll let users stream an entire song once for free too which was my favorite feature.
During his WWDC keynote, Steve Jobs touted iCloud as a service that will sync many of your Apple devices, for free. Macs, iPhones, iPads, and even Windows computers can synchronize documents, contacts, calendar appointments, and other data.
The most commented posts on Engadget over the past 24 hours.
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
What a waste. So glad I avoided buying a $4 album off lala because they were then owned by apple. Lala used to be a good site with some cool ideas, but they suck for letting Apple buy them.
@The Kite Eating Tree
God forbid some entrepreneurs start up a business to make some money. PS I'm sure Apple is dying for your $4. Quick, everyone sell their stock now, Apple didn't get Kite Tree's $4. They're doomed!!
@High haha so true. It was the principle though. I don't have a problem with them selling the company. It's just,couldn't they find a company who actually wanted to do something with the site they put so much hard work into?
@The Kite Eating Tree how do you know that Apple doesn't. Seriously, with all the stuff like the itunes preview web site and timing this so that Lala.com shuts down within 10 days of WWDC. how do you know that Apple hasn't been working behind the scenes on a major conversion, while letting the existing lala stay up. And now they are ready to go. and in typical Apple style they like to close the doors for a spell to do the final bits and reopen with a big TA-DA
@Charlik but with LaLaI could listen without having iTunes eat my music collection. Oh well, I have Mog, Spotify, and grooveshark.
OT: Engadget, you android app always scrolls past the comment box when I try to type with me keyboard on my droid. It's very annoying
@Charlik Well mainly the assumption comes from web songs turning into itunes credits. If apple does the cloud music service that would be cool though, and wouldn't be too shocking. It just doesn't seem likely to be done right because they seem to want people to use the itunes program which ruins it on public machines. I kind of doubt they'll let users stream an entire song once for free too which was my favorite feature.