iPod for Windows (again)

beckett writes "Yahoo is reporting that TrentSoft has released EphPod, software that allows Windows users to use all the features of the iPod. I'm suprised that it took a third party to provide support." Also note the previous story on the XPlay, a similar software package.

Comments

Where is Microsoft ?

[selderrr]

considering the fact that they make a buttload of money on Mouse Hardware, it surprises me trmendously that they haven't jumped the mp3 bandwagon yet...

Then again, the XBox hardware adventure hangover still got them knocked down I guess

Why are you surprised?

[interactive_civilian]

"I'm suprised that it took a third party to provide support."

If I am not mistaken, Apple is primarily a computer hardware company, right? Which means that they want to sell their own computers, right? Which means that if other cool products they release work only with their computers by default, then their computers just might look a little more attractive to the potential computer buyer, right?

Now, of course, I am not saying that an iPod is going to make the standard typical PC using geek/nerd/gamer/etc want to rush out and buy a Mac, but combine it w/ MacOS X, competitively priced notebooks (not to mention sexy), and some of the other nice details that come w/ owning a Mac (iMovie, Office on *nix, etc), and some people just might be swayed to buy one.

So, why do you think Apple should cause one of their "hot products" to be supported by default on a competitor's hardware? If a PC user wants to use this hardware, then they can do the extra work required to get it to work w/ their hardware...or they can get a Mac.

IMHO, it is not Apple's problem.

Re:Why are you surprised?

[OpenMind(tm)]

competitively priced notebooks (not to mention sexy)

Brrr... I'm sorry, but I think that Apple, with its "sexy" machines is a major threat to human life on this planet. Apple wants us to redirect all our sexual energy into playing with computers, thus trimming the population growth rate, and making us weak. That way, we will be vulnerable when their teal-plastic-bubble robots move in to take control of the planet.

Sure, it would be a benevolent dictatorship, with easy-to-use interfaces and open standards, but consider the horror when a person's largest muscle is his right index finger, from clicking that one button thousands of times a minute.

Seriously, though, this is not a new tactic from Apple. The lack of a version of Final Cut Pro for Intel platforms has seriously annoyed me for a while. I can see this as a viable way to push their hardware, but I'm not sure they end up making more money by doing so. Limiting one of the best video editing packages to ~10% of the possible market is missing a big oppurtunity.

When it comes down to it, I think Apple's software is what distinguishes it. The interesting form factors they put through are neat, but could be done as well with Intel hardware. Really Apple hardware doesn't do anything Intel hardware can't, except run MacOS. They would sell much more hardware, I think, if it was x86 based. But then they'd have nothing to push their operating system.

So in the end, I have to wonder, is Apple using its software to push the hardware, or its hardware to push the OS platform.

Re:Why are you surprised?

[PsychoSpunk]

My HP printer isn't supported on Mac. What's your point? You'd think a LaserJet III would be, but no PPD available. I'm awaiting CUPS in 10.2, the rest is just iCandy.

So what, Apple's way of being unfair is hella better than Microsoft's way of being unfair.

Apple: Check out this cool toy I have but if you wanna play, you have to use it in my house with me watching.

MS: Oooo, cool toy, lemme see that. <runs away>

Btw, last I checked, Epson wasn't a "PC company", HP wasn't a "PC company" either. Epson sells printers, HP sells anything they think will sell. Name a true PC company that supports Mac. Dell? Gateway?

Re:Why are you surprised?

[MoneyT]

If I recall correctly from other places that I've read, Apple turns something like 15-20% profit on every machine sold.

So that's $209.85 per every low end iMac at 15% profit. At the same profit margin, that's 59.85 per lowend iPod. So lets do numbers

$209.85 * 1,000= $209,850

$59.85 * 10,000= $598,500

So yes assuming these numbers, Apple would have made more profit. But take other factors into consideration. The iPod is a one time purchace. The iMac is a purchase, then any additional hardware, plus the possibility of an iPod purchase. And also another loyal customer (once you go mac, it's hard to go back). In all, Apple probably would be better off selling their hardware everywhere they can. They're doing that currently. Think about it, now they've sold those 1000 iMacs + iPods, plus with the new drivers (which cost them nothing to produce, and they have to devote no support to, they've just sold the other 9000 iPods. Grand total 10,000 ipods and 1000 iMacs. Apple wins

Third party.

[saintlupus]

I'm suprised that it took a third party to provide support.

Yeah, that's weird. You'd certainly expect Apple to be eager to give people one less reason to buy their computers and OS.

[/sarcasm]

--saint

Re:Third party.

[Steve B]

Realistically, the number of extra iPods they'd sell with Windows support is far greater than the number of extra computers they'd sell because of the iPod connection.

It's already been noted that letting third parties create the Windows hack gives them the best of both worlds -- they sell the iPods but don't have to support them.

File Transfer speed over firewire?

[laxian]

In the FAQ ... right above "Part 5" it says that the highest transfer speed is 6MB/s.

I thought Firewire transfered much, much faster than that (like ~30MB/s). If this is slower, is it just because it's such a hassle to deal with the iPod on a PC?

Re:Meaning of ":ephpod?"

[EvilAlien]

It comes from fPod, i.e., f'Pod, i.e., what you say when you can't use the f'ing iPod on your Windows box.

What's good for the goose...

[mhesseltine]

Why is it that if Apple releases a product that only works with their systems without a third party application, everyone says "Oh, well of course. They sell Macs, so why shoot themselves in the foot by making it work with PC's running Windows?"

Now let's flip the situation. Someone makes an MP-3 player, printer, external hard drive, whatever, that only runs under Windows. Now everyone cries "Why don't they port it to Linux, Mac OS X, Solaris, Joe's OS 0.001?"

I just want to know why it's fine for Apple to only make their hardware work with their OS, but everyone else should port to everything else?

The meaning of ":ephPod"

[EyesWideOpen]

"EphPod is named after my alma mater, Williams College. Our mascot is the Eph, pronounced EEF, after the school's founder, Ephraim Williams."

~Source

Re:Where's Bill in all this?

[Lysander Luddite]

I'll tell you where Bill is. Out in the cold. MS doesn't "own a big chunk of Apple". I wish people would quit believing this. MS bought $150 million of NON-VOTING stock 5 years ago. Most if not all of it was sold when Apple's stock price was very high. MS even made a profit out of it. MS has no voice on Apple hardware/software development.

So what if you have to have 3rd party support to use i-Pod on Windows? I bet you use 3rd party apps to make your MP3s. You should be glad Apple isn't preventing 3rd parties from making compatibility software. Apple's usual course is to just sue people who use their products in ways they don't like.

Rumors are Apple itself will come out with Windows compatible software or hardware. But since it's Apple there's no way to know for sure.

Be thankful you have the money to burn. Why anybody would buy a Mac just so they can use their i-Pod is beyond me. I own a Mac and simply can't afford to buy anything beyond food and rent. So please, quit your complaining about having to get a 3rd party app to run your 1st class hardware and how you no longer need to buy a Mac.

Yes, I'm frustrated ATM. Nothing personal.

From the FAQ

[Lysander Luddite]

Q: What do I need to use an iPod with my PC?

A: You need a firewire port on your PC, and some software to allow you to add song files to your iPod.

Since you're reading the EphPod help file, you should know that the best software solution is EphPod plus MacOpener. :)

They even mention several compatible firewire cards and answer the question as to why you need a powered firewire cable.

www.ephpod.com/faq.html

I'm sure the web site could answer even more questions should you have them.

Re:Apple?

[Jucius Maximus]

"Is Apple simply not on the ball with this?"

Apple is far more on the ball than you might think. In fact I think they are being incredibly smart.

Apple has happily released an amazingly good personal mp3 player with official support for Mac only. They knew all along that because this player was so good, SOMEONE would eventually develop PC interface software for it. And when that someone did it, millions of PC users would buy an iPod but since they are not using an officially supported configuration, Apple does not have to provide any support to them but still gets to profit from their purchace of the device.

Pretty good deal, huh? Would any developers like to comment about the percentage of profit lost on a product when someone calls for tech support?

Re:And the big deal about iPod is...?

[paradesign]

you have seen it, right?

Correction: MacOS X is UNIX not *nix

[toupsie]

some of the other nice details that come w/ owning a Mac (iMovie, Office on *nix, etc)

According the Open Group (owner of the UNIX trademark), MacOS X is UNIX and not a Unix-like operating system (like Linux and BSDi). MacOS X follows the Single UNIX® Specification as set by the Open Group allowing Apple and its users to call MacOS X UNIX and not *nix. So feel free to call MacOS X for what it is, pure, certified UNIX -- just a real fruity version of it.

Oh yea, I LOVE my iPod. The best MP3 ever made for the UNIX platform.

Re:Correction: MacOS X is UNIX not *nix

[Jordy]

Once upon a time, AT&T was UNIX®. They shifted the trademark inside the company to a dozen different subsidiaries (Unix Support Group, Unix System Laboratories, etc.) AT&T then sold UNIX® to Novell who donated it to X/Open. X/Open then became The Open Group.

Simply following the Single UNIX® Specification doesn't not entitle you to use the UNIX® trademark, you must be certified or have been granted a license to use the trademark from one of the AT&T companies.

As it stands, Darwin doesn't follow the Single UNIX® Specification. It is missing a number of commands in the specifcation (fuser, gencat, hash, etc.), several missing API calls (poll, pthread_rw*, etc.) and even some headers (utmpx.h, wchar.h, strops.h, etc.)

Shameless plug

[SlashDread]

Ephpod rocks my world.

Have you ever wished Apples design for the OS and the Apps would trickle down to "other" osses?

I have.

Well Ephpod just did it. Its software is beautifull, and simple to use, as is the marvelous iPod.

It installed in 5 minutes, windows2k has build in IEEE 1394 (firewire) support, so plug in your el-cheapo Firewire PCI card, reboot, install Eph and bobsyourunlce.

Some feats on the iPod:
- Best formfactor for HD mp3 players, it actually fits in a breast pocket.
- Stores 10GIG
- Transfers at firewire blazing speed

The only drawback is the godawful high price

I take no care in comments that apple _should_ release for other OSses, their apps, their hardware their choice.

A different "stink" is the lack of Macdrive support for other OSses. Whereas Apps and special hardware are their own deal, the lack of support for mac disk formats is another. In the best interest of Apple buyers, and people sharing data with them, it is _needed_ to buy third party stuff like MacOpener for windows from dataviz.
Now THATS reason number one for oldschool MacFreaks to eventually switch;their customers run windows, and are tired of converting files and disks. This is the stupidist thing from Apple since quicktime.

When are we getting linux mp3 players that are cheap and dont suck?

Gr Richard

Re:Shameless plug

[Zoop]

A different "stink" is the lack of Macdrive support for other OSses.

Huh? Macs have supported Windows file formats for YEARS, like since at least '92. The Mac CD Burner supports different formats, even. This is just Windoze FUD.

A favorite trick of mine was to recover files for people when their Windows machine could no longer read the disk, but pop it into my Mac and it would open it beautifully. It's the Windows world that cuts itself off from anything but Windows formats. In the Mac world it comes standard with the OS.

This oldschool MacFreak is helping transition his office and customers back to Macs.

Re:Shameless plug

[phillymjs]

A different "stink" is the lack of Macdrive support for other OSses. Whereas Apps and special hardware are their own deal, the lack of support for mac disk formats is another. In the best interest of Apple buyers, and people sharing data with them, it is _needed_ to buy third party stuff like MacOpener for windows from dataviz.

Awwww, poor baby. Cry me a river.

Your OS of choice doesn't support the Mac filesystem. That is Apple's fault how, exactly? Macs have been able to read and write PC disks (floppy, Zip, CD, etc-- even HDs, in some cases) for YEARS, out of the box. Apple saw it was an important capability to have, so they added it into the OS. Microsoft wants to lock your ass into their platform for life to serve their own interests, whereas Apple needs to be somewhat compatible with the Windows world to make things easier on their users.

The iPod is an *Apple* device designed for use with *Apple* computers. If you're using some third party hack to make it work with Windows, tough shit if you don't like something about it. If you want to use it in the most hassle-free way possible, buy a Mac. Otherwise, shut up and pick from the tens of MP3 players that are Windows-only or fully cross-platform. Nobody put a gun to your head and made you buy the iPod.

And by the way, how does it feel to want/have a cool device that is better supported on some other OS than your OS of choice? Mac users have been on the outside looking in for as long as Windows has ruled the market. Now the shoe is on the other foot and some of you Windows people can see what we've endured for so long. It's not nice when a company tells you that your money is not worth their time or effort, is it?

~Philly

Re:Shameless plug

[Sentry21]

Whereas Apps and special hardware are their own deal, the lack of support for mac disk formats is another.

So you're complaining about Apple because no one else supports their filesystems?

Regardless, OS X is one of the most interoperable OSen out there (Linux wins easily, but OS X is right up there). Plus, if it doesn't support your filesystem, learn IOKit, and write a driver. Then Mac users can burn/write to disk/format hard drives/fileshare in whatever filesystem you like (ISO9660, FAT32, WevDAV, SMB, Appletalk, etc. just to name a few).

Just a thought.

--Dan

Apple should not release Windows software

[fermion]

This is actually a brilliant tactic on Apples part. It was almost certain that someone would come out with link software. By letting someone else do this, Apple reduces its customer service nightmare.

I mean think about it. Apple released a tightly integrated device that works quite automagically. Most things in iTunes, even when connected with USB or Firewire, happen automagically, or require only single button drag and drop use. Even though Windows has almost this level of simplicity, Windows is also controlled by Microsoft. Microsoft actively tries to screw every other vendow(and honestly, to some extents, so does Apple), which means no one knows if the software is going to work with the next patch.

By releasing a minimal, yet compelling version, and allowing other to expand it, Apple is harnessing the third party market in a perfectly reasonable way. I feel it made the same decision when it did not build in windows networking, another moving target, into MacOS 9. Thursby Software had an inexpensive working method, and handled all problems with Windows, including clueless users that do not wish to pay software.

Now some would say that Apple should be nice and create a better value for Windows users. Of course, Apple does not exist to make Windows more valuable, does it.

To predict the critics, Internet stuff is a bit different. Products like realplayer promote the brand. It is also safer because it does not deal with the low level system and hardware layer that Microsoft likes to mess with on a regular basis. Again, so does Apple.

Let me get this strait...

[SaturnTim]

Okay, Apple builds a cool but expensive MP3 player. They write the software for it to run on the mac, which helps to sell macs. Sounds good so far, right?

Now, they are helping other companies write software so the player runs on other systems. The other companies pick up the marketing costs, support costs, and add a small "windows tax" in the form of the price of the software, which sill helps the mac to look more attractive.

And apple makes more money by selling the iPod to a larger market.

I think this is a brilliant move by Apple. They open up a larger market with little effort, and eliminate the supports costs.

--T

Chipmaker for iPods get's $42 million

[burgburgburg]

PortalPlayer, the chipmaker for the iPods just got fourth round funding of $42 million. Amongst the investors are J.P. Morgan Partners, Investcorp International and Shamrock Capital Advisors. Though the company has no announced customers for it's chips, it's relationship to the iPod has already been documented here on /. . According to representatives from PortalPlayer, this is the last round of financing before IPO (though they have no timetable at this point). Read more at news.com.

Why apple doesn't offer third support...

[Traicovn]

Simple business. Apple wants to make this a very sought after product. If they only make it available for their computers then it means people will buy THEIR computers so that they can have an IPOD. It's very simple. Yes, you would think that if they made this one product available to a wider customer base that they would improve their profits, but then you have to remember that they also don't offer their operating system for x86 (and it's also written into the MacOS license agreement that it is illegal to use the operating system on a non-apple branded computer) architecture. If Mac would offer support for the operating system and have an x86 version of the operating system as well as a powerpc version (g3, g4, 680xx) as well as sell both types of hardware I think they could become more dominant in the industry, but they are very tied to their hardware.

The bottom line? Apple doesn't want non-mac support for the IPOD because their profits are so heavily tied to people buying THEIR computers. It wouldn't surprise me if somewhere in the IPOD license agreement it says you can only use it with a computer using the Macintosh Operating System.

My take on Apple's hardware/software

[BMonger]

First off.... For the past 10 years or so I've been Windows/Intel-type bound. But now I own the flat-panel iMac and you'll have to pry it from my cold dead fingers many times over before I'll let you take it away. I love the OS and the machine looks neat to boot.

One thing that I find rather annoying is when people complain that Apple products don't work with their PC's such as there being no Windows iPod software and Apple using non-standard connections for things like their flat screens.

First, the iPod. If Apple released software for the iPod to connect to the PC then they'd have to support it. The people in their building are Mac coders and know Mac stuff inside and out. Do they know Windows? I dunno. But probably not all that well. It costs to support an additional operating system. With the internet being as it is they probably could have released the iPod with no software and software would have arisen to use it on the Mac and the PC. Of course that would've been dumb so why not support your own platform. Let the other guys worry about their platform or let somebody else do it for free. They may lose some money because nobody will buy their non-existent $19.95 program that let's you use the iPod on the PC but Joe Schmoe just made it for them and they're selling $400-$500 iPods like hotcakes.

Now this is a little off-topic but I've seen a few people complain about it in this newspost. People are ill at Apple because the flat screens that Apple sells for it's hardware won't plug into most PC's without a dongle or something. Well so what? My TV doesn't plug into my iMac without a dongle and a little piece of hardware. My old PC monitor won't work with my iMac either unless I put Bob's string of dongles between my iMac and the monitor. My toaster won't plug into my iMac either and probably never will (although I'm sure somebody will do it soon so they can link me to it to irk me!). Apple sells hardware and makes software for Apple computers. It's their deal. That's what they do. If Radio Shack Bob want's to back some special inbetween hardware to let people use apple hardware with pc hardware then let 'em at it. If that programmer wants to create the software interface to use the hardware on the PC then yippee for them. Don't rag on Apple because their toast fits in their toaster and nobody elses without some modifications.

Yeah... it was probably a bad rant. I'm sure I'll be shown the errors of my ways in less than 30 minutes or my money back...

Re:Apple?

[Jucius Maximus]

"Who the hell would need tech support for an iPod?"

You have been spending too much time on slashdot. The technological competence here is extremely high compared your average computer user. If you require a reminder as to how clueless the average user is with technology, try phoning up the support line for a cellphone service or ISP. Try going through their automated help menus. (press 1 if you have problems with e-mail, press 2 if ...) The questions and answers are so obvious you'd think that a person would have to be incredibly stupid to need to call that line. Then realise that the majority of issues are solved by the responses provided in these menu systems.

Re:it is 400Mb/s...

[Geekboy(Wizard)]

I copied all of MS Office to my iPod in 5 seconds flat! (j/k)

Quicktime 6

[hotsauce]

Before you babble nonsense, why don't you try Quicktime. Download Quicktime 6, click on WGBH Boston's Mango Blue link, and tell me with a straight face that Network TV should not be very afraid. Not to mention QTSS, Broadcaster, VR, etc.

Do you even know the history of Quicktime and how instrumental it was to multimedia?

Re:Apple?

[MatriXOracle]

When you want to plug an iPod into a windows PC, it's not just the iPod that needs support.

Most likely the PC needs a FireWire port. That's gotta be installed in a PCI slot and configured with drivers. Does Apple want to support that? No.

Then there's gotta be software that syncs with the iPod that's gotta work without causing any Windows conflicts. Does Apple want to support those? No.

It's much more of a headache than it's worth.

Re:The Open Group Disagrees

[toupsie]

From the article:

UPDATE
Since osOpinion's publishing of this piece, the Open Group has updated their web site to include Apple into its list of vendors that support the single Unix specification. This appears likely as a direct result to osOpinion's publishing of the report.

Got to read the entire article! :P