MM Cloud

Any ideas about how to improve MediaMonkey? Let us know!

Moderator: Gurus

Nova5
Posts: 193
Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 11:33 pm

Re: MM Cloud

Post by Nova5 » Sun Jan 22, 2012 2:21 pm

windcrest77 wrote:
Agrajag wrote:I'd love to see MediaMonkey embrace the changing online world and move away from a client app and more towards a cloud version or at least a version we can install on our own servers and run from anywhere (which would include our phones, tablets, laptops, etc.)

Take the registration income and move to an online model. Put ads on the site (they generate more revenue than you can imagine but make them for things related to the music).

For me, I noticed I almost never use MediaMonkey anymore. Why? All my music is now in Google Music and I have Spotify. Between them I've got access to all my music and all music in general. The only thing I'm using MM for is editing my files. Sort of sad that that's what it's being reduced to. Nothing, in my view, is better at that but it just too inconvenient to bother with it otherwise.
I just ran a quick calculation...

If I had the luxury of leaving my computer running 24 hours a day, AND my Internet connection never went down, AND it ran at a constant upload speed of 1 mbps (which is typical average for my provider). It would take exactly 69.5 days to upload my 6TB library to "the cloud" additionally said "cloud provider" would easily charge me a cost of $15,000 over 3 years (based on Amazons current pricing for 3 year contract). Of course Internet connections are not always fast, do not alwways stay up, etc. so uploading my files would more likely take an entire year because I dont intend on running the computer 24 hours. Additionally if I did, my ISP would charge me for going over my upload transfer allocation further adding to the cost. Probably adding $100 a month to my bill for $1200 a year.

Here is how I got 70 days (6,000,000,000,000 bytes / 1,000,000 mbps = 6,000,000 seconds / 60 = 1,000,000 minutes / 60 = 1667 hours / 24 = 69.5 days). This is the ideal upload of course, never achievable. I figure more like one year of lost time doing an upload to "the cloud".

Or I can buy a couple of 3TB hard drives for around $300 (pre-Taiwan flood pricing). I can buy another pair of 3TB hard drives to store off-site as a backup in my safe deposit box. So for only $600 vs over $15,000, I am all set with very fast 600 gbps SATA 3 hard drives and no lag or need to be connected. Or I can pay Amazon $5,000 a year and my ISP another $1,000 and get really slow access time and the requirement that I always be in somebodys "hot spot" to do stuff.

Hmmm which would I pick? Tough decision.

Don't forget that a meg is 1024 bytes. not 1000 ;)

windcrest77
Posts: 399
Joined: Sat Aug 07, 2010 12:28 pm

Re: MM Cloud

Post by windcrest77 » Sun Jan 22, 2012 5:09 pm

Nova5 wrote:
windcrest77 wrote:
Agrajag wrote:I'd love to see MediaMonkey embrace the changing online world and move away from a client app and more towards a cloud version or at least a version we can install on our own servers and run from anywhere (which would include our phones, tablets, laptops, etc.)

Take the registration income and move to an online model. Put ads on the site (they generate more revenue than you can imagine but make them for things related to the music).

For me, I noticed I almost never use MediaMonkey anymore. Why? All my music is now in Google Music and I have Spotify. Between them I've got access to all my music and all music in general. The only thing I'm using MM for is editing my files. Sort of sad that that's what it's being reduced to. Nothing, in my view, is better at that but it just too inconvenient to bother with it otherwise.
I just ran a quick calculation...

If I had the luxury of leaving my computer running 24 hours a day, AND my Internet connection never went down, AND it ran at a constant upload speed of 1 mbps (which is typical average for my provider). It would take exactly 69.5 days to upload my 6TB library to "the cloud" additionally said "cloud provider" would easily charge me a cost of $15,000 over 3 years (based on Amazons current pricing for 3 year contract). Of course Internet connections are not always fast, do not alwways stay up, etc. so uploading my files would more likely take an entire year because I dont intend on running the computer 24 hours. Additionally if I did, my ISP would charge me for going over my upload transfer allocation further adding to the cost. Probably adding $100 a month to my bill for $1200 a year.

Here is how I got 70 days (6,000,000,000,000 bytes / 1,000,000 mbps = 6,000,000 seconds / 60 = 1,000,000 minutes / 60 = 1667 hours / 24 = 69.5 days). This is the ideal upload of course, never achievable. I figure more like one year of lost time doing an upload to "the cloud".

Or I can buy a couple of 3TB hard drives for around $300 (pre-Taiwan flood pricing). I can buy another pair of 3TB hard drives to store off-site as a backup in my safe deposit box. So for only $600 vs over $15,000, I am all set with very fast 600 gbps SATA 3 hard drives and no lag or need to be connected. Or I can pay Amazon $5,000 a year and my ISP another $1,000 and get really slow access time and the requirement that I always be in somebodys "hot spot" to do stuff.

Hmmm which would I pick? Tough decision.

Don't forget that a meg is 1024 bytes. not 1000 ;)
Actually my calculation is off by even way more. My upload speed is 1,000,000 BITS per second (not bytes), I divided 6TB by 1,000,000 bits and as any math teacher will tell you you cant divide apples by oranges. So actually the total time to upload this data is way more than what I said (because there are 8 bits to a byte). The total number of bits being uploaded is 6,000,000,000,000 times 8 (56 trillion bits).

So the corrected problem is:

(56,000,000,000,000 bits in total / 1,000,000 bits per second) = (56,000,000 seconds / 60) = (933,333 minutes / 60) = (15,556 hours / 24) = (648 days /365) = 1 year and 283 days to upload the data!

(And this number is still too low because I did not account for the extra 24 bytes on every kB which, would be an extra 144 billion bytes added to the original 6TB).

So my computer would have to run 24 hours a day for nearly 2 years to upload 6TB to this so-called "cloud".

Therefore for the purposes of maintaining a music library I think the cloud does not work. Maybe it works for a few songs that you want to access on a portable basis for convenience. But thats not the strength of MM, MM's main strength is its ability to maintain a large personal library. Maintaining a library in "the cloud" seems problematic until access speeds start to approach that of a 1990's IDE hard drive. Today we use SATA 3 which can run to 600 mbps (for read and write) vs 1 mbps in the cloud (for write and maybe 10 mbps read).

I dont have 2 years to spend just doing the initial load of my media collection to the cloud, let alone spending the ongoing cloud fees for that storage, and bandwidth fees of my ISP. And lose the ability to work offline.

Nova5
Posts: 193
Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 11:33 pm

Re: MM Cloud

Post by Nova5 » Sun Jan 22, 2012 5:39 pm

And with an ever expanding collection as you add new data, costs increase. which is why a personally handled "cloud" is better. a server with access ports set right on the router. You can either do direct port passing, or indirect port passing. Direct would be port 200 outside to port 200 inside. But people know and look for the specific ports so indirect is better if you can manage it with your client software. Port 8753 outside to port 200 inside.

wormywyrm
Posts: 73
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 4:40 pm

Re: MM Cloud

Post by wormywyrm » Fri Sep 07, 2012 12:23 am

I am trying to find/recall the personal cloud software (where you host from your own computer) that is compatible with both mediamonkey (so it loads in your music and playlists from media monkey) and one or more apps on android/iphone/wp8. I can't remember what it was called but I remember reading about something like this...
MM to Grooveshark Playlist Sync w/ MonkeyShark.
http://lysle.net/projects/monkeyshark.php

kjegou
Posts: 33
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2008 10:40 am

MM and cloud storage

Post by kjegou » Thu Dec 13, 2012 7:31 am

I am running MM with an external USB drive libary on the USB and MM DB also on the USB). I am investigating the option of running MM with the libary media being on a remote cloud (meaning: not on a local physical drive, should it be SAN or portable USB) located at an external, commercial provider.

Options are Amazon (see existing topic in this forum), but also Google Play, maybe others like Dropbox, Adrive. My internet provier also has its own cloud offer where i can put MP3 files.
Although i am not a fan of iTunes, i have to say they are stronger in this area with the iCloud.

Unfortuantely i have not found in the forum experience of MM users that are really running MM using the cloud.

If you have any experience in this area, please share. Please mention the cloud provider also.

rovingcowboy
Posts: 14153
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2003 7:57 am
Location: (Texas)
Contact:

Re: MM and cloud storage

Post by rovingcowboy » Sun Dec 16, 2012 8:13 am

I for one don't like the idea of using web servers to store my personel files, where i have to log on to get my files.
I do that with web pages but i have copy of my web site here where i can move to another host if need be.
Makes no sense to me to have computers here and not use them. And to have hand helds and not use them the size of mem cards for devices has gotten huge so no need to store on the web.
I use the web for others to view and get files i offer them, ms is trying to make us go to their online web apps and storage and i'm not buying what they say is good for me, i dont trust the cloud, which by the way is just the web servers, cloud refeers to the text balloon that is used to write the word internet in when drawing web layout on a whiteboard.
I mean really took brains to call it a cloud geeze any kindergarden kid could have thought that up. 8) and podcasts all they are is mov files uploaded to web for down loading via streaming,
Sorry got on rant.

Some might use web based serving of song files here but i dont think many do, still your request is a fair one i can see others might use it if it were simple enough.
Last edited by rovingcowboy on Sun May 05, 2013 4:38 pm, edited 1 time in total.
roving cowboy / keith hall. My skins http://www.mediamonkey.com/forum/viewto ... =9&t=16724 for some help check on Monkey's helpful messages at http://www.mediamonkey.com/forum/viewto ... 4008#44008 MY SYSTEMS.1.Jukebox WinXp pro sp 3 version 3.5 gigabyte mb. 281 GHz amd athlon x2 240 built by me.) 2.WinXP pro sp3, vers 2.5.5 and vers 3.5 backup storage, shuttle 32a mb,734 MHz amd athlon put together by me.) 3.Dell demension, winxp pro sp3, mm3.5 spare jukebox.) 4.WinXp pro sp3, vers 3.5, dad's computer bought from computer store. )5. Samsung Galaxy 5 Android 5) 6. Proscan tablet Android 4.3 ) 7. amd a8-5600 apu 3.60ghz mm version 4 windows 7 pro bought from computer store.

GlitterKill
Posts: 1
Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2013 9:34 am

Access to Google Music and/or Google Drive

Post by GlitterKill » Fri Mar 29, 2013 9:39 am

Being able to play music from a Google Music account (and make ratings to songs) and/or access to play songs that may be located on Google Drive would be fantastic.

Also other online storage as sources to play music from would be nice... ie. Dropbox, Box.net, Yandex.disk, etc.

Thanks for the great product!

morellcsarah
Posts: 2
Joined: Thu May 02, 2013 5:22 am

Re: Access to Google Music and/or Google Drive

Post by morellcsarah » Fri May 03, 2013 9:22 am

I think this is a great idea! :)
"Each person must live their life as a model for others." value point distribution

andyco63@gmail.com
Posts: 2
Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2009 11:19 pm

Re: MM and cloud storage

Post by andyco63@gmail.com » Sun May 05, 2013 8:04 am

Cowboy -
been a fan, albeit silent, of your contribution on the site for many a year.
however, i believe "cloud" based storage - more particularly, the geographic separation/independence of content (music) and the app (player) - is a
trend that will only accelerate over time.

Clearly there IS a huge incentive for MS and most s/w vendors to promote this trend, but it also enables
an ease of use & capability that a huge majority of users will want/demand. and the "less tech sophisticated"
users won't have the know-how (or confidence) to set up their own home-based servers (even if they already have the h/w and s/w
6 inches in front of them :wink: )

So although i agree with your approach (and largely have followed it myself), i hope that MM follows
the masses into support for cloud/remote storage. Ignoring cloud storage would only serve to narrow the
usage model and clientele, further isolating it from the broader media, s/w and networking landscape.

One of the primary core competencies of MM is the ability to create, organize and manage a media library. This function is
the primary (sole?) reason i've never been tempted to consider another manager. I gotta believe that this is true for
many or most MM users. That Media Library will move to the cloud for many, many users over the next few years.
We could debate that MM users may migrate slower, but it's inevitable that most (commercially available) media will be
geo separated from the app/user in the near future. MM should strive to provide the best management system for media libraries
where-ever they reside - something for which they've been a leader to date (and admittedly is getting tougher to accomplish).

/soap box off/
andy




andy

rovingcowboy
Posts: 14153
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2003 7:57 am
Location: (Texas)
Contact:

Re: MM and cloud storage

Post by rovingcowboy » Sun May 05, 2013 4:44 pm

wow i got a fan? :o cool 8) thanks. :)

yepper andy most are going to head to the web servers for storage and access of their own files. it will be made super simple by the big companys so it will be the normal thing to do. but i hope all program developers keep ways for us that don't want to store on the web. to be able to use their programs offline,
there use to be a term used for types like me, it was " A Stick in the Mud ". but like that stuck stick i can be moved to a different spot in the mud. just not very easy. :lol: and mostly i'll go kicking and screaming. :roll:
roving cowboy / keith hall. My skins http://www.mediamonkey.com/forum/viewto ... =9&t=16724 for some help check on Monkey's helpful messages at http://www.mediamonkey.com/forum/viewto ... 4008#44008 MY SYSTEMS.1.Jukebox WinXp pro sp 3 version 3.5 gigabyte mb. 281 GHz amd athlon x2 240 built by me.) 2.WinXP pro sp3, vers 2.5.5 and vers 3.5 backup storage, shuttle 32a mb,734 MHz amd athlon put together by me.) 3.Dell demension, winxp pro sp3, mm3.5 spare jukebox.) 4.WinXp pro sp3, vers 3.5, dad's computer bought from computer store. )5. Samsung Galaxy 5 Android 5) 6. Proscan tablet Android 4.3 ) 7. amd a8-5600 apu 3.60ghz mm version 4 windows 7 pro bought from computer store.

wormywyrm
Posts: 73
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 4:40 pm

Re: MM and cloud storage

Post by wormywyrm » Fri Jul 26, 2013 12:39 am

I completely agree, the cloud is where music is moving. I stopped using mediamonkey 1-2 years ago because I have a phone, tablet, and PC. Syncing them with mediamonkey was too confusing, time consuming, and never really worked right. I have been keeping an eye on mediamonkey hoping that they give us a cloud solution.

We store and organize our music so that it can be played. We now live in a world of multiple devices, pretty much everyone has at least 2 devices, a phone and a computer. Many people also have a tablet, multiple computers, a device connected to their tv, or maybe their car.

If mediamonkey wants to help people organize and store their music, it will need to organize and store the music in such a way that it can be accessed by these devices.
MM to Grooveshark Playlist Sync w/ MonkeyShark.
http://lysle.net/projects/monkeyshark.php

wormywyrm
Posts: 73
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 4:40 pm

Re: Access to Google Music and/or Google Drive

Post by wormywyrm » Sat Jul 27, 2013 8:58 pm

I was playing with google music API a bit, it is only available for Python though and I am not very familiar. I was hoping to make a way to auto export music from mediamonkey to google music so I can see my music on the cloud and android phone easily.

The idea is probably better for an add-on as opposed to a full out functionality of MM.

I never got my google music script working but like I said, it is doable if you know python. I ended up using grooveshark instead (grooveshark API is accessed via PHP), see my signature for that. Grooveshark has phone apps and web app.
MM to Grooveshark Playlist Sync w/ MonkeyShark.
http://lysle.net/projects/monkeyshark.php

olivechicago
Posts: 52
Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2013 11:57 am

Re: MM and cloud storage

Post by olivechicago » Sat Oct 26, 2013 12:37 pm

Hehe... the "cloud," nothing like a catchy name to rebrand a technology that has been around since the mid 90's.

WebDAV anyone? That's kind of cloud 101 from the consumers point of view. If I can have a webDAV folder residing on my PC(s), there should be a way for MM to recognize this "drive."

But since webDAV could be too complex to the average user, esp if they don't have access to an internet facing server, Dropbox, Google Drive, Sky Drive and the like all have API's.

anonymust
Posts: 66
Joined: Sun Oct 10, 2010 12:11 pm
Location: Earth
Contact:

Playing from the "cloud"

Post by anonymust » Tue Apr 15, 2014 5:38 pm

I am running out of space on my computers since I started to edit videos... .. this has caused me to move most of my music to an external harddrive (slow usb 2.0) and put some music I hardly listen to anymore in "the Cloud"

Less space on my system means more (free) cloud services I sign up for.. to test the waters and their services.. and I just left my 22GB dropbox account behind thanks to Condoleezza Rice

Are their any future plans for MediaMonkey to allow play and sync back of files from the cloud?

I would love to see this feature and I'm willing to adapt to a new cloud service just to have my music. (and not iTunes/iCloud hate that)
Last edited by Lowlander on Tue Apr 15, 2014 8:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Merged with existing topic
"MediaMonkey is the shizzle my nizzle" - Snoop Dogg

jmcc
Posts: 113
Joined: Sun Apr 01, 2012 4:47 pm
Location: Paris, France
Contact:

Windows Azure and cloud storage

Post by jmcc » Thu Jun 12, 2014 6:19 pm

Hi - I've just started playing with Windows Azure BLOB storage and was wondering whether you had any development plans in the cloud direction? I'm thinking specifically of using the cloud to host a music collection which would then be accessible from any Mediamonkey device without having to worry about backups etc. At $0.0179 per Gb per month it's also fairly cost effective (my 150Gb wav file library would cost $32/year). You could probably already do this by using 3rd party software to map the cloud container as a virtual drive, but I suspect this would involve latency whilst waiting for the file to download completely before it started playing. As the storage container is accessed via http/https, you could get round this latency issue by starting to play the file before it was fully downloaded in a pseudo streaming fashion. Just some thoughts to try to divine what direction you're moving in.
Last edited by Lowlander on Thu Jun 12, 2014 7:38 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Merged with existing topic

Post Reply