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

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)

Astro7x said:
What is the advantage to having your browser used anyway? I don't see how they can make money off it if. Do they get a small kickback every time I search with the built in Google Search Bar or something?
Click to expand...

Yep. It really adds up.
 
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)

duaneu said:
Small White Car said:
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)



How? Why? On what grounds?

This wouldn't block you from using another browser.

(Once again, I'm NOT in favor of it, but the legal issues seem imaginary.)
Click to expand...

I think Microsoft said the same thing when they integrated Internet Explorer into Windows, and look at all the trouble it caused them...
Click to expand...

Yeah, and that's nothing like this.

iPhoto can edit photos AND make books. Do you think that's a lawsuit waiting to happen too?
 
BuddyTronic said:
I thought it sounded like a good idea for these reasons:

1. iTunes navigation around is really bad right now. [...]

2. iTunes does way too many things right now. [...]

3. iTunes is a monster and needs a massive redesign. [...]
Click to expand...


All valid points.
BuddyTronic said:
I am open to the idea of merging and converging the media constructs - maybe into a Monster Safari.
Click to expand...
Now you've lost me. :confused:
 
MacRumors said:
Tying iTunes into Safari, it is argued, would likely bring a significant boost to the company's share of the browser market as consumers turn to the integrated environment.We are highly skeptical of the claim for a number of reasons, including significant reservations due to the rumor's source, which has in the past appeared to base its claims on significant amounts of speculation.

Article Link: Rumor Claims Safari and iTunes to Merge Into Single Application
Click to expand...

Does anyone else find the qualification on this amusing given the Hardmac story used as the basis of the Final Cut Server cancellation story?
 
Lol, imagine what this would do for their browser share percentage. People cannot open iTunes without opening Safari. This rumor intrigues me, but I doubt it will come to fruition.
 
Well itunes is already by far the most bloated, slow and hateful program i have. Why not make it even worse by adding the worst browser to it.
 
thinkadrian said:
No no NO!

I already want iTunes to split into at least two apps; one for media, one for the iTunes store, and one for syncing devices...
Click to expand...

I am completely amazed at how much faster the Mac App Store works compared to the iTunes Store. I think it just sort or proves how much bloat is in iTunes.
 
The more I think about this the more I'm convinced there IS an idea within Apple that's both real and somehow involving all these pieces.

But someone saw it and completely misunderstood it and came out and told people about it.

Watch, 8 months from now we'll all be saying "Oh, THAT's what they were talking about...wow, whoever stole that news sure was a dope."
 
TrickyTree1984 said:
Well itunes is already by far the most bloated, slow and hateful program i have. Why not make it even worse by adding the worst browser to it.
Click to expand...

Uh, you realize that "worst browser" is already in it. How do you think they render the iTunes Store? And before someone jumps on me saying I support Apple removing Safari and making everyone use iTunes, I am not commenting on that. It is a random rumor republished by Macrumors. If even half of the rumors posted on here where true we'd have iMacs running off of hamsters or something.
 
Small White Car said:
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)



How? Why? On what grounds?

This wouldn't block you from using another browser.

(Once again, I'm NOT in favor of it, but the legal issues seem imaginary.)
Click to expand...

Well if you want to use Itunes you have to have Safari - sounds like Microsoft and Internet Explorer issues in Europe.
 
Cromulent said:
Only if they were an idiot who had no idea what the word monopoly meant or indeed about anything to do with law and this is coming from a European perspective.
Click to expand...

I think he meant anti competitive. Microsoft was fined in a big way by the EU for anti competitive practices, just for shipping IE with their machines (something Apple does with Safari). This move with iTunes would attract the attention of the competition commission
 
NAG said:
Uh, you realize that "worst browser" is already in it. How do you think they render the iTunes Store? And before someone jumps on me saying I support Apple removing Safari and making everyone use iTunes, I am not commenting on that. It is a random rumor republished by Macrumors. If even half of the rumors posted on here where true we'd have iMacs running off of hamsters or something.
Click to expand...

Ahh. I didn't realise that. Is that why the store is so crap and slow? Good job i only use it for updating apps.

You are probably right though. I can't see this coming true. Its anti competitive
 
Astro7x said:
I am completely amazed at how much faster the Mac App Store works compared to the iTunes Store. I think it just sort or proves how much bloat is in iTunes.
Click to expand...

Well you can't stream apps, nor is anything in the App store located on your hard drive. I agree that iTunes is bloated, but the App store does not illustrate it. Sad as it is to admit, I still prefer iTunes and all of its bloat to other media players.

Safari and iTunes both need some serious work, this is just awful though.
 
davids8477 said:
Well if you want to use Itunes you have to have Safari - sounds like Microsoft and Internet Explorer issues in Europe.
Click to expand...

No it doesn't.

So you used to use iTunes for your music and Firefox to browse the web.

After this change you use iTunes for your music and Firefox to browse the web. Hmm, sounds the same to me...what's different? Oh, iTunes can browse the web now, but you never use that feature.

How is that a legal problem? It's nothing like tying the browser into the OS.

(Once again, I don't believe or like the rumor. I'm just saying that adding a feature to software is not gonna get them sued.)
 
i smell data center/cloud and itunes.com written all over this.

i agree that they are both pretty clunky. both are very slow to respond. i dont like this at all. this is going to be on the same level as ping. Come on Apple, not another one of these ideas!!
 
Please Apple, give us separate snappy apps:

  • iTunes
  • iBooks
  • iVideo (since iMovie and AppleTV is taken)
  • iOS App Store
  • Mac App Store
  • iOS Sync Tool

All of them can use Webkit, but keep them separate. Do one thing and do it well. The Mac App Store proves you remember how to do that.

B
 
balamw said:
Please Apple, give us separate snappy apps:

  • iTunes
  • iBooks
  • iVideo (since iMovie and AppleTV is taken)
  • iOS App Store
  • Mac App Store
  • iOS Sync Tool

All of them can use Webkit, but keep them separate. Do one thing and do it well. The Mac App Store proves you remember how to do that.

B
Click to expand...
AGREED! I cannot concur enough.

On another note, if this rumour is true, what the hell are they gonna call this iTunes/Safari hybrid?
 
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