Syncing Music Players In Linux?

Daengbo writes "I recently sold my old laptop to a friend, and she asked me to keep Ubuntu on it rather than installing Windows for her. To help her with the transition, I wrote two intro lessons for her, but we've hit a stumbling block. The iRivier Clix (4GB) she's been using syncs with Windows Media Player. My research shows that the model has both an MTP for the sync and a UMS mode which acts as a mass storage device. Rhythmbox's 'Scan Removable Media' doesn't pick up anything from the USB mass storage device, and although Syncropated claims to support these types of devices, it doesn't find any supported devices. Unless you use an iPod, this appears to be a real weak point in the Linux desktop. Do you sync your mass storage devices and music players? What do you use?"

Comments

Please -- Mount Man

[fishdan]

So the obvious thing is you can tell her she's going have to do 'man mount' to find out how to get her music synced. No -- really!

That joke never gets old...

Seriously though -- in UMS mode you should be able to mount it as a drive. You'll abviously have to make a script for her, but that's easy enough.

I love that I know how hot this girl is based on the detail in your help pages for her....

Re:Please -- Mount Man

[19thNervousBreakdown]

Jesus, you people are ridiculous.

Lesson: If someone is interested, they will do overt, flirty things, unless they're a shy and insecure mess, which you want nothing to do with even if you're one too. Ordering the same type of soft drink is not a declaration of love.

Re:Please -- Mount Man

[QCompson]

It's obvious that this girl is interested -- otherwise, why else would she switch to Ubuntu?

Is this an admission that linux is so bad that someone must have an ulterior motive to want to use it?

My solution

[JustNiz]

I buy players wisely first. I make a point of researching beforehand and only buy players that:

1) Appear as a generic storage device when plugged into USB and doesn't require drivers or other software to be installed on your PC.
( this gets around any Windows-only and most DRM limitations, and also means I can use it as portable storage for other files).

2) Supports ogg ( and FLAC if possible )

3) Doesn't contain DRM

Re:My solution

[ErroneousBee]

Ditto that.

I view ogg support as a clue that the designers of the device have given some thought to what the device should be capable of, and arnt just ticking the boxes that marketing want ticked.

Other clues are:

• Battery life. In particular, lying about it. A sign that the company is dishonest, and have lied about other features.
• No products in the lineup that take AAA or AA batteries. A sign that designers only develop features suggested by marketing.
• Proprietary connectors. Unless theres some good reason for it, like Apples dock.
• Sudden changes in technical direction from the company. Archos and iRiver did this, and their product suite turned to shit overnight.
• Flash ridden website with no device specifications. A sign that the company are selling an image and do not understand the product.

I go for UMS devices because then I can manage my player from anywhere without having to use special software. I can drop a podcast onto my player at work, or when I'm away.

Amarok + iRiver T30

[Anonymous Coward]

I use an iRiver T30 with the standard MTP firmware, and Amarok works quite well with it.

In fact, it works a bit better with Amarok than with WMP11, since WMP11 will occasionally decide that it is a new device and demand that I set up syncing again. And of course Amarok has additional benefits, such as podcatching and better library management. As far as I'm concerned, the only drawback is that you can't do an Audible.com device activation with Amarok.

You are positively batshit insane.

[mrsbrisby]

Unless you use an iPod, this appears to be a real weak point in the Linux desktop.

iRiver doesn't work very well on a Macintosh either, so I bet you consider it a weak point in the Macintosh desktop as well.

How about this: if iRiver doesn't work in Linux, complain to iRiver.

With Linux, you could also fix the problem yourself. You could also pay someone to fix the problem. If the iRiver is popular enough, you could also wait and someone else will fix it for you.

With Windows, you don't have those options, so I consider that a weak point in the Windows desktop.

Re:What do you use?

[ak3ldama]

And if you feel like firing back with the usual Linux fanboy "I think Amarok is better..." BS don't bother. You are wrong.
Actually, mr anonymous, you are wrong. Amarok is clearly not going for your average section of the user base.
It has the usual open source "more features is better than a smaller but useful and coherent set of rock solid ones"
It's a very elegant program with many features, and is not meant to just be iTunes. If you think iTunes is all anyone needs your are as blinded as any of the Linux fanboys. (Disclaimer: I have used iTunes and Amarok and I personally don't use either.)

Re:can't blame you for trying

[danpsmith]

Cassandra said... this is awesome Dan thanks!! you OBVIOUSLY have way too much time on your hands...lol but i'm glad to benefit from it! In other words, DENIED! Sorry, man, we've all been there.

Yep, it's good that you have time on your hands, cuz you are gonna both need that time and your hands, most importantly.

Re:What do you use?

[Anonymous Coward]

He described the alternative as smaller, more elegant, and rock solid...

and you thought he was talking about iTunes????

iTunes probably isn't "smaller" in any comparison, even when compared to Rosie O'Donald
Not sure I'd call the interface elegant - it looks more like a bunch of packing slips.
Rock Solid... Not on any Windows machine I've seen. It uses too many resources, and tends to bring the machine to the speed of... well, a rock.

Re:can't blame you for trying

[Cutie Pi]

In other words, DENIED! Sorry, man, we've all been there.

My thoughts exactly.

As a woman, the initial feeling I got from the story is that this guy somehow persuaded this girl (who's level of friendship is probably not reciprocal) to use Ubuntu instead of Windows. That gives him an opportunity to continue the (somewhat desperate) interaction past the point of sale. A hint to geeks out there: Girls get scared when you start going out of your way to be "friendly" or "nice". Guys think the girl will be swept off her feet; girls think the guys are sacrificing their own time (and happiness) just to make them happy.

Re:What do you use?

[idonthack]

I don't know what any of you guys are talking about. My instance of Amarok has been running for days now, and processor usage rarely reaches 10%. The only time I ever had CPU issues with it was when I was running badly written extension scripts. Memory usage is around 100MB, which is not totally unexpected considering its complexity, and the fact that I'm playing FLAC files.

So either you're running it under adverse conditions (read: Gnome desktop) or something is wrong with your installation.

reality distortion field

[twitter]

Amarok positively blows on my 1.0GHz PIII (Ubuntu).

and you think "Microsoft Office is lighting fast on just about any hardware, and that has been true for every release cycle the site has had so far after Office 95." That's rich.

You must be bored with your Slashdot troll job and want to be fired to write such transparently false nonsense.

Re:reality distortion field

[dedazo]

Actually, let me reiterate that - Office is fucking lighting fast on most normal business hardware. The Office 2003 apps are actually faster to load than the 2000 ones were, and I can't tell the difference between 2003 and 2007 though I've noticed Word 2007 is actually slightly faster at loading larger documents, probably because it's doing more in the background. I haven't played much with the others.

With the possible exception of Outlook, I've never seen an Office app take more than 2-3 seconds to load. We're not talking prefetch or cache or the Office accelerator, which I always disable anyway. Go ahead and prove me wrong.

Anyone with half a brain that has ever used Office can tell you all this - unlike you I don't feel the need to make shit up about things I've never used. Your FUD doesn't actually change reality, no matter how much you want that to be the case.

That Amarok is slow might be irrelevant given the functionality it provides (I use XMMS mostly anyway), much like Firefox vs IE. But that doesn't mean it's not slow or that it doesn't leak memory for some reason.

Other than having to install xine to have it play MP3s, on my Ubuntu box Amarok is in pristine post-Synaptic install state. I cannot believe I did anything to make it slow, so I must conclude that it needs a beefier box to work well. That's OK, I don't have a problem with that at all. It just invalidates your bullshit fanboy claim that it works fantabulously on a 1GHz processor. Maybe you should stop using that "let me tell you how it is" tone in your posts, and no one would feel the need to constantly call you out on them.