Apple Cuts Off Linux iPod Users

Will Fisher writes "New iPods will no longer be able to work with Linux. iTunes now writes some kind of hash (SHA1, md5?) to the iPod database which new iPods check against. If this check fails then the iPod reports that it contains 0 songs. This appears to be protection against 3rd party applications writing out their own databases. We haven't found out how to generate our own valid hashes (but we do know the hash includes the database itself, and possibly the iPod serial number), and are looking for help."

Comments

Have you tried Corned Beef?

[2names]

I've heard this is the best way to make a good hash.

GAIM^WPidgin developers?

[morgan_greywolf]

They should talk to the GAIM^WPidgin developers. I've heard that they have a wee bit of experience in reverse-engineering hashes transmitted over a network.

Old ones

[aedan]

My old 5 gb iPod just jumped in value.

Not that I'd sell it.

Re:Old ones

[brian1078]

here, let me take care of that with this firmware update.

But but but...

[Markvs]

I thought Apple had embraced open source

Re:But but but...

[cmowire]

In order to not get in trouble with shareholders, the CEO is usually obligated to sell his own mother to slavery if it will make sufficient impact to the bottom line.

Re:But but but...

[sayfawa]

And despite this, you'll still get told how good Apple is for open source in a few days in the next OSX vs Linux flame war.

Anyway, this just makes it easier to say no to them IMO. I was already pissed off enough that my 2nd gen Nano couldn't load Rockbox, but now this.

In TFA they make it clear they are going to try to get around this, and they probably will, but part of me just wants to say why bother? Fuck Apple. They don't want my money, good, they won't get it.

Re:But but but...

[arth1]

I never understood why the iPod became so immensely popular compared to other personal players in the first place. It locks you down to using iTunes, makes it difficult to use multiple machines or move music around, doesn't have particularly high sound quality, and doesn't support a lot of music formats. I see a crowd mentality at work here -- people buy and then vigorously defend having bought an iPod, not because it's better than the competition, but because it's what your friends have. Individuality is fine, as long as it's the exact same individuality as all your friends!

Granted, I see some advantages to the bigger iPods -- lots of storage is a good thing, and halfway decent battery life likewise. But the smaller ones? Just because it's branded "Apple"?

Re:But but but...

[betterunixthanunix]

Careful! The last time I even suggested that Apple was not an open source friendly company here on Slashdot, I was modded down as "flamebait." Of course, I also reminded everyone that Apple's developers did not invent the mouse, object oriented programming, the GUI, and that those developers were also not capable of producing a preemptive scheduler, and the presence of those features in OS X represents Apple's team simply borrowing ideas from other people without contributing anything back.

Re:But but but...

[thePowerOfGrayskull]

Usability and simplicity. I've had three other music players, some of them having received very good reviews (cowon products). But I used my wife's iPod, and it is simply a better, more user-friendly experience. I was disappointed to go back to my old player; and will very likely be replacing it with an ipod when it dies.

Itunes is another reason for the casual user. They don't care about formats. Most of them can't tell the difference in quality. They don't need to transfer it to a million different locations. They know they can hear a song they like, and own it, and enjoy it -- relatively cheaply, and without any headache or hassle. I'm not a fan of it for the reasons you mentioned, but the vast majority of the paying public doesn't really care about those issues. Most aren't even aware of them.

Re:But but but...

[hiryuu]

I see a crowd mentality at work here -- people buy and then vigorously defend having bought an iPod, not because it's better than the competition, but because it's what your friends have.

While I can't argue that many people may have done that, I went from swimming upstream to something that was designed to work with what I had. I had a Rio Karma from a few years back, specifically for the Ogg Vorbis support, but once I made the transition from Windows to Mac, I found that I was swimming upstream in my insistence on using this device. Still, I persisted until the hard drive died, and once the time came to buy another device - well, since I already had and really liked my iBook, I decided to go along with the design flow and picked up an iPod Nano. I wish I hadn't had to re-rip my collection, but I've been very happy with the aesthetics and the usability, given that I use a digital audio player specifically for working out, running/biking, or long drives.

A number of people will complain about iTunes and how it manages files and playlists - and I agree that it doesn't do things the way I want, the way I'd done them before. It is very easy to use, but does some things I don't like and doesn't present the flexibility or power in use. Do you know what I discovered after a short while? I didn't care - it did a good enough job, and it wasn't worth the effort of micro-managing my playlists in painstaking detail the way I'd done before.

Re:But but but...

[LordSnooty]

Yes, casual users don't care for the technical details, so they want something usable and stylish. The fact that many of their friends have one too probably doesn't go amiss, since they'll no doubt need help with it or itunes now and again, and want to be confident that they own a machine that must be good because everyone else has one. Usability and marketing were the two edges that pushed the ipod ahead. Having said that there are many equally usable devices out there, but it's no coincidence that the ipod was and still is the most heavily marketed portable media player.

Re:But but but...

[xrayspx]

Well, until very recently (this article), they DIDN'T lock you down to using iTunes. Amarok worked very, very well with my iPod, in fact, I loathe iTunes in comparison. Apple won't let you copy music from your ipod with itunes, Amarok allows this, case closed.

I hate this decision, and see no benefit to Apple from it except to "drive eyeballs" to iTunes, which is horrible, and thus ITMS. So between that and making the recording industry feel more comfortable, since they just broke all the third party apps to let people copy THEIR OWN MUSIC off of their iPod, I'd say it's "Lose/Lose" to the users.

Still happy I bought my Mac, still like my iPod, probably will skip a new one if this doesn't get fixed. What other players allow music to be Scrobbled when you plug them into your machine, and what apps support these properly? Amarok? I hope?

Re:But but but...

[notthe9]

I really don't see how this improves the bottom line. Does it hurt Apple for people to be using something other than their media player (which is free to obtain) to put songs on their iPod?

I know it is suggested that this is to thwart syncing with third-party apps, but it seems like that's a pointless effort. I have been known not to understand stuff, though.

Re:But but but...

[ajs]

Apple's trying to freeze out not only Linux, but any other player which tries to write to the iPod. Exactly. What they want to avoid is having to compete on the iPod-manager software front. They don't give a rat's whiskers about the Linux tools, but if Microsoft puts out their own tool that syncs the iPod up to the Zune Website and ships it with their OS... there goes Apple's user lock-in.

On the one hand, I empathize with wanting control of the platform. On the other, I just can't work up any sympathy for them. They're certainly going to fail in the long-term, unless the invoke the DMCA... a move which would alienate them with the rip/burn crowd they've courted over the last many years, but might make them friends with the networks that they've lost.

Re:But but but...

[macshit]

I call BS on the usability arguement, sorry. My Creative Zen Nano is just as easy to use as my daughter's iPod if not easier. The only reason iPods sell as well as they do is name and hype.

Maybe (hopefully) things are different these days, but the last time I looked at mp3 players (a year or two ago), it was pretty obvious why the ipod was so popular: all the models from other companies were (1) really ugly, (2) kind of flimsy feeling (apple used aluminum, others used painted plastic, usually with tacky chrome-looking plastic accents), (3) had awful UIs (hard to press and badly placed buttons etc), and (this is the part that amazes me), (4) more expensive than the ipod for the same amount of storage.

It was really kind of surreal, like the other manufacturers were living in some sort of dreamland where they had no competition and people would buy any old junk they released as long as it had the string "mp3" in its name...

How many days until someone develops a work around

[Traegorn]

Because I expect the Linux community to have one on my desk by Monday. Companies drive me crazy when they do this, I mean punishing someone whose a potential consumer of your product makes so much sense... yeesh. It's not like they're trying to hack the iTunes DRM - they just want to use a legitimate product they've purchased...

Inevitable comment

[interiot]

I heard cannabis brownies were the way to go.

Re:Inevitable comment

[protolith]

Mix the beef with the cannibis oils and get Corned Beef Hashish!

I don't know if I should smoke it or serve it up with eggs.

Re:So I guess...

[Thrip]

You got it exactly backwards. Apple just gave a lot of people much more incentive to install a new OS on their iPod. (Including Windows users who don't like iTunes -- not just Linux users.)

Question

[s.bots]

Does this also mean that new iPods will only work with iTunes and not with superior media management apps?

Danger, Will Robinson! DMCA Alert

[querist]

First, I applaud your determination to uphold the implied freedom to do what one will (within reason, of course) with something that someone owns.

However, if you are in the USA you are running the risk of Apple invoking the DMCA.

I hope they don't. I hope you succeed. I firmly believe from a technical standpoint it can be done. My concern is the legal ramifications.

Re:Danger, Will Robinson! DMCA Alert

[Dusty00]

I doubt that the DMCA will be an issue. Though it's been preverted, the technology retarded politicians they convinced to pass the DMCA are under the impression the circumvention clause was really about preventing piracy. Attempts to use the DMCA as to control a market have been shot down before in court (Lexmark Int'l v. Static Control Components, Chamberlain v. Skylink).

*sniff*

[target562]

Application is using a non-public interface to access functionality... Vendor changes said non-public interface... Community is SHOCKED! WTF?

design now defective

[Anonymous Coward]

so .. tell me again why I should buy an ipod? because its the hippest device on earth?

Rockbox

[AlexCorn]

Just use Rockbox then. It's an open-source firmware replacement. Though it may not run on the newest generation of iPods yet... http://rockbox.org/

Re:Rockbox

[pithen]

Uhh, RockBox doesn't need iTunes since it doesn't use the database. Rather it reads the files directly from the FAT filesystem.

Re:Rockbox

[makomk]

Not only does Rockbox not run on the newest generation of iPods, it probably never will, because the firmware is now encrypted (and possibly signed as well, but no-one knows for sure yet). This means that it isn't a solution of any of the iPods affected by this issue. The index file changes aren't the only thing Apple has done to lock them down.

I hate iTunes

[wonkavader]

I just hate iTunes. I know other people like it, but it seems to me that non-tech people find iTunes easy, and tech folks don't. As a tech guy, iTunes drives me insane. It doesn't do what I want, doesn't do things my way, does things I don't expect, etc.

Re:I hate iTunes

[caerwyn]

I dunno about that. I'm a tech guy and I like iTunes- but then, the three computers on my desk here are a mac and two windows/linux dual boot machines.

The trick is to let the software do its job without micromanaging it. Focus on what you want to get done rather than the detailed steps of how to get there, and you'll find that it does actually end up being easier and faster.

(Actually, that's generally the problem with open source UIs, I've found. Sure, they provide every possible way to customize every detailed step of the process... but all I want to do is accomplish X! If I want to break things down into algorithmic steps and tweak the parameters of those steps, well, that's what programming is and I do that enough in my job and my side projects. Applications should just work, they shouldn't need to be programmed.)

Re:I hate iTunes

[Mr. Underbridge]

I just hate iTunes. I know other people like it, but it seems to me that non-tech people find iTunes easy, and tech folks don't. As a tech guy, iTunes drives me insane. It doesn't do what I want, doesn't do things my way, does things I don't expect, etc.

I think much of it is a control issue. Techies tend to be control freaks. We also grew up with Winamp (or similar), and are used to devising our own directory structure for our music collection, expecting to have iTunes use our file management schemas. When I first started using it, I got confused. Where the hell are my music files? Why is it recopying what I just put over there? Why won't it let me play these files?

After a day of this, I just said 'screw it' and let iTunes put shit where it wants to, and I decided it does a good job. That's the difference in perception - iTunes is a good system to get music from various sources and never have to worry about the notion that music is contained in 'files.' If you try to buck the system, you and iTunes will hate each other.

Re:I hate iTunes

[caerwyn]

This is a symptom of exactly what I was talking about.

Why do you want your music files organized a certain way? The point of iTunes and such software is that you shouldn't need to care how it's organized- you should be able to focus on the task you *actually* want to accomplish: 1) Find specific music. 2) Play said music. 3) Put a subset of your music on an mp3 player. 4) Burn cds of subsets of your music.

Having to organize files is a problem, not part of a solution to a problem- you should simply be able to perform the above tasks without needing to worry about the details. That's the philosophy of software design with systems like iTunes.

That's one of the things that has really pushed me away from Linux and toward MacOS X for everyday usage over the past years- the focus on actually getting something done rather than worrying about the stuff that I have to do first in order to subsequently get something done.

Re:I hate iTunes

[EdBear69]

I agree completely with your point about not messing with file management.

I started using iTunes on Windows as jukebox software while working at Microsoft. Previous to that, I'd been using Winamp while at work to listen to the 80Gigs or so of music that I had on my work computer.

Here's why I switched:

First, my listening preference at the time was what I like to call 'Gong Show Radio', where Winamp would run in random mode on a playlist of all my music. If a song came up that I didn't like or wasn't in the mood for, I'd click next. The hassle with using Winamp was that I had to remake my 'everything' list whenever I added music to my collection. I had to use a ripping program to rip my cds, then put them logically in my file system, then add them to my Winamp playlist. ITunes does all that itself. In fact, when adding several discs at once to my collection, there's a setting that allows me to have a cd ripped on insertion, then eject when done. That meant I could rip my music on my computer without even thinking about it, just swap cds when I noticed the drive tray open.

Next, making playlists in iTunes is drag-and-drop. Making playlists in winamp was a PITA.

I don't burn cds of my music very often, but when I have, I've appreciated the simplicity of iTunes. It's even easier than Nero to put together a disc the way you want. You want mp3 disc? data disc? AIFF disc? Time gap between tracks? no problem.

Some people here have complained that iTunes wants to organize their files in a different way than they would do it themselves. I have never found this to be a problem, because regardless of how the songs are stored on the HD, the interface for accessing them in iTunes is the same. And unlike Winamp*, I'm able to view and sort my music based on album, artist, genre, song title, or whatever other data column I care to.

The only bitch I have about iTunes is that it wouldn't help me put music onto my 20GB Zen mp3 player. The device came with its own proprietary software that was kludgy to use, and after a month or so, I stopped updating my mp3 player, and a year later got an iPod. Updating songs on it from iTunes is insanely easy, my only bitch is that it takes so long to sync. Since then, my zen has just been collecting dust. (please note that I did not purchase either mp3 player, both were gifts.)

Again, these are the reasons I switched to iTunes as a digital jukebox. There are other perquisites that have been released in iTunes updates since then, like automatically downloading podcasts, video support, and netradio. I don't know of any other product that is as easy to use that has as much functionality. Please advise if you know of any.

*Please note that my switch occurred around 4 years ago, and Winamp may have changed since then. The features and faults I describe may be out-of-date, but I don't really care as I have software that works great and I haven't looked back. I still have an open mind, but I haven't heard anyone screaming about how $foo software makes a much better jukebox than iTunes, and at this point the software would have to be significantly better to make me switch.

Re:I hate iTunes

[John Whitley]

I call BS. I wrote a rb-appscript tool to sync a master iTunes library (mostly ALAC) to a transcoded (AAC + other) iTunes library, and every last bit of ID3-style metadata was preserved in the files for an entire ~600 album collection. A few dimensions are stored only in the iTunes DB, the user/library specific stuff such as play count, rating, etc.

Note that the aforementioned tool works only by using Applescript to make iTunes transcode files, then transfers those files to the secondary library's directories -- there's no attempt to transfer data directly between the iTunes Library database files. The secondary iTunes picks up everything just fine from only the file-stored metadata.

The possible exception to this may be album art downloaded from iTunes (as opposed to that originally embedded in tracks and/or manually acquired using something like the AmazonArt widget, web search, etc.). Haven't really experimented in this area much yet...

Could Apple be sued over this?

[MichaelCrawford]

I remember a while back Apple got a lot of criticism from the European Community because the iTMS DRM didn't work on competing players - that's probably one reason Jobs pressed the record labels to let him offer DRM-free music.

I'd like to see some legal type make the case that Apple has a monopoly on portable music players, and that this is an illegally anticompetitive action.

Re:Could Apple be sued over this?

[MBCook]

It's not like they sold you an iPod saying it would work with Linux and then removed it. You could sue over that. People have (the famous Intellivision keyboard for example). You bought a product for a non-supported use and are complaining that it's not working in a non-supported configuration. They didn't take Linux support away because they never gave it to you in the first place. You were using a hack, and you will in a few weeks when someone figures this out.

Re:I've never understood the desire to use an Ipod

[Logger]

Agreed. Isn't the allure of an iPod the entire integrated experience, iPod/iTunes/iTMS? iTunes is the very heart of that, so if you don't want to use iTunes, why would you use an iPod?

Apple increasingly hostile to Linux users

[Pausanias]

Apple is hostile to Linux, because it is beginning to compete with OS X in a much more serious way than Windows.

It all started last year when with the release of iTunes 7, Apple purposely broke DAAP, ending the compatibility of their iTunes software with various media players. Now rhythmbox/amaroK/banshee users can't listen to iTunes shares, and no one has yet been able to break the hash that would allow it.

So it comes as no surprise that the iPod is being further locked down. The closer our desktops get in usability to OS X (and they are not close yet, but making progress), the more of this we'll see.

Disclaimer: I use an OS X desktop and a Linux laptop.

Re:Apple increasingly hostile to Linux users

[Pausanias]

Price was no object. The main reason I went for a linux laptop was simple---pixel density. I work with very large images, and the more pixels I can see at a time, in better. Even back in 2001, you could buy a cheap 14" Dell with 1440x1050 resolution (128 pixels/linear inch). By contrast, in 2007 you cannot buy a 15.4" inch MacBook pro with similar pixel density. The best Apple can do is 1440x900, which comes to a crappy 110 pixels/linear inch. Simply put, the pixels on a MacBook/MacBook Pro are just way too big.

My current laptop is a Dell Precision M70 (top of the line in 2004) with a screaming graphics card (NVidia Quadro FX 1400 Go). It runs Ubuntu. Since it's a Pentium M, I can undervolt it in linux and it runs fairly cool. Wireless, everything works out of the box (though WPA didn't work until the most recent version of Ubuntu, 7.04). I love it.

For things like iPhoto/iMovie/iDVD, you can't beat a mac---I still go back for those. But I'm starting to get sick of this iTunes nonsense, and if there were suitable linux alternatives to iLife (which there aren't, no matter how much we'd like to think so), I would completely ditch OS X.

Worst product launch in a long time

[ahbi]

What is going on with Apple?
Let us count how bad this product launch is:
1) 33% price cut for the iPhone, which threw early adopters in a fit, and then the $100 "rebate".
2) iPod touch is crippled. The Bluetooth is physically there (supposedly) but not enabled. No editing calender appointments. No Notes app or the other apps from iPhone. Screen issues with the contrast & blackness versus the iPhone.
3) iPod Classic, slower less responsive UI. Old Video accessories don't work with the iClassic.
4) iPod Nano, the FatPod. Same slower UI as the Classic. No memory increase.

Seriously, in 10 days Apple seems to have found a way to piss everyone off. Now they go after the Linux community. How badly have they bungled this product launch?

1) As a non-iPhone owner or wanter, the brew-ha-ha over the $200 price cut irritates me not because of the price cut but the reaction is such that you better believe Apple won't ever make similar price cuts in the future.
Plus you know a 16GB iPhone will come out as soon as the iPhone is released in Europe.

2) Once again, the iTouch will be jailbreaked and the iPhone apps ported to the iTouch, but this type of needless product differentiation crippling cause bad will. And, this hacking may break whenever Apple releases a firmware update. For example, the Linux lock-out of this story.
Apple could have just given people the product they want in the first place. As the screams of people have shown, there is a market for a phoneless iPhone.
The screen issues are unfixable but possibly explained by manufacturing variables.

3) The iClassic is the least changed and therefore least disliked of the new products. The software (DRM) incompatibility with video accessories is unnecessary.

4) Now the FatPod is merely ugly. It is a shame about the less responsive UI. And really it was time to bump up the storage to 16gb. One wonders if the storage was capped at 8Gb in an attempt to differentiate this versus the iTouch. After all if they are needlessly crippling the iTouch why not nerf the FatPod?

Is it just hurbis that has gotten Apple's head so far up its ass, or is this just a cyclical Apple implosion? If the latter, we are in for a few more years of Apple stupidity before they re-emerge with some new wonder product.

only a big deal for ITMS

[Floritard]

If you're using only Linux, then you're not using iTunes, and unless you have a some separate access to a computer with iTunes you're not using ITMS. So why use the proprietary database format of iTunes at all? Just use rockbox and treat your iPod like what it is, a mass storage device. Easier manage your files that way anyway. Headline really should read Apple Cuts Off ITMS From Potential Users.

Re:only a big deal for ITMS

[ben kohler]

Rockbox, last I checked, had a fraction the battery life of the ipod os, and was also not very responsive of an interface. Are you saying its better now? i don't have an ipod, but i do follow rockbox development. from the changelog, august 6:

Reduced battery consumption on PP5002 targets (iPod 1st/2nd gen and 3rd gen). Now rockbox battery runtime is better than OF, verified on 2nd gen :-) OF = original firmware, of course. so apparently, yes it is better now! maybe time to give it another try =)

Re:only a big deal for ITMS

[AusIV]

Just use rockbox and treat your iPod like what it is, a mass storage device.

There are a number of reasons not to use Rockbox. First, it's not yet supported on the new line of iPods, so it's not even an option. Next, rockbox has horrible battery life relative to the iPod firmware. Then there's the interface to consider: I never really could figure out how to find songs or playlists in the rockbox interface. Lastly, the main reason I see to use an iPod is the vast array of addons that are available for the iPod. I have an adapter in my car radio that lets me plug in my iPod and control it with the head unit - don't think you can use that with Rockbox.

That said, I'm still completely content with my old grayscale iPod, which works quite well with Amarok. I've no intentions of "upgrading" until it has completely died. Once that happens, I'll consider another iPod if they're working with Linux again, otherwise Apple has lost a semi-content customer.

Re:How many days until someone develops a work aro

[99BottlesOfBeerInMyF]

Companies drive me crazy when they do this, I mean punishing someone whose a potential consumer of your product makes so much sense... yeesh.

The thing you're missing is that Apple executives did not sit down and decide to make things hard for Linux users. Probably they sat down and looked for a way to stop MS from making WMP work with the iPod, since, MS uses similar lock in strategies against them in other markets every day. They were probably considering Sony and maybe Real. They may or may not have considered Linux at all and if they did they probably decided there were so few Linux users that the impact would not be as bad as letting MS leverage their monopolies to push Apple out of markets while not taking every effort to leverage their own near monopoly.

Normally I'd object pretty strongly to any sort of enforced tie ins like this, but when competing against MS and while it is clear the Justice department will do nothing to stop their abuses, Apple and all other companies competing with them are in a very bad spot. Two wrongs don't make a right, but anything that stops MS from becoming the sole gatekeeper for DRM and all media within the next decade sounds like something we really, really need. And make no mistake, if not for Apple's iPod and Apple leveraging it, WMP would be the format for almost all legal music on the internet and MS would be taking a cut of it and preparing to stop said music from playing on Linux and other OS's altogether

Also, I don't own an iPod and am pretty sure there will be a work around in short order.

Re:So I guess...

[Leftist Troll]

That is, assuming this isn't defeated.

Hop along to freenode #gtkpod if you have some serious technical expertise in this kind of thing and are able to obtain a new iPod Classic or Nano.

Re:Oh boy

[cens0r]

I know that the article says this affects Rockbox, but I'm unsure as to how? Rockbox replaces the iPod software with new software. It replaces the iPod song database with its own. The hash should be meaningless to it. Of course, Rockbox doesn't yet run on the new iPods, so the point is moot right now.

MediaMonkey Is Much Better

[rebmemeR]

iTunes sucks. I have an iPod 160 and my library has 11,000 songs (and there are folks out there with 50,000+). I'm on Windows XP SP2 on a fast box with 2GB memory and USB 2.0. iTunes is entirely unscalable. It is very slow to do anything with my library, even with manual sync. Adding one song to the iPod is a 5-minute process. File transfer speed is not the problem. For sure iTunes wastes time doing unnecessary work. Ejecting the iPod alone takes over a minute. Also, the iTunes MP3 player is buggy. It has trouble with MP3/VBR and generates clicking in the audio output. MediaMonkey is a much better content organizer. It is very fast. But the Apple's file format change on the iPod Classic means the current version of MM can't handle the iPod filesystem. I hope the MM developers will have the problem solved soon.

How amusing

[div_2n]

I just emailed Apple a few days ago asking for a Linux version of iTunes. No wonder I didn't hear back from them.

Re:How many days until someone develops a work aro

[Arabani]

Putting in cryptographic hashes isn't just "breaking the interface". It's called locking down the entire bloody thing and making life miserable for anybody trying to reverse engineer it.

Granted, Apple is well within its rights to do such a thing, but it's bad PR. People are starting to warm up to the idea that once you buy something, you should be able to use it however you like (since you BOUGHT it). Apple has no obligation to support 3rd party software, but neither are they obligated to break 3rd party software. Without any other explanation, it looks like it was a deliberate attempt to lock out non-Apple software. And that's why people are upset - it's the same reason DRM riles so many people.

Re:How many days until someone develops a work aro

[Dread Pirate Skippy]

This revolutionary new tool allows any audio device with a 3.5mm stereo output jack to dock with any other audio device with a 3.5mm stereo input jack.

Missed the point

[laird]

This move isn't about blocking Linux iPod users - it's broader than that - it blocks all third-party applications from putting music onto the iPod. The fact that some of those applications run on Linux is probably irrelevant to Apple, because Linux users who don't also have a PC or Mac are probably a very small percentage of Apple's potential sales.

So, why would Apple want to block third-party apps from writing to iPods? Let's speculate:

- Apple might be getting customer support calls from people who corrupt their iPod databases. So by blocking third-party apps, Apple is reducing support costs.
- Apple is about to make major changes to iTunes, and to the iPod database format, and needs to keep third-party apps from corrupting the new databases.
- Apple wants to be the only way that music gets on iPods for some business reason.

Re:Linux Schminux

[hypnagogue]

Even Microsoft doesn't have the balls to be so obviously hostile.

So the Vista-lockout is less obviously hostile? I disagree. Microsoft is the real trailblazer when it comes to obvious hostility toward their customers. Followed closely behind by the RIAA, MPAA and Sony. This little iPod interop issue is pretty minor by comparison.

Because they made it cool

[Sycraft-fu]

MP3 players were out long before the iPod ever came around, but nobody really cared. To the extent that people did listen to music, they'd just keep doing it on a walk/discman or the like. An MP3 player was just a new gadget that only some cared about. Well, Apple changed that, they sold the style, they made it cool. It became a fashion accessory. Sorority girls started to carry them not even because they cared about listening to music, but because it was fashionable to do so.

Apple convinced everyone that a music player was something you needed to have, and their's was the stylish one to get. As such, they managed to grab the majority of the market.

Well, once you've got something like that going, inertia will carry you a long way. People don't like change, once they get something that works for them they don't change it without reason. As such you get people sold on iPods and when they need a new player, they just go and get another one, they don't really look at alternates. It works for them, why change?

Finally you should know that individuality isn't something most hold in a high regard. Even most of the "non-conformist" types simply work real hard to conform with their given non-conformist group. It's rare to find people who simply don't give a shit and do their own thing regardless of society.

Re:Oh boy

[TrekkieGod]

I know that the article says this affects Rockbox, but I'm unsure as to how? Rockbox replaces the iPod software with new software. It replaces the iPod song database with its own. The hash should be meaningless to it. Of course, Rockbox doesn't yet run on the new iPods, so the point is moot right now.

Encrypting of the database shouldn't directly affect rockbox, but they've been encrypting the firmware too, and the hardware will not run unencrypted firmware. It's not only the extremely new iPods that rockbox won't run on. I got a 2nd gen nano for free that I would love to install rockbox on, but the encryption thing appears to be one of the reasons they don't have a version for it yet.

So it's not that the encryption of the database directly prevents rockbox. The encryption of the database prevents users from using Linux with the Apple firmware, and since they've been encrypting the firmware for a while, installing rockbox isn't likely to be an option anytime soon.

Re:My wife was given an Ipod for Christmas..

[Anonymous Coward]

.trl

It is a proprietary format for encoding troll posts.

Re:How many days until someone develops a work aro

[Blakey Rat]

Two points:

1) You're assuming that this change is intended purely to alienate Linux users. This change was probably made for some other reason, and alienating Linux users was a (possibly unintended) side-effect of it.

2) The iPod never claimed to carry any sort of support for Linux whatsoever. It seems to me that if you wanted to support Linux, you'd buy a product that actually supports Linux instead of one that doesn't-- and then complaining when the hack you're using to get it to work no longer works!

Re:So I guess...

[omeomi]

Eh, this is just one more reason why I went with a non-Apple mp3 player...it plays all of the music and podcasts I want it to, and I'm not locked into using iTunes. I can't listen to the DRM'd iTMS tracks, but who cares, it's not like I can't buy and rip CDs...

modded down by the iPod fanboys in 3...2...1...

Re:So I guess...

[The Great Pretender]

I can't believe Microsoft did this! What a bunch of evil, coporate money grubbers. M$ will use every trick in the book to make sure they protect their systems and force people into drinking the Kool-Aid. What a bunch of...what? Apple? Oh! Good for Apple protecting their rights and systems. Damn Linux pirates should respect the fact that the iPOD is Apples proprietry knowledge. I can't believe that Linux users thought they could get away with it...

Encrypted firmware prevents Linux on the new iPods

[traindirector]

Apple just gave a lot of people much more incentive to install a new OS on their iPod.

They've also made it currently impossible to use alternate OSes on the iPod by encrypting the firmware on the 2nd gen Nano and all subsequent iPods, which is a much more difficult obstacle to overcome. I'm surprised there isn't as much of an uproar about this on Slashdot.

Re:The obvious answer...

[alienw]

I doubt that is the case. The file is not encrypted; it's just signed with a hash. You can still get the files off of the thing, and you can find out what they are from the database, which is still readable. It's just impossible to modify the iTunesDB with third-party software now (at least until this gets cracked, which shouldn't take more than a couple of weeks). I'm guessing the reason is either for database integrity, or as some part of FairPlay (maybe to keep people from copying DRMed content between iPods).

Re:Slashdot confirms it: the iPod is dying.

[GPL Apostate]

..and gained about a hundred in the time it took you to post this.

There's a sucker born every minute.

Re:Encrypted firmware prevents Linux on the new iP

[E IS mC(Square)]

*time to lose some karma* >>I'm surprised there isn't as much of an uproar about this on Slashdot.

I am not. When it comes to Apple, the fanatics will gang up on anybody complaining even a slight bit about Apple. They don't see the irony that Apple has become Microsoft of the DAP market. Force is very strong on them.

The iPod is made of weird.

[argent]

I thought the iPod worked like any other USB drive - I don't need iTunes to put music on my thumb drive, I just mount it on the file system and transfer the files.

No, the iPod doesn't work this way. It keeps the files in a special part of the file system and even if you put the files there it needs special tools to make it work.

I don't understand why anyone using Linux would bother with an iPod. I found it a horribly frustrating MP3 player because of the annoying user interface and daft click wheel... AND it costs more! Why bother with it?

Re:So I guess...

[fratermus]

iPods are highly overrated, and irritatingly restrictive. I have a sandisk sansa express (3gb after adding in the microSD) and the wife has a creative zen stone 3gb. Both were cheap and show up as USB drives on our respective Debian Linux 2.6.x boxen.

Re:So I guess...

[PachmanP]

Why not "Apple just gave a lot of people much more incentive to buy something besides an ipod!?
Maybe one that just shows up as a removable drive or is media player independent or doesn't demand you use window or OSX.

Re:Encrypted firmware prevents Linux on the new iP

[numbski]

This is just bizarre. I bought an iPhone 2 days ago. In 1 hour, I had it jailbroken, youtube fix run, unlocked, had a full bsd subsystem installed, and openssh running. I have full access to the filesystem, and I am, as I type this, setting up the toolchain to compile even more applications for it.

The iphone dev team at iphone dev wiki are due most of the credit, but the fact remains that this iPhone is very hackable, and is looking to be my favorite mobile device. Now they're trying to encrypt the crap out of everthing. :(

Go fig.

Re:So I guess...

[Anonymous Coward]

To All:

http://www.apple.com/feedback/ipod.html

You know what to do. Complaining to the source is sometimes better than complaining to other people with the same opinions.

Re:So I guess...

[nicolastheadept]

Install rockbox on an iPod, as that supports vorbis.

Easily fixed.

[berkus]

Worry not, friend! Apple will fix this bug in the next iPhone revision.

A gated suburban hell

[Shihar]

I have a better idea. How about you just stop buying Apple products? These days, I would take MS over Apple any day of the week. Even better, I can pick neither one of them and rest easy at night. Going to the Apple world is like entering someone's personal fiefdom. Sure, Apple might not control the entire market, but once you step into the Apple world they control just about every single aspect of that world. If you want a single company in control of all of your electronics, go with Apple and get your iBook, iPhone, iTunes, and iPod. Your products will certainly play nice with each other, even if they don't play nice with anyone else. If nothing else, you will easily fall into the shiny white plastic aesthetic of Apple and find that Apple marketers will work tirelessly to make you feel cool for doing it. That said, I feel that I can survive without a team of marketers making sure that my gadgets make me feel cool.

I'll take the chaos and diversity of the city over Apple's quiet little aesthetically pleasing, shiny white, gated suburban community.