I saw that, too. Sounds to me like Lala. Which would be great... if they hadn't failed. Then again, with a built-in subscriber base, maybe eMu could pull it off.
But unlike Lala, you'd only be able to stream songs you've bought and paid for...or did I miss something? As posted on the eMu messboard, I see no benefit of this personally, and am wary of additional costs associated with it. I mistrust the whole "cloud" thing...it assumes an extra layer of technology that I don't currently have and don't plan on acquiring anytime soon.
@Doofy - With Lala you could stream anything you owned, whether you bought it from them or not. Everything else you could stream only once.
If you can create playlists, radio stations, etc. then I would find it useful as it might cut down on me carrying my external HD back and forth from work. I couldn't imagine paying extra for that feature, but it would be an added bonus that might keep me subscribing.
I don't think lala "failed" - Apple bought them for their library-matching cloud tech, iirc. Why lala was awesome for me was not the cloud, but the one-free-streaming. If emusic arranged those rights with their cloud model, that would be equally awesome. I subscribed to napster to dupe that, and it's a pretty good deal ($60/yr), but their label coverage is less than lala's, unfortunately, and I find a lot of undesirable holes.
Comments
(an A. Klein, nonetheless)
If you can create playlists, radio stations, etc. then I would find it useful as it might cut down on me carrying my external HD back and forth from work. I couldn't imagine paying extra for that feature, but it would be an added bonus that might keep me subscribing.