6th Gen iPods won't work with Linux, Winamp

It is an astounding misconception that programs that run on Linux must be open source. Closed source applications for Linux/Unix are commonplace and it is entirely possible to produce a completely closed-source iTunes for Linux, if that is what Apple wanted to do. I doubt they do, but it's not for the reason you suggest.

Ya But Unlike Windows And Even More OS X Tiger
both are closed os's which are depneds on the os extremly hard to hack (windows i do with my eyes closed but os x is not easy at all).
the reason they don't want to make a version for linux or unix is because then itunes will have to be open scource to work, and i don't think they want us devs looking at their code

"Linux is a platform for people who don't like to pay for things, so Apple's probably not losing anything from locking out Linux-- "

iTunes is available free of charge, whether you use Mac or Windows. Linux users pay (money) for many things that users of other OSes do - cpus, hard-drives, RAM, digital music, bandwidth, even software, etc. And iPods too. There is no such thing as free beer.

In any case, this was never an "anti-Open Source" thing. Apple's intention isn't really "locking out Linux", that's just a side effect which they may or may not care about - their real purpose is to lock out any non-Apple music management suite, open source or not, whether it is run on Mac, Windows, Linux or whatever, to make it less convenient to purchase music from anyone but Apple's iTunes store. They've already won the battle for the media player market, now they want to control access to content. They can't very well [i]force[/i] us to buy music from iTunes for our iPods (the implications of Microsoft's legal troubles do not escape them), but like the browser debacles of the past, they can ensure that iTunes is the most convenient method to do so. Certainly, a good first step is to ensure that iTunes, and not gtkpod or WinAmp is the only method of adding music to an iPod (as well as tripping up the iPod firmware alternatives like RockBox and iPodLinux).

On the bright side, the gtkpod team has already cracked the hash and Gen 6 iPods have already been made to work with gtkpod (albeit with some difficulty and the need to manually tinker with the iPod every time a change to it's database is made) - it's only a matter of time before this discovery will be integrated into future gtkpod releases and we'll all forget that our iPods didn't work with our Linux machines.

As for myself only, I think some of the mad scramble for "new" technology gets a bit goofy. I have a massive pre-DRM CD collection that plays on my Discman and my new Intel Mac, and just about anywhere else. I can't imagine that an iPod beats that in any respect except volume of space taken up, and it's no issue for me. I'm no Apple fanboy, but I've advocated them over Microsoft for years. Sadly, it appears they're going the same direction. But then, that's the new paradigm, I suppose.

You gotta love the hypocrisy in the comments. :-)

Whole articles on Microsoft not fully supporting features on their Mac versions that have existed forever on Windows versions get printed. Complaints about Windows games that take forever, if ever, to port to Mac dot the comments sections on TUAW. The games isles for Windows are long and well-stocked whereas the Mac games, if a store even bothers to support it, are often contained in one tiny section. There is always an undertone of dismay about Mac users being ignored or treated as an afterthought by hardware and software companies.

One comment about how Apple doesn't support Linux and we get such wonderful nuggets as:

"Linux is a platform for people who don't like to pay for things, so Apple's probably not losing anything from locking out Linux"

and...

"...get a compatible OS and run iTunes."

If someone suggested you dump OSX for Windows if you want to be able to do something... this comment section would flame the guy who said it into oblivion. (and for good reason)

For the record, iTunes is free so even if Linux people "don't like to pay for things" (a falsehood) nobody else has to pay for iTunes so where's the beef there?! Apple makes little money on iTunes content but lots of money on iPods. Linux people like iPods (else there would be no gtkpod software to break) and buy them. So there *is* profit in Apple compiling iTunes for Linux.

It is my opinion that the hash key has only one purpose: to lock the hardware device (iPod, iPhone, etc) to Apple (iTunes). If you want to use the hardware, you have to connect to Apple's software and by extension their servers. Apple uses this to lead customers into a set of bundled products that make switching to another company difficult. In other words, your iPhone isn't the only thing they want to stick in a "jail".

This is what Verizon does with Fios, Cell phones, and VOIP telephone. Brighthouse cable does this too. AT&T is equally guilty. And yes, even Bill Gates does it.

Linux users will pay for hardware (probably more than Apple users do) and software. What they tend to not do is pay for products that are riddled with customer lock-in strategies. I'd buy a new iTouch if I could, but I won't buy INTO Apple's lock-in or Microsoft's lock-in (or both) just to use one. As a Linux user, I don't want things that are free as in beer, what I really want are things that are free as in out-of-jail.

iTunes is a means to keep customers as locked to Apple as the iTouch is locked to iTunes. If you don't care about that, cool, use it. But go in with your eyes open.

Oh, come on now... It's not as if the other MP3 players ever bothered to work on the Mac, so why should Apple be willing to play nice with the other music programs?

Mac has iPod, and Windows gets it out of the kindness of Apple's heart (and a desire to profit). Linux is a platform for people who don't like to pay for things, so Apple's probably not losing anything from locking out Linux-- It's not like those people were buying anything from the iTunes store, or would if they could. Same goes for the WinAmp people.

These fine alternative users can still pick up a dozen other players to connect to their weird OS and old-fashioned media player. Creative will be happy to have the business.

This, combined with the block on 3rd party cables, and not allowing the use of panther all have a "nickel and dime" feel to it that I really distaste. In fact (even though I use OSX) I will not be upgrading from my 5.5G ipod, and this weekend bought a remaining 5.5G for my son.

you need linux on your ipod to run cracked versions of the itunes store games. probably could be a reason to stop it? and i'm sure there are more

I was mad over MS for bundling Explorer with Windoze back then and I'm mad over Apple for barring third party software that copies to and from ipods. It seems they want their online store to appear on every screen as the first choice one has to look and buy tunes online.

But... I hate iTunes. On my G5 as well as on a clunky XP box I have on the side I use Ephpod and Anapod as I only want to copy my neatly organized in folders music to the mp3 player and not fuss with libraries etc. If I now wanted to get an iPod Touch I wouldn't have that option and would be bullied to use iTunes. No thank you, when the time comes to upgrade my mp3 player this will be a serious reason not to look at iPod Touch (unless it's cracked by then)

No one currently knows why, for sure, this was done. Speculating that this is 'consumer hostile' at this stage is rather premature. There's good technical reason to go with the database approach Apple has adopted because it makes management of the file system and metadata far easier. Seeking several thousand files someone stuffed into a single directry sucks and part of this scheme removes the need to even worry about that. Metadata is more up to the software adding files to support various tagging schemes and understand how to convert it to the iPod database. If tomorrow we're all using APEv2 tags in MP3 and Apple decides to support it, the iPod doesnt care -- it's iTunes' problem.

Now, something I know I've personally come across is sometimes the database has been corrupted by using third party apps where suddenly nothing is displaying properly (multiple entries, sometimes stuff is just 'gone'). This happened a long while ago, but I do recall it. For all anyone knows, this hash method is an integrity check and perhaps the newer iTunes software is capable of comparing hashes and restoring the datbaase as needed if this was a common enough issue. Cory Doctorow (ha!) outright said he *believes* it's not for integrity checking, but just stating something is so does not actually make it so. I've seen no one who owns one attempt to figure out why this was done.

Regardless, this scheme will be cracked, third party applications will be compliant with these changes and life will go on.