3 ms·

I can see how it’s better (the performance is awesome, searching in iTunes is just sooo damn slow, inflexible and no fun) and it has some cool but obvious tools

by ugh 15y ago

I can see how it’s better (the performance is awesome, searching in iTunes is just sooo damn slow, inflexible and no fun) and it has some cool but obvious tools. I’m just wondering why Apple needs to buy them. Can they really not just copy that?

marquis 15y ago
Talent acquisition?
- pemulis 15y ago
  And submarining Android app discovery doesn't hurt.
  - jrockway 15y ago
    True! With Chomp gone, where will Google find experts in search?
    - sskates 15y ago
      You can laugh, but Android Market search is horrible.
    - revorad 15y ago
      Perhaps look in the basement of the SPYW department?
    - megablast 15y ago
      You say that, but android market place search is embarrassing.
pooriaazimi 15y ago
I came here to say how nice of Apple not just bluntly copying Chomp (you know, like widgets, Safari Reader and notifications)...
- ugh 15y ago
  I don’t think it’s possible to bluntly copy Chomp (if you stay away from copying their aesthetics). All the stuff they do is pretty obvious and standard. It’s only special because the App Store search is so terrible. To me a performance upgrade would be the most valuable thing, I don’t think anyone would claim Apple copied Chomp when their search suddenly performs better.
  - 2muchcoffeeman 15y ago
    But why reinvent the wheel? They saw something they liked, they thought it was better to buy the technology, so they did. Good for Apple and good for Chomp!
- falling 15y ago
  http://blog.arc90.com/2010/06/07/safari-5-another-step-towards-better-reading-on-the-web/ http://blog.arc90.com/2010/06/07/safari-5-another-step-towar... (last paragraph links to: http://twitter.com/chrisdary/status/15672452287 http://twitter.com/chrisdary/status/15672452287)