Slashdot Mirror


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."

16 of 301 comments (clear)

  1. Sounds sketchy. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Is it digitally signed?

  2. This is quite exciting. by Sheetrock · · Score: 5, Insightful
    While the iPos already does everything it needs to (decent music playback, excellent interface, remarkably durable) there would be a number of advantages to putting Linux on it.

    It would be possible to get third-party support for formats that are not officially supported, such as RealMedia or Microsoft DRM-protected audio files. Additionally the dial interface lends itself to use for reading e-book or USENET newsgroups, or for keeping an address book, phonebook, or the days events in your pocket.

    However, I wonder if the GPL would create problems in this sort of environment -- presumably there is content that is not open on the player that would be necessary to incorporate into this project. Perhaps it would be wiser to adopt something Open Source such as OpenBSD instead; it's a text-only environment, so the lack of graphical support would be a minor problem at best, and it contains a good deal of security features that would be beneficial should wired applications for this new platform be developed after this project takes off.

    --

    Try not. Do or do not, there is no try.
    -- Dr. Spock, stardate 2822-3.




    1. Re:This is quite exciting. by seanadams.com · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I disagree - probably the only things that would be developed on top of iPod linux would be entirely new apps. Porting things like audio codecs or rewriting a work-alike of Apple's simple UI is trivial in comparison to the task of getting an OS with complete hardware driver support working on a custom embedded system.

      It would be simpler to reinvent those things than to try and get Apple's code to run atop Linux (through emulation of Apple's underlying firmware).

      The only reason not to GPL it is if you want to make it easier for Apple (or others) to reincorporate your improvements. That might be a good thing depending on your goals. I'd say porting Linux to the hardware is interesting per se, and could yield a groundswell of other OSS support - Apple has bigger fish to fry right now.

      Also realize: there are some generally accepted (but not explicit) rules that differentiate "derived" vs "aggregate" works when it comes to GPL. It is unlikely that using a GPL'd OS would preclude higher level apps like phone books from being offered under whatever license the author chooses.

  3. Re:This has to be... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Not really. This is a very important project because there are several autonomous surveillance vehicles (ASVs) which will be deployed by the military that use the same basic architecture of the iPod for one of their flight control systems. It turns out that for long transcontinental flights, the little Lego pilot inside the ASV needs about 10 hours of music to keep him alert during the mission. Porting Linux to the iPod ensures that ASVs will be able to fly long after the iPod craze peters out and Apple goes out of business.

  4. Already down by Stevyn · · Score: 5, Funny

    I think they were hosting the site on an iPod.

  5. Bah! by jcr · · Score: 5, Informative


    I want an iPod with a 512x384 display, emulating a Mac Plus (except with much more RAM.)

    -jcr

    --
    The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
  6. Holy crap. What DOESN'T Linux run on? by crazyphilman · · Score: 5, Funny

    I mean, my GOD. It's almost like NetBSD. Next thing you know, there'll be Linux vibrators!

    Hmm...

    Suddenly I want to be a sysadmin!

    --
    Farewell! It's been a fine buncha years!
    1. Re:Holy crap. What DOESN'T Linux run on? by seanadams.com · · Score: 5, Funny

      I mean, my GOD. It's almost like NetBSD. Next thing you know, there'll be Linux vibrators!

      Where is this NetBSD vibrator of which you speak? I've always wanted to telnet in and see what's happening down there....

    2. Re:Holy crap. What DOESN'T Linux run on? by n0dalus · · Score: 5, Funny

      I've always wanted to telnet in and see what's happening down there....

      Don't forget to use protection. SSH.

  7. Progress by Cereal+Box · · Score: 5, Funny

    In a nutshell, the reviewer finds that the iPodLinux Project has progressed a long way from its early proof-of-concept days.

    Looks like it has support for the "back" and "stop" buttons. Support for the "play" button should be available shortly. But it plays OGG!

  8. Re:Only cool until Apple lowers the axe by DiscoOnTheSide · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Hmmm... Let's see...

    Safari, their own web browser... I seem to recall they took code from Konqueror, made it better in terms of rendering things better and more compatible... released Safari (closed-source), then gave their changes back to the Konqueror people

    Rendezvous. You may know this as ZeroConf. Yes, it existed before they did Rendezvous, but no one did it well. and they released their code back to the ZeroConf people to make the implementation and API better. They also made SDKs so people from every OS can use Rendezvous technology and work with Macs. Did MS help the Samba people?

    No company that shoots to make a profit is going to be 100% open source. No one has found a reliable business model on how to do it and stay alive more than a year. Apple does make closed software (and protects it, rightfully so, thats where their INCOME comes from. thats what keeps you on THEIR Unix, instead of taking their stuff and running off to any Linux distro that runs on PowerPC.) and ok, so you can't see the code, but the APIs are so well written, that just about anything Apple makes, I can plug into with my OWN software. How does MS let you plug into shit? With VB? Feh. They make things as easy as possible for developers, and give back to those they borrow from (the Watson thing was a load of crap, there was nothing "unique" about that, and the guy from Konfabulator is a whiny bitch cause someone else made widgets for OS X and did it in a way that doesn't eat up 95% of my CPU at idle.)

    While Apple IS a for-profit company, and they HAVE at times used legal threats to keep their products "safe" its mostly out of the purity of the mac "experience", not "shit, we're losing money on that".

    I don't see Apple getting too pissed off about this one though... If they aren't against people running Linux on their macs, why would they care about the iPods? Remember, the majority of the cash Apple sees is from hardware sales. The times when Apple gets pissy is when you meddle with their SOFTWARE. This keeps their software on the iPod intact (sort-of) so I don't see them getting their panties in a bind.

    But if you want to demonize Apple for trying to make a buck even though they've done more to try and help open source software than most of the other major players in the industry... go right ahead. it just make YOU look like the rabbid zealot for anything anti-Mac.

    --
    Viva La Revolucion! Buy a Mac!
  9. Re:Only cool until Apple lowers the axe by Lank · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...keep in mind that Darwin has no practical use beyond its basis for OS X.

    Most operating systems have no practical use except for running applications written for them. What's your point?

    --
    Gotta get me one of these!
  10. Re:Only cool until Apple lowers the axe by seanadams.com · · Score: 5, Funny

    For as much as they take from FreeBSD, they give nothing back.

    Let's not forget high-paying jobs for all those core developers....

    And quite a bit of Darwin code that you're free to roll into your own "BSD for PPC" distro.

    And the wine, the wine goes without saying.

    And the aquaeducts.

    But apart from the wine, the medicine, the acqueducts, and the peace, what has Apple done for us?

  11. Question of OGG Support by Kalak · · Score: 5, Informative

    Since every time a media player is mentioned on /., and this is an iPod running Linux, and 95% of my collection is in ogg, etc. I've karma whore by posting this link to the currently /.ed iPod Linux Wiki FAQ. In short, here's the answer, and there is no reason, from either the site or TFA to change it (TFA says nothing about ogg.) No mailing list or forums available.

    Note: Linux != ogg. If your iPod runs linux, that does not mean everything you can run in mplayer will suddenly work on your iPod as some seem to be suggesting.

    Short version (from the Wiki):

    Is there an OGG player?

    The Tremor (http://www.xiph.org/ogg/vorbis/) player is running at about 80% real-time.

    --
    I am, and always will be, an idiot. Karma: Coma (mostly effected by .hack)
  12. Re:Only cool until Apple lowers the axe by Thumpnugget · · Score: 5, Informative

    This has got to be a troll, since you're cheering about Microsoft's open source contributions, but I'll bite.

    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. It's simply not possible. Everyone takes more than they give. It's like asking a Linux user to contribute to every open source project they use. They can't. But that's part of the beauty of open source: there is a huge amount of high quality code out there with healthy developer communities that a software vendor (and end user) can put to good use without having to vet every single line of code themselves. And when all of those vendors each give back to a few of the projects they use, it feeds back into the health of the entire open source community. So, every company can't help every project, but every project can help every company (and user). That's a good thing, the way I see it.

    And, Apple does give back. Particularly to GCC, FreeBSD userland, KHTML, X.org, Postfix, and others. And they always publish source for any modifications according to the appropriate license. I'm too lazy to go look up specifics for all of those, but there's a quick writeup regarding KHTML at www.kdedevelopers.org. Examples of the others shouldn't be too hard to find. But, you're not likely to see much front-page press about it. "Vendor X gives some code back to project Y" won't capture people's attention like "Vendor X stole code from project Y and is violating the license". You can scan the Slashdot headlines for proof of that. :)

    I cannot personally think of any mainstream Apple software that Apple has made OSS.

    Well, there is Quicktime Streaming Server. That should count for something. There's also OpenPlay, and Rendezvous. Anyway, there's a list on Apple's site, go take a look. It's not Apple's fault if none of the projects they have put out there are anything that you want to use.

    but what has Apple really given of their own creation?

    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.

    What about Quartz, Aqua, iTMS, iTunes, "Fairplay", Sorensen?

    Quartz: I highly suspect there may be issues with IP from the display technology vendors. ATI and NVidia are stingy with their IP, which is why there are no real open source drivers for their display cards for any OS.

    Aqua: Apple's UI is their main point of product differentiation, besides the custom hardware. Giving away Aqua would be like giving the hardware away.

    iTunes/iTMS/Fairplay: They can't release the source to these because it would compromise the authentication/DRM scheme that allows them to sell RIAA music in the first place. But even so, who cares? DRM sucks anyway and I won't buy DRM encumbered music from anyone for any cost. And, if you want to use iTunes for library management, there's Crossover iTunes.

    Sorenson: Not Apple's IP to open source. Go talk to Sorenson.

    --
    Free yourself. Everything else will follow.