Apple kills Linux compatibility with new iPods

Perhaps an iTunes for Linux is in the works?

Of course Apple is locking Linux users out. Just as Safari is meant to go head-to-head with Firefox and Opera, both open source browsers, so too is preventing ipods from syncing with Linux PCs. Jobs has tipped his hand by not making anything Linux compatible. Apple's market share is slowly increasing and the increasing popularity of Ubuntu and surely other Gnome systems will dig into Apple's profits just a little because you don't need to buy a new computer when you install Ubuntu. Jobs and Gates are the same in one respect... They both hate open source.

Every time Apple snubs Linux, the irony just gets richer.

Eric M, you're too right.

This does suck, not that I use Linux (much). It seems pointless to cut off a segment of the market, albeit a small segment.

It is one more of a growing list of small mistakes that Apple has been making recently. It is a bit worrisome.

Or maybe this was one of the necessary steps to make sure their movie rental system "hackerproof". Apple has been getting all sorts of criticism about DRM and this was a way to plug another hole without alienating 99.9% of the market.

"We're betting Steve Jobs isn't that dumb, so we wonder if there might be some other advantage to adding security measures to the song database."

It's not stupidity -- it's arrogance. And he has shown himself to be that arrogant.

@wrt: Opera is not open-source. It's free, and supports open standards, but Opera Software absolutely does not share Opera's source code.

I like Linux. Much more than Windows. But being that MacOSX can run most of the same software with a simple recompile I switched. What prevents more people from doing so? What are your thoughts?

Is it possible this could be a new security feature they add to the ipod before blowing the doors wide open with DRM free music all over itunes?

@ojfl maybe that I already have a computer and I do not want to buy an Apple computer. Oh yeah and OSX86 has too much unsupported stuff on my pc so that is not an option either :P

@ojfl
I use Mac OS X, and I like it, but it feels like I'm using an OS designed for a two year old.

"We're betting Steve Jobs isn't that dumb"
I do believe he is; that or he's a bigger dick than the vice-president himself.

So I'm not ditching Windows any time soon.

The content of this article hits the nail right on the head. Apple sees their principle competitor in the future being Google. Can you say...gPhone!? Add to this the latest intel...that the gPhone will be Linux based, and voila!--there's the reason why linux is nixed for iTunes (or anything else they can figure out how to block. Based on Google's history, they'll develop a phone that is just as spiffy as the iPhone, costs less, and won't be used to leverage tying the buyer into using only what they want you to use. Viva la gPhone...now THIS is worth waiting for! I can't stop drooling and I'm praying for a Christmas release.

Maybe Steve Jobs isn't that dumb. But who said he was the one who made that decision?

Screw the Bitch steve jobs, I can no longer support apple, it is just another M$. The imac is the first and last apple product I am willing to buy. Linux is the only OS I will from now on only use.

I think the whole thing is silly. To be honest, as kind of an outsider and insider in a way (Meaning I don’t know a lot about one thing, but I know a few things about a lot of stuff.)

Companies and hackers are going to go round and round for more then likely… forever. Companies are convinced that they can stop hackers, and hackers (rightfully so… giving them the name Hackers) are going to continue to hack anything they come out with no matter what level of security they try to put on their products.

No matter what companies do, there is always going to be a “get around” or a hack, or something that gets software / hardware to do what you want.
(Examples: Every “I” device produced Including Iphone – Windows anything – Xbox any release – Macs any release.)

The thing is companies that produce interesting stuff like Windows or Apple have this frame of mind like “We’re gonna release this, and if anybody wants anything to do with it, they are going to have to use our software / hardware and that’s the bottom line. It’s our product and we will be the only ones that provide any service for them.”

And the fact of the matter is consumers think “Well its mine? Why can’t I do what I want with it?”

If a company really wants to have full control over a product they release then this is what they need to do.

Make something, prefect if, let people know about it, then don’t distribute it. Granted they aren’t gonna make any money off it, but at least that way it’ll be theirs and nobody can touch it.

apple will never win. it's impossible to cut everybody while everybody is trying to slice it's piece of a pie

look at the movie downloading market. apple is still working on a movie itunes department. and others already sell (http://www.coplace.com)or lease (http://www.netflix.com) movies succesfully

I simply feel that by locking down the database, third-party programs that can rip the songs off of one iPod can't function. They might not want people whom have friends with a rich music and video database to share there music. They want more money in iTunes music store, and, they would like to continue the iTunes monopoly. For instance, when I got mu iPod, the only thing I started using WMP and REAL (as well as Mplayer and a few others,) is specifically for movies and videos. Since all of my music is in iTunes because I own an iPod, there is rarely any need for me to use anything else.

But if your database has been figured out, plugins and whole other programs can be used for it. Another thing, Apple likes to bundle the Freeware version of quicktime with it to promote the commercial version of Quicktime.