Slashdot Mirror


Linux's iPod Generation Gap

An anonymous submittor says "Today's young generation can use Linux on the desktop provided it works with their iPod. Linux on the desktop still hasn't reached that stage and has to be compatible with multimedia applications like iTunes and iPod if it has to beat Microsoft's Windows dominance on the desktop. Open source gurus at LinuxWorld discuss solutions to make Linux more consumer-friendly."

27 of 533 comments (clear)

  1. I use my iPod with Linux by generic-man · · Score: 5, Funny

    Really. It's not hard.

    Just emerge gnupod and make sure you compile it with the --with-ffxk-so-opti=3 directive in autoconf. That'll hose you every time. Also I recommend that you use gnutunes out of the gnxms repository; the vanilla Gentoo repos's version is hosed.

    Also, my iPod only works if I mount it as /dev/sdc6. Don't know why that is, but the dev said he'd put it on his TODO list.

    Aside from that it's pretty easy!

    --
    For more information, click here.
    1. Re:I use my iPod with Linux by jeremyp · · Score: 4, Interesting

      If you remove the device (physically) without "eject"ing it (how logical is that?) You'll lose your itunesdb and have to recreate that, which I'm sure would really throw off a newbie...


      I dunno, exactly the same thing could potentially happen if you remove an iPod from a Macintosh without ejecting it.
      --
      All I want is a secure system where it's easy to do anything I want. Is that too much to ask ~~ Randall Munroe
  2. Re:Linux needs to get its act together by Chosen+Reject · · Score: 5, Funny

    User: "How do I get my iPod to run in Linux?"
    Zealot: "Oh that's easy! If you have Redhat, you have to download quake_3_rh_8_i686_010203_glibc.bin


    Wait, I can access an iPod from inside Quake 3 on Linux? Sweet. Does it give you a boost? Like an extra few feet with the rocket jump?

    Now all I need is an iPod.

    --
    Stop Global Warming!
    Just say no to irreversible processes!
  3. Re:Linux needs to get its act together by also-rr · · Score: 5, Informative

    Linux is *not* user friendly,

    Well, it's not friendly to first post trolls perhaps.

    In my case I plugged in my MP3 player, it showed up on the desktop, I copied over some MP3s and they worked. Some people might have said this was because I picked an MP3 player that implimented a standard (USB bulk storage) protocol rather than one from a vendor who aims to keep everything locked up tight, but personally I think that it's just trying to make you jealous.

  4. I beg to disagree... by cagle_.25 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...with the article summary, which implies that Linux is going to have to "be compatible" with technology X in order to appeal to the masses. In point of fact, if Linux adopts that strategy it will *never* appeal to the masses, because it will always be catching up.

    The only way to have significant appeal is to offer something that the masses want, that Windows can't. Hint: rock-solid security is not something the masses *want*. Yet.

    --
    Human being (n.): A genetically human, genetically distinct, functioning organism.
    1. Re:I beg to disagree... by kfg · · Score: 5, Insightful

      . . .[Linux] will always be catching up.

      Ironically, this is because Windows and OSX are plots to take over the world; whereas Linux is just an operating system.

      KFG

    2. Re:I beg to disagree... by techno-vampire · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Until then, I guess we'll keep seeing "XXXX app is what linux needs to be on the desktop" articles...


      Even more to the point, as long as there's even one app running on MS or Mac that isn't on Linux, the naysayers and fanbois will claim that Linux isn't ready for the desktop because of that one app. No matter how good Linux is, how much better its stability and security, how many apps there are for it, as long as the fanbois can point to one thing that isn't duplicated to their satisfaction, they'll continue to claim it's not ready yet.

      Linux is ready for the desktop, right now. It's ready for Aunt Minnie because Aunt Minnie isn't going to be installing her own software on Linux anymore than she is on Windows. What it isn't ready for is the MS/Mac zealots, but then, it never will be because they have no desire to change, nor to admit there even is a viable alternative to their favorite OS.

      --
      Good, inexpensive web hosting
  5. Re:Linux needs to get its act together by mr_shifty · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Ditto here. I plug my Archos Gmini into my laptop, which is running Slackware, and I drag and drop music onto it, no problem.

    No goofy drivers, no 3rd party software, no arcane commands. It just works.

    Apple puts out a proprietary, defective-by-design consumer electronics product and won't port the required software to platforms other than Mac OS or Windows and it's somehow a Linux shortcoming?

    ???

    I'm confused.

    --
    And the circle of life continues to spin, occasionally wobbling on its axis thanks to the weighty presence of dumb.
  6. iPod != iTunes by peter_gzowski · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Well, what do you want? Do you want to be able to throw your music on your iPod? You can do through a number of applications, although I find Amarok's new versions (>= 1.4.1) are the most seamless way to do that. I use my 4th generation 40GB iPod exclusively through Linux, and have had minor issues (had trouble getting rid of that "Do Not Disconnect" message in Mandriva/PCLinuxOS, that's about it), but no show-stoppers. As far as iTunes, I haven't tried to pull down music from the music store. I'm assuming it's not possible right now.

    I find the summary deceiving. To pose the question, "does Linux work with my iPod?" and then answer "no, it hasn't reached that stage yet" is not giving a true picture. If someone asked me that question, I would say "yes, mostly" and then get them to clarify what they wanted to do.

    --
    "Now gluttony and exploitation serves eight!" - TV's Frank
  7. Ipod? That's easy! by common+middle+name · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Pretty much every media player for Linux supports the ipod. Amarok, Rhythmbox, Banshee, etc, etc. Not to mention gtkpod! AFAIK every mainstream distro compiles the proper support into the kernel for usb or firewire support as well as VFAT/HFS file system support. The ipod should be pretty much plug and play on any modern Linux distro.

    At the very least the title of the article is misleading BS.

    1. Re:Ipod? That's easy! by ZakuSage · · Score: 4, Informative

      In fact I find it's easier to use an iPod with Linux then with Windows. I was able to access my brother's shuffle with ease as a mass storage device, and then put songs on it by copying through Natuilus. I did all this with a stock Ubuntu Breezy installation a few months ago. With Windows you had to access it through iTunes, and couldn't do something so simple as using a file manager.

  8. Re:Linux needs to get its act together by also-rr · · Score: 5, Informative

    Apple puts out a proprietary, defective-by-design consumer electronics product and won't port the required software to platforms other than Mac OS or Windows and it's somehow a Linux shortcoming?

    And the best bit is that I (and probably you soon) got moderated down for saying it.

    What do you expect Linux devs to do? Magically support every bit of hardware in existance without decent specs and no access to the closed DRM which makes the bit people are most unhappy to leave behind tick? Yes, I am aware that the actual format is open, thank you very much, but the DRM is not and so purchased large music libraries are non-trivial to convert to something that works on any platform.

    And yet the iPod does work on Linux (even the new ones). How about that for good service, and all for free I might add.

  9. Re:Linux needs to get its act together by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    Why is this modded as a "Troll"? Post makes complete sense to me.

    Funny, you must be really comfortable with accessing your iPod from Quake3 then.

    The post is an known, old troll where the lazy AC only managed to replace Quake 3 with iPod in the 'questions.' If you really used Linux 'for several years' you'd have spotted the trollness of it easily - iPod access is easy both in KDE and Gnome, what's missing is iTunes (for store+iPod use)

  10. Re:Linux needs to get its act together by also-rr · · Score: 5, Informative
    Well, yes. The strength of the OSS movement is that, technically, anything can be done. The fact that this has yet to be done points at a larger problem - the people who can, don't.

    The people who can, have. Then they turned it into a library and now iPod support is available in
    • amaroK
    • gPodder
    • gtkpod
    • iPodDisk
    • podtool
    • and Rhythmbox
    you were saying?
  11. Re:I'm sorry, but fuck the iPod. by kfg · · Score: 4, Funny

    . . .all you iPod junkies, get a fucking detox.

    Does the detox support vorbis?

    KFG

  12. Not just ipods by Colin+Smith · · Score: 5, Insightful

    BTW, don't they just plug in and appear as a drive? Anyway...

    It's all the peripherals. Your ipod, palm, nokia, cameras etc syncing with the calendar, todo, email, files etc. The problem isn't actually with Linux, it's with closed proprietary protocols. Saying the problem is with Linux is naive, the problem is with standardisation and with peripheral manufacturers writing software which works on several platforms. Its really an economic problem rather than a technical one.

    --
    Deleted
  13. iTunes is good despite iTMS, not because of it. by Kadin2048 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I don't think anyone is really asking for support for M4P (those would be the encrypted, DRMed files purchased from the iTunes Media Store) files on Linux. Everyone realizes, I think, that there's no way to do DRM with open-source software, and frankly I think this is a Good Thing.

    However, people use iTunes and iPods for a lot more than DRMed music. There is this tendency here on Slashdot to assume that everyone who uses iTunes or owns an iPod has purchased lots of music for it from the iTMS. This is not true, and in fact is provably wrong. The vast majority of music on most people's portable devices and in their music libraries, comes from ripped CDs (or from peer to peer).

    Linux would be doing well if it could just come up with a library management program that was as good as iTunes is, and it would be doing better than iTunes if it made it as easy to download music OFF of the iPod as it is to put it on. (That is, to do the magical and frightening-to-media-companies "reverse syncronization.")

    iTunes had a large userbase long before the Music Store existed: it gained popularity (back when it was a Mac-only program) because it has a good interface for managing a lot of songs and playlists. I have yet to see (although if someone wants to point one out I'd be interested) a Linux application that is the equal of it. All the Linux programs seem to assume that the OS' file browser is the best way to manage music, and that small single-purpose tools should be used to do syncronization or updating.

    I remember what managing a large MP3 collection was like before nice library management programs were developed to automatically sort files into folders by Artist/Album, and it sucked. The file browser--even a good general-purpose browser (like Konqueror)--is not the tool for this job.

    While this is very true to the "UNIX way," it's not what people want. People want big, monolithic, do-everything applications. They want something that's a media player, a library manager, a file uploader, an ID3 tag editor, and a portable-device-syncronization manager. If you could build a BitTorrent client and P2P browser into that at the same time, that would be great, too.

    iTunes isn't good because of the Music Store, it's good despite it. There is a huge, gaping hole that the Linux community could fill if people desired to, for a program that's BETTER than iTunes: one that works seamlessly with the iPod but also works with other music stores (non-DRMed ones: AllOfMp3.com, eMusic, etc., plus free sources), and doesn't shy away from features because it would piss off music companies (sharing/streaming of music, true bidirectional syncronization).

    Apple's software is hobbled by the company's relationship with the media companies and the necessity of flogging their own music store, not strengthened by it. It means that they have to produce crippled software, which doesn't do everything that it could otherwise. The FOSS community could run circles around iTunes; heck, they could make the closest thing that Linux has to a 'killer app' for home users. Going on about DRM is just a red herring; only a very few people can afford to buy large quantities of music from iTMS anyway, the great majority wouldn't be stopped by that from moving to a clearly superior piece of software, if one existed. To my knowledge, it does not. And that's why iTunes reigns supreme.

    --
    "Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
    1. Re:iTunes is good despite iTMS, not because of it. by EvilIdler · · Score: 5, Informative

      >They want something that's a media player, a library manager, a file uploader, an ID3 tag editor,
      > and a portable-device-syncronization manager
      Sounds a little like amarok..

  14. don't fix linux, fix the damn ipod by dindi · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The basic idea of itunes is just flawed (from my perpective at least)..

    Most players, even my stupid Panasonic car radio can read-in an MP3 list on the fly, and then play it, so why not that super-intelligent-wonderful device?

    As on any normal MP3 player I have seen, you could just drop the files onto the device, and then it would create a playlist from it....

    That way you could use any system, not just that retarded Itunes. That way you could use m3u files as well.

    But wait: this way you would not need a windows or a mac running that bloated crap, that is nothing but a "buy more from itunes" adware pile.

    And here is what really bothers me: you cannot use iTunes store from where i live, and now they even stopped selling prepaid cards at the apple stores. Still I have to download a new version of their crap almost every 3 weeks, with bigger and bigger file sizes, while i could just drop files on an USB drive's filesystem, and then press play...

    I think I am one of the very few people who is sick of his ipod in every single sense, except it's physical strength (i use it at the gym every day and get it wet, and hit it with weights and run with it... then usually steam it for a few hours in my gym-bag's front with my wet heartrate monitor)
    Other than that: sound:ok i guess, earphones:garbage, interface awkward, functions:bloat, control:complicated (always those menus with the idiotic scrolling)......

    Oh if that little function existed, you could use it with linux just fine, as far as usb drives are enabled ... you just connect it and an scsi device(on most systems) show up, you just have to mount it ....

    mounting something too complicated? I guess do not use linux, that is my advice .....

  15. Why appeal? by MagicAlex84 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Why does Linux have to appeal to anyone but the people who use it? I thought that was the whole point. If you don't feel like paying for software then you've either got to write it yourself or wait for someone to give it to you (or steal it, but that's another topic). And this is exactly what the Linux community has done; as many people here have pointed out you can use an iPod in Linux (to say nothing of using Linux on an iPod). So the majority of people find using Linux to be too difficult? So what? They can just pay for a simpler OS that does work for them. It's like paying someone to clean your house, wash your car, make you food, or any number of services, and if you're someone who's not willing to pay for those services then you either have to do them yourself, or find someone who will do it voluntarily (or to enslave).

  16. Actually, you can. by porkchop_d_clown · · Score: 4, Informative

    couldn't do something so simple as using a file manager.

    Believe it or not, iTunes hides the Shuffle from Windows. If you plug a shuffle into a machine that doesn't have iTunes installed, it will appear as a drive.

    At least, mine did when I first got it. Maybe newer ones are different?

  17. Funny but wrong by alandd · · Score: 5, Informative

    On my OpenSUSE 10.1:

    - Open Amarok
    - Attach iPod Nano
    - Amarok pops up a box that asks if I want to use it to manage a new iPod
    - Click affirmative
    - Transfer, delete, manage music and podcasts at will

    I have not read the article so I don't understand the issue. Are the using a two-year-old version of some odd distro?

  18. Re:You're delusional...Suckah by Kennon · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Well you can wake me up when iTunes displays song lyrics on the fly, pulls up Wikipedia entries on the artist, sorts music in a sane manner, does not phone home on your music collection for an "enhanced" buying experience, is fully skinable so you can get rid of that 1900 Ford mentality of "They can have it look however they want as long as it is this shitty minimalist skin", and supports ALL the music file formats i want to use like .ogg

    And I wouldn't brag about iTunes music store as a feature considering they don't even really sell YOU a song...With their permission you are granted the right to listen to their music on a limited number of computers.

    Oh and did I mention that it's memory footprint is about 1/4 of iTunes?

    Oh and did I mention that it KICKS the llamas ass?

    --
    "All those moments, will be lost in time...like tears in rain..."
  19. You're delusional and owned. by twitter · · Score: 4, Insightful
    iTunes lets one painlessly burn, share, listen to and buy music.

    You are so suckered by the music industry. iTunes gives you DRM garbage without long term credibility. It's a step backward from analog, except for convenience of play. Free media is technically superior and easier to use than non free.

    Burn? Why? CDs are an input and an archive. I save my wavs as gziped tar archives and play them as oggs.

    Amazingly enough, I can buy CDs and listen to my music with Amarok. Reasonable services will sell you FLAC without DRM. Reasonable bands let you trade their concerts without charge. iTunes does not live up to the Amarok + Wikipedia + Lyrics experience, nor is it's database as good. As time goes by, the gap in quality will widen.

    As usual, non free is getting it's ass kicked and people are routing around it. Artist and users are getting a better deal elsewhere. When they fold and leave you without a key to what you purchased, you will understand why the deal was raw to begin with. I've digitized my parents and my grandparents music collections and will be able to give them to my kids. I'm not buying into something that will prevent that. Your player won't last forever, but the music and the culture it represents should.

    --

    Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.

  20. Individual desktop users are irrelevant by Brunellus · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I have concluded that "Linux isn't ready for the desktop" rants like TFA and "This is the Year of Linux on the Desktop" raves are both equally irrelevant, because they both miss the point.

    If an attractive, usable desktop environment with excellent multimedia capabilities were what it took to make a desktop computing platform dominant, I wouldn't be typing this comment from my Windows box at work. We'd all be using Amigas. The /. Macolytes will argue that we all would have been (and still should be) using Apple Macintoshes of one description or other. Let's review, though: the Amiga is on the dustbin of history. The Mac soldiers along, but for all its "Volkskomputer" propaganda, only a relatively small proportion of relatively affluent Macolytes ever use them.

    What dominated the desktop? What made the Personal Computer a commodity item? Bring yourself to say it: IBM-Compatibles running MS-DOS. They were ugly and primitive. It were single-user/single-task systems. Keeping one running initiated a user or administrator into the secret world of cryptic command lines and oracular error messages (ABORT, RETRY, FAIL?). It certainly wasn't an attractive platform by any standard now applied....and yet it completely trounced all its competitors. Why?

    Because it was extremely attractive to the sort of person we don't like here on /.--procurement types. It was "good enough," they were "smart enough," and, goshdarnit, the IBM-compatibles ran Lotus 1-2-3! Industry kicked off the massive adoption feedback loop, and, flash forward to the present day, we're all in a Microsoft universe.

    We will leave that universe NOT because the competition offers a compelling, beautiful, secure product that is compatible with the latest Apple blobject. We will leave it when the same hated procurement types start to calculate that the costs of staying in proprietary software outweigh those of running Free software. Once the argument is framed in those terms, the adoption loop will turn again, and people will be forced to use the platform they use at work, at school, or wherever.

    If Linux is or isn't ready for YOU, that's really your decision. But it's pointless to evaluate desktop Linux's chances of mass adoption assuming that the masses will all flock to a better, more secure, and more usable platform without being compelled to do so by some external force.

  21. Redherring.com is aptly named by Cid+Highwind · · Score: 5, Insightful
    --
    0 1 - just my two bits
  22. Re:Linux needs to get its act together by Anivair · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Moron. Repeat after me. here's how you install linux. Insert CD. Hit enter till it loads. For 95% of all modern instalations, that's it. Installing windows is more complicated than this, I swear. It's just that most people never install windows. Also, here's how integrating my ipod worked in ubuntu: connect iPod. ta-da.