Slashdot Mirror


Rhythmbox Gets iPod Support

Bhondai writes "The latest release of the popular GNOME based iTunes clone, Rhythmbox has, amongst new features, initial support for the iPod. Things are still a little unpolished at this moment (requiring manual mounting of the iPod to /mnt/ipod), but this does look promising. A list of changes and new features in Rhythmbox 0.7.1 is available at Footnotes."

5 of 249 comments (clear)

  1. Re:I don't see... by ernstp · · Score: 4, Informative

    No, that's not enough. For the songs to become visible on the iPod you have to edit the iPod's database, add ID3 tags etc.

  2. Re:I don't see... by sprouty76 · · Score: 4, Informative

    There's a lot more to syncing an iPod than just copying the mp3s onto it. There's a big database on there that needs to be modified every time you add a track, so that the iPod can find it while browsing by artist, genre etc.

    --

    No, I don't want a free iPod

  3. Syncing - Read only for now by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    I've been using this from CVS for about a month, and it only reads from the ipod. Write support is planned for the future.

    In response to the comment about cp/ls - the iPod uses a proprietary database (iTunesDB) to store meta-information, so cp *mp3 /mnt/ipod/ will do nothing but store it on the iPod hd. You won't be able to play it

  4. Re:Nervousness about RythmBox by pldms · · Score: 4, Informative

    Silly me - if you open 'About iTunes' you'll find that:

    'G-Force visualisation engine licenced from WhiteCap Technologies, inc'

    --
    Slashdot looked deep within my soul and assigned
    me a number based on the order in which I joined
  5. Re:Meh. Innovation, please? by slux · · Score: 5, Informative

    Apple has developer mindshare not because of iTunes, but because it comes up with things like iTunes before anyone else does.

    Apple didn't come up with the idea behind iTunes any more than the Rhythmbox developers, this Wikipedia article explains how it is based on SoundJam MP from another company and Apple just hired the people and bought the app. I would not be terribly surprised if there was something comparable even before that.

    For all the talk of GPL != theft, there sure are a lot of clones of non-free software out there.

    The "GPL != theft" part makes you sound a lot like a troll. Where did you get the idea that writing a similar app to an existing one is anything even remotely comparable to theft? It happens all the time even in the non-free software industry. More on that a little later.

    How many Aqua GTK themes, now? And they *all* missed the point. It's not about pinstripes. Even Apple started backtracking on the pinstripes a bit. Pinstripes are the chrome, guys

    People made Aqua GTK themes because they wanted them. It hasn't much to do with what direction GNOME, KDE or the free software desktop is taking. Why not rant about Windows XP which also has this Aqua theming craze and how Microsoft just doesn't get it?

    The GIMP is a clone (and if you don't believe it, compare things like the order of the layer transparency menu to Photoshop's).

    Again, even Adobe didn't originally come up with Photoshop. Just like Apple, they bought it after they saw what it was. (Wikipedia link. Drawing/image editing programs certainly have a long history before it as well. GIMP isn't the only clone either, there's other proprietary software such as Paint Shop Pro that is even closer to Photoshop as far as the look and feel go.

    Blender couples the simplicity of emacs with the interface of vim.

    Well, that's something original, isn't it? Some people think Blender's UI's just great.

    XMMS is a clone. OGG Vorbis is a conceptual clone -- it may not share any code with MP3, but you can't tell me it isn't essentially an "oh, yeah, we can do it too" situation, even if it's for all the best reasons. OpenOffice is complete garbage: it's ugly and unstable compared to the ten-year-old wopro my Mac Classic runs.

    And for every app you've mentioned there's also a lot of non-free clones and in many cases the dominant ones aren't the original appearances of the application type. Ogg Vorbis? It actually tries to improve (succesfully?) on the idea, providing better audio quality and/or smaller file size. There's AAC, mp3pro, WMA and a bunch of others too, you know. Why not whine about them too? What you said about Ooo.org pretty much applies to any modern Office suite.

    Okay, so there's Nautilus. That's the only thing that's really pushing any part of the envelope as a desktop app. And maybe Kudzu. Other than that, it's just a little chrome on Xerox PARC, Microsoft, and Apple.

    The desktop metaphor is still going strong after around 30 years (so's UNIX, by the way). The problem with lack of innovation in UI design is not just a GNOME or a KDE problem if you want to view it as one. If you want to see UI innovation you really shouldn't bee looking at the desktop environments that as their very goal are trying to provide the dominant user experience based on the 30-year-old metaphor. How about checking out something like Ion, Fluxbox and others from the plethora of available window managers? You could still also look at some of the more original stuff brewing for the big traditional environments, such as the kicker replacement called Slicker. In my opinion, GNOME has managed to stand u