locked
iCloud - oh the irony... RRS feed

  • Question

  • I read that Apple are not going to copy the Google cloud strategy (which Microsoft appear to be slavishly apeing) of accessing cloud data uniquely through a web browser. Instead, they will continue to sell Apps that will interact and synch with data stored on the cloud. I have little doubt that this approach will be a great success as it will allow people to work offline when necessary, and allow people to work with flexible and fast apps rather than clunking away through a web browser.

    How ironic then that this was EXACTLY how MS Money used to work - until the new muppet in charge of microsoft binned it...

    Thursday, June 9, 2011 8:55 AM

All replies

  • If they were ahead of their time storing people's financial data in the cloud, I suspect they were a long ways ahead. I'm betting there are a LOT of people who feel more comfortable storing their tunes and birthday pix and spam mail from amazon in the cloud than their entire fianancial histories. OTOH, mint.com doesn't seem to be disappearing.
    Friday, June 10, 2011 2:12 AM
    Moderator
  • MSMoney used to sync over the cloud between two machines, and used to download lots of public data, but crucially all data was stored locally, and the application could be used offline. It would fit in perfectly with Apple's cloud vision.

    Mint fits with Google's cloud vision - everything stored on the cloud and users have to clunk away through an online connection to update their data. I agree, Mint is completely unappealing to me.

    Friday, June 10, 2011 7:51 AM
  • MSMoney used to sync over the cloud between two machines, and used to download lots of public data, but crucially all data was stored locally, and the application could be used offline.


    I don't recall Money ever letting you sync data between two machines running Money--IIRC it stored a subset of transaction data and allowed you to enter transaction data into the cloud and later recover it into your full data set locally stored. It was oversold as doing more than it ever really did. Precious few people used it. It didn't last long. All data was stored locally--some of it was also stored online. In their hearts, I suspect the Money team really preferred the Google vision primarily because it reduces their costs and increases their control over the users: it reduces support costs by eleiminating the infinite universe of local problems beyond their control that could break their app and reducing the number of ways users can lose their own data; it increases control over the user because it enables them to force users to use whatever version of the code they want whenever they choose and gives them complete insight into the user, their data, and their use model.
    Saturday, June 11, 2011 3:21 AM
    Moderator