Latest Version of iPodLinux Reviewed

Demolition writes "The latest release of the iPod-Linux Installer has been reviewed on Accelerate Your Mac!, a popular Mac performance/modification site. As mentioned in previous Slashdot articles, the iPodLinux Project is an open source venture devoted to porting Linux to Apple's iPod. In a nutshell, the reviewer finds that the iPodLinux Project has progressed a long way from its early proof-of-concept days."

Comments

This has to be...

[yetdog]

From the "because you can, and really no other reason" department.

GODDAMNIT

[CmdrStallman]

That's GNU/iPodLinux. How many fucking times do I have to tell you. By the way, anyone know a good way to get cheeto stains out of your beard without bathing or using water?

Re:But...

[Anonymous Coward]

Does it play OGGs?

Ogg is for dirty hippies. This software was created by dirty hippies. Therefore, all dirty hippies like ogg. Simple logic, my friend.

Only cool until Apple lowers the axe

[ValourX]

Just like they did with RealNetworks, Apple will probably put the kibosh on this project with a firmware upgrade or legal buffoonery. I don't know why so many Slashdotters like Apple; they do not support or sell Free Software and they do little to contribute to the FS/OSS community. For as much as they take from FreeBSD, they give nothing back. And if you start going on about Darwin being open-source, keep in mind that Darwin has no practical use beyond its basis for OS X.

Apple is not our friend. You might like their fancy computers and software, but never forget that they are a proprietary hardware and software company.

Now watch the Apple zealots mod this down for being anti-Apple. ::audible sigh::

-Jem

Re:Only cool until Apple lowers the axe

[ValourX]

Okay, so with your link you have proven my point... look at how many projects Apple *takes from* and look at how many they *maintain or contribute to*. How useful are their OSS projects to non-OS X users?

The APSL is also not compatible with the GPL.

Look, justify your love for Apple any way you want, but your rationalizations don't change the fact that Apple does not give back what they take from Free Software. And it won't change the probability that Apple will try to kill this iPodLinux project.

-Jem

Re:Only cool until Apple lowers the axe

[AstroDrabb]

Let the Apple zealots mod you or me down. I have karma to burn ; P

I did RTFA and one thing I noticed was

Recordings is a remarkable feature

Does the iPod not allow recording? If that is true, that is pretty lame IMO. I would never purchase an MP3 or Audio player that didn't allow recording. I use my dog-old Archos Jukebox recorder every week to record about 3 hours of audio data from my church. I then convert those MP3's into WAV and burn CD's for others to listen to. I don't see how useful an MP3 player is without the ability to record from line-in.

I agree with you about how Apple as a company is. Though I don't think Apple can really stop this. They can only issue so many firmware update. Each of those firmware update can be reverse-engineered. I also agree with you that Apple as a company _takes_ much more then they give. Darwin is of very limited use and Apple has been very slow on releasing KHTML updates. Apple uses some big-ticket OSS items for their OS and server OS, yet Apple doesn't release any of their big-ticket items as OSS. That is why I don't buy a Mac (oh and because they are _way_ over-priced IMO for what they provide).

Re:Only cool until Apple lowers the axe

[aldoman]

Most of what you said is purely biased.

They took the KHTML code, and improved it. They submitted their patches back, not as helpful, commented code, but instead mainly huge code dumps of uncommented, undocumented code that needs to be audited, understood and then finally intergrated. Most of the code Apple has submitted is still not intergrated, months after the dumps started coming in. Why? Because it's just so damn hard.

I think you are also confusing the ZeroConf story. Name one software product outside of Apple that uses Apple's implementation - oh, next to none. Because it's buggy and undocumented, the open source one anyway. On OSX it may be a glorious, synergized, Jobs-thumbs-up development experience but outside of that it's basically a shitheap.

The only reason Apple lets you 'plug into shit' is because they are desperate for developers to use their platform. You think they'd be oh-so-nice and happy if they had the monopoly like Microsoft has? Nope is the answer to that. I know we don't admit it on Slashdot, but .NET is a very nice programming enviroment, techincally. I wouldn't use it personally because I don't enjoy playing Microsoft politics, but then again I don't develop for OSX.

Oh btw, I don't really see Apple as a hero in the OSS world. I see them very good at taking OSS techonology and using it to plug the gaps where they can't afford to write their own code.

Re:Only cool until Apple lowers the axe

[AstroDrabb]

Informative? All you did was list a link to OSS software that Apple _USES_. Most of those project Apple doesn't contribute to.

I mean, come on. How much of an Apple Zealot are you. Did you look under the "Server" section? Apple lists:

• Apache httpd
• Axis
• Berkeley DB4 for OpenLDAP & Cyrus
• Cyrus IMAP mail server
• JBOSS
• mailman
• MySQL
• OpenLDAP
• SquirrelMail
• Tomcat

I know that Apple has not contributed to all of those projects. I doubt Apple contributed to _any_ of them. I read the change logs for many of them, and Apple is not in them!

It is pretty funny when Apple can post a link to a bunch of OSS software and an Apple Zealot somehow assumes Apple had _anything_ to do with those projects other then to take from them.

All you did was _reinforce_ the GP's post about Apple taking more then they give.

I cannot personally think of any mainstream Apple software that Apple has made OSS. Sure they have taken OSS like KHTML and FreeBSD, but what has Apple really given of their own creation? What about Quartz, Aqua, iTMS, iTunes, "Fairplay", Sorensen?

Heck, if you look through my posting history, you will know that I am not a big fan of the corporate tactics of MS. However, I will say with certainty that MS has given more of their own creations to OSS and even the poor "shared source" then Apple every has ever contributed back to the community from which they feed..

Re:Only cool until Apple lowers the axe

[AstroDrabb]

since you're cheering about Microsoft's open source contributions

If you think that is cheering, you have some problems. I just stated that MS has given more to OSS then Apple. And yes, even their bad "Shared" source license.

First, Apple cannot possibly contribute to all the open source software projects that ship with their OS. Neither does Sun, or Red Hat, or IBM, or anyone else

Who said they should contribute to _all_? It would be nice to see Apple do any significant amount of contribution. The whole of their OS is based on OSS. Their OS sucked until they used OSS. They mostly do little contributions that benefit their OS. Apple doesn't even come close to what Sun, Red Hat or IBM have done to the OSS community. All three have contributed millions and millions of lines of code and big ticket items. Red Hat employs a handful of the top 10 kernel developers.

QSS, as just mentioned. Anyway, you can't make any money by just giving everything away. Ask Red Hat. Anyway, every vendor has to keep certain things for themselves to differentiate their product or there would be no reason to buy their specific product. That holds true for any vendor using open source code, be it Sun, IBM, SGI, Apple, or anyone else.

Again, who ever said to give away everything?

iTunes/iTMS/Fairplay: They can't release the source to these because it would compromise the authentication/DRM scheme

Huh? Their DRM was cracked in no time. Not releasing the code did nothing for them. So why can't they release specs for iTMS so all platforms can use the service? Being able to to purchase/download from iTMS isn't going to break their poor "FairPlay".

And, if you want to use iTunes for library management, there's Crossover iTunes.

No thanks. I don't need a closed source music manager. There are plenty of fine OSS ones that do everything I need. I don't hate Apple, I just consider them real contributors to OSS, especially to the extent that they have used OSS.

Price drop

[ananegg]

Instead of making iPods work with Linux, why not Make them more accessible by lowering the price?

Re:Price drop

[ananegg]

So you don't agree with me? Or are you jsut upset you did not think of it 1st?

Re:Price drop

[ananegg]

I was not talking about Linux, I meant apple.......

Re:Price drop

[ananegg]

Then we agree.

Re:Coolest fad ever, but still...

[Anonymous Coward]

Am I the only one seeing the IPOD going the way of POG in a few years?

Well, Apple is going out of business...

Re:So now I'm an abuser

[zpok]

"If your servers can't handle the load, say so.
Don't accuse newssites and innocent surfers of being 'abusers'..."

Hi there,

I love to pay for traffic of people who are too lame to link to the google cache.

That's how I am. Not only do I work for free, I'm pleased to pay for everything people throw at my feet, including traffic.

Thank you please, can I have some more?