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

Interesting theory, but doesn't go with Apple's app philosphy.

More likely, the iTunes store becomes web-centric.
 
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)

1-don't knock it til ya tried it.
2-IMO, fewer applications to do the things we do most can only be a good thing.
3-haven't y'all learned yet that apple develops for the future, rather than hang back in the past-hard to argue with considering the companies performance.
 
PBF said:
You do realise that iOS App Store and Mac App Store can be a single app called App Store, right, genius? :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Too much risk of confusion there for Mac owners that don't have iOS devices IMHO. (Until Mac OS comes with an iOS simulator that can run your App Store apps on the Mac).

I believe this is one of the reasons that they didn't just make MAS part of iTunes. (EDIT: Apart from the fact that they wanted to release it only for 10.6).

B
 
pmz said:
Hmm, maybe. You do realize that the App Store app for OSX is Mac-only. Right? Genius?
Click to expand...
We're talking about ideas here. I repeat myself, it'd make no sense to have two separate apps for iOS and Mac App Store. It could easily be a single app called App Store featuring two separate sections "iOS" and "Mac OS". :rolleyes:
 
no no no. I hate using Safari and iTunes is getting bloated enough with Ping and all that crap.
 
It is also rumored that Quark Inc. has plans to merge Quark XPress with Dark Castle to boost it's lagging graphic design application...
 
darbus69 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)

1-don't knock it til ya tried it.
2-IMO, fewer applications to do the things we do most can only be a good thing.
3-haven't y'all learned yet that apple develops for the future, rather than hang back in the past-hard to argue with considering the companies performance.
Click to expand...

Is that why they have a 4G phone? ha ha
 
Only an idiot would believe this rumor.

iTunes is already buggy and slow. Same goes for Safari. Apple isn't going to increase its headaches by combining the two.

Apple should forget about Safari - there are plenty of better alternatives out there that have support that can keep up with the bugs, security issues, extensions, etc.

Apple should also divide iTunes in to two or three programs to break down the bloated, sluggish feel iTunes has developed over the years.

I remember when iTunes first came out. It was awesome. It kicked ass over WinAmp (imho.) Nowadays I cringe at the idea of having to start it or synch my devices with it, for fear of staring at the beachball for a minute or two before the app becomes usable. Now because of some short sightedness on Apple's part the application is expected to organize all your music, movies, iOS applications, sync your iPods, iPads, iPhones, do social networking crap, buy music, movies, and music videos, and I don't know how much more. It's complete crap these days.
 
I hope Apple reads this thread. Even if it is just the rumor, maybe they will get the point that iTunes is already way too bloated.
 
I will say I'm proud of this group. I was curious to see what fan boys would come out and think it's a great idea to do thiis just because Apple are visionaries. Everyone is against it, which is a good thing. Shows Apple can do something wrong and not have sheep follow it. :) ...and yeah, this rumor is asinine. I too wish iTunes wasn't so damn bloated. Safari, well it runs really good until it tries to run flash. :eek:
 
No reason to get worked up over this. It isn't going to happen.

mingoglia said:
I will say I'm proud of this group. I was curious to see what fan boys would come out and think it's a great idea to do thiis just because Apple are visionaries. Everyone is against it, which is a good thing. Shows Apple can do something wrong and not have sheep follow it. :) ...and yeah, this rumor is asinine. I too wish iTunes wasn't so damn bloated. Safari, well it runs really good until it tries to run flash. :eek:
Click to expand...
Maybe you're the one who misjudged people? The 'group' here is plenty fond of complaining about Apple decisions (or a lack of response)—just as they are fond of defending the platform they enjoy. There's nothing unusual about this: these are the same sort of responses you might see from people who are fond of any platform, and find themselves weighing in on changes or attacks relative to it.
 
After running around the room screaming "please God no", then sit back and think about where the idea may have come from... The rumour itself is obviously bullcr4p, but it could mean that Safari will play a part in iTunes future in the Cloud.

If Apple ever merge these two already bloated applications (especially iTunes), it would be insane. However, having some iTunes plugins or added features to Safari *may* make sense.
 
I don't know which is worse?

This actually being posted as news.

People getting upset about it and writing comments.
 
I am more shocked that this lame rumor made its way to the front page of MacRumors (surpassing page 2 and even page 3)

If this is true, I don't think it will replace iTunes, but allow people who travel and have a large library to access iTunes from their Safari browser from any location/computer.

img0059n.png

My face when I read the news.
 
stupid crazy

Let's hope that's just a foolish rumor. It would be a stupid idea. Browsers need to remain browsers. M$ tried (and somewhat has) integrated IE into their OS, and all they created was a big ole mess.

For Apple it could kill market share. Companies, education, government, etc. do not allow iTunes in their organizations. Merging Safari and iTunes would kill all business use of "Safari" and hurt the cause instead of helping it. Dumb idea. Leave Safari & iTunes separate.
 
dwsolberg said:
This completely makes sense. iTunes is right now a bloated, slow program — by far the worst on my computer. They have to be thinking about rewriting the program to be faster, and they also have to be thinking about how to integrate the online shopping experience for software, apps, games, movies, tvs, audiobooks, and print books. Already, we can see that you can view iTunes apps on the internet, so the germ of an idea is already there. And we know that a lot of iTunes browsing is essentially html. And with the Ping-type social networking, a web device would make sense. They also probably want to integrate Facebook into the experience to improve social networking. Another reason for this is to compete with Google's in-the-clouds solutions. In addition, we know that Apple is trying to get into streamed music.

With all this, I suspect we'll get a new app that combines all the online stores and adds social networking into a newly named web browser that also manages local content a la iTunes. It could be rewritten "iMedia" app that provides a central source for media. It would also make sense to provide a sort of web server that allows a user always-on access to their content where ever they are (as long as iMedia is running on their home computer. This would be a ground-up rewritten app that thoroughly takes advantage of multiple core and the graphics processor. Who knows if they will do it, but it's completely logical.
Click to expand...

I agree 100%. People are missing the big picture here. This is exactly the type of move from Apple I've been waiting for. We are in the midst of a transition to cloud computing. Microsoft and Google are rapidly building out their web apps. Google's vision, as shown in the Chrome/Chrome OS project, is to deliver ALL applications within the browser. This is the main competitor to the iTunes/App Store model. Many think this vision will fail, but keep in mind that Chrome is already very successful - it has hit 10% market share in 2 years, while Safari is still around 4% after much longer.

Meanwhile, Apple's only venture in the cloud has been MobileMe, which is developing slowly. Apple is pushing their iTunes App Store model as an alternative to Google's web apps, and with the "appification" of the internet, seem to be trying to eliminate the need for a browser altogether. While Google is trying to bring desktop apps into the browser, Apple is trying to bring browser content to the desktop via web-enabled apps. They actually seem to want to get RID of the browser by delivering all cloud services via native iOS/Mac OS apps.

In this context, it is not hard to believe that Apple would merge Safari with iTunes and make this application run ONLY on their platform. Everyone agrees that Apple will soon introduce a streaming, cloud-based version of iTunes. We also know that Apple is working on some "revolutionary" HTML features for Lion OS. The move of bringing iTunes into the browser (or the browser into iTunes) is a logical next step.
 
There's so many implications of this image:

- Father and son, representing them being different products from the same company. Also, them both being similarly crap (the programs).
- Red and blue, good and evil - they don't mix.
- Darth vader being in a straight position - not moving; therefore, slow, like iTunes.
- Darth vader wanting Luke to join him and Luke rejects, as it would be a bad choice. (Merging iTunes and Safari = bad choice.)
 

Attachments

  • itunes-9-no-pre-sync (0;00;00;00).png
    itunes-9-no-pre-sync (0;00;00;00).png
    277.8 KB · Views: 81
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