Slashdot Mirror


iTunes For Linux, Thanks To CodeWeavers

pizen writes "The folks over at CNet have the scoop that a new version of CrossOver Office (3.1) now supports Apple's iTunes. The preview version of the software is being tested and is currently only available to current CodeWeavers customers. They expect a final version to be available later this year." Reader snowtigger contributes a link to this screenshot. White demonstrated iTunes on a Linux machine at OSCON as well; a rendering glitch marred that demo, but he was still able to demonstrate playing back a song which he'd purchased from iTMS using iTunes on Linux.

352 comments

  1. Finally!!! by h4rm0ny · · Score: 4, Interesting


    This is has honestly been the only reason that I still boot up in Windows.

    Also seems I not the only one:
    "iTunes has been our No. 1 most requested application," CodeWeavers CEO Jeremy White said in a statement.

    And presumably a free open source version cannot be far behind? Now, if I can just take this opportunity to ask the iTunes people to please add some (a lot) more to their back catalogue then the world will become perfect.

    --

    Aide-toi, le Ciel t'aidera - Jeanne D'Arc.
    1. Re:Finally!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      The CodeWeavers people are pretty cool about contributing back their code changes. Their product as such is more or less a way to make wine's configuration "just work"

    2. Re:Finally!!! by moonbender · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Is that because of the music store or because of iTunes management capabilities? Because I never got that last one - I've got a lot of music, mostly my albums on my computer - they reside on their own partition, one folder per album. I can play them using the context menu entry that opens Foobar. I've never needed more management than that - why would anyone? Seriously, I'm asking. :)

      --
      Switch back to Slashdot's D1 system.
    3. Re:Finally!!! by Progoth · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I've never needed more management than that - why would anyone? Seriously, I'm asking. :)

      just use it for a couple of days...see if you don't love it

      try out the tag editing also

    4. Re:Finally!!! by ultrabot · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      This is has honestly been the only reason that I still boot up in Windows.

      Linux has several alternatives for the same functionality.

      --
      Save your wrists today - switch to Dvorak
    5. Re:Finally!!! by moonbender · · Score: 1

      My gf uses it on her iBook, so I do know it. I just don't see the point. The only thing it can do that I can't readily is tell me when I played a song last, which I suppose would come in handy for filtering rarely used songs.

      --
      Switch back to Slashdot's D1 system.
    6. Re:Finally!!! by pebs · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Is that because of the music store or because of iTunes management capabilities? Because I never got that last one - I've got a lot of music, mostly my albums on my computer - they reside on their own partition, one folder per album.

      Personally, I use Winamp 5, which I think has a much better interface than iTunes, but its the same concept with its media library. I used to have all my music in folders and run them from there. But then I started using Winamp 5 and really liked the media library once I started using it. Being able to search your entire library for a song or artist and have the entire search result be your playlist is just one possibility. Bookmarks, rating songs, recently played songs, most played songs, being able to scroll through your entire library are other nice features. When you have a music collection that has become disorganized and fragmented like mine has, it helps a lot, too.

      Though iTunes is lacking in comparison to Winamp 5, it is slowly catching up. But screw iTunes, I want to see Winamp 5 running on Linux!

      --
      #!/
    7. Re:Finally!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      ... huh?

      What makes you think that BitTorrent or MlDonkey can be considered alternatives to iTunes + Apple's online Media Store?

    8. Re:Finally!!! by argent · · Score: 0

      Funny, I've been running iTunes under UNIX for months.

    9. Re:Finally!!! by Nexum · · Score: 4, Funny

      Lacking in what way exactly?

      WinAmp has always had a non-standard small, confusing and cluttered interface. It tries to have every control available to you within the space of a postage stamp on screen, and the effect is woeful.

      From the sound of it you've never used iTunes. And iTunes "catching up" yeah... must be tough catching up with the full quality built in cd ripping to MP3 AAC WAV etc. that WinAmp does. Oh and catching up with the one click CD burning that WinAmp does. Oh and the online music sotre integration that WinAmp has. Oh and the easy interoperability with my iPod that WinAmp manages.

      Seriously though, all the WinAmp features you've mentioned have been done in iTunes for years.

      Go download it and give it a whirl.

      --

      This sig has been deprecated.
    10. Re:Finally!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      "Being able to search your entire library for a song or artist and have the entire search result be your playlist is just one possibility. Bookmarks, rating songs, recently played songs, most played songs, being able to scroll through your entire library are other nice features."

      So which of these features is iTunes missing now?

    11. Re:Finally!!! by Zelet · · Score: 2, Insightful

      This was my killer app for linux too.

      I didn't spend days rating and organizing my songs for nothing. Until some free (as in speech) app comes along that can import *all* my iTunes ratings and organization I wont be switching from my Mac or Windows PCs.

      --
      ...And when they came for me, there was no one left to speak out for me." - Martin Niemoeller (1892-1984)
    12. Re:Finally!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Though iTunes is lacking in comparison to Winamp 5, it is slowly catching up.

      You lost me there. Itunes actually has all those features you mention.

      Especially searching: that just blends in with the search facilities of Finder and all the other components in OS X.

      Ah, right you're talking windows...

    13. Re:Finally!!! by pebs · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Lacking in what way exactly?

      The Winamp playlist is much easier and more powerful than what iTunes has. iTunes' "Party Shuffle", gives you some of this functionality, though, but before they added that, there was nothing to match it.

      Seriously, download Winamp and give it a try. I have compared with the latest iTunes, and I find Winamp to be more feature-rich and flexible. A bit more for "power-users" though, so I can see why some people may not like the interface.

      Not to say iTunes sucks or anything, its a great player, and should satisfy most people. If I owned a Mac, I'd probably be using it. But I simply find Winamp 5 to offer more powerful features and a more useful interface.

      As for the iTunes feature you mentioned...

      BTW, Winamp does have ripping/burning in the Pro version, but that does cost $15 and I can't vouch for it. There is also an iPod plugin, but I can't vouch for it because I'm not willing to buy that overpriced, overrated player.

      I don't particularly see having an online store integration as a good thing when you are locked into one store for that integration.

      --
      #!/
    14. Re:Finally!!! by 2nd+Post! · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Well, if you don't need it, you don't need it.

      I love the search capabilities.
      I love the 'smart playlist' which can filter songs by number of times played, last played, ID tags, and ratings.
      I love not needing to worry about organization. It's like not caring which track, sector, and platter my data is on; there's no need to care when the OS takes care of that detail. All I need to know is enough meta-data for the OS to find the file.

      Sharing is cool, streaming is cool, and so is the music store!

    15. Re:Finally!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I tried iTunes, but as I have my own neat folder organization set up (1 folder per artist, subfolders for albums) I elected NOT to have iTunes take over control of organizing the files. The problem I now can't figure out is when I add new MP3 folders artists or albums (often several dozens at a time), how do I get them seen by iTunes quickly without having to delete the existing iTunes database and rescan my entire top-level "MUSIC" folder again which takes hours including the volume scanning feature. It seems that it would be a good feature for iTunes to automatically scan your chosen folders at startup for new files. WinMX does this.

    16. Re:Finally!!! by pebs · · Score: 1

      You lost me there. Itunes actually has all those features you mention.

      True that they have all those features! Why do you think I responded to someone asking about iTunes when I am using Winamp??? I mentioned all the features that both of them have so that it can apply to iTunes too. The whole media library concept is a useful feature in any implementation.

      Download both of them and try them side to side. You may not need all the features of Winamp 5, but I find them useful. YMMV

      --
      #!/
    17. Re:Finally!!! by The+Infamous+Grimace · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I agree. I let iTunes organize my music, but I don't download it to the music folder. One way to get around this is to put the song(s) where you want them, then double-click to get them to play. iTunes will then find them. Crappy solution, I know, but there it is. Seems like an AppleScript that checks the date, or maybe checks your iTunes music list against your music directory. Another thing might be a folder action; every time something is added to your music folder, iTunes launches and adds it to its' list.

      (tig)

      --
      Ignorance and prejudice and fear
      Walk hand in hand
    18. Re:Finally!!! by schussat · · Score: 4, Interesting
      The story doesn't mention the hardware side of things, but it's an important issue: Will I be able to sync my iPod through Codeweaver/iTunes?

      -schussat

      --
      The hour of noon has passed. Let us go and get some Kentucky Fried Chicken.
    19. Re:Finally!!! by cerberusss · · Score: 1, Insightful
      This is has honestly been the only reason that I still boot up in Windows

      So... have you hit the Codeweaver's Store and purchased it?

      --
      8 of 13 people found this answer helpful. Did you?
    20. Re:Finally!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

      There are plenty of native linux programs out there that can sync with your iPod, so what's the point?

    21. Re:Finally!!! by athakur999 · · Score: 1, Interesting

      I used it for a couple of days... and then uninstalled it.

      The only feature iTunes had that I miss in Winamp was the "smart playlists" thing, that wasn't enough to make me switch over.

      --
      "People that quote themselves in their signatures bother me" - athakur999
    22. Re:Finally!!! by Hatta · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Why? In my experience itunes is one of the most painful apps to use. For instance, if I open an M3U with it, it puts the files into the library and scatters them among all the other files. Don't you think if I'm opening a playlist, I want to play those files in order? I have to create a new playlist and drop the m3u there in order to do this. And it still sorts them in reverse order. Further, if a song has id3 info, you can no longer sort by filename. And I really ought to be able to drag songs off of shares onto the local hdd. I seriously cannot understand why anyone would want to use itunes except to play ITMS files. And I can't understand why anyone would want to buy music that can only be played in such an awkward player.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    23. Re:Finally!!! by drinkypoo · · Score: 3, Informative

      Winamp's ID tag editing functionality is a pale, wan ghost of what iTunes can do. This is the specific reason why I now use iTunes. I don't use Winamp as a video player because it is a spectacularly crappy one, so iTunes fits my needs very nicely. I like being able to rate songs and see when I last played them right in the playlist, but for all I know WA5 might do that. I have WA5 but I haven't bothered to install it because WA2 plays shoutcast streams just fine, and the first time I installed WA5 (version 5.0 as opposed to 5.0x) it wouldn't work, I'd try to run it and it just never started. Maybe I jumped the gun but from that experience I decided that nullsoft has lost its thunder and I should stick with the old winamp for my shoutcast needs. :P

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    24. Re:Finally!!! by cameraman_ben · · Score: 1

      from http://www.codeweavers.com/site/account/download_b eta/

      "Look, let's be honest. We wanted to release the full version of CrossOver in time to announce it for the LinuxWorld Expo. We didn't get it done in time - it still has problems and issues we're working on. However, for marketing reasons, we wanted to announce iTunes support at LinuxWorld. (This isn't as awful as it sounds, we've made the public Wine tree run iTunes, and we wanted to get credit for that before someone else discovered that and publicized it)."

      Has anyone discovered how to do that yet and publicised it yet?

    25. Re:Finally!!! by athakur999 · · Score: 1

      Both Winamp and iTune's tagging capabilities are pretty weak compared to a dedicated tagging utility like mp3tag or tag. Tagging from within either Winamp or iTunes is convenient for small changes, but for any bulk changes they're both a pain.

      --
      "People that quote themselves in their signatures bother me" - athakur999
    26. Re:Finally!!! by Swedentom · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Quote about iPod: overpriced, overrated player

      Seriously, What other portable music player is better and cheaper than iPod?

      --
      Sig Nature
    27. Re:Finally!!! by drinkypoo · · Score: 3, Informative

      It's bulk changes that attract me to iTunes as opposed to winamp, because I can select a range of files and ID them at the same time. For example I can select all the songs by a given band and set the artist and genre, then I can break it down into albums and set the total number of tracks, album name, and year, then I can set track numbers one at a time and so on. It's not as good as using a dedicated tagger but I just want to tag from inside my player. The only thing I don't like about iTunes (besides the amazing slowness, at least on windows) is that the list jumps to the current song when the current song changes. That is really, really stupid.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    28. Re:Finally!!! by kisielk · · Score: 1

      WA5 does exactly what you describe as well. You can select a bunch of songs in the Media Library and then edit their tag information together. I haven't tried iTunes yet, but it sounds quite similar. I've just heard that iTunes uses a lot of memory, but I'll probably end up giving it a try anyway

    29. Re:Finally!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, if you, say, have an MP3s folder, you can drag the entire folder into the iTunes Library (assuming you've got it selected). It will then add the contents of the entire folder.

      I generally keep my MP3s at home and work in sync by "deleting" the library, copying my MP3 library off a portable HD to a local HD, then drag the local HD's MP3 folder back into iTunes. I'd get clever and psync the portable HD to the local HD but just don't care enough to spend that kind of time (the copy just goes on in the background while I'm doing other stuff).

      As for my Music folder, I let iTunes keep that organized, but the only things that temporarily stay there are CDs I'm ripping (after I'm satisfied with tagging, folder structure, etc. I move them into "MP3s") and of course recent iTMS purchases (which get moved into an "M4Ps" folder).

    30. Re:Finally!!! by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      iTunes is slow and does use a lot of memory, but if you have 512MiB or 1GiB it's pretty much irrelevant.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    31. Re:Finally!!! by Falc0n · · Score: 0

      "Seriously though, all the WinAmp features you've mentioned have been done in iTunes for years."

      Except one: MP3Pro.

      Although I use Linux for my desktop, the one reason why I have a dedicated Multimedia Computer is because of MP3Pro in Winamp and other Audio Editing (Audition).

    32. Re:Finally!!! by Hatta · · Score: 1

      just use it for a couple of days...see if you don't love it

      I have, I don't.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    33. Re:Finally!!! by Moofie · · Score: 1

      OK, so in Winamp 5, how do you say "I'd like to listen to all the music I haven't listened to before"?

      How do you say "I want to listen to all my Depeche Mode" without hunting through the file system?

      I used Winamp since v1.something lo these many moons ago. When iTunes came out (with its absolutely sublime database) I never looked at Winamp again.

      Party shuffle is excellent, but it's hardly THE killer feature.

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
    34. Re:Finally!!! by Moofie · · Score: 1

      I could never read the infinitesimal type in the media library, so I never tried. It doesn't do quick queries, or detailed queries, near as well as iTunes does.

      I'll gladly trade the extra RAM footprint for the infinitely superior UI and functionality.

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
    35. Re:Finally!!! by VooDoo999 · · Score: 1

      OK, so in Winamp 5, how do you say "I'd like to listen to all the music I haven't listened to before"?
      Manage Playlist->Open Media Library View Results->Never Played

      How do you say "I want to listen to all my Depeche Mode" without hunting through the file system?
      Hit 'J' for Jump->Type 'Depeche' (probably get it after just 'Dep'
      or
      Sort->List by title and scroll to the 'De' section

      To each their own.

    36. Re:Finally!!! by Tim+Browse · · Score: 1
      WinAmp has always had a non-standard small, confusing and cluttered interface

      Are you trying to say the iTunes interface is in any way standard..? Give me a break.

      Plus, Winamp isn't dog slow.

      iTunes is great for ripping, but for actually finding and playing music, life's too short to use iTunes (on Windows, at least - but it's not exactly nippy on my Mac either, to be honest).

      Plus just having iTunes running takes up >40Mb of RAM on Windows. 40Mb! To play mp3s! Winamp 5, which has largely similar search facilities takes less than 8Mb for me. Plus when I click on stuff, it happens on a non-geological timescale. That's always a bonus.

    37. Re:Finally!!! by Moofie · · Score: 1, Funny

      Is there any good documentation for this Byzantine interface, or do I just have to keep clicking on stuff at random, to get it to do what I want it to do?

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
    38. Re:Finally!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yet you're still sad enough to bother posting on a story entitled 'iTunes For Linux, Thanks To CodeWeavers'.

    39. Re:Finally!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is classic zealotry in action.

      When Winamp 2.x was the state of the art of mp3 players on Windows and iTunes came along, all the die hard Winamp users complained that iTunes wouldn't allow them to continue their existing technique of navigating their carefully crafted folder structure, right clicking on the folder and doing 'enqueue in Winamp'.

      Then Winamp 5 comes out which tries to clone iTunes as carefully as possible, and all the Winamp users cry 'See! It's just like iTunes... only BETTER!'

      Sometimes you just have to give up...

    40. Re:Finally!!! by pebs · · Score: 1

      How do you say "I want to listen to all my Depeche Mode" without hunting through the file system?

      In Winamp this is just like you would in iTunes, Rhythmbox, JuK, etc... Type "Depeche Mode" into search box, hit enter, and then double click on where you want to start in the search results. You can also search by artist, song title, etc, if you want to, but I tend to not use that feature because my music is poorly tagged.

      --
      #!/
    41. Re:Finally!!! by Smurf · · Score: 2, Informative
      I tried iTunes, but as I have my own neat folder organization set up (1 folder per artist, subfolders for albums) I elected NOT to have iTunes take over control of organizing the files.

      I understand that you may want to keep your own organization for your music files, but it so happens that your set up is identical to the one used by iTunes!

      Yes, in the iTunes folder you will find a subfolder called iTunes Music. In it, every artist has one folder, with a subfolder for each album. Additionally, there is a folder for albums that are compilations of songs from different artists, and some artists have an "Unknown Album" subfolder for the files with empty Album tags.

      Now, if you insist on doing it the hard way, I believe that you can simply drop your whole collection into iTunes every time. I haven't tested it (as I let iTunes organize my music), but I believe that it won't even try to re-link what has already been linked.

      Well, as you are an AC I believe that I Have Been Trolled.
    42. Re:Finally!!! by VooDoo999 · · Score: 1

      This is classic zealotry in action.
      Having a preference is not zealotry. I've used iTunes. I don't care for it. I like Winamp 5. I don't claim it's better than iTunes, you made that assertion. Winamp 5 is better for me, but then I don't use iTMS or own an iPod. It can do many of the same things as iTunes, so hating on it because you think it can't do those things isn't quite right.

    43. Re:Finally!!! by myconid · · Score: 1, Informative

      One caveat of this system that you do not take into consideration is compilation albums. I have Soundtracks for example that have various artists; and I do *not* want iTunes breaking these into artist folders, when they are sound tracks, or other compilations.

      --

      SB.
    44. Re:Finally!!! by cbirdsong64 · · Score: 2, Informative

      If you make the "Part of a Compilation" option "Yes" then it puts all the songs in a folder of the album's name under the folder Compilations.

    45. Re:Finally!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      font size is changeable in Winamp.

    46. Re:Finally!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It doesn't do quick queries, or detailed queries, near as well as iTunes does.

      What do you mean by this?

      BTW, you can use regular expressions in your searchs in Winamp 5. Its a power user's media player. iTunes, instead, has a simple easy-to-use interface. They are both good for their domains. To say that iTunes is superior is like saying Windows is superior to Linux because you know how to use Windows XP.

    47. Re:Finally!!! by Moofie · · Score: 1

      Don't need to change my font size in iTunes.

      Hell, I could code myself a skin to do whatever I want in Winamp, but why the hell would I, when iTunes does everything I could ask of it right out of the box?

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
    48. Re:Finally!!! by ColMustard · · Score: 1

      It's good that you have your own preference, but I just thought I'd point out that iTunes has all the features you listed, except perhaps bookmarks.

      Plus considering that iTunes can encode several formats, burn CDs without a speed cap, and considering that it costs nothing, I wouldn't say it is "slowly catching up." It looks like it's at least equivalent if not better.

      As far as Winamp having a better interface, well, that's obviously subject to differing opinions.

      --
      Moof.
    49. Re:Finally!!! by Trillan · · Score: 1

      This may surprise you, but if someone had tried both LInux and Windows and were to make that argument, I would find it valid. Raw program features mean nothing; experience is everything.

      I used Winamp for years until iTunes was released, and Winamp will never touch my hard drive again. I don't care how many features it has or how efficient it is; its interface is too hostile for me to be comfortable using it as a jukebox.

    50. Re:Finally!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't need to change my font size in iTunes.
      Hell, I could code myself a skin to do whatever I want in Winamp, but why the hell would I, when iTunes does everything I could ask of it right out of the box?


      Well that's great! Some of us ask for MORE or for something DIFFERENT. To each his own.

      If I wanted iTunes for Linux I'd just use Rhythmbox or JuK.

    51. Re:Finally!!! by Lours · · Score: 1

      This is has honestly been the only reason that I still boot up in Windows.

      Also seems I not the only one:
      "iTunes has been our No. 1 most requested application," CodeWeavers CEO Jeremy White said in a statement.


      Then, I hope, that - as I just did, you went to Apple support and wrote them a line requesting a linux version of iTune.
      I just can't imagine they'd ignore such a request even if half of the linux slashdotters reading this article did it.

      Here's the link : just do it now .
      (important : indicate that you will use iTunes to buy songs (if that's true of course))

    52. Re:Finally!!! by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 1

      If you prefer a product that is different from the product I like, clearly you are a misguided zealot! Now, while we wait for the Grand Inquisitor to arrive, why don't we relax and have a nice Koolaid. . .

      Just kidding. Except about the Koolaid part.

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
    53. Re:Finally!!! by dnahelix · · Score: 1

      "I've never needed more management than that - why would anyone? Seriously, I'm asking. :)"


      in no particular order...

      -Sorting by Artist, Track Name, Length, Bit Rate, Release Date, whatever... ( if you sort by artist, it will subsort by album)
      -Playlists (I have so many, usually according to mood)
      -Playlist burning to Audio CD (I drag and drop a playlist and burn it in 3 minutes before a drive somewhere)
      -ID3 Tag Management (I need to correct all of these track's album name at once)
      -Inline Searching of ID3 Tags (show me, lets say, all tracks composed by Beethoven)
      -Displaying embedded album art (I'm obsessed with this)
      -Use of scripts (this one searches for lyrics)
      -Advanced Ripping options (bitrates, formats, numbered files, error correction reading crappy CDs)
      -Network Sharing! (I have 6 machines in my house, they all play music from the same drive and I manage only 1 library)
      -Streaming Audio Stations (endless hours sampling the world)
      -Nifty Psychedelic Visualizer (copied by many, mastered by none & it looks great at 120" from a projector at parties!)
      -Party Shuffle! (since I'm on the subject - I love this new feature)
      -Equilizer and Sound Enhancing controls (really helps on the older computer speakers)
      -Track Cross Fading (I adore this, I used to DJ at a radio station)
      -Time and Size management (I know that I have 16221 tracks that take up 32 days, 16 hours and 23 seconds and take up 61.01 GB - no shit.)
      -Track Rating (some of my favorite artists have some stinkers)
      -Show Song File (I, like you, have my music firewire drive neatly organized, but rarely see more than the file(s) I need)
      -Compatability with iPod (I actually don't have one, but it seems like everyone else does)
      -Random Shuffle (I'm hearing stuff I forgot I have!)
      -Exporting Song Lists or you Library (xml for other ideas?)


      Damn, now my fingers hurt!







      --
      Slashdot Eds Link Anonymous Posts With Logged Posts
      They Are Vermin Feeding On Each Other's Feces.
      I Hate \.
    54. Re:Finally!!! by Jim+Hall · · Score: 1

      The point is that with iTunes, you can buy songs from the iTMS. These are encrypted AAC files .. in order for your iPod to play them, iTunes has to write a key to the iPod at the same time it writes the music. But as the OP asked, if you can't sync to the iPod using iTunes via CodeWeavers, there's not much point.

      I suspect this ability is there. When the full release is available, I'm going to download the 1-month demo copy of CodeWeavers and try it out. Like many in this thread, iTunes is about the only reason I boot into Windows anymore.

      -jh

    55. Re:Finally!!! by sydsavage · · Score: 1
      Well, I took your advice and submitted my request for a Linux version of iTunes. Here is my plea:
      • I am a very satisfied, long-term Macintosh, iPod, and iTunes user. I have purchased over 300 tracks from the iTunes Music store so far, and find it to be an excellent resource for obtaining music legally over the internet.
      • I also use linux at home, and am intending to build a home theater PC running linux. The only thing missing from my linux experience is the ability to play the encrypted AAC files purchased from the iTunes music store. I would really like to consolidate my entire music library, both encrypted AAC files and mp3s and other unencumbered formats, and be able to share all of my music with all of my home computers, regardless of operating system.

        Although I have purchased many times more music from the iTunes Music Store than I have on CD in the past year, the one thing that keeps holding me back is the ability to play this purchased music on my future home theater PC. Once this new machine is built and deployed in my entertainment system, I think it is likely that I will again opt for purchasing music on CD, as it can then be encoded in a format that allows playback on all of my devices.

        While I realize that the Airport Express would offer some of the features that I seek in integrating my iTunes purchased tracks into my home entertainment system, I feel it does not fulfill all of my requirements, such as IR remote control, or streaming to other computers in the house that are running a non-Apple or Microsoft operating system. And really, once I have a home theater PC, I will want to access my music from within the on-screen display on my television screen as I will with the rest of the features of the home theater PC.

        Thank you for reading my suggestion, and providing such an excellent set of products as iTunes, the iPod, and the iTunes Music Store. They are all the best-of-breed in their respective categories that I have come to expect in my nearly 25 years as an Apple customer.

      I hope other slashdotters will send similar feedback to Apple.
  2. Futurama Quote applicable by CrackedButter · · Score: 4, Funny


    Bender: What better way to celebrate our success than by me showing Bubblegum this globetrotters uniform I made myself.
    BubbleGum: Let me see.
    Bender shows him his uniform.
    BubbleGum: Hello lawsuit *rubs palms*.

    1. Re:Futurama Quote applicable by CrackedButter · · Score: 1

      The success of porting itunes to linux, im sure a license agreement is being violated somewhere.

    2. Re:Futurama Quote applicable by penginkun · · Score: 2, Insightful

      How so? CodeWeavers didn't do anything to iTunes itself. They just tweaked their software so it could support iTunes.

      If Apple can sue because some talented hackers managed to get iTunes to run under Linux, then MS can sue because they've gotten Office to work.

      One day you'll realise the lawsuit isn't the answer to every problem.

    3. Re:Futurama Quote applicable by Mhtsos · · Score: 1

      Maby so, but it's broken by the user running it (and he's usually poor enough not to get sued)

    4. Re:Futurama Quote applicable by xRobx · · Score: 2, Informative

      It wasn't ported. The iTunes code was not touched. It runs on top of a layer, there is no infringement.

    5. Re:Futurama Quote applicable by andreyw · · Score: 1

      RTFA, dumbass. iTunes is run in what is essentially a beefed-up Wine. iTunes hasn't been touched.

  3. Re:Linux is about open standards by byolinux · · Score: 4, Informative

    Apple haven't sued Codeweavers over QuickTime under GNU/Linux so why would they do it over this?

    It's running whatever software Apple offer. No DRM is being tampered with.

    I think they will worry far more about RealNetworks than this.

  4. Re:Well, it saves Apple some work! by Ford+Prefect · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I think iTunes on MacOS X is a Carbon application, ie based on an updated version of the old Macintosh APIs. If it's anything like Quicktime for Windows, the Windows version of iTunes probably makes use of what's effectively a Carbon layer for Windows.

    Just because there might be BSD stuff underneath everything on MacOS X doesn't mean everything directly uses the BSD APIs...

    --
    Tedious Bloggy Stuff - hooray?
  5. Why would I use it? by CaptainZapp · · Score: 0
    Not to bitch and moan. I think the Code Weavers dudes do an excellent job, but for people who neither own an IPod, nor can buy from the apple store for country restricitions reasons it looks like a rather lost proposition.

    Not that I would buy any digital restrictions managed music from anywhere in the first place, but I digress...

    --
    ich bin der musikant

    mit taschenrechner in der hand

    kraftwerk

    1. Re:Why would I use it? by Quobobo · · Score: 4, Funny

      You are not the only Linux user in the world. Some of them might even have these "iPods" you mention.

    2. Re:Why would I use it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Do you have any idea how ignorant you sound?

      Consider the following:
      Not to bitch and moan. I think them foreigners do an excellent job, but for people who neither speak non-English languages, nor know anyone who does, i18n looks like a rather lost proposition.

      Just because YOU can't use something doesn't mean that lots of other people can't. Why is it necessary to denigrate the efforts of a company to serve its customers when their intentions are noble? This is obviously a feature that their clients requested, so they made it happen. Why is this a bad thing?

      I'm sure that snowtires seem a silly/useless proposition in Mexico, but they prove to be incredibly useful to the inhabitants in Canada.

      Don't be so short sighted.
    3. Re:Why would I use it? by 2nd+Post! · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You use it because it's the best music management app out there.

      People generally want to use the best if they can, right? Now you (and other Linux-folk) can.

      The real question is... Why wouldn't you use it? It's free, it's powerful, it's easy, it's simple!

    4. Re:Why would I use it? by greed · · Score: 1

      I don't know about you, but I have yet to find a jukebox for Linux which (a) I can get to compile and (b) works anywhere near as nicely as iTunes.

      Every time I try a so-called jukebox program, I go back to xmms. For all its lack of "media management", at least it plays correctly (without clicks & pops) and doesn't crash part-way.

      I like iTunes (though, being non-American and non-European, have no iTMS music to worry about) because it is easy to use and works well. I don't want to program my computer just to listen to music.

    5. Re:Why would I use it? by aztracker1 · · Score: 1

      I don't know, I find that the search functionality in winamp, and rip/burn in pro works better for me.. I tried the first two versions for windows, and it was slow, buggy, and crashed quite a bit.. the second made a marked improvement though...

      I paid for winamp 5 pro, because it was that worth it to me.. only thing I liked in itunes, is their visualizers are slightly better than what I see in winamp, but since I don't use it much.. doesn't matter much.

      --
      Michael J. Ryan - tracker1.info
    6. Re:Why would I use it? by 2nd+Post! · · Score: 1

      Well, at the time I switched to iTunes, Winamp didn't have a Pro which had rip/burn features. I had to use CD n Go for those functions.

      I think it was WA 2.9x when I switched to iTunes. Obviously WA has progressed since then.

    7. Re:Why would I use it? by aztracker1 · · Score: 1

      yeah, I wasn't fond of a lot of the 3.x stuff.. 5 seems to be a lot more well put together.. I ran 2.x for a long time, and ran Musicmatch for a while, got annoyed with their pay service tie in though.. just irritating... now, I mostly listen to shoutcast stations.. also listen to a few other net-radio stations(rm or wma) when not in my car...

      --
      Michael J. Ryan - tracker1.info
  6. Wow. by trans_err · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Now I finally have a reason to buy a copy of CrossOver office. iTunes is really a killer app, and using gtkpod to manage the songs on my desktop was almost insulting to the ipod itself.

    Wooohoo.

    1. Re:Wow. by dcstimm · · Score: 1

      why is he a troll? gtkpod is a very crude way of getting songs on an ipod

  7. Re:Well, it saves Apple some work! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

    its crossover - so, its running the windows version.

    asshat.

  8. This is a good thing by tourettes · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I have been in love with iTunes since I first used it in Windows late last year, I have all my music in it, and allow it to keep everything organized. While in Windows, everything is nice and neat and tidy, however, as soon as i switched to Linux and loaded up my tunes in XMMS, or Juk, or Kaffeine or any other multimedia player, all the titles and ID3 tags would look messed up.

    While some of the open source projects out there have been doing a great job emulating iTunes, none have yet to duplicate the easy of use and great interface that Apple gives us. I wouldn't say this is the only reason why I use Windows, but I would say that while in Linux, I rarely listen to any of my music because I find it too difficult.

    Thank you code weavers, and I will be looking forward to the release.

    --
    tourettes
    1. Re:This is a good thing by Zebbers · · Score: 0, Troll

      omg........ I understand the usability and looks of iTunes is nice, but are you retarded? You find it difficult to play music? You load the file and push play....it's not like xmms doesn't support playlists or (j)umping....zinf isn't bad either and has better playlisting support

      I gave you credit until that comment. You don't listen to music because it is difficult....interesting.

    2. Re:This is a good thing by tourettes · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I should have said 'more difficult', i know it's not hard to pop in a song at a time, or even a playlist of a few hundred songs. However, I like how iTunes organizes everything when it comes to being able to browse by Album/Artist/Genre, and give you the options to create playlists and smart playlists. I have used Juk a lot, and while it is a good program, and does some of these things well, it always felt like there was something missing.

      As for Zif, I did give it a try, but I kept having problems with it scanning my hard drive to find my music files, I haven't filed a bug report until i figure out if it's something with my system causing that problem.

      --
      tourettes
    3. Re:This is a good thing by Matthias+Wiesmann · · Score: 1, Insightful
      You don't listen to music because it is difficult....interesting.
      No, this is quite legitimate.

      There are times when you want to listen to music, without giving it much attention. This means you don't want to navigate a filesystem every three minutes to select the next tune, which would amount to interrupt what you are doing. Playlists don't work well with me, because this means selecting stuff in advance. You can do the analogy to how you listen to music in your car, playlists are like burning your own compilation on a CD, selecting files is like inserting a new tape after each tune. The first one implies work and to be organised (I'm not), the second would not be very safe. Of course, you listen to whole albums sequentially, but this is often not what I feel like.

      I used to have a Sun station with XMMS, but not listening a lot to music because of this. With iTunes, I usually browse either by genre or artist or even use the search facility and play the set of songs that come out. The party mode is also, I think, quite a good idea, although I have to figure out how to prevent certain tunes from ending up in there.

    4. Re:This is a good thing by Joe+Enduser · · Score: 2, Interesting
      No, it is difficult.

      Alsa? Oss? Esd? Artsd? Jack? Jackit? Wtf? How does one know that you need xmms-alsa.rpm installed when you play music in KDE with this sound system thingy enabled?

      And it used to be isapnp+sndconfig. Hell, I used to not listen to music because it was too difficult in those days.

      Of course, I do not know if this is the grandparent poster's point. I-tunes is certainly not going to change this situation, and you have pointed out some nice alternatives for sure.

    5. Re:This is a good thing by _|()|\| · · Score: 4, Insightful
      are you retarded?

      And this is why the gulf between Linux and Mac OS is so wide. "It's so easy, just do this and this and this. Oh, you mean you want it to just work?"

      Whether it's because iTunes tagged the files unconventionally, or because the XMMS is broken /inferior, the simplicity of iTunes didn't translate to the original poster's Linux environment. iTunes has plenty of room for improvement, but it's a solid app., both on Windows and OS X. I don't blame the OP for missing it.

    6. Re:This is a good thing by IamTheRealMike · · Score: 2, Informative

      You know, if you look outside of KDE apps they can be quite good. RhythmBox is a competent iTunes clone though gstreamer is still a bit immature - for now you may wish to use the Xine backend. If you're looking for something truly fresh then Muine has an innovative, unique (afaik) interface especially suitable for lots of albums. It doesn't do net radio though: it's purely for playing back music. Other downside is that it requires Mono. It works nicely however, in my limited experience.

    7. Re:This is a good thing by dirkdidit · · Score: 4, Informative

      The reason your ID3 tags look messed up is because you only put track information into the ID3v1 tags and not the ID3v2 tags. ID3v2 being what most players use for song information nowadays

      All is not lost however, you can turn off ID3v2 support in XMMS under the MP3 decoder options. XMMS will then read the song information from the ID3v1 tags and your problem will be fixed in a snap.

    8. Re:This is a good thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      LOL. Parent post is a perfect example of why people like iTunes and hate everything else. Who cares about ID3v2 vs ID3v1?? I want something that just works.

    9. Re:This is a good thing by civilizedINTENSITY · · Score: 1

      Wow. XMMS and Mozilla are the two apps to which Windows users are most attracted when first they see me running Linux. I'm assuming that if iTunes did your ID tags right that alone would make the difference, yes?

    10. Re:This is a good thing by plj · · Score: 1

      Interesting. Would you have as good explanation for this: I recently installed a new box for my sister, and put Fedora Core 2 into it. I also installed extra Gstreamer plugins and other multimedia stuff from freshrpms.net.

      I then tested Rhythmbox by moving a couple of songs encoded in AAC to that box, which I had ripped on iTunes. They played without a hitch, and all track information seemed to be there too -- except that track numbers were lost (the field had a thext "never" in them), and when I tried to fix that, I realised that none of those fields where actually editable. I first thought that perhaps this is all about AAC, but the fields remained in uneditable state with MP3s, too.

      And yes, the user account it was running as had write permissions to those files and to the directory they were located in.

      Any ideas?

      --
      “Wait for Hurd if you want something real” –Linus
    11. Re:This is a good thing by pavon · · Score: 1

      Thats weird. You'd think that that when they created ID3v2 they would have included some way for an application to determine if v1 or v2 is being used. Is the ID3 format really that brain-dead, or are the linux mp3 players just assuming that everyone is using the latest and greatest?

    12. Re:This is a good thing by MasterVidBoi · · Score: 4, Informative

      If that is indeed the problem, under the Advanced menu in iTunes, you can batch convert any number of files to a newer (or older) version if ID3 tags, v2 included. It will copy over all information as necessary.

    13. Re:This is a good thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The best player for linux is XMMS and Lplayer. Lplayer allows you to rate songs, and has a truly random play feature. Powerfull searching and playlist features, along with the color-coded mood feature makes listening to large playlists a pleasure.

    14. Re:This is a good thing by Hatta · · Score: 1

      And this is why the gulf between Linux and Mac OS is so wide. "It's so easy, just do this and this and this. Oh, you mean you want it to just work?"

      Just work? I load a playlist into XMMS or start it with 'mplayer -playlist list.m3u' It just works. I open it with itunes and it scatters the files around the library, I have to manually create a new playlist, and it still sorts the playlist in reverse. This is not easy or intuitive. There are lots of little frustrations in itunes that "just work" with mplayer.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    15. Re:This is a good thing by AstroDrabb · · Score: 1
      From the Rhythmbox FAQ:
      Rhythmbox currently doesn't support id3 tag editing. This is a feature that will be added at some point in the future.
      --
      If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land,
      it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy. -James Madison
    16. Re:This is a good thing by DMUTPeregrine · · Score: 1

      Exactly. Why is everyone in Linux GUI trying to replicate windows anyway? Most of windows' interface sucks, base your stuff off MacOS. Imagine a system as good as a mac and as cheap (cheaper) as a windows pc.

      --
      Not a sentence!
    17. Re:This is a good thing by plj · · Score: 1

      Well, it seems that I should actually search harder next time... or even see vendors webpage, which is what I of course somehow failed do following the best /.-style, although I did try to Google for that issue.

      But thanks for information!

      --
      “Wait for Hurd if you want something real” –Linus
    18. Re:This is a good thing by hobbit · · Score: 1
      The party mode is also, I think, quite a good idea, although I have to figure out how to prevent certain tunes from ending up in there.

      Place certain tunes in playlist P; create smart playlist Q with rule "anything not in playlist P"; source party shuffle from playlist Q. Playlist P can of course itself be a smart playlist with contents sourced according to artist, genre etc.

      In general, if you don't want to delete songs from your music library but you don't want to listen to them at all, simply uncheck them.

      --
      "Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something" - Plato
    19. Re:This is a good thing by imroy · · Score: 1

      Agreed. ID3 is a horribly limited hack (hence the need for ID3v2) on a format (MPEG) that was never meant to support arbitrary user metadata. I have no problem with my Ogg Vorbis music files. Ogg files are designed to hold metadata in a simple but flexible name=value format. Title, artist, album, track number, genre, whatever you want. You can even add your own fields, like Vorbisgain data.

      ID3 is just a block of data tacked onto the end of the MPEG I layer 3 audio file. It isn't a part of the MPEG standards. Frankly, it's very poorly designed, with fixed-length fields and no way to add extra fields. Except by adding even more data at the end, hence ID3v2. Bad, bad, bad.

  9. on Linux? by SvendTofte · · Score: 3, Informative
    he'd purchased from iTMS using iTunes on Linux.

    You mean that he purchased from iTMS using iTunes on Windows on Linux?
    1. Re:on Linux? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      er, no. do you even have a clue what you're talking about?

    2. Re:on Linux? by benjamindees · · Score: 1

      I suppose you mean 'on Windows or Linux', in which case the answer is 'on Linux'. We've been able to play songs purchased on Windows for a while, just not to purchase them on Linux.

      --
      "I assumed blithely that there were no elves out there in the darkness"
    3. Re:on Linux? by IamTheRealMike · · Score: 1

      You can purchase songs and play them on Linux. However, iPod integration doesn't presently work.

    4. Re:on Linux? by pecko666 · · Score: 1

      No, he meant 'onWindows (running) on Linux' ! The iTunes was running on emulated Windows instance, which was running on emulator running on Linux! So we still have no Linux iTunes. We have only emulator support for Windows version of iTunes on Linux.

    5. Re:on Linux? by ananke · · Score: 2, Informative

      uhmm, sorry to confuse you some more, but that thing was running on wine, not windows. BIG difference.

      --
      --- d'oh
    6. Re:on Linux? by TuringTest · · Score: 1

      But the iTunes version still is native for Windows, which is what the gp stated.

      --
      Singularity: a belief in the "God" idea with the "demiurge" relation inverted.
    7. Re:on Linux? by civilizedINTENSITY · · Score: 1

      +5 insightful?

      "he'd purchased from iTMS using iTunes on Linux" is accurate.

      "purchased from iTMS using iTunes on Windows on Linux" is not accurate and indicates you don't know what codeweavers (or wine) is.

      You don't need Windows to run codeweavers/wine. It isn't like vmware, rather "Wine is an open source software initiative that is systematically re-implementing the Win32 API under Linux. Wine makes it possible for Linux PCs to run Windows application as if natively." The idea is natively code enough of windows under linux that linux becomes a superset of windows.

    8. Re:on Linux? by plj · · Score: 1

      "he'd purchased from iTMS using iTunes on Linux" is accurate.

      It is, but I think the most descriptive for would've IMHO been "using iTunes for Windows on Linux" OR "using the Windows version of iTunes on Linux" (or the same with regular genetive form without "of"...)

      However, considering the amount of typos I've already made on my replies to this story, may be I should just stop this nitpicking and shut up...

      --
      “Wait for Hurd if you want something real” –Linus
    9. Re:on Linux? by SvendTofte · · Score: 1

      I do know what codeweavers is and what wine is. And it's exactly like vmware, it's emulation of a interface. Wine emulates the windows interface, also known as the win32 api (unless wine has changed alot since I last messed with it).

      The keypoint of your post, is in the "as if" part. Because no matter what, it'll only ever be "as if" it's running on linux...

    10. Re:on Linux? by Geoff-with-a-G · · Score: 1

      What we have here is a failure to communicate. Since the art of English grammar is lost on this crowd, let's try parentheses:

      The original post:
      "... playing back (a song which he had purchased from iTMS) using iTunes on Linux."

      That was unclear, so the parent poster attempted:
      "... playing back (a song which he had purchased from iTMS using iTunes on Windows) on Linux."

      Everybody follow that now?
      Parent poster's point was that the demo did not include the ability to purchase a song using iTunes on Linux. The song still had to be purchased using iTunes on Windows, then it could later be played back using iTunes on Linux.

    11. Re:on Linux? by tornado2258 · · Score: 1

      NO
      wine is not exactly like vmware. Vmware is an emulater of the x86 architecture which you can then install an operating system into, wine is a (free) reimplementation of the win 32 API. With vmware you still have a copy of windows running, you don't with wine (or crossover office).

    12. Re:on Linux? by AstroDrabb · · Score: 3, Interesting
      which was running on emulator running on Linux! So we still have no Linux iTunes. We have only emulator support for Windows version of iTunes on Linux.
      According to Wine
      Wine is an Open Source implementation of the Windows API on top of X and Unix.

      Think of Wine as a Windows compatibility layer. Wine does not require Microsoft Windows, as it is a completely alternative implementation consisting of 100% Microsoft-free code, but it can optionally use native system DLLs if they are available
      Then name Wine stands for Wine Is Not an Emulator. Wine does not emulate windows, it is an implementation of the Win 32 API. So iTunes running on Linux is not being emulated at all. It is running natively, though it is not using default Linux API's or traditional Linux GUI tool kits. Instead it is using Windows API's that were ported to Linux. This is no different them me writting a Windows applications using GTK+, QT or wxWindows. All three of them run on Windows, they are not the default Win32 API and they do not emulate. An API is just something you program to, a set of functions, etc that you use to make a program do something. Again, repeat after me, Wine Is Not an Emulator.
      --
      If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land,
      it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy. -James Madison
    13. Re:on Linux? by Minna+Kirai · · Score: 1

      was running on wine, not windows. BIG difference.

      No. Wine is a version of Windows. It's not Microsoft(tm) Windows(r) XP, but it is a kind of windows, in the same sense that Hewlett Packard sells xerox machines.

    14. Re:on Linux? by AstroDrabb · · Score: 2, Informative
      You don't know what Wine is. Read my previous post. Wine does not emulate at all. It is a code rewrite of the Win32 API, so to a program written for Windows, it is Windows. So, Windows programs now become GNU/Linux programs too. Though not all windows apps run under Wine Cross Over Office because Wine has not implemented 100% of the large Win32 API.

      VMWare is in a totally different class. VMWare _is_ an emulator/virtual machine and will _emulate_ hardware in software.

      Because no matter what, it'll only ever be "as if" it's running on linux.
      Um, how is it _not_ running on Linux? Linux has many different API's (just like Windows and Mac OS X do), Wine is just another set of API's you can use to program under Linux. It is a special API because the goal of Wine is to be a 100% clone of the Win32 API that MS wrote.

      You need to understand what an API is to understand that Wine is not an emulator. An API is just a set of functions, etc that a program can use to do things. For example, in MS Windows, there is a function in the Win32 API called CreateWindowEx. Your program can call this function to create a new window. Under GTK+ for Linux, there is a similar function called gtk_window_new that your program can call to create a new window. Wine is just another API under Linux and Wine has the same CreateWindowEx function that you would find under Win32.

      --
      If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land,
      it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy. -James Madison
    15. Re:on Linux? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is *technically* incorrect. Applications recompiled using Winelib are arguably native applications. However, if an application is launched via the Wine PE loader it is most certainly running in an emulated environment. If you want to get REALLY technical, it's actually a VM in the style of .NET or Java. For it to be a true emulator, Wine would actually disassociate the hardware and OS characteristics from the program, as per the name, it doesn't.

    16. Re:on Linux? by geoffspear · · Score: 1
      Wine is an Open Source implementation of the Windows API on top of X and Unix.

      Then it can't possibly run under GNU/Linux, because, repeat after me, GNU's Not Unix.

      Damn hypocritical pedants.

      --
      Don't blame me; I'm never given mod points.
  10. Hmmm by anonicon · · Score: 0, Troll

    Wow, cool, now the Linux community can easily, painlessly join the choice of a new generation. Fan-f*cking-tastic, where do I sign up? *drool*

    1. Re:Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

      oh look, a cheap bastard...

    2. Re:Hmmm by Valar · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You know, I've never found artists not getting a very big cut as a good excuse to not pay them at all...

    3. Re:Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yay, zealot sites with an agenda! Their mature additude with the material("screw job" now that is classy!) really makes an impression on me. No, no, I will not research the facts on my own, your exemplary site has made such an impression on me!

    4. Re:Hmmm by anonicon · · Score: 2, Informative

      "You know, I've never found artists not getting a very big cut as a good excuse to not pay them at all.."

      Talk about your erroneous, false conclusions. I wasn't referring to iTunes as an alternative to Kazaa, but I was pointing out that it's funny that so many people are excited about the opportunity to buy low-quality DRM'd music on Linux (like their Windows counterparts).

    5. Re:Hmmm by FuzzzyLogik · · Score: 1

      that whole page is full of rubbish. the problem isn't the artists getting zero money, it's the contract they signed with their record company. now the record company dictates how much money they get. that's their own fault.

    6. Re:Hmmm by FuzzzyLogik · · Score: 4, Insightful

      i've bought 140 songs from itms. probably a good 40 or 50 of them were from the pepsi promotion. but with my klipsch pro media speakers they don't sound bad either. my monsoon stereo in my car seems to like them too because it sounds like any other cd. ya.. i agree 128kbps is kinda low and i wish they'd raise it to 160kbps or 192kbps but oh well. this gives me a way to buy single songs from those cd's that have 1 or 2 good songs on them and not spend $10-15 to get those 1 or 2 good songs. even if they quality isn't cd quality i still saved myself a crap load of money by buying them this way. if you looked through my itms smart folder you'd notice that it's all 1 or 2 songs by an artist and not full cd's. I still buy the full cd's from a store like best buy or cdnow.com. but when it comes to a couple songs on a cd that sucks other than those couple songs.. i'll take the DRMed low quality than paying $10-15 for them.

    7. Re:Hmmm by discstickers · · Score: 4, Funny

      Repeat after me: "iTunes is not just a music store."

      Good, I knew you could do it.

      --
      I have a shitty sig!
    8. Re:Hmmm by nuggetman · · Score: 1

      Some of us don't use the music store. See, iTunes also has this neat feature where it can organize and sort your music and all kinds of other nifty stuff. In the next version there's even rumors it will PLAY music too!!!

      --
      ...and that's all there is to it.
    9. Re:Hmmm by sabNetwork · · Score: 2, Insightful

      At least 95% of the population can't tell the difference-- 128kbps AAC sounds great. The other 5% or less can suffer the inconvenience of buying physical CDs or using P2P.

      --

    10. Re:Hmmm by sabNetwork · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Saying that artists only receive $0.11 per song or less isn't just unperceptive, it's wrong.

      Most artists have up-front contracts with their labels, paying them millions in advance. Musicians don't make their profits from album commissions.

      --

    11. Re:Hmmm by MetaMarty · · Score: 1

      Interesting, my allofmp3.com stats page shows that I've downloaded 142 songs so far. They were all high quality, DRM-less mp3's. The total cost of this was less then $10, and that was without any discounts or promotions. I just don't understand why people keep feeding services like itms and the RIAA. And yes, artist *do* get royalties from allofmp3.

    12. Re:Hmmm by mcc · · Score: 1

      You know, I've never found artists not getting a very big cut as a good excuse to not pay them at all...

      Which is an excellent point!

      But I have to admit that conversely, I don't find "the artists will get a miniscule, almost insignificant amount of money that will probably all go just toward paying back their recoupment" a terribly convincing reason all by itself go make me really want to just rush out and spend $17 at fye.

    13. Re:Hmmm by Smurf · · Score: 1
      Interesting, my allofmp3.com stats page shows that I've downloaded 142 songs so far. [...] The total cost of this was less then $10,

      So in average every song costs you far less than 8 cents. Taking away the slice that allofmp3.com takes (or do you believe they maintain the service out of the goodness of their heart?), the artists must really be getting filthy rich with your purchases.

      Sarcasm aside, please get real: most artists have a contract with their labels, and they can't offer their music directly to sites like allofmp3.com. The labels will never, ever, accept such a low price. Please note that you will find music from such artist in allofmp3.com, (even bootlegs that are certainly not officially endorsed).

      And even for artists who can deal directly with the site (legally), they won't be much happy receiving far less than the 11 cents that they receive from iTunes after the label and the RIAA have taken their slices.

      Please, get this in your head: allofmp3.com is lying to you when they say that they aren't ripping the artists. In fact, such sites exist because of the several loopholes in the Russian legislation (and that is true for most of the Russian commerce that is considered illegal in most other countries).

      In my opinion, sooner or later the North American and European governments are going to squeeze Russia commercially until they straighten up their laws, and you will see all those bootlegs disappear and the prices go up. (Or maybe the service will be made inaccessible to people from the offended countries, just as US customers can't buy music form the French iTunes site, etc).

      Allofmp3.com knows that what they are doing will eventually be acknowledged as a crime, and they are trying to get as much money from you meanwhile. People of such so low moral stature can be expected to lie in your face directly, so don't be surprised if what you are buying is actually pure pirated music, and the artists are getting nothing from it. If they are lying about giving them a fair share of the profit, they can be lying about everything else.
  11. Re:Well, it saves Apple some work! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    (youngandstoopid) so its like QT/GTK then? (/youngandstoopid)

  12. Yuck... by oliverthered · · Score: 1

    Sounds like Apple are embeding the UI layer and the Application layer, that's what you get from a single vendor solution....

    Well.. maybe not.. but how hard can it be for Apple to do a carbon copy for Linux, like they've done for Windows.

    --
    thank God the internet isn't a human right.
    1. Re:Yuck... by Otter · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Sounds like Apple are embeding the UI layer and the Application layer, that's what you get from a single vendor solution....

      Uh, no. I'm not sure how you reached that conclusion. The point is that MacOS isn't FreeBSD with an Apple window manager slapped on top, as Slashbot dimwits all seem to believe.

      Well.. maybe not.. but how hard can it be for Apple to do a carbon copy for Linux, like they've done for Windows.

      Probably just about as hard to make, although a lot harder to support. But for 1% of the desktop market instead of 97%, "no harder to make" isn't necessarily a winner.

    2. Re:Yuck... by oliverthered · · Score: 1

      I don't know about you, but when I write code it's fairly easy to slap any old UI on the front. It's not like ITunes does anything fancy interms of UI.

      Also your demagraphics are heavly scewed.

      'But for 1% of the desktop market instead of 97%'

      Ok, 50% of desktops are in offices, almost all Windows.

      Then who's going to by an IPod, geekie people who are probably a few hundred percent more lightly to have Linux at home then the rest or the population.

      So there target audance is probably about 15% of the desktop, maybe less with not to great a split between linux, windows and maybe mac usage.

      This is based on the people I know who would consider buying a IPod. 3% of the people I know which works out as about 10 or so people.
      of them it's about a 35-65 split between linux and windows.

      I would say that about 60% of the people I know own a computer of sorts, about 10-90 linux-Windows with the odd Mac.

      --
      thank God the internet isn't a human right.
    3. Re:Yuck... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      " I don't know about you, but when I write code it's fairly easy to slap any old UI on the front. It's not like ITunes does anything fancy interms of UI."

      So that explains why Open Source software is known for their intitive user interfaces. Oh wait.

  13. Re:Linux is about open standards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You don't understand what Crossover Office is, do you? Read the article before you make stupid comments.

  14. gtkpod? by bach37 · · Score: 2, Informative

    What about gtkpod?

    1. Re:gtkpod? by Accipiter · · Score: 1

      What about it? Buy a song from iTunes with it.

      Yeah.

      --

      -- Give him Head? Be a Beacon?
      (If you can't figure out how to E-Mail me, Don't. :P)

  15. Re:Well, it saves Apple some work! by Shisha · · Score: 5, Informative

    iTunes is not an X windows app. That's why porting it to Linux won't be much easier than porting to Windows.

    Oh and the parent is moderated interesting! No it's not it's rubbish. Repeat after me Aqua is not X! CoreAudio is not ALSA (or OSS)!!!

    Yes Mac OS X has got BSD kernel, but 95% of things above that level (exlcluding OpenGL) are proprietary Apple stuff and so a nearly full blown port is requeried from Mac OS X to Linux! Nowadays programs like iTunes use more then fopen(...); and printf(...).

  16. What's so good about iTunes? Not a troll. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    Serious question, as I have no system capable of running iTunes smoothly. What's so good about iTunes? If you don't intend to buy an iPod or music from the iTMS, is there anything special about iTunes that other music players don't have?

    1. Re:What's so good about iTunes? Not a troll. by rharder · · Score: 5, Informative

      Even w/o an iPod or an interest in iTMS, iTunes can make a great music program. Like many other things Apple, iTunes doesn't necessarily have unique features, but (nearly) all its features are easier to use than in (nearly) all other software (there are always exceptions).

      Things that you can do anywhere but are particularly easy, pleasant, or automatic in iTunes:
      o Searching for songs
      o Manipulating playlists
      o Consistent sound quality/volume
      o Smart playlists

      Other nice things that some people use:
      o AppleScriptable (OK, only applies to Macs but extremely useful nonetheless)
      o Album art
      o Rate your songs

      Just a few thoughts...

      -Rob

    2. Re:What's so good about iTunes? Not a troll. by bach37 · · Score: 1

      Not to mention the mp3 encoder in iTunes is excellent. That's one thing Linux lacks.
      (Disclaimer: Please don't say ogg or lame, b/c they don't do classical music at all, unfortunately.)

    3. Re:What's so good about iTunes? Not a troll. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Huh?
      Classical music, isn't music?

      Ohh i see where you're going, i demand my own encoder as well, for emo.

    4. Re:What's so good about iTunes? Not a troll. by ScottGant · · Score: 1

      sorry to differ with you, but I encode CD's on my Linux machine and then transfer them over to my Wife's for her to play on iTunes because it's so much better. This is for mp3's mind you. Apple's AAC is a different story, yet less flexable IMHO.

      And I don't understand what you mean that lame and ogg don't do classical. Can you point me to websites that show this? Or is this just opinion.

      Let me know

      --

      "Music is everybody's possession. It's only publishers who think that people own it." - John Lennon.
    5. Re:What's so good about iTunes? Not a troll. by bach37 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Sorry I wasn't entirely clear. I mean, if you take, say the Mahler 2 San Fran/MTT CD and encode it with lame as a mp3 or encode as an ogg (to the highest levels), it comes out sounding like ass unfortunately. Lots of airy distortion, and noise. And if you have a choir in there, you can really hear the noise even worse. Lame is good for pop songs, etc. but it just doesn't work as well as the Franhaufer (sp?) encoder with classical music unfortunately.

    6. Re:What's so good about iTunes? Not a troll. by bwy · · Score: 4, Informative

      Also, many OS X apps like iTunes, iPhoto, etc. store their data in XML files and easy to navigate file systems, so you can get at them with your own software/scripts/etc. I bought a Mac because OS X in general has the overall quality newcomers have found in apps like iTunes. It is a rare thing to be able to build a complete OS that is easy enough for newbies but powerful enough to satisfy software developers/hackers/power users/etc.

    7. Re:What's so good about iTunes? Not a troll. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Lame is good for pop songs, etc. but it just doesn't work as well as the Franhaufer (sp?) encoder with classical music unfortunately.

      This public listening test includes 4 classical pieces (Bartok, Debussy, Brahms, Mahler). Ogg's (aoTuV) performance was excelent on all of them, while Lame only dropped the ball on the Debussy track.

    8. Re:What's so good about iTunes? Not a troll. by SilentChris · · Score: 2, Interesting

      "AppleScriptable" ... one of iTunes biggest downfalls. I ran into a really weird situation a week after I bought my iPod. I wanted to create a "smart" playlist that would randomly select 20 minutes of music for exercising. Sounds simple, right?

      Wrong. The ONLY way to do it was through AppleScript. You could create the playlist, but it would always have the same 20 minutes of music. I needed to script a way to remove all songs from the playlist so iTunes got the hint that I wanted 20 minutes of random music *every* time I opened the playlist.

      And it's not that it was overly complicated, or differed much from what's already offered (iPod updates, for example, date-based playlists on the fly). Apple's reliance on AppleScript though, perturbed me. Basically, there was no way to get this functionality WITHOUT AppleScript. It's become an excuse.

    9. Re:What's so good about iTunes? Not a troll. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I dunno wtf you're talking about. Both OGG and LAME not only do classical music, they both do it well.

      My Etymotics agree.

    10. Re:What's so good about iTunes? Not a troll. by jsebrech · · Score: 1

      Don't forget the cd insert creation functionality. Very smooth, very easy to use, very pretty.

    11. Re:What's so good about iTunes? Not a troll. by TuringTest · · Score: 2, Informative

      The next version of Mac OS X will have an application to program automatic tasks with a GUI, without using AppleScript.

      --
      Singularity: a belief in the "God" idea with the "demiurge" relation inverted.
    12. Re:What's so good about iTunes? Not a troll. by bach37 · · Score: 1


      My ears are all the testing I need to have. Pop in an orchestral cd of your choice to try and see, if you need a test. The "performace" is nothing any classical music listener would call "excellent," unless you enjoy noise.

      Even cheaper mp3 encoders in windows don't do well with classical music. I've found that only the Fraunhofer codec does well.

      I've tried getting a few Windows programs to work with wine that have the Fraunhofer encoder, but haven't had any success as of yet. :-/

      - Classical Musician

    13. Re:What's so good about iTunes? Not a troll. by dogmatixpsych · · Score: 1

      Also, iTunes' visualization is the best. I've never seen any other free visualizations that even come close and I've played around a lot with WinAmp, WMP, and RealPlayer.
      Not that visualizations are really that imporatant overall, but it is a very nice touch. I never get sick of iTunes' visualizations (it is pretty graphics-intensive though if you try to run at full-screen).

    14. Re:What's so good about iTunes? Not a troll. by xenoandroid · · Score: 1

      That's the stupidest reasoning I've ever heard as to why iTunes shouldn't be scriptable.

      Write this down:
      For your iPod:
      Main Menu>Settings>Shuffle - Set it to songs.

      In iTunes: lower left corner, second button from the left OR
      Menus: Control>Shuffle

      All you have to do is select your playlist (or entire library) and turn those options on, instant random song playback.

      So immediately that 'no way to get functionality' is WRONG.

      Now back to how stupid it is to say Applescript is a downfall. AppleScript IS suppose to allow you to add new functions to OSX and it's programs, so what? What's so bad about it? Are you saying you would rather not have the option to make your computer perform things that other software developers didn't think of? Gee I guess BASIC was a big downfall of older computers.

      The only time I've used Applescript in OS X was to write an Address Book plugin that allowed me to send SMS messages through Proteus from the address book without having to manually enter +(phone number) into a messaging box for AIM. You can't expect Apple to write programs that have every single feature and interconnective option possible with every single program in the world just because they try to.

      That being said, I'd like to see you find a valid place where Applescript is the only solution to something that really should be built into the program. Interconnecting products of two different developers doesn't count.

    15. Re:What's so good about iTunes? Not a troll. by rjung2k · · Score: 1

      Did you try the "Smart playlists" feature from within iTunes itself? There's no reason you needed to go to Applescript for something which iTunes already supports.

    16. Re:What's so good about iTunes? Not a troll. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pu-LEEZ.

      You are yet in another long line of people that claim they can tell the difference of something but can and are proven wrong time and again in a blind sampling.

      I bet dollars to donuts that you couldn't tell the difference and would probably pick Ogg, which let's face it blows the old Fraunhafer codec away.

      But you're one of those that just KNOWS that something is better and won't even belive their own ears if something shatters your little pre-concieved little world.

      Also, being a "classical musician" doesn't automatically make you an expert on this. But hey, no one can tell you anything right? Your ears are all the testing you need to have. Please, sell it too the whales....

    17. Re:What's so good about iTunes? Not a troll. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ohh i see where you're going, i demand my own encoder as well, for emo.

      Don't bother. I'm sure the emo will come out whiny whatever encoder you use.

    18. Re:What's so good about iTunes? Not a troll. by SilentChris · · Score: 1

      "All you have to do is select your playlist (or entire library) and turn those options on, instant random song playback."

      Sorry, you're an idiot. Plain and simple. I'm not talking about shuffling preexisting playlists (any moron can do that). I'm talking about create new playlists with randomly selected songs from the library. Exactly how I mentioned it in my original post. Show me how to get iTunes to randomly choose 20 minutes of songs (different music every time I open iTunes) without scripting.

    19. Re:What's so good about iTunes? Not a troll. by SilentChris · · Score: 1

      "Did you try the "Smart playlists" feature from within iTunes itself?"

      Yes, I did. As I said before, it'll create the random list once, but it'll never change the songs after that. You have to (quite stupidly I might add) force iTunes to remove every song from the list to have it regenerated. If it was as simple as some settings in Smart Playlist, I wouldn't have posted it.

    20. Re:What's so good about iTunes? Not a troll. by xenoandroid · · Score: 1

      Randomly choosing 20 minutes of songs every time you open iTunes is pointless, why would you want a smart playlist for that when shuffling your music for 20 minutes is pretty much the same thing without a playlist that you can burn to CD.

      Me being an idiot or not, you're pretty stupid for thinking such an obscure feature such as creating a new random playlist every time you start iTunes not being present it the software's code being some kind of 'downfall'. The random selection on playlists is there so you can tell iTunes to randomly select some amount of music for you to make a CD with.

      You said you wanted 20 minutes of music to exercise to that was selected randomly, that's what the damn shuffle is for.

      Your idea is stupid and pointless, give me (and Apple) a REAL reason for making iTunes do that and I might respect your idea more (and they might add it). Until then I'll just assume you're being a nitpicked asshole because it's related to Apple (why aren't you nitpicking all those other media players out there that don't even have the create a random playlist function. Next you'll be saying that all Apple computers should have a fan sticking off the side that randomly turns on and off to make you cool, your idea is equally as pointless and I bet you won't be bitching about Dell not having this 'feature'.

    21. Re:What's so good about iTunes? Not a troll. by hobbit · · Score: 1

      Sorry, you're the idiot.

      The very reason you like using iTunes is because Apple haven't put every single bit of functionality that every fool requests who can't work out that what he needs to do is use party shuffle mode and then stop the music manually when he's finished exercising.

      --
      "Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something" - Plato
  17. Re:It's still all unix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    > and OSX's fancy graphics are still X11 based,

    No, Quartz is like DisplayPDF, totally different from the X11 model.

  18. Re:It's still all unix by GregChant · · Score: 5, Informative
    It still only needs the right layer in there. OSX still uses a BSD interface which is alot similar, and OSX's fancy graphics are still X11 based,

    No, they aren't. X11 is completely separate from Aqua/Quartz. One of the many reasons why you need either Xfree86 or Apple's modified X11 to run X applications. Additionally, like the grandparent said, iTunes is based on Carbon, which is separate from the BSD subsystem. For the most part, OS X uses BSD for its kernel and services only: all Mac OS X native programs are written in Cocoa, Carbon, or Java.

  19. Waaaaaa! by spotteddog · · Score: 1

    "while in Linux, I rarely listen to any of my music because I find it too difficult."

    Bull. What's more difficult about listening to your music in Linux than Windows? I have not seen messed up ID3 tags in my mps or ogg files in Linux, Windows , or on my Pocket PC. Perhaps the original software that created your music files was less than compliant with the standards (or you are using old versions of XMMS/Juk/Kaffine). Did you report your problems to the developers? What makes you think the Linux version of iTunes will be any better?

    --
    . there used to be a sig here.....
    1. Re:Waaaaaa! by greed · · Score: 1

      There was a bug in XMMS ID3 decoder that would sign-extend an 8-bit byte to 32-bits, resulting in a negative number, which it would then discard as being (correctly) insane. Since this was the length field, nothing was usable in the rest of the tag--it couldn't skip to the next record.

      Consequently, any file with a comment field between 128 and 255 bytes long would have no tags showing up.

      It's fixed in 1.2.10.

      (BTW, SoundJam and iTunes both record the information needed to do a CDDB query on the disc in the comment field, so you can refresh the info data without having to drag out the CD.)

  20. AirTunes? by mccalli · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Any news if this will work with the Airport Express? I'm guessing yes, because I'd imagine AirTunes to be a rendezvous (err... I mean OpenTalk)-based service working at the application level, rather than requiring any extra low level networking code. Still, worth a check.

    Cheers,
    Ian

  21. slightly off topic, but... by jerky42 · · Score: 1

    What is a good program to use to batch change all ID3 tags to match the file name, or better yet, to match the file name minus the ".mp3"?

    Suggestions?

    --
    The strong do what they can, while the weak suffer what they must.
    1. Re:slightly off topic, but... by mccalli · · Score: 4, Interesting
      What is a good program to use to batch change all ID3 tags to match the file name, or better yet, to match the file name minus the ".mp3"?

      Which OS? I used to use Tag&Rename when I ran my music stuff under Windows - excellent program. Don't know for Linux, and under OS X I just use iTunes to manage stuff.

      Cheers,
      Ian

    2. Re:slightly off topic, but... by Swedentom · · Score: 1

      If you have a Mac, you can make a quick AppleScript for this.

      --
      Sig Nature
    3. Re:slightly off topic, but... by jerky42 · · Score: 1

      Thanks. That looks like a great program. I was looking for Windows software, but I can also use Linux stuff.

      --
      The strong do what they can, while the weak suffer what they must.
    4. Re:slightly off topic, but... by Eivind · · Score: 2, Informative

      easytag. It has a parser that can fill in id3-tags from the filename, or the other way around (rename files to match id3-info). The parser is quite flexible, using user-provided patterns. So for example if the files where named like ARTIST_ALBUM_SONGNAME.mp3 you'd provide easytag with the pattern {artist}_{album}_{title}.mp3 and have it work as expected. Also supports looking up info from cddb aswell as specifying manually as a last resort.

    5. Re:slightly off topic, but... by Marauder2 · · Score: 1
    6. Re:slightly off topic, but... by zpiderz · · Score: 1

      I use easyTag and it's working out great. It supports changing ID3 tags, changing filename to match ID3 tag, CDDB searches, etc.

    7. Re:slightly off topic, but... by mattyrobinson69 · · Score: 2, Informative

      i use juk (kde app) to listen to my music, and i used it to rename all the chilli peppers songs of one of their albums (files named properly, but id3 tags were like 01 - unknown or similar. under juk, click tagger > guess tag information > from filename.

      it worked out the correct id3 tags perfectly

    8. Re:slightly off topic, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Does it support cddb?
      Last time I checked it only had freedb support which has many entries where the artist and the cd title are mixed.

    9. Re:slightly off topic, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >If you have a Mac, you can make a quick AppleScript for this.

      If you have a Mac, you can download dozens of pre-built AppleScripts which add functionality to iTunes. Try a search on versiontracker which brings up eight pages of results for "iTunes". I've seen track-renaming scripts floating around among other things.

    10. Re:slightly off topic, but... by MeanJeans · · Score: 1


      ID3-TagIT

      http://www.id3-tagit.de/english/index.htm

      This program is great. Filename to tag, tag to filename - it makes it very easy. I cleaned up 11 Gig in 5 or 6 hours.

      --
      =====
      imagetweak.netWeb-based image t
    11. Re:slightly off topic, but... by jhh09 · · Score: 1
      Easytag is a wonderful app for mass tagging mp3, ogg, and flac files on linux. It can set tags based on the file name, rename files based on the tags, sort your mp3s into folders based on artist and album, etc. It is the best music cataloging tool I've seen on either windows or linux.

      jh

    12. Re:slightly off topic, but... by Razor's+Edge · · Score: 1

      How about software which helps identify duplicate songs (same name, different format)? Ran into this when restoring from backups. Older rips vs. new rips. Restoring from iPod also has complicated my collection. So far it seems I'll have to write a script of my own, but somebody has probably already done this.

    13. Re:slightly off topic, but... by Hatta · · Score: 1

      bash, sed, and id3

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    14. Re:slightly off topic, but... by zpiderz · · Score: 1

      Unless they are trying to pass off freedb support as cddb, it looks like it does.

      From the site under .31 release features
      CDDB support (from http protocol)

    15. Re:slightly off topic, but... by arkhan_jg · · Score: 1

      On linux, for kde there's juk, or the gtk based easytag.

      Easytag is more 'power user', juk is easier to use. I use both, depending upon what I'm doing.

      --
      Remember kids, it's all fun and games until someone commits wholesale galactic genocide.
    16. Re:slightly off topic, but... by subtillus · · Score: 1

      There are applescripts to do this kind of thing on the mac, depending on exactly what you want...

      Go check ipodlounge.com! it's full of goodies!

      Cheers,
      -S

  22. Re:It's still all unix by Senjutsu · · Score: 4, Insightful

    OSX still uses a BSD interface which is alot similar

    iTunes doesn't, so you're wrong here. It uses Carbon, a completely different and very large API ported to Mach from MacOS. I doubt highly it touches the BSD server much.

    and OSX's fancy graphics are still X11 based

    Wrong. Quartz is essentially a display PDF renderer, written from scratch and having nothing to do with X11.

    and music devices and disks are still /dev/whatever/ so I don't see any problem

    Wrong. 0 for 3. Thanks for playing "Slashdot pundit who doesn't know what he's talking about".

  23. "The Hard-Bodied Sounds of the Gay Circuit..."? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    Ummm... yeah. Great screenshot.

    1. Re:"The Hard-Bodied Sounds of the Gay Circuit..."? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Brings a whole new meaning to using CrossOver Office...

    2. Re:"The Hard-Bodied Sounds of the Gay Circuit..."? by ardent · · Score: 1

      I'm a linux newb so pardon me if it doesn't look like it's taken straight from a mac with maybe some photoshop?

    3. Re:"The Hard-Bodied Sounds of the Gay Circuit..."? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Grow up.

    4. Re:"The Hard-Bodied Sounds of the Gay Circuit..."? by nuggetman · · Score: 2, Informative

      No.

      1. There's two title bars. The windows one with the "_ [ ] X" buttons and then the (X)(-)(+) one from the Linux.

      2. How do I know the second title bar is Linux? The controls are on the right side.

      --
      ...and that's all there is to it.
    5. Re:"The Hard-Bodied Sounds of the Gay Circuit..."? by Just+Some+Guy · · Score: 1
      OK, first, that's not my thing either. However, have you ever noticed that almost every Slashdot article mentioning a new window manager or GIMP release or OS review features a screenshot with naked-chick-du-jour as the background? Frankly, it would take a lot of wieners for the gay geek contingent to even remotely approach a representative sample.

      Having said that, I would much rather see everyone adopt, say, a picture of a waterfall or forest than to see the straight and gay populations battle it our for domination of the screenshot background wars.

      --
      Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
    6. Re:"The Hard-Bodied Sounds of the Gay Circuit..."? by callipygian-showsyst · · Score: 1

      Sadly, the fact that Apple is associated in most people's minds with homosexuality doesn't help their image any!

    7. Re:"The Hard-Bodied Sounds of the Gay Circuit..."? by FuzzyBad-Mofo · · Score: 1

      You don't have to be gay to listen to Circuit music. But it helps.

    8. Re:"The Hard-Bodied Sounds of the Gay Circuit..."? by useosx · · Score: 1

      Holy shit you mean gay people actually listen to music!?!?! Unfuckingbelievable...next thing you know they'll have their own TV show.

      Oh, wait...

    9. Re:"The Hard-Bodied Sounds of the Gay Circuit..."? by gyrojoe · · Score: 1
    10. Re:"The Hard-Bodied Sounds of the Gay Circuit..."? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please... no. Definitely would rather see a naked chick-du-jour than a bunch of wieners at full salute. Ewww.

  24. Re:Linux is about open standards - Ogg Vorbis by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Now there's iTunes running in Linux. Good.

    On the other ahnd, there's an Ogg Vorbis for QuickTime Plug-In, currently just for OS 9, OS X and Win32:

    http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group _id=41359

    But one keeps wondering how much of an effort it would be to combine the two, thus getting Ogg Vorbis functionality within iTunes running under GNU/Linux on i386 and PPC??

  25. Screenshot Confusion by Nutcase · · Score: 5, Funny

    I looked at the screenshot and saw the OS X like buttons... my first thought was "Wow! They ported Crossover to OS X so now I can run iTunes on my mac!!"

    Then I realized what I was thinking, and felt dumb.

    1. Re:Screenshot Confusion by plj · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You're just joking, but actually my first thought was, that the desktop theme selection was really bad for that particular screenshot, as if someone would've shown that to me as is, taken out of this story's context, I'd have automatically assumed that it is actually iTunes for Windows running inside Virtual PC on OS X.

      --
      “Wait for Hurd if you want something real” –Linus
  26. Re:Linux is about open standards by Mant · · Score: 5, Informative

    Contrary to popular belief, you don't have an inherent right to music, just like the RIAA has no right to sales. Listen to non RIAA bands, or go out and make your own music.....

    I should have a right to the music I have paid for though. That's what anti-DRM people are usually complaining about.

  27. I don't know about that by spectasaurus · · Score: 0, Troll

    Looks a lot like an OS X or Windows XP screenshot to me. Taking a snap of only the one window does not make it a screenshot. It makes it a window capture.

    1. Re:I don't know about that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who modded this a Troll??? He's right, a screen shot is a shot of the screen. A window capture is a shot of a window. Look it up.

    2. Re:I don't know about that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't know, but I got to metamod the 'insightful', and it's definitely been marked Fair.

  28. Hidden Significance by ajs318 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Don't tell anybody, but this must actually break the iTunes DRM good and hard. CrossOverOffice almost certainly uses a standard Linux sound driver to get the sound data to the sound chip. This is bound to mean /dev/dsp, which is "hackable" in the sense that anyone with root access can snarf the digital audio data between when it gets decrypted by iTunes and when it gets sent to the sound chip. You can then make unlimited unencumbered copies. Additionally, knowing that the file was uncompressed from lossy AAC compression, it should be possible to recompress it in such a way as exactly to recover the original compressed file, just sans DRM encumbrance.

    The same would, of course, also go for any successful attempt to run Windows Media Player under Linux.

    DRM is a pipe dream. There is a fundamental physical reason why it will never work, though a formal mathematical proof escapes me right now. It's time to stop trying to do the impossible, even if that means having to swallow the unpalatable.

    --
    Je fume. Tu fumes. Nous fûmes!
    1. Re:Hidden Significance by Graff · · Score: 5, Informative
      Don't tell anybody, but this must actually break the iTunes DRM good and hard. CrossOverOffice almost certainly uses a standard Linux sound driver to get the sound data to the sound chip. This is bound to mean /dev/dsp, which is "hackable" in the sense that anyone with root access can snarf the digital audio data between when it gets decrypted by iTunes and when it gets sent to the sound chip.

      Don't tell anybody, but this happens under Mac OS and Windows also.

      Just because you can re-route audio that doesn't mean you are breaking the DRM. Apple knows about all of these methods and has only done a pro forma job at closing them off. Basically, Apple needs to be able to tell the RIAA "We're making sure the music is uncopyable." so that the RIAA will continue to sign distribution contracts with Apple.

      Don't make a big deal that you can create DRM-less copies of iTunes Music Store Music and its most likely that Apple won't bother you. Remember that Steve Jobs was the one who said, "Every security scheme that is based on secrets eventually fails."
    2. Re:Hidden Significance by _|()|\| · · Score: 1
      this must actually break the iTunes DRM good and hard

      You can already de-DRM iTMS songs with Hymn. If you don't like leaving your Apple ID in the file, it's probably not a big deal to modify the Hymn source.

      I'd caution people authorizing iTunes under Wine (and Windows, for that matter) to be aware of the DRM scheme, so that you don't accidentally lose the right to play your songs. You can authorize up to five computers, and you may unwittingly reauthorize the same computer multiple times with no clear way to fix it. With Wine, it is probably quite easy to reset some of the data that determines the system key:

      • Windows product ID
      • BIOS version
      • CPU name
      • serial number of C: drive
      The first three items are taken directly from the Registry. I don't have a Linux box handy, but it's possible that those entries are simply missing. I don't know how Wine would handle the serial number of the C: drive.
    3. Re:Hidden Significance by DavidLeblond · · Score: 1

      Um, so? I can turn on WireTap on my Mac and do the same thing. I must be a "hacker" then. :P

    4. Re:Hidden Significance by Mant · · Score: 1

      You can get Windows programs that act as 'fake' sound drivers. Set them as your machine's sound out, and play anything protected, iTunes, WMP, Real, whatever, and it will save it out as a wav file. Instant DRM avoidance, as DRM doesn't yet extend that far into the computer.

      That's why folks like the RIAA want "trusted" computing. Your trusted sound card won't work without a trusted driver, that won't non-trusted things have the sound info. That's the pipe dream of DRM.

    5. Re:Hidden Significance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Don't tell anybody, but this must actually break the iTunes DRM good and hard
      Don't tell anybody, but iTunes DRM is already broken good and hard.
    6. Re:Hidden Significance by base3 · · Score: 1
      DRM does extend that far--Windows ME an XP have Secure Audio Path with signed audio drivers. All a DRM-enabled player would have to do to defeat capturing the PCM stream is to require one of those signed drivers to play.

      iTunes currently does not do this, but it would be a trivial change. And given Apple's propensity for starting with what they would like to appear as "kinder, gentler DRM," then turning the screws, I wouldn't be surprised to see that change come down the line--it would have the dual effect of reasurring the RIAA that their capos' music is "protected," while eliminating the ability to do things like copy RealAudio to iPods and run iTunes under Linux.

      --
      One CPU cycle wasted on digital restrictions management is ONE TOO MANY.
    7. Re:Hidden Significance by foo23 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The easiest explication why DRM cannot work: Encryption means you have a sender, a receiver and an attacker. There are working systems for this. Now make the receiver the attacker ...

    8. Re:Hidden Significance by MarsDefenseMinister · · Score: 1

      I user VMWare under Linux. Even with Windows XP's secure audio path, it isn't secure all the way to the physical hardware.

      --
      No weapon in the arsenals of the world is so formidable as the will and moral courage of free men.-Ronald Reagan
    9. Re:Hidden Significance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's another way. It's called: burn to CD. iTunes already allows this. You can then use any machine to copy this CD as many times as you like.

    10. Re:Hidden Significance by base3 · · Score: 1

      That's a good point--and I'm actually quite surprised there's a signed audio driver that works on VMWare.

      --
      One CPU cycle wasted on digital restrictions management is ONE TOO MANY.
    11. Re:Hidden Significance by kistral · · Score: 1

      I was with you to here: Additionally, knowing that the file was uncompressed from lossy AAC compression, it should be possible to recompress it in such a way as exactly to recover the original compressed file, just sans DRM encumbrance. No. You can't take the uncompressed data from an AAC file, AAC compress it, and hope to get back the initial file. You're going to lose quality.

    12. Re:Hidden Significance by Minna+Kirai · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Just because you can re-route audio that doesn't mean you are breaking the DRM.

      Yes it does. Maybe the RIAA isn't aware of it yet, or just hasn't reacted because it doesn't consider the threat either immient or solvable. But it IS breaking the DRM. It's a way you can get a perfect digital copy with no analog degradation, which is exactly what the RIAA moans about.

      DRM today is in an embryonic state- there are many ways to break or avoid it, and this is just one of them. But the foot is in the door. We can expect DRM to increase in power on proprietary OSes, so that Windows and MacOS will refuse to play DRMed music if your audio-driver and soundcard don't match a pre-approved list of Trusted players.

      When that happens, the RIAA (or the computer/audio hardware companies that work with them) will try to make iTunes, and every other DRM-trusted player, incompatible with emulated environments. There will be technical steps, and legal steps (DMCA).

      In a future with strong-DRM or Trusted Computing, it will not be possible to simply pay for a commercially produced Trusted media player to run on a Free OS (unless code signing was used to guarrantee that although you have the OS's source code, you didn't edit & recompile)

    13. Re:Hidden Significance by ajs318 · · Score: 1

      You would just have to make sure so as to reject exactly the same bits on the second encoding cycle that were rejected the first time around. If you could make sure of that, then you should not lose any quality. How easy it may be to make sure of that is another matter.

      --
      Je fume. Tu fumes. Nous fûmes!
    14. Re:Hidden Significance by frankie · · Score: 1
      you can get a perfect digital copy with no analog degradation

      Only if you save the audio stream to a lossless format. Save it as MP3/AAC/OGG/etc and you get transcoding artifacts. Yes, this breaks DRM 99%, but it's not perfect.

      Breaking DRM 100% means removing the wrapper and saving the decrypted bits of the original music file, like what PlayFair does.
    15. Re:Hidden Significance by FauxPasIII · · Score: 2, Funny

      > DRM is a pipe dream. There is a fundamental physical reason why it
      > will never work, though a formal mathematical proof escapes me right now

      I've got one, but it's too big to be contained in the margins of this site.

      --
      25% Funny, 25% Insightful, 25% Informative, 25% Troll
    16. Re:Hidden Significance by illumin8 · · Score: 1

      Don't tell anybody, but this must actually break the iTunes DRM good and hard.

      Don't tell anybody, but you can actually already do this on Windows or Mac by burning your iTunes music to CD, then re-ripping to .AIFF or .WAV format. It's the same exact thing; you're converting the AAC format files to uncompressed, unencumbered audio by either playing them through a virtual sound card driver or burning them to CD. Both formats are "unencumbered".

      Nothing to see here, move along folks.

      --
      "When the president does it, that means it's not illegal." - Richard M. Nixon
    17. Re:Hidden Significance by ajs318 · · Score: 1

      That would be defeated by using a piece of hardware which sits on the PCI bus, and perfectly emulates a sound card; so it can intercept the clear digital signal (many legacy sound cards are reasonably open specced and don't support encryption; consider the venerable SoundBlaster 16 bit, surely the Epson FX-80 of sound cards).

      The whole point of emulation is that if you're doing it properly, it's absolutely impossible for any software to tell whether it's running in a real or emulated environment. That's really a manifestation of the same physical law that says you can't tell the difference, by measuring the voltage drop and current flow alone, between a 100 ohm resistor and two 200 ohm resistors in parallel, or even ten 10 ohm resistors in series -- just on a huge scale, with a vastly more complicated circuit.

      --
      Je fume. Tu fumes. Nous fûmes!
    18. Re:Hidden Significance by krel · · Score: 2, Informative

      The DRM in iTunes is contained wholly in the encryption around the raw AAC stream. DeDRMS decrypts it and gives it to you exactly as it was before, but unprotected. That's breaking the DRM. The decompressed pcm is by no means as useful as the original file; you can't compress it again with a lossy algorithm without it sounding like crap. By recording the data sent to the dac, at worst you're breaking the license -- but what's it matter, Apple lets you burn any song an unlimited number of times.
      You can even use public QuickTime API functions to decompress encrypted songs.

      --
      karma: ouch!
    19. Re:Hidden Significance by base3 · · Score: 1

      Just when I think the world is going to eventually end, and the genie to be put back into the bottle, someone like you comes along with an interesting approach. It will take some time before even the mighty Bill can obsolete the venerable SB16.

      --
      One CPU cycle wasted on digital restrictions management is ONE TOO MANY.
    20. Re:Hidden Significance by ajs318 · · Score: 1

      Well, I'm certain that it's possible; but the realisation of such a device would require more than I can spare, since I'd have to get hold of, and learn to use, some specialised kit -- and fit this in with a full-time job.

      OTOH, I'd love to see such a device for real. I've described it, in varying levels of detail, many times before. If you have, or know somebody who has access to PCI bus prototyping cards, high-end micros / DSPs that can keep up with the data rate, and so forth, I'd be more than delighted to know that my idea had reached the stage of a working prototype. I'd be tempted to take out a patent on the idea, but I'm not sure that (a) it would pass the "obvious to an expert in the field" test {even someone like me could think of it, for crying out loud} and (b) I haven't blown it already by describing it on a public forum such as Slashdot.

      --
      Je fume. Tu fumes. Nous fûmes!
    21. Re:Hidden Significance by norkakn · · Score: 1

      why couldn't I just use jack to route itunes to audacity?

    22. Re:Hidden Significance by illumin8 · · Score: 1

      why couldn't I just use jack to route itunes to audacity?

      You can, but for the 'noobs that might not know what Jack is, this is a simple way to "bypass" the DRM without using any third-party software.

      --
      "When the president does it, that means it's not illegal." - Richard M. Nixon
    23. Re:Hidden Significance by ShavenYak · · Score: 1

      DRM is a pipe dream. There is a fundamental physical reason why it will never work, though a formal mathematical proof escapes me right now.

      No, no, you're supposed to say that the margin is too small to contain your proof!

      --

      Hey kids, there's only 5 days left 'til Yak Shaving Day!
  29. Heh I have been saying this for a long time by dcstimm · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Why Apple Needs iTunes for Linux.. PHP-Nuke As of Late, I have been looking into buying an ipod, they are so cute and sexy, but I cant get over the fact that I cant download music legally for it. You might ask me, why cant you go onto Apple's iTunes and pay for your music, well because THEY DONT support Linux! I have been using Linux for the last 5 years and I feel that it is the perfect desktop for me. It has loads of functionality and it always seems like things are getting updated, so it feels like a new experience every time I turn on my computer. (most people don't like that, but it keeps me productive). I have everything I have ever wanted in Linux, except a legal way to download music. I have even gone as far as buying a ibook to play around with macosx and use iTunes, but I was soon disappointed that I couldn't transfer my iTunes collection I had just purchased to my Linux computer. Now there is a very cool open source project called playfair, that takes the DRM (Digital Rights Management) Software out of the AAC file that you download from apple and allows you to play it on your Linux computer. But this is again not legal, and it could be used for wrong doing. Apple doesn't understand if they would have supported the Linux community in the first place, they wouldn't have programs like this all over the Internet. The only thing they have done to support Linux at all is creating a ton of open source software that helps the open source community, but not Linux in general. I would even go as far as saying there are probably more Linux users out there than Mac users and it only hurts Apple not to create a Linux version of iTunes. Come on apple help stop Piracy and come out with iTunes for Linux!

    1. Re:Heh I have been saying this for a long time by xenoandroid · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If Apple sees enough demand for iTunes for linux from iPod owners or prospective iPod owners than they might do it. But generally most linux users I know of don't want to deal with Fairplay AAC in the first place.

    2. Re:Heh I have been saying this for a long time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Apple doesn't understand if they would have supported the Linux community in the first place, they wouldn't have programs like this all over the Internet."

      You're kidding, right?

      People will do things in Linux just because it's possible, or to prove that it is. I've seen all kinds of ridiculous hacks to make things that really aren't all that useful, just to claim it's been done.

  30. Screenshot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

    Wow, great screenshot! It really shows us... ummm... well, what iTunes looks like.

  31. Re:SWEET...? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Umm your it was such a terrible program line is missing a few things - like what was so terrible about it.

    I have used every music jukebox app available and prefer itunes over all of them because it is easy, efficient and well organized.

  32. Re:Linux is about open standards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So don't pay for music that you don't get the rights you want to. Check out www.magnatune.com if you'd like freedom with the music you buy. They allow you to download full 128kbps mp3s of all the songs available as samples (at least they have for all the artists I've checked), and after you buy a record (recommended price is $8, but they allow you to choose from $5-$18) they allow you to download in a variety of formats: WAV, FLAC, high quality OGG or MP3, etc.

  33. iTunes does all that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Are you raving about iTunes or Winamp? iTunes does everything you describe, and it looks better to boot. In fact, I'll bet you dollars to donuts that Winamp's media library is patterned after Apple's. Start by looking at the screenshots.

  34. Re:Linux is about open standards by sotonboy · · Score: 1

    "I think they will worry far more about RealNetworks than this."

    Apple have always made people use their products through superior design / better UI / usability / looks and feel. How sad that they now want to force people to use them using lawyers.

    I use itunes / itms and my ipod because theyre great. I will only try the Real one because Apple are stooping as low as their rivals.

    Yes, I know its offtopic. No need to tell me.

  35. Also, AAC and transcoding by tentimestwenty · · Score: 2, Informative

    The AAC codec in iTunes is now excellent and really takes on all comers. The one biggest feature for me is the ability to transcode from WAV-->AIFF-->AAC-->MP3 with just the click of a button. It makes keeping a reference copy of your collection in uncompressed form very easy and desireable because you can easily automate the process to rip for portable use and smaller sizes. Smart Playlists make this even easier.

  36. Everybody doing Apple's work for them by jamesmrankinjr · · Score: 3, Funny

    First Real makes their player compatible with the iPod. Now someone makes iTunes available on Linux.

    Apple hardly needs to do a thing to improve iTunes. Their competitors are doing it all for them.

    Peace be with you,
    -jimbo

    1. Re:Everybody doing Apple's work for them by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, heaven help us if Apple EVER made a consumer level product for Linux users itself. That would be violating Jobs' sacrosanct pact with Satan, apparently.

    2. Re:Everybody doing Apple's work for them by sabNetwork · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Have you heard of QuickTime Streaming Server? Or Shake?

      --

    3. Re:Everybody doing Apple's work for them by SlamMan · · Score: 1

      Shake is by no means a consumer level product. I'd argue that QTSS isn't either.

      --
      Mod point free since 2001
  37. Takeover??? by Performaman · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I think this makes iTunes the first mainstream online music store to run under Linux. Apple should really try a native port, 'cuz if they did they would own the Linux market for music stores.
    Step 1: Port iTunes to Linux
    Step 2: ???
    Step 3: Profit!

    --

    I have gas, but my car uses petrol.
    1. Re:Takeover??? by cbirdsong64 · · Score: 1

      I'm pretty sure #2 is "Sell songs." in this case. Not too difficult, this one.

    2. Re:Takeover??? by aristotle-dude · · Score: 1

      No, selling songs online are only profitable for the labels. Apple is not earning a significant profit from iTMS. They are however, earning a significant profit from iPod sales.

      --
      Jesus was a compassionate social conservative who called individuals to sin no more.
  38. Re:Well, it saves Apple some work! by mjj12 · · Score: 1

    Well, given that iTunes in in a lot of ways just a nice front end for Quicktime, then iTunes must be like this if Quicktime is like this, I guess.

  39. One step forward, and two behind by QCompson · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Great... now only if I could get firewire to work easily and reliably on linux.

    1. Re:One step forward, and two behind by cabbey · · Score: 1

      Um... tried it with a relatively modern distro? I beat on firewire, er ieee1394, devices on SuSE 8.2 and 9.0 all the time... solid as a rock... and neither of these are bleeding edge, heck, they're not even current!

  40. Why iTunes? by m5brane · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I'll admit to keeping a Win partition on my machine, so that from time to time I could boot into XP and play with apps like iTunes. I was pretty taken with iTunes at first, but the only thing it seems to offer over any collection of similar Linux apps is convenience. Why not use apps like rhythmbox (for gnome) or juk (for kde)? While neither app is as mature as iTunes (yet), they both do a great job. And both have better .ogg support than iTunes.
    I would argue that ITMS, while convenient, isn't that great a value. Why not opt for one of the other services that lets you download files encoded at a higher bitrate? Or in multiple formats? Or from Linux? This is exactly the kind of application where Linux users should be looking to innovate, in the interest of offering more choices, and not just waiting for the CrossOver port. There are plenty of great projects out there doing just that, and they could all use the attention that CrossOver's iTunes work seems to be getting.

    1. Re:Why iTunes? by 2nd+Post! · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Why?
      It's more mature.
      It's more convenient.
      It's *still* free
      It gives you more capabilities with downloaded music:
      Burn on 7 CDs before needing to alter your track order
      Stream to 5 computers
      Did I mention burning to CD was free?

      You are right, Linux programmers *should* try to write a better iTunes. They haven't yet. Taking a look at Juk features... you do realize that 90% of the features they tout on their website was first implemented by iTunes? Inline search, tree view mode (though implemented as column browse mode), tag editor, vfolders, online tag lookup, as well as the file renamer :)

      So the real question is... What does Juk do that's better than iTunes that would suggest anyone use Juk?

    2. Re:Why iTunes? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      itunes has fine ogg support if you bother to install the quicktime component for ogg.

    3. Re:Why iTunes? by 2nd+Post! · · Score: 1

      Because I'm not going to make all the improvements I want.

      When you start with that premise, then the issue of value becomes, "What worth is it to have source you won't use, won't consider, won't touch?"

      A house you can live in, but built by someone else, or a house you can do everything except wash the dishes and open the windows, except you have the blueprints?

  41. Re:really by PhoenixFlare · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I personally have no interest in paying apple $1/song for a proprietary format; reencoding in ogg is not an option. Really, $1 per song is very, very expensive - considering a cd is about the same and you get a nice semi-permanent media, far higher quality audio, with artwork lyrics, etc.

    Only if you like and will listen to every single song on that hypothetical CD. If you'd rather pick and choose every track to make sure there's no dead weight that you'll always skip over, then $1 is a perfectly good price point.

    Come to think of it, $1 per song is a complete rip off. If they were ogg encoded, I might give it some consideration at .50/song.

    With how pervasive MP3 is these days, it's going to take a hell of a lot of catching up before anyone will give a damn that a relatively miniscule group of people won't listen to music that isn't ogg encoded.

  42. Re:really by Mant · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If $1 a song is too expensive, it should come down, unless online operators start colluding. Still, it is cheap, in Europe we pay a lot more.

    Remember also Apple are only making a small profit at the moment. At $.50 they would lose money. If you have no interest, don't buy. I don't. Just accept you aren't part of their target market. I'm puzzled why people need to keep saying they wouldn't buy something, just don't buy it.

  43. Re:It's still all unix by LEgregius · · Score: 3, Informative
    Cocoa is essentially a descendent of NeXt Step, so the non-UI code would be BSD based. Sound coding is very different, but coding to a sound api is really not hard to port. And, btw, the sound code even then doesn't use /dev stuff, not even under the covers.

    Cocoa apps are, in theory, not hard to port over to GNU Step unless they use a lot of the new features. GNU Step apps can usually just be tweaked a bit and recompiled as Cocoa apps.

    That's all well and good, but like the parent said, iTunes is written in Carbon, which is like the old OS 9 api's, so it doesn't use ANY of the bsd like api's for anything.

  44. Re:It's still all unix by LetterJ · · Score: 2, Funny

    "Slashdot pundit who doesn't know what he's talking about".

    Isn't that America's favorite game show?

  45. Lawsuit in 5 . . . 4 . . . 3 . . . by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So, will it be DMCA, or will we hold out for Fritz's INDUCE? Or will it be a novel approach based on patents for obvious things?

  46. Re:Linux is about open standards by ArbitraryConstant · · Score: 1

    'course, it's easier to nab the encryption keys on a Linux box...

    --
    I rarely criticize things I don't care about.
  47. Re:SWEET...? by brufleth · · Score: 0

    It decided that I obviously didn't want to use any other program to do anything related to music. If I put a CD in the computer it started and I was unable to find a menu option to disable this. It terms of being a jukebox it offers nothing I can't get from Winamp which is less bloated and has more plugins. I'm not sure what you're using to quantifying "efficient" but it definitely took up too much of everything to be used as anything other than maybe a music store and I have no interest or need to buy my music using it. It did nothing better and many things worse than smaller more expandable programs like winamp. If you compare it to Musicmatch it wins hands down because Musicmatch is worse in every respect but if you're not going to buy music with it there is no reason I can see to use it.

  48. Re:big whoop by 2nd+Post! · · Score: 1

    Well, see, with iTMS the artists will see the money, unlike allofmp3 :P

  49. Re:really by 2nd+Post! · · Score: 2, Informative

    What does Juk have over iTunes as far as managing you music collection?

    iTunes is free (like Juke)
    iTunes is on v4.6 with the accompanying stability and polish
    iTunes has sound normalization
    iTunes has song ratings
    iTunes plays CDs, internet radio, and streaming music from other computers
    iTunes rips songs

    Unless there's a version of Juk I don't know of... Juk doesn't rip songs or play CDs?

  50. Dang! by Solilok · · Score: 1

    I just switched from Linux to Windows and installed cygnus just because of iTunes!

  51. Good clone by alain1234 · · Score: 1

    Juk is a quite good clone of itunes for KDE (not the shopping stuff, just a library manager)

    You can transfer files to your ipod with gtkpod

    Better prefer to launch a proprietary software with a windows emulator.

    Avoid the ID3 tags !

    1. Re:Good clone by fungai · · Score: 2, Informative

      JuK is painfully slow with 600+ albums...

    2. Re:Good clone by Chucker23N · · Score: 1

      "Better prefer to launch a proprietary software with a windows emulator."

      Hmm, I see. How exactly is that software *not* proprietary, eh?

  52. Re:Linux is about open standards by Anonvmous+Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    " Apple haven't sued Codeweavers over QuickTime under GNU/Linux so why would they do it over this?
    "


    Because Apple is making a significant amount of money out of it?

  53. Re:It's still all unix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Actually, I think he was playing "push the buttons of slashbots eager to correct any detail they perceive as a mistake" and he just got through to the level 2.

  54. Where is the download? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Can't seem to find the link to the beta version after I login (I am a current customer). Anybody who can tell me where to find it?

  55. That is so silly. by SPYvSPY · · Score: 4, Insightful
    The claims on that website you link to are ridiculous.

    First of all, it claims that Apple basically does nothing to reap its one-third cut of the price of a song on iTunes. What about the front-end costs of bulding the iTMS backend, developing the client application (for multiple platforms) and the ongoing costs of the bandwidth? I guess that's "basically doing nothing"?


    Secondly, if a recording artist is making 11 cents per song on iTunes, isn't that 11 cents that the artist would never otherwise receive? I mean, an artists' overhead for selling on iTMS ought to consist of: (a) rehearsal and studio time, (b) mixing services, (c) hiring session musicians and maybe a famous producer or something, and (d) marketing. The label gives them an advance for all that stuff, and takes it back (and then some) in their 53 cents per song cut of sales on iTMS.


    So, once the artist has paid back the label for any advance money, every 11 cent per song sale on iTMS is pure profit, right? The artist has no ongoing expenses for selling on iTMS, right?


    And Apple has lots of really expensive ongoing overhead, right? And Apple says they're barely breaking even on iTMS today, right?

    So how is Apple screwing artists?

    1. Re:That is so silly. by Samhaine · · Score: 1

      Must... not.. succumb...force of logic...on /. making head explode

    2. Re:That is so silly. by huchida · · Score: 4, Insightful

      So how is Apple screwing artists?

      You're absolutely right, Apple is not screwing artists. To all you downhillbattle trolls, see if you can grasp this concept: iTunes makes their deal with the entity that holds the rights to the song. If the artist signed their life and rights away to the label, then they have no choice as to how the music is distributed and what cut they take. It's a terrible shame that the music labels do proudly and routinely screw over their artists, but it's not Apple's responsibility to take a stand and start the revolution, no more than it's Tower Records' or Amazon.com's.

      Now, there are artists on iTunes who aren't on a major label and take a bigger cut for themselves. If you support them-- or similar DIY business models-- then maybe, just maybe more and more will realize that they don't have to be a part of the RIAA machine.

  56. Re:really by colanut · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Come to think of it, $1 per song is a complete rip off. If they were ogg encoded, I might give it some consideration at .50/song.

    I've always considered $1 for a good song to be a great deal when thrift store record shopping. If the album contains 1 good song (good being a relative term) then I've done pretty well. Even better if I average that ratio over the course of a day's finds.

    Now with iTMS, I am pretty much guaranteed that ratio. I know what song I'm getting and its usually one I've been wanting for a while. To me it is worth it. Also you don't have to buy a whole album or buy from RIAA members. It really is that easy. But if you don't want to do either, fine, but I get tired of those who pronounce judgment against those of us who do find it useful.

  57. Re:Linux is about open standards by nuggetman · · Score: 1

    Where is their DRM being tampered with here? All this is doing is running a Windows app on a different platform

    --
    ...and that's all there is to it.
  58. Re:really by Alsee · · Score: 1

    As for OGG encoding, well the moment they actually start offering any non-crippled files such as MP3's, well it costs them essentially zero to also offer OGG and a dozen other formats. It doesn't much matter how few sales there are of a format so long as the sales of that format exceed the cost of offering it.

    -

    --
    - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
  59. Winamp playlist by Catullus · · Score: 1

    Good point. I think iTunes is great, but how the £$%^ can I get it to store a playlist that:

    - is emptied when I open iTunes (or even better, when I haven't been using it for 30 mins or more)

    - I can append songs to really easily, preferably by double-clicking

    - I can clear easily?

    I find "Party Shuffle" a pain to use - adding stuff to it and clearing it is fiddly.

    1. Re:Winamp playlist by RevAaron · · Score: 1

      I've no clue why or how you'd have a playlist that empties itself automatically, but for the other two:

      - It never seemed to hard for me to drag the music to the playlist. When you drag from your Library to any playlist it appends it to the playlist. I can't imagine it getting much easier.

      - To clear a play list, Ctrl/Cmd-A and then Delete works quickly and easily.

      --

      Working toward a usable PDA environment in the spirit of Newton OS: Dynapad
    2. Re:Winamp playlist by Durandal64 · · Score: 1

      He wants a "scratch" playlist, a little like an On-The-Go playlist on an iPod. You just load it up with songs you want to hear for that particular listening session. Then when you relaunch iTunes, you can load it up again with whatever you want to hear for that time. Not an unreasonable request, in my opinion.

    3. Re:Winamp playlist by sh00z · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Good point. I think iTunes is great, but how the £$%^ can I get it to store a playlist that:

      - is emptied when I open iTunes (or even better, when I haven't been using it for 30 mins or more)

      This sounds like a pretty unique requirement. Winamp will do it for you now? In MacOS, I'd use AppleScript. It would take about three lines. There is a Windows equivalent, isn't there?
      - I can append songs to really easily, preferably by double-clicking
      Drag-and-drop is *that* much more difficult? You do know that the default behavior for double-cliking on a song is to PLAY it, right? I think you'd have a few million folks disagreeing with you on this one.
      - I can clear easily?
      In the playlist, ctrl-A, then press Delete.
    4. Re:Winamp playlist by RevAaron · · Score: 1

      I didn't say it was unreasonable, still not something I see any desire for. Making a new playlist is easy, whether or not it's scratch- and deleting a playlist you don't want anymore is as easy as hitting the Del button.

      But I never use playlists. One reason I abhorred older version of *amp. I listen to albums. And I want my music player to manage my collection along those lines. Newer WinAmp has a library, though it's still not as good as iTunes. To each his own.

      --

      Working toward a usable PDA environment in the spirit of Newton OS: Dynapad
    5. Re:Winamp playlist by Samhaine · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If that's what he wants, it's relatively easy (just requires a CTRL+A, then Delete to refresh)
      Set a Smart Playlist with, say, Random 25 songs from library, Live Updating, and (for grins) Only include checked songs. When you want to refresh, clear the contents and the playlist will regenerate to fill the criteria. As long as Live Updating is turned on, this works for ALL Smart Playlists, the only caveat being if you use one of the "Not played in..." criteria, in which case it works no differently than the Party Shuffle.

    6. Re:Winamp playlist by Catullus · · Score: 1

      That seems to work really well. Still not as simple as Winamp, though :)

      Thanks for your suggestions, everyone.

    7. Re:Winamp playlist by sh00z · · Score: 1

      Whoops, I screwed up. Clearing a playlist is even easier. Right-click on the playlist title, and then choose "Clear" from the pop-up picklist. Duh.

    8. Re:Winamp playlist by hobbit · · Score: 1

      - I can append songs to really easily, preferably by double-clicking

      I find "Party Shuffle" a pain to use - adding stuff to it and clearing it is fiddly.

      You want exactly what I want, and I really hope Apple catch on to how good this would be: Party Shuffle Lock, in which any action which would usually cause a song to be played immediately (e.g., double-clicking) instead causes it to be added to the front of the party shuffle queue.

      I'm not holding my breath, though... I'm still waiting for Apple to implement gapless crossover. Grrr, it's hardly rocket science, Apple, is it?!

      --
      "Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something" - Plato
  60. Re:Linux is about open standards by plj · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Insightful my ass. Could parent or parent's moderator please explain, how the hell it is supposed to affect Apple's bottom line if Apple's customer using iTMS with iTunes for Windows client is actually some other os, which just happens to provide the same interfaces iTunes for Windows needs? That customer is still shopping on iTMS, and DRM is still effective. That customer may still own an iPod, too.

    Theoretically one could explain that it is easier to bypass DRM on Linux than on Windows, but as we now have things like a commercially licensed PowerDVD for Linux and Hymn for Windows, I think that argument won't really hold any water.

    --
    “Wait for Hurd if you want something real” –Linus
  61. Re:Well, it saves Apple some work! by nuggetman · · Score: 1

    From what I've heard, while QuickTime is Mac code running on a Carbon layer for Windows, iTunes is a native port.

    --
    ...and that's all there is to it.
  62. Also don't forget by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting
    that it allows you to use windows plugins in mozilla/konqueror etc. browsers in linux.

    I love being able to use embedded quicktime in firefox in linux =) It rules.

    1. Re:Also don't forget by Minna+Kirai · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I love being able to use embedded quicktime in firefox in linux =) It rules.

      The dominant Linux video player, MPlayer, has a plugin version, which can play embedded QuickTimes in Firefox. Because it avoids the overhead of duplicating Win32 calls, it may be faster than the Crossover way.

      Plus, the last time I looked at it, Quicktime on windows had some user-hostile features, such as restrictions on rescaling the playback window. MPlayerPlugin will avoid those too.

    2. Re:Also don't forget by gyrojoe · · Score: 2, Informative

      Indeed.
      http://mplayerplug-in.sourceforge.net/
      I use it all the time to view movie trailers and the like.

  63. NO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    WINE = Wine Is Not an Emulator

    It's not an emulator. It uses the names of windows dlls, and it uses the directory structure of windows, but nowhere does it run a windows kernel; it's all implemented in libraries installed on your machine.

  64. Really nice one I just found recently... by Azureflare · · Score: 1
    easytag

    This problem rules. It is very efficient, and changing id3 tags take literally a few mouse clicks. A very well put together program.

  65. But many of us do own iPods by Ars-Fartsica · · Score: 1

    Why did you even post this comment? Well golly, if you don't own an iPod, this means nothing to you! What an astounding conclusion. And of course you are right that CodeWeavers should wait for you and you alone to jump on the bandwagon before they start work. My God, why didn't I think of that?

  66. Developing code? Better check with Captain Zapp! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    I am totally shocked that they worked on this before you thought of buying an iPod.

    To any other developers out there - please check with Captain Zapp and make sure he has use for your code before you develop. Forget your own desires or other users - Captain Zapp is now the gatekeeper for all coding projects.

  67. GtkPod is not a music store by Ars-Fartsica · · Score: 2, Informative

    GtkPod is an excellent program for managing the iPod but the authors make no claims regarding iTunes, which of course they would never be granted access to in any case. Apple controls the iTunes commerce channel.

  68. Re:Linux is about open standards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So don't pay for music that you don't get the rights you want to.

    Sorry, but 'rights' is not something you can buy at the market. Politics is about "one person, one vote" not "one dollar, one vote".

  69. Re:It's still all unix by keytoe · · Score: 2, Informative

    all Mac OS X native programs are written in Cocoa, Carbon, or Java
    <pedantic>Actually, Cocoa, Carbon and Swing are the frameworks you can use. Java, Objective-C, AppleScript, Python and Perl (and more every day) are languages you may choose from in order to target those frameworks.</pedantic>

    Cocoa and Carbon are both considered 'native', though. For a new project, the only real choice is wether you want to go procedural and target Carbon or OO and target Cocoa. Legacy code bases will naturally choose Carbon to leverage existing code, but there are virtually no differences in capabilities (now - there were) between the two frameworks now.

    In fact, most of the Cocoa objects use the same low level data structures and functions under the hood as the Carbon framework - so much so that Apple offers 'Toll Free Bridging' between the types. An NSString object can be swapped with a CFString reference without having to convert it at all. The idea here is to encourage 'hybrid' Cocoa/Carbon applications - but the the fact that this works proves that there isn't much difference under the hood between the frameworks.

    The advantage of using the Cocoa framework is simply being able to use Objective C (very funky at first, but very cool language) and an extremely elegant framework that does most everything you might need with minimal work. If you're starting a new project, you should be using Cocoa. It's fast, powerful and is Apple's Wave Of The Future. I don't expect Carbon to go away any time soon (you try telling Adobe that they have to rewrite Photoshop from scratch), but I do expect lack of effort at some point. This doesn't mean that Carbon is somehow non-native.

    iTunes is a legacy application (released initially for OS 9), therefore it was started on the Carbon framework. However, a LOT of the refinements Apple developed using iTunes (alternating row colors on lists, split views, controls in table cells, etc) has made it down into the frameworks and are now available to both Cocoa and Carbon.

    PS - Interesting tidbit: The Finder was initially a (badly) modified Carbon application when OS X was first released. It was re-written in Cocoa for 10.2, and I believe it is the ONLY Apple application that has made that transition. It's either a testament to the simplicity of the Finder (right) or the power of Cocoa (likely) that they were able to change so easily. Not that I don't have my gripes...
  70. I have been saying this even longer! by A.S. · · Score: 1

    Why Apple need a hole in the head. Mozilla like recently, ive wanted an ipod really bad, 'cause maybe they'll help me pickup chix. This punches a huge gaping hole in the lame excuse I had before. I would tell you that I cant download music from itunes because they dont support my s00per leet OS. I used to conveniently ignore all of the other legal sources of music online, because I dont really buy an music anyway. Kazaa roolez! But anyway I am maD leet, 'cause I use teh linux long time. Mozilla my themes look k-rad, and I am even k00ler 'cause I update my libraries to 0.99rc1.pre-alpha.0_3 whenever a new Gentoo build script is available. (It's all about USE flags!) I live in my parents basement, so I don't need a job. That's why I can spend all day rebuilding my OS. I tell my parents that, if they buy me an ipod all my music will be legal, so they wont have to be afraid of getting sued anymore. Mozilla I think they're gonna get me one. They bought me an ibook for college, but i dropped out. I couldn't recompile my kernel under OS X, so i don't like using it. People might think i'm gay. I got a bunch of AAC files from my warez buddies, and the ibook played them, but I couldnt figure out how to play them on Gentoo. it must be impossible! I heard about this program once that lets you play music that someone else bought, but there wasnt a emerge script for it, and I could find it online, so it must not be around anymore. Mozilla Apple doesn't understand if they would have supported the Linux community in the first place, i wouldn't need to steal more music, cause Id already have a bunch. The only thing they have done to support Linux at all is creating a ton of open source software that helps the open source community, including linux. Mozilla but they havent given my the things that I want. We will fuck them up. We are Legion, They sUx0rs. Peace out.

  71. Re:It's still all unix by GregChant · · Score: 3, Informative
    PS - Interesting tidbit: The Finder was initially a (badly) modified Carbon application when OS X was first released. It was re-written in Cocoa for 10.2, and I believe it is the ONLY Apple application that has made that transition. It's either a testament to the simplicity of the Finder (right) or the power of Cocoa (likely) that they were able to change so easily. Not that I don't have my gripes...

    Actually, it's still in carbon. Very easy test: attempt to execute an operation that would normally hang Finder (emptying the trash, etc.). Notice the wait cursor you get (hint: it'll alternate between the pinwheel and the stopwatch). Unless the developer has added the stop watch resource into the program (which Apple hasn't), the stopwatch is a legacy wait indicator from OS 9 and Carbon.

  72. Re:really by xenoandroid · · Score: 1

    An entire CD costs $10, a single song $1. If you only like certain songs on the CD you buy them separately, you save money from buying the entire album, that's the point. If you do like the entire CD, well most CDs on iTMS cost more than $10 if you buy the hard copy.

  73. Re:It's still all unix by keytoe · · Score: 2, Informative

    Actually, it's still in carbon.
    Wow - you're right. I could have sworn I heard Apple trumpeting about that change, but I seem to have mixed one of those silly rumors with real life. Damned pre-coffee posts.

    That only strengthens my original point, though - with the only difference being that Apple hasn't moved any of their applications from one framework to the other. Apple themselves treat Carbon and Cocoa as equals and the proof is in the Applications they develop.
  74. what good? by TheUser0x58 · · Score: 2, Funny

    What good is this when we already have Linspire's lsongs?

    --
    -- listen to interesting music, support independent radio... WPRB
  75. Doom 3 pirated--news that Slashdot won't report by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Gamespot and the BBC are reporting that several thousands of illegal copies of Doom 3 were pirated over the weekend. One technology correspondent estimates that Activision and id Software lost up to "$2,749,500 worth of software at Doom 3's $54.99 sticker price." Activision has no comment, but Matt Pierce of PC Gamer has some harsh words. John Carmack is reportedly not happy. The game is legally scheduled for release today.

  76. Re:Well, it saves Apple some work! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not to mention that iTunes is based on QuickTime. It's the reason why other iApps can access iTMS M4P files and the reason why Real can play iTMS songs on their player. iTunes on Windows was an easier port since QuickTime for Windows exists. It'll be hard to do so on linux, but that is not to say that Apple can't implement limited QuickTime functionalities. OTOH, the rumors (only rumors, mind you) are that QT 7.0 is written from gound up to free it from legacy code, so QT and iTunes for linux may happen in the future.

  77. Re:Linux is about open standards by jaoswald · · Score: 1

    Funny, the "right" to watch a baseball game or movie in person is something I buy at the box office. No ticket, no admission; that's not a violation of my Constitutional rights, is it? The right to use equipment at my gym is another thing I buy. The right to eat a cheeseburger from McDonalds is another thing I have to buy on the market.

    When a "right" is the "right to make use private property" it *is* something that can be bought in the market. And it so happens that in this reality, musical works and performances are (intellectual) property, for which the right of re-distribution is restricted to those licensed by the copyright owner, except under the *limited* free use exceptions.

  78. Re:really by kels · · Score: 1

    Only if you like and will listen to every single song on that hypothetical CD. If you'd rather pick and choose every track to make sure there's no dead weight that you'll always skip over, then $1 is a perfectly good price point.

    But you're not buying the song for $1, you're getting certain rights to use it on certain devices. You have waived the rights you have under fair use to do whatever you want with music that you buy on CD. I can rip my CD and reencode it to whatever format I want, play it on any device I want, as many devices as I want. A song I "buy" on iTMS can only be used with a computer running iTunes (Mac, Windows, or now Linux i386 w/Crossover plugin) or an iPod. Nothing else, without violating the terms of use you agree to when "purchasing" the song on iTMS. I've got CDs that still play that are 15 years old. I can legally make backup copies, and listen to ripped and encoded tracks from it on devices that hadn't been dreamed of in 1989. What are the chances you'll still be listening to your $1 song in 2019?

    Spend $1 each on songs if you want, just don't fool yourself by thinking that you're "buying" them. You're renting.

    --
    "I believe that the cult of the particular brings only death - for it bases order on likeness." St.-Exupery
  79. Re:As someone who runs both OSX, Windows, and Linu by hkb · · Score: 1

    Uhm, I wonder what's wrong with your dual 2ghz G5, because iTunes absolutely flies on my dual 2ghz G5. You didn't downgrade the RAM to 128mb, did you?

    --
    /* Moderating all non-anonymous trolls up since 2004 */
  80. I had a dream! by Eric_Cartman_South_P · · Score: 1
    iTunes on a Mac. Dare to dream!

  81. Re:It's still all unix by Have+Blue · · Score: 1

    The Cocoa Finder has been a perennial rumor in the Mac community since OS X was launched, as though a Cocoa rewrite were some sort of magic spell that would solve all the problems in the
    There's an even simpler test for Carbon/Cocoa-ness: It's possible to use most Cocoa controls while a window remains in the background by holding down Command while clicking. If you can manipulate a window without bringing it to the foreground, it's Cocoa. If it always pops on top, it's Carbon.

  82. Re:It's still all unix by Have+Blue · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Damn HTML...

    The Cocoa Finder has been a perennial rumor in the Mac community since OS X was launched, as though a Cocoa rewrite were some sort of magic spell that would solve all the problems in the <10.3 Finder with no further effort. In 10.3 it's just a much-better-written Carbon app.

    There's an even simpler test for Carbon/Cocoa-ness: It's possible to use most Cocoa controls while a window remains in the background by holding down Command while clicking. If you can manipulate a window without bringing it to the foreground, it's Cocoa. If it always pops on top, it's Carbon.

  83. Re:Linux is about open standards by Anonvmous+Coward · · Score: 1

    "Could parent or parent's moderator please explain, how the hell it is supposed to affect Apple's bottom line..."

    It doesn't have to affect their bottom line, it only has to make them nervous. And since there's money at stake, there is reason to think they might overreact whether it could pratically hurt them or not.

  84. Re:As someone who runs both OSX, Windows, and Linu by owlicks58 · · Score: 1

    I'm with you... It works great on my 1 Ghz G4 powerbook... it also works just fine on my 450 Mhz G4 at work even when I'm doing stuff on Photoshop all day.

    --
    -Alex
  85. No iPod support yet by gyrojoe · · Score: 4, Informative
    Looks like they don't yet have iPod support.
    http://crossover.codeweavers.com/pipermail/announc e/2004-August/000026.html
    The iTunes Music Store should work fine, but we don't currently support iPods or CD-burning.
    Hopefully it will be added soon so I can rid myself of Windows once and for all.
  86. Dealing with it as in... by ControlFreal · · Score: 1

    as in:

    DeDRMS.exe MyMusicFile.aac

    ...you mean? Get it here. It's C#, so also for Linux.

    --
    Support a Europe-related section on Slashdot!
  87. winamp is the best by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    i don't think itunes can convert Real Media/Monkey's Audio/NSF to mp3/wav
    i don't think itunes can even play any of those codecs...poor itunes people won't be able to play the nintendo tunes in small nsf files
    winamp is capable of a lot of things if you can find the right plugins...however the staff of winamp are idoits...

  88. No -- it was purchased while using Linux by timothy · · Score: 1

    "Parent poster's point was that the demo did not include the ability to purchase a song using iTunes on Linux. The song still had to be purchased using iTunes on Windows, then it could later be played back using iTunes on Linux."

    Unless I completely misunderstood J. White when he explained this (which I'm confident I didn't because it was something he emphasized and was happy about/ proud of), the song he showed *had* been purchased from iTMS through iTunes running with WINE (CodeWeaver's version, that is) on a Linux machine. He did not need a machine running Microsoft Windows to purchase the song.

    timothy

    --
    jrnl: http://tinyurl.com/c2l8yr / foes: http://tinyurl.com/ckjno5
  89. Re:As someone who runs both OSX, Windows, and Linu by pjludlow · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The name iTunes refers to what it does - plays tunes (music). It has never been meant for video, although you can now have music videos through iTMS, and they could easily incorporate video because Quicktime is running the show underneath the GUI.

    Why the crap do you want to make a thousand folders to put each individual song/movie in so that you can search them? In OSX I could do the same and search in the finder for "Rated-G Animated Movies" following your method of approach and still come up with the same results possibly faster. Using tags or metadata is much better to organize then making folders.

    I can't say anything about your PC, but I have a Dual 2.0Ghz G5 and have iTunes running most of the time and it doesn't make a dent in slowing down what I'm doing. I work on Photoshop mostly and usually am not working on a file less then 100 MB. Buy some more RAM.

    I can't comment on the iTMS quality as I haven't purchased anything. I do have 65 GBs of music on my drive though, and a 128 kbps AAC is roughly the same as a 160 kbps mp3 to my ears. I rip at 192 kbps mp3 though for compatibilitys sake.

    And are people really asking for Ogg playback? Out of /. I don't hear much about it. The average person knows mp3, if I even try to explain AAC to them they get confused, so I tell them to think of it as mp4 and of course the higher number helps them see it as better (I do know what it is, so you don't have to tell me.)

  90. Just tried it. Doesn't quite work yet... by thmclean · · Score: 2, Informative

    Just downloaded the latest alpha, and installed iTunes, but the pulldown menus are kinda b0rked (common with not-quite-there Crossover/Wine apps). It's a step forward, though. I find XMMS perfectly useable, and with the LongPlayer companion app, i have a great random jukebox, on par with iTunes w/ Party Shuffle.

  91. iTunes! by mewphobia · · Score: 1

    Just look under the advanced menu in iTunes. "Convert ID3 Tags".

  92. haha by mewphobia · · Score: 1

    You're a nutcase, Nutcase! ;-)

  93. Re:really by tracker1972 · · Score: 1

    Not to be picky but how popular was AAC before Apple picked it? Still not sure it is that popular now but if a company can't "protect" their product, and they want to, then they will pick something that offers that "protection".

    I do not know, does OGG offer any kind of DRM? I am guessing not. Which leaves us with home rips and file sharing, back where we started, without a source to buy the product, rather than, erm, borrow it.

    Tracker.

  94. Re:really by scrypt · · Score: 1

    A song I "buy" on iTMS can only be used with a computer running iTunes (Mac, Windows, or now Linux i386 w/Crossover plugin) or an iPod. Nothing else, without violating the terms of use you agree to when "purchasing" the song on iTMS.

    Not true. When you purchase a song from iTMS you have to ability to burn that song to a CD (the same playlist on up to seven CDs), thus converting it into an .aiff file which you can do with what you need to at that point. You can backup all you like, convert all you like, play that burned CD in your car or wherever you have a CD player. I'd say the chances are largely in my favor that I'll have my iTMS purchases available to listen to on almost any device that has speakers till the day I die.

    I 'own' my iTunes songs to the same extent that you 'own' the songs you buy on CD. You own the CD, but you don't own the music. That little 'C' with the circle around it pretty much says so.

  95. Re:really by wobblie · · Score: 1

    iTunes is not "free like juk". Not even in the least.

    Secondly, juk does one thing, manage and play music files. You use something else to rip if you like. Why do we need one program to do everything? Who cares?

  96. Re:really by 2nd+Post! · · Score: 1

    Oops, your're right, iTunes is not free like Juk, but Juk is free like iTunes. The transitivity is one way here.

    Why do you need one program to do everything? Uh... well, I suppose it's because CDs are music too.

    Why is it Juk doesn't play *those* music files?

  97. Same as burning then ripping! by CreateWindowEx · · Score: 2, Informative
    Don't tell anybody, but this must actually break the iTunes DRM good and hard. CrossOverOffice almost certainly uses a standard Linux sound driver to get the sound data to the sound chip. This is bound to mean /dev/dsp, which is "hackable" in the sense that anyone with root access can snarf the digital audio data between when it gets decrypted by iTunes and when it gets sent to the sound chip. You can then make unlimited unencumbered copies. Additionally, knowing that the file was uncompressed from lossy AAC compression, it should be possible to recompress it in such a way as exactly to recover the original compressed file, just sans DRM encumbrance.
    This is just the same as burning songs from iTMS in iTunes onto a CD, ripping them, and then recompressing (or not), which is allowed behavior on a normal iTunes installation. Or using a digital sound card (you can get an Edirol UA-1D USB for $40) and a S/PDIF loopback cable. Or writing a fake soundcard driver under Windows or OS X (believe it or not, but Linux is not the only OS with documented device driver protocols!).

    The problem is the signal is already decompressed by the time it gets to the sound card driver. "Breaking iTunes' DRM" means getting access to the unencrypted compressed sound data. There is no known way to recover the AAC compressed source from the decompressed version--to preserve the same sound quality as the original iTMS file you have to recompress lossless (which creates a much larger file)--if you just recompress as AAC or MP3 you will lose quality from the roundtrip, although presumably this is fine for some. Basically, iTMS DRM is supposed to guarantee that you cannot create a unencumbered small file of the same quality from your downloaded songs, plus put a convenience barrier to discourage casual file swapping.

  98. compilations by grrrl · · Score: 2, Informative
    I have Soundtracks for example that have various artists; and I do *not* want iTunes breaking these into artist folders, when they are sound tracks, or other compilations.


    if you tick "compilation" in the info/id3 pane in itunes, it creates a artist directory called "compilations" and puts the album, then the tracks in there (the file names do not have the artist tho... iirc)

    "compilations" also comes up as an artist in the browse section

    *however* (and this annoys me muchly) this is not replicated on the ipod - the ipod ignores "compilations" altogether and u get a billion artists in the artist browse list

    to get around this i give compilations "compilation" as the artist and name the song "artist - song name" and soundtracks have "soundtrack" as the artist

    its a bit crap but u only have to do this for the ipod, not if all u use is itunes

  99. Re:It's still all unix by Xyde · · Score: 1

    FYI: QuickTime Player in 10.4 is re-written in Cocoa.

  100. Is it just me? by otterpop378 · · Score: 1

    Or is this the kind of roundabout plot that Zim would use?

    Now we can run iTunes on every PLATFORM!!!!
    Gir... why is there bacon in my ipod??

  101. Thanks but... by juhaz · · Score: 1

    You can keep it, I won't touch iTunes with a ten-foot pole ever again.

    Maybe it fits nicely and works well in OS X, but the Windows version of iTunes is ugly, looks and behaves differently than any other app in the desktop, and same goes for running it in Linux. That's matter of taste, of course, the real problem is that it's SLOW, I mean, changing a song takes about a second on 2GHz machine, what the hell are they smoking?

    If you like the dynamic playlists of iTunes and have any geek blood left in you, try wxMusik, what could possibly beat doing SQL queries into your music library?

    1. Re:Thanks but... by Swedentom · · Score: 1

      A second on a 2 GHz machine? It's pretty much instant on my 733 MHz PowerMac. Maybe 1/4 of a second.

      --
      Sig Nature
    2. Re:Thanks but... by ItMustBeEsoteric · · Score: 1

      What are you talking about? I've never had iTunes lag on loading on a song even on the 1300 Duron I use at work.

      Wait...you're not trying to listen to songs off of a floppy...are you?!?!

  102. Re:As someone who runs both OSX, Windows, and Linu by eroyce · · Score: 1

    Not trying to be repetitive, but I also find it strange that on a 2Ghz machine you are having problems. My 400Mhz, 128 RAM machine has absolutely no problems with iTunes. No "1 second wait" at all. No need to respond, just giving more testimony.

  103. Rhythmbox by AvantLegion · · Score: 1
    Rhythmbox is just a shameless iTunes ripoff, in GTK. Except it lets you add new streaming radio stations without having to resort to little "tricks".

  104. iTUNE Noob by superpulpsicle · · Score: 1

    I have heard there is a program in windows and mac that can upload and download stuff in folder form. So I can see the iPod contents where playlist are in individual folders etc.

    Does any iTune expert know if this program is a myth or a real iTune alternative?

  105. So how do i hook up the ipod in linux using itunes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    this is driving me crazy now!