Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Questionable Rumor Claims Safari and iTunes to Merge Into Single Application

I'm sorry everyone. I didn't have anything better to do today than spreading one of the most ridiculous rumors of the new year. BTW: Apple is going to switch back to PPC CPUs with the G8. I heard it from a "reliable source." ;) And no,it's not the voice in my head.
 
The rumor is of course, bunk, but here's what I'd like to see.

iTunes should be turned into a media server and accessible from a web-only UI. That's right, make a web front end to iTunes that can access all content on the media server from anywhere in my house.

A non-web UI might be desirable to rip new media (CDs), and/or manage the media store, but that would likely be minimal.

When I add something to iTunes, it should move content to the media server (which might be on the same machine, but also might not). Multiple accounts should have access to the same media server, or different ones if they desire. But there should never be a situation where I'm reduced to "sharing" an iTunes library between different accounts, and I have to keep switching users to shut down iTunes. That's just idiocy.
 
roadbloc said:
For the sweet love of God Apple, NO!
Click to expand...

It is highly unlikely they would even consider such a move as at would trigger an antitrust investigation

My guess is that they are moving the iTunes/app store to a truly web based experience for computers, perhaps streamlining the media manager side of the app etc. And someone just ran too far with it or totally misunderstood what they were being told
 
charlituna said:
It is highly unlikely they would even consider such a move as at would trigger an antitrust investigation

My guess is that they are moving the iTunes/app store to a truly web based experience for computers, perhaps streamlining the media manager side of the app etc. And someone just ran too far with it or totally misunderstood what they were being told
Click to expand...

Kinda what I was thinking. Or they are adding the ability for Safari to stream one's music from the upcoming "cloud."
 
HLdan said:
I certainly don't think Safari is utter crap. I'm suspecting you're a PC user that's tried Safari and just hates it. On the Mac it's an excellent browser and it's inline with the UI. iTunes is great app, but yes it's sadly bloated and slow. Apple needs to work on iTunes badly, but I don't agree either with integrating the browser and media player.
Click to expand...

I use Safari for Windows, along with IE9, on my desktop and laptop and I think Safari it's pretty damn good.
 
This would make sense. Since itunes can be viewed in a browser.

If apple does it right.......who knows, it just might be ok
 
Stetrain said:
I think that this is really what Apple should do:

-Make a new app that manages iOS devices and also lets you shop for iOS apps.

-Make iTunes work exactly like iBooks does on iOS devices, it's a place for content and also a store for that content.

-The iOS management app would let you sync iTunes content just like it lets you sync iPhoto content. It would also have all of the iTunes stores available within it, but to play music it takes you to iTunes.

This way Apple still gets to put all the parts of the iTunes store in front of everyone with an iPod or iOS device, but the actual music player gets separated out. Maybe the music/video player part of iTunes could just become part of QuicktimeX, or the other way around, iTunes becomes Quicktime X with library management.
Click to expand...

I missed this comment before. I agree. That seems like a very logical separation (unlike many of the suggestions on this thread!) However, it would then require users to install not one but two Apple programs just to make use of their iDevices, and for many this would seem twice as confusing.

Of course, Apple COULD create the syncing app so it was compatible with a range of media libraries, not just iTunes. But I suggest Hell will probably freeze over before that happens. Apple's not going to give up the dominance of iTunes any time soon. If anything they're thinking how they might leverage it to maximum advantage. That's what scares me about this rumour — from that point of view, it's not entirely inconceivable. But it would be a sign to me that Apple is becoming the next Microsoft. I certainly hope this one proves to be false.
 
This would seriously blow. I'm not a fan of Safari at all. I use Firefox. C'mon Apple, keep the apps separate.
 
Unified Store!

The first time I saw the Mac App Store I was thinking that they should have just combined the iTunes and Mac App Store for OS X users. This would have made sense to me instead of having another ugly icon on my Dock. If Apple just force users to use Safari because of iTunes this is not right. Besides I don't think this is a secure way having your iTunes account exposed in every website you visited. If they can make this a very secure and not bloated fast iTunes-Safari combo app that might change my opinion. I'm this is not gonna happen anytime soon!
 
Apple can't even merge QuickTime 7 with QuickTime X. False rumor because Apple is terrible with combining apps like iCal, Mail, Address book. FaceTime and iChat, Mac Server and Mac OS. iMovie and iDVD. Perhaps not good examples but you get the idea.
 
First of all there's a reason why you have your media in one program and your browsing in another. Combining the two is like adding a potato to a bowl of milk.

Secondly if it is pure speculation and no facts, no real journalism done here to support any of this - throw it up on page 2 .. why waste our time on the frontpage.

Even if it is true, if apple decides to do this horrible thing and force a side bar, I don't want to think about the load times of the browser (Chrome, I will join your religion) - there's also finally a need to search for an alternative media manager.

OS11 the reason I switch back to Windows 8 that finally ge.. nah - that won't happen. I will just stick to 10.6.6
 
Whatever Apple's up to, it is about increasing their control over the user content and "guiding" users and 3rd party content providers into using (more of) their products, distribution/purchasing channels and services. It's the Apple way or the highway...
 
keaide said:
Whatever Apple's up to, it is about increasing their control over the user content and "guiding" users and 3rd party content providers into using (more of) their products, distribution/purchasing channels and services. It's the Apple way or the highway...
Click to expand...

Thats how they raked it in with the iDevices, and now they're gettin' greedy with the Macs too :p
 
HLdan said:
This might be exactly why Apple would integrate Safari into iTunes. ;)
Click to expand...

Yep. But considering that Safari looks like a back end of a bus :D in windows, I doubt people would still use it.

Apple needs to drop the OSX - Safari look in windows - it doesn't work.
 
Stella said:
Yep. But considering that Safari looks like a back end of a bus :D in windows, I doubt people would still use it.

Apple needs to drop the OSX - Safari look in windows - it doesn't work.
Click to expand...

It's not necessarily intentional, at least not in the sense of "we want our app to like like a Mac, even in Windows". What's likely happening is that the Safari code is running on top of a "translation layer" of code that runs on Windows. That would reduce the effort in coding apps like Safari and iTunes (and underlying technology layers like Quicktime) to run on both Macs and PCs. That would also explain why the program has essentially the same look and feel despite Windows having some pretty drastically different UI conventions.
 
Mass exodus to Chrome! No wait no H264! What will we ever do! the horrors the horrors! :eek:

I hope this mashup never happens!

keaide said:
Whatever Apple's up to, it is about increasing their control over the user content and "guiding" users and 3rd party content providers into using (more of) their products, distribution/purchasing channels and services. It's the Apple way or the highway...
Click to expand...
 
Stella said:
Yep. But considering that Safari looks like a back end of a bus :D in windows, I doubt people would still use it.

Apple needs to drop the OSX - Safari look in windows - it doesn't work.
Click to expand...

Err... no it doesn't.

Safari5_windows_mainimage.jpg
 
Safari 5 on Windows XP = TOTAL CRAPWARE

At work I switched from FireFox to Safari 4. It was OK overall, but occasionally buggy.

Then Safari 5 came out and to this date it is the WORST piece of crapware on Windows XP. I'd like to see if it's any better on Windows 7, but I don't have that choice. I should be on Win7 sometime later this year.

First, there's the flashing UI issue: Often, all apps in Windows begin to 'flicker and flash' as if someone's holding a keyboard key down or - I dunno - epilepsy is going on. It stops when you either minimize or quit Safari.

Second, often times the 'wall' in Safari will not load a webpage when clicked. It's functional (e.g., clicks respond) but most of the wall is still there - or it's a black screen of death.

I switched back to FireFox a few weeks ago after the latest Safari for Windows update because as far as I could tell it didn't fix anything.

And FFox works just fine. (And no, I won't use Chrome. Google does evil.)
 
What do you get when you combine two programs that already have massive performance issues?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back