How to Use Your iPod Under Linux 217
Jon writes "For those lucky readers who received an iPod for Christmas I've put up an article on LinuxLookup.com on how I got my iPod working under Linux. I've given a little overview on the different options available, and which one worked best for my needs. All in all, I'm extremely happy with the outcome. I can transfer my music, create playlists, and add all of my contacts. The only thing missing is a nice GUI."
iPod (Score:5, Funny)
Re:iPod (Score:1)
"All that is missing is a nice GUI" (Score:5, Funny)
No iPod (Score:2)
Re:No iPod (Score:1, Informative)
Been over this... (Score:5, Informative)
While it hasn't been updated since the 20gb units w/remote came out, it does allow for review of more elements than most buyers ever consider (also tips, links and related trivia).
Bottom line...FireWire is the only way to go (transfers and charging), and at 7 oz., an iPod will truly fit in your pocket. And yes, the new remote is backwards compatible...just be sure to update your iPod.
your site is way out of date (Score:5, Informative)
The Creative Nomad Zen is sleek and small, and supports both FireWire and USB, as well as recharging through USB.That alone makes it a much better choice for Linux users than the iPod. It also seems to have somewhat better battery life, and it supports recording.
your favorites are really "out there..." (Score:2)
From the Nomad site: "available soon"...how lame is that?
Besides, I love it when Nomad and Archos L-users whine
do your homework (Score:2)
The only thing that's lame is your excuses. The Nomad Zen and the entire Archos product line have been at our local electronics store for a while. And if you bothered to check PriceGrabber.COM or similar sites, you'd see that, while some companies are sold out due to Xmas, several still have them in stock. Reviews on Amazon.com go back to October 23.
Besides, I love it when Nomad and Archos L-users whine :)
And that's your excuse for putting out inaccurate and outdated information?
Re:Been over this... (Score:3, Insightful)
They have virtually identical practical transfer rates, so the additional capabilities of USB 2.0 go to waste - unless, I suppose, you find yourself doing huge amounts of simultaneous data transfer to multiple USB 2.0 devices on the same bus.
FireWire also sports two great benefits: more power (requires the 6-pin verion that is sadly not found on many smaller devices and x86 laptops) and no host-specific controller. People talk about putting Linux on a PDA and using USB to control devices from it, but until USB On-the-Go becomes pervasive, this cannot be a reality. On the other hand, Any FireWire device can communicate with any other.
FireWire is a more flexible standard, and with planned upgrades to 800 Mbps and higher, there's no shortage to it's possibilities.
If someone would just make a drive that doesn't use an IDE/FireWire bridge but actually has an on-drive FireWire interface, the benefits could be substantial.
*sigh*
As a note, you can get FireWire hard drives [westerndigital.com], , scanners, printers, and the [sonystyle.com] Kodak DCS Pro 14n [kodak.com] 14 megapixel camera will use FireWire
Re:Been over this... (Score:2)
Sorry for the mixup [sonystyle.com]
Re:Been over this... (Score:2)
As for chipsets, they aren't as available as USB, but there are a few of them out there. All of Shuttle's XPC line incldues FireWire. Almost everything Sony makes; nVidia's nForce chipsets support it. Two of the three South Bridges Sis offers have it. I can't say about AMD or Intel, as AMD's site is worthless and, strangely, I can't get intel.com to load.
Re:Been over this... USB 2.0 has a Purpose (Score:3, Interesting)
1. They offer another back up option. My networks have tapes but they also have this extra redundancy. Connect it to a plane jane windows box running 2000(any old box). And you can have it back up your entire network quickly and easily in the wee small hours. 80 gigs is a lot space and you can restore from it rather quickly, much quicker than a tape. Still keep the tapes but for an 80 gig back up that will run for about 3 years constantlym you can beat the price.
2. I have one that does in my tech back with 4 20 gig partitions, one is mp3's for me to listen to. One is just about every software tool imaginable. The third is ISOs of all the redhats, windows, solaris,office, you name it i got it. And the fourth I use to grab files with that need fixing.
I also carry an interface card with me. Because now I dont carry around all those cds. If I have to dump a lotta data, i just pop in the 2.0 card(if the machine doesnt have it) and I boogie.
USB 2.0 is fast enough for me, will be more widepread than firewire. And I have never had a problem with it.
Now my 'doctor' bad is just a Leatherman, this drive, and the adaptor card, and one cd with the drivers.
Firewire is great technology but Apple forced intels hand when the wanted to charge per installation per motherboad. They reneged but way after the fact. That is why it didnt take off so quick.
I have an ipod, and an ibook. And firewire is fast. But I gotta say when I can dump 10 gigs in hardly anytime. No messing with tapes(I still use em but this is quicker) if it fails I always have the tape.
My other USB 2.0 personal drive gets the same treatment as my clients. I leave the house for the night, it goes with me.
Puto
iPod again? (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:iPod again? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:iPod again? (Score:5, Informative)
The price/capacity is even worse for the IBM Microdrive, but I'd rather stick one of those in my camera than a 120GB WD1200JB
Re:Ebay (Score:2)
Re:iPod again? (Score:1, Funny)
I'm sure Apple buys all of their hard drives off of Ebay.
Re:iPod again? (Score:2)
slashdotted? (Score:2, Informative)
to a community that you can expect to hammer your server into oblivion?
Sigh.
Re:slashdotted? (Score:2)
Goodbye "Not Invented Here" days (Score:4, Insightful)
It's great for the industry and many others that Apple is slowly crawling out of the mindset that all of their products must work strictly with a Mac. Their move to Mac OS X would be contradictory to such a philosophy since *nix is a widely supported and tinkerable OS.
The iPod is mostly a glorified FireWire drive, so this software doesn't impress me as much as the relative enthusiasm of developers to make it work. Even if you don't use it, Mac OS X and the iPod is a nice catalyst for a drab, uninventive computer industry at the moment.
Re:Goodbye "Not Invented Here" days (Score:3, Insightful)
So.... just like the iPod then, which works on other platforms only due to 3rd parties reverse engineering parts of the on disk format?
It's great for the industry and many others that Apple is slowly crawling out of the mindset that all of their products must work strictly with a Mac
No it isn't. Otherwise why are Apple buying up app vendors (I don't recall the name of the product i'm thinking of, some graphics/music program), and scaring all the customers silly because they think Apple will make them Mac only?
Their move to Mac OS X would be contradictory to such a philosophy since *nix is a widely supported and tinkerable OS.
Except OS X isn't tinkerable at all. Practically all the code Apple has written is closed source, and the Mac parts of MacOS are generally only capable of doing things one way. Unlike every Linux and Windows, MacOS is still not capable of being themed by 3rd parties (unless you consider a grey version of the default a "theme").
Re:Goodbye "Not Invented Here" days (Score:5, Insightful)
Here [apple.com] is proof to the contrary. It took them a while, but Apple did release a Windows compatible iPod.
Even Dell [macworld.com] sells them [dell.com].
You must have missed the announcemnt a few months ago.
Anyway, the Mac version just uses HFS. There are 3rd party HFS readers for *nix and Windows. I don't know if they were reverse engineered or created from Apple specs.
Except OS X isn't tinkerable at all. Practically all the code Apple has written is closed source, and the Mac parts of MacOS are generally only capable of doing things one way.
If you ignore the fact that you can recompile the kernel and change most OS variables using XML plists and NetInfo, you are absolutely correct. If I ignore my need for oxygen I can breathe in space too.
Re:Goodbye "Not Invented Here" days (Score:2)
HFS is not what was reverese engineered, the on disk catalog format was not documented. You can't just add an MP3 to the iPod disk, you have to update the database as well.
If you ignore the fact that you can recompile the kernel and change most OS variables using XML plists and NetInfo, you are absolutely correct. If I ignore my need for oxygen I can breathe in space too.
plists and NetInfo are hardly customization tools. They are minor tweaks at best. Even the Windows registry does much better than that, and of course this is nothing compared to what can be tweaked if you have the source, or can replace layers of the OS at will.
Re:Goodbye "Not Invented Here" days (Score:2)
The really nice thing is being able to plug the iPod into a Mac, transfer files to the iPod, then plug it into a PC and transfer files from the iPod. It is this kind of flexability that made be buy the Windows version , even though my primary machine is a Mac.
Re:Goodbye "Not Invented Here" days (Score:5, Funny)
Well, that is the first time I have ever read anyone praising the registry.
That damn registry is the worst thing ms ever came out with, including Bob.
Re:Goodbye "Not Invented Here" days (Score:3, Informative)
Check out the 3rd-party utilities and web sites to get what you'd like:
Re:Goodbye "Not Invented Here" days (Score:5, Insightful)
So.... just like the iPod then, which works on other platforms only due to 3rd parties reverse engineering parts of the on disk format?
mmm, go to www.dell.com and buy an iPod for windows by
Except OS X isn't tinkerable at all. Practically all the code Apple has written is closed source, and the Mac parts of MacOS are generally only capable of doing things one way. Unlike every Linux and Windows, MacOS is still not capable of being themed by 3rd parties (unless you consider a grey version of the default a "theme").
I could list half a dozen OS X theme managers AND a few dozen themes. Sure, there a lots more for windows but OS X has been around much less time than Stardock.
As for the "OS X isn't tinkerable at all' look at the hundreds of programs that 'tinker' with OS X. Fruitmenu, XSounds, WindowShadeX, ASM, CeePeeYou, A-Dock, Synergy, and tons of other cursor, menu items, haxies, and other enhancements.
And if you want a full cocoa Finder you can get Path Finder from cocoatech.com.
Just because you don't have the source code of OS X doesn't mean that you can't tinker with it to your heart's content.
Re:Goodbye "Not Invented Here" days (Score:3, Interesting)
You may be thinking of Shake.
Except OS X isn't tinkerable at all. Practically all the code Apple has written is closed source, and the Mac parts of MacOS are generally only capable of doing things one way.
Hogwash. Just because it's closed-source doen't mean it's not tinkerable. Perhaps not to the extent you'd like, but really, how many end users hack the source code of their GUI? OSX has a ways to go, but it's quickly becoming more hackable than OS9 ever was, and if you don't think OS9 was hackable, well, you haven't known many Mac users.
Unlike every Linux and Windows, MacOS is still not capable of being themed by 3rd parties (unless you consider a grey version of the default a "theme").
Hogwash. I'm using a third-party theme right now. It happens to be an imitation of the Platinum theme from Mac OS 9, because that's what I happen to like, but there are others. Not a huge number of themes available, but it's a relatively new OS. They'll come.
And yes, this Platinum theme [webwizardry.net] is a little quirky - it's got a funny little piece of something at the top of the scrollbar, no window borders, and a few other details aren't quite right. And, I've combined it with the Mozilla Classic theme from Mac OS 9, which is even quirkier with the OSX version of Mozilla. I'll probably go back to Modern. Anyway, like I said, give it time.
Re:Goodbye "Not Invented Here" days (Score:2)
Now there's a problem I'll stay up nights fretting about.
Re:Goodbye "No Theme" days (Score:2)
Hmm, now that I've compiled this list (and I'm sure I missed a bunch of stuff), why haven't I installed any of this on my OS X machine? *off to download
Re:Goodbye "Not Invented Here" days (Score:3, Interesting)
I guess if Apple was actually in the habit of coming up with cool gadgets year after year you might have a point. But the only possibly crossplatform gadgets I can think of that Apple has even innovated in the past 15 years are the newton and the ipod. So while it may be all well and good that the Ipod hasn't specifically been designed so it won't work in Windows or Linux, Apple mostly continues to be a computer maker not a inventor of new technology for all platforms. So again I'm just not sure what your point was since Apple really only makes computers, not hardware for every platform that we can all benefit from.
"It's great for the industry and many others that Apple is slowly crawling out of the mindset that all of their products must work strictly with a Mac."
One product (the ipod) doesn't mean much. Especially when you consider its not Apple themselves making it work with other platforms.
Sorry if I seem negative about this, but your whole post seems to try to give Apple credit for something they haven't earned. What you said is akin to sending congrats to MS because their mice are cross platform. Now you may be able to do so, but A) this wasn't intended and B) it represents a minority of MS's product line.
Just something to think about.
Re:Goodbye "Not Invented Here" days (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Goodbye "Not Invented Here" days (Score:5, Interesting)
To compliment their achievments in hardware they open or offer freely a lot of software now as well, Darwin and Rendevouz not to mention the quicktime streaming server.
Re:Goodbye "Not Invented Here" days (Score:2)
Also Apple gave away Darwin so they could get free R&D, and talk to me when a quicktime client is available for Linux.
I guess I won't bother mentioning that Apple is as suit happy as Disney as well. Oh well I did anyway.
Think a little harder on that and then post again.
I'm not expecting Apple to go completely OS anytime soon. But I'm sure a hell not going to forget their proprietary, suithappy past and start slapping them on the back just yet.
Re:Goodbye "Not Invented Here" days (Score:2)
As far as that pathetic argument of apple wanting free R&D I think you need to take your head out from where the sun doesn't shine. Apple has put as much or more into Darwin as any open source developer. That stupid comment about quicktime for Linux is just what i would expect from a linux bigot. Quicktime is not a codec, there is no reason open source developers can't implement mpeg4 and the other codecs with the exception of sorenson (note sorenson not apple) on linux.
If you want to be anti-Apple then do so with at least a moderate amount of intelligence and evidence.
Perhaps you can define suithappy. I'm thinking you pulled that one out of your ass as some sort of wannabe argument against Apple.
Better luck next time.
Re:Goodbye "Not Invented Here" days (Score:2)
Incorrect. I know that IBM's Aptivas (my buddy's Pentium 133 had two ports) shipped with USB onboard. Of course Microsoft didn't have drivers for USB until Windows 95 Second Edition.
Re:Goodbye "Not Invented Here" days (Score:2)
Intel pushed USB, but Microsoft didn't, and that was all that mattered, pre-1998. USB had no backers because the PC industry is resistant to change for fear of affecting the bottom line adversely.
I remember in 1997 when dozens of Compaq workstations appeared at my workplace with USB cables--but no operating system that supported it. The USB drivers in Windows 95 OSR2 were busted and practically unusable. There were very, very few USB devices.
In comes Apple, who didn't create USB, but just took an otherwise useful serial bus and installed it in all Macintosh systems since, starting with the iMac in 1998. That very act alone lit a fire under the computer industry's ass, and USB has been commonplace every since.
Also Apple gave away Darwin so they could get free R&D, and talk to me when a quicktime client is available for Linux.
OF COURSE Apple is giving away Darwin to make Mac OS X stronger. Does that make it or other operating systems that do the same thing (giving itself away) any less worthy? I would think not.
As for something that can run QuickTime: you can start here. [heroinewarrior.com] It ain't official, but many software projects in the *nix world aren't anyway. Besides, why would Apple make a QuickTime client that competes against their own OS? Duh...!
You can also stream QuickTime for free from Linux. [apple.com] Reviews indicate this is the best streaming server out there, even compared to MS and Real.
I guess I won't bother mentioning that Apple is as suit happy as Disney as well. Oh well I did anyway.
Think a little harder on that and then post again.
I'm not expecting Apple to go completely OS anytime soon. But I'm sure a hell not going to forget their proprietary, suithappy past and start slapping them on the back just yet.
A little food for thought: Compaq is a proprietary box. They make proprietary drivers that work only in specific models. They may run Windows, but not without a lot of help from Compaq.
You throw around the "p" word as if owning something or the sole right to change it makes it less worthy. Everything worth something has a proprietary component. Even Linux. Your nose is bleeding from sitting so high on your horse.
Apple is a business, and it is not out there to impress you or cause a revolution. If it can give away something to help their bottom line, great. If it can leverage its technologies to get more computers sold, that's fine. Can it still benefit you, presumed Linux user? Sure. Could Apple lapse back to its own ways? Maybe, but the market forces would destroy it.
Re:Goodbye "Not Invented Here" days (Score:2)
> right to change it makes it less worthy. Everything worth
> something has a proprietary component. Even Linux. Your nose is
> bleeding from sitting so high on your horse.
It does make it less worthy in my eyes as a buyer of technology. When I see the "p" word in ad copy I cringe. I might still buy, but the "p" is always a negative. It means more expensive, harder to maintain and usually single source products. All bad things from the perspective of the buyer. Name the positive virtues you associate with the word; from the point of view of a CUSTOMER. Bet you can't.
As for Linux having a proprietary component, huh? Some distros do, such as SUSE and Mandrake and Redhat used to flirt with the dark side, but Linux itself has no such attachments. RedHat != Linux.
I lived through the PC revolution and saw great systems, innovative software and countless products die because of being proprietary and therefore incapable of surviving the death of their manufacturer. Never again will I walk into the trap of depending of a proprietary product for anything important.
Nifty, but... (Score:3, Insightful)
Although I'd seriously consider going through and re-ripping all of them if I had the money... The iPod is just one of the coolest little gadgets I've seen in a while - especially the clean interface.
Has Apple indicated any wish to support alternate compression? A quick Google didn't find anything.
I suspect Apple should start researching OGG, as it seems much more likely than MP3 to remain un-DRM-contaminated... and Apple seems to be placing itself in the position of "use our computers - no stupid DRM!"
I also wonder if Apple could be persuaded to issue a release of iPod software for Darwin... that way it could more easily be converted.
Re:Nifty, but... (Score:5, Insightful)
It's my understanding that OGG is a good format, but my gut says is you're more likely to see MP4 support on the iPod first.
Re:Nifty, but... (Score:2)
) off OGG, however -- I for one like to listen to tunes away from my PC. Don't feel bad -- somewhere out there someone who transfered all of their family films to betamax knows just how you feel.
Re:Nifty, but... (Score:2)
Actually I'm in the process of transferring all my family films to ogm, the ogg media stream format. Ever heard of it? Not surprised. Its better than avi, wmv, quicktime, and rm, but you'll probably never use it until its "the next big thing", kinda like xvid. There's a huge difference between an audio/video codec and a phsyical product that relies on capitalism to perpetuate itself. Ogg will replace mp3s in the near future, its only a matter of time. Hint... people like me aren't supporting, sharing or using mp3s anymore than we have to.
Re:Nifty, but... (Score:2)
Re:Nifty, but... (Score:2)
The gripe that most people have around here with mp3 is more of a legal problem rather than DRM.. the mp3 encoding/decoding technology is still owned by a single corporation and that means royalties I imagine. MP3 won't go away anytime soon, but it will probably die a very slow death like GIF.
Re:Nifty, but... (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Nifty, but... (Score:2, Informative)
Cheers,
-JD-
Re:Nifty, but... (Score:1)
OGG may be a better format, but when you're listening to music through tiny earbuds while riding the bus or walking around downtown, it's unlikely that you'll notice any loss of quality. I don't have a "proper" portable MP3 player yet, but I do have one of those portable CD players that will play MP3s on CD-ROM -- and this is *exactly* what I do.
Re:Nifty, but... (Score:2)
Re:Nifty, but... (Score:2)
Re:Nifty, but... (Score:2, Insightful)
Hopefully, we'll get that on January 7th along with official Ogg support and Rendezvous streaming in iTunes. I have a feeling the AAC codec is more likely, though.
Re:Nifty, but... (Score:2, Informative)
Apparently this is no longer true (Score:2)
Re:OGG on portables... (Score:2)
The only thing missing is a nice GUI. (Score:4, Funny)
*avoids smart alec temptation to link to apple.com
Re:The only thing missing is a nice SIG (Score:2)
You're sig will fall on deaf ears with the /. crowd, and your a fool to think otherwise. Most people would of realized that by now.
Since I can't read his article... (Score:1)
Re:Since I can't read his article... (Score:1)
If you aren't looking to put all of your music on it at anyone time, and therefore save some money, I would go with a Nomad Muvo, just because Creative makes hands down the best flash Mp3 players on the market, as far as size, sound quality, and price go.
if you are looking for a hard drive player you have a lot of choices. But make sure it has IEEE 1394 (firewire, iLink). Even if you don't have that on your computer it will be worth buying the PCI card (or PCMCIA) for the speed jump over USB (1.1 or 2.0). From there it is really a question of two things: Size and style. Hands down, if money isn't an issue the smallest and best looking HD Mp3 player on the market is the iPod. If you don't mind lugging something a little larger there are many choices: Any of the Nomad Jukebox lines or the Zen are good products. I would be wary of any company that is comming on the market with a large MP3 player with lots of flashy features though. Chances are they don't have good battery life or track record.
Overall the best advice I can give you is once you've decided HD or Flash, go to Best Buy or Circuit City and play with the MP3 players they have. You want something that is easy to operate, not too heavy for you to comfortable cary around etc.
Re:Since I can't read his article... (Score:1)
That was very helpful. I wasn't quite sure what I was even looking for in a device, and now I do.
iPod is great but.... (Score:2, Interesting)
For $229 (BestBuy $279 + $50 mail in rebate) I'm very satisfied with my Archos Jukebox Recorder 20 [archos.com].
It has 20GB HD, USB 1.1,2.0, and comes bundled with Music match Jukebox.
My wife uses it mostly, so it's only seen Windoze, but I'm sure it wouldn't take long for me to get it working with Linux. If someone hasn't done it already.
Re:iPod is great but.... (Score:1)
I'll stick to Ephpod and my Win32 ipod thankyouverymuch
Re:iPod is great but.... (Score:3, Informative)
It already works under Linux. It is accessed as a USB Mass Storage device using the ISD-200 chip with a VFAT filesystem. The driver is in the vanilla kernel, and the web site for it is here [bjorn.haxx.se]. Also, there is open source firmware (which Archos will be including on its CD-ROM with future players) located at this page [rockbox.haxx.se]. This firmware doesn't support recording yet, but it will very soon now according to the web site.
I have my whole MP3 collection on it, and it's great. Although I have to admit that it's not as visually pleasing as an iPod.
Re:iPod is great but.... (Score:2)
my 20GB works great :) (and howto) (Score:5, Informative)
I'm using the latest stable kernel (2.4.20). 1394/ohci/sbp2 are all working great. Be sure to check "prompt for development drivers", then add the 1394 module and be sure to add OHCI and sbp2 (these also help if you're into dv
modprobe the 1394 and ohci modules. Do a tail -f on
Now, for the GUI. Download ephpod [ephpod.com]. Install it using wine (wine ephpod.exe). Change your wine config (probably ~/.wine/config) to use wherever you mounted your ipod as a drive. Startup ephpod. Be sure you've added some nice fonts to your wine install.
Enjoy!
Re:my 20GB works great :) (and howto) (Score:2)
Re:my 20GB works great :) (and howto) (Score:2)
EphPod is a cool program, and I'm glad to have it. However, using EphPod under linux still has some glitches:
(1) The "Add Directory..." feature doesn't work, you just get an empty selection browser. I suspect this is a wine limitation (I'm using the Crossover plugin version). You have to use "Add Files" instead, and just select all the files you want to add. That doesn't sound like too bad a workaround, but it's quite painful if you're adding a few thousand.
(2) Sometimes EphPod screws up the iPod database: choose a Fleetwood Mac tune, get Elvis Costello song instead. *sigh* Using the EphPod's "Rebuild Database" function cures that problem, but it almost always loses the playlists. Solution: always keep linux-side copies of the playlists. I use xmms to build the playlists, then use Emacs to clean the xmms-specific lines out of them. Xmms can still use them, and they can be re-loaded into the iPod after rebuilding the database.
(3) The 1394 drivers are immature. They frequently fail to recognize the iPod; unloading then reloading sbp2 usually fixes this. The drivers sometimes cause kernel oopses, at least with 2.4.19 and the latest 1394 drivers as of the time I got my iPod - I haven't tried 2.4.20 yet.
(4) EphPod doesn't seem to recognize mp3 genre tags; I haven't looked deeply into this problem yet, but I suspect it may be an id3v2 vs v1 problem.
That sums up my experience. I would say that using an iPod under linux is not for the faint of heart.
--
(Because linux sees the iPod as a generic block device, there are some interesting things you can do with it. When I first hooked up my iPod, I used a 'dd if=/dev/sdb | gzip -9' to grab an image of the hard disk - which could later be used to restore the entire iPod back to "virgin" state. I also dd'ed off a copy of
--Jim
Re:my 20GB works great :) (and howto) (Score:2)
my mom had the hardest time installing the software and pluging the darn thing in
I bet she did. For instance, when I plug mine in under winxp as soon as "Musicmatch Jukebox" recognized the iPod the #@!ing computer restarts. I'm not re-installing the (P)OS for this when a kernel compile takes 5 min. I was, however, able to get it to work in windows with ephpod, but all my music is on the linux box anyways and transferrring over the network is slower than firewire. Kudos to the ephpod developers, very nice. Open source it!
Mike
he wants s GUI (Score:2)
whatsa matter? command line not good enough?
damn elitists
;-)
Enough! (Score:4, Informative)
1)compile the kernel with the modules
2)mount the ipod
3)use ephpod or gnupod (if you are a masochist)
If it werent for my kernel issues, the install would have taken, at most, 20 min.
And I am not very advanced with linux.
Lets get more software and less howtwos
aissur teivos ni (Score:1, Funny)
RIAA commercial I heard today.. (Score:3, Interesting)
I wonder how many people who were ripping their CDs to their iPods or other devices felt about hearing that.
Re:RIAA commercial I heard today.. (Score:2, Funny)
"One."
Wouldn't this infringe on Amazon's one-click patent?
Re:RIAA commercial I heard today.. (Score:3, Funny)
xtunes has this with a nice GUI (Score:2, Insightful)
Why??? (Score:2)
However, from a practical point of view, I can't imagine any reason to run Linux on a box that comes with a very tightly (and well) designed BSD Unix OS.
D'oh! (Score:4, Funny)
it's been done before (Score:2)
Re:The investment in an iPod warrants the followin (Score:2)
Re:All in all? (Score:1, Funny)
"ALL IN ALL" means: "We want ALL software and music IN ALL our hard drives".
Quite shameful really, if these guys didn't steal software and music, prices would be lower and quality would be higher.
Re:All in all? (Score:2)
Re:All in all? (Score:2)
"All in all" is slang for an orgy. You know, one with no holes barred.
Re:Can you get it to take ogg files under linux? (Score:1, Funny)
Why, I bet it does! Of course, since the iPod can only play mp3 files you're shit out of luck now aren't you? You might as well upload jpegs.
Re:Can you get it to take ogg files under linux? (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Learn to run a website (Score:2)
--jeff++
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Learn to run a website (Score:2)
Back when I worked for Excite@Home, we got to play with this on our E-Commerce sites. Usually it took ten web servers to handle peak load. We tried out transparent reverse proxy-caching, and were able to reduce that to *two* web servers. We could have easily gotten by with one if we didn't need fault-tolerance. It may seem unnecessarily complex, but IMHO any site that expects to handle massive web traffic should seriously investigate a front-end proxy-cache server. Virtually all of the very high-traffic sites do this (including Slashdot, though done in a slightly different way).
So, complex? Yeah, a little bit. But the performance benefits of using specialized products designed to do one job well (squid proxy cache, plus an apache-based cgi engine behind it) cannot be ignored by anybody expecting her site to get hammered.
Re:Learn to run a website (Score:2)
No, it's a cheap idea, but not excellent. A hardware loadbalancer is always the way to go if the funds are available. Round Robin's will blindly direct a user to A) an over burdened server (eg: each server has 5 users but server A's users utilizing much more resources), or B) a downed server.
And I definitely wouldn't use
Re:Learn to run a website (Score:2)
Despite many efforts to create "worldwide hardware load balancing", every idea that doesn't use DNS round-robin in some form to distribute load across caches that do not share high-speed private networks between them has been a fairly unspectacular failure. Hardware load balancers like the Cisco LocalDirector, BigIP F5 (which also does reverse proxy-caching), and Arrowpoint (same) are very cool, and give you very nice redundancy, but don't scale to a globally distributed architecture at all. In those situations (sorry I wasn't more explicit), a DNS round-robin is the main choice if you're not going to attempt to do some sort of ARIN lookup to redirect people to the correct cache, or have a manual redirect to a more responsive country. Of course, behind each of those DNS round-robin entries, you should have an HLB so that that IP will not go unavailable.
Good uptime is generally a side-effect of competent systems administration, not a direct effect of the architecture underlying it. Poor architecture can be worked around by good systems administration, and likewise good architecture made better the same way. However, the original question was about performance, not uptime. A reverse proxy web-cache in front of your web server is a sound decision for high-performance web serving. The uptime or lack thereof can be caused by other systems administration problems, or perhaps something as simple as having a single point of failure along the path.
That said, I should probably have pointed to CNN, Yahoo, or another heavy-load web site that uses reverse proxy web-caches to improve their site's responsiveness, rather than Slashdot.
Re:Learn to run a website (Score:2)
I still stand by my assertion that a hardware based load balancer is the way to go. I also disagree about your contention regarding the quality of sysadmins. Although the quality of a sysadmin is definitely a factor, a poor architecture that can't handle the load will fail no matter the quality of the sysadmin(s), and visa versa.
Re: (Score:2)
How much a speed hit for dynamic xsl. (Score:2)
I'm actually writing a blog system that stores blog files in xml and then transforms them from xml to html (among other formats). I've considered the whole just-in-time transformation thing, but I'm worried that it might be too much of a speed hit (every time a user hits the blog site, yet another transform). If it saps too much server cpu cycles, sysadmins might not be all to keen on having the software installed.
Do you think my fears are unfounded, and that 1000 users hitting the site a day (which means maybe ~1500 jit xslt transformations) on a server that a hell of a lot of people are using for a hell of a lot of other things is reasonable?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Learn to be a Luddite (Score:1)
What exactly makes you think that? I'm not a huge PHP fan, but the site could be running any number of load balancers (software or hardware) in front of its backend. Additionally, PHP can scale to very high concurrency, it just needs to be tuned correctly. Your precious "flat-file-serving" Apache can only serve 150 simultaneous clients out of the box if you haven't tuned it.
Now I know you're talking out your ass, because if you had any experience at all with Oracle, you wouldn't have stated this. I suppose Amazon, Yahoo, CNN, et al aren't able to scale? The simple fact of the matter is that, like any other piece of software, how you tune your applications goes a long way to how many simultaneous threads you can serve up.
I think you really underestimate the true power of the Slashdot effect. What's likely happening in this situation is that Apache is buckling under the thousands of simultaneous requests, many of whom are coming from modem users -- using up precious processes to download the content. I seriously doubt that, if this person is running a 500MHz or greater machine, that processor time is an issue at all. What he/she needs to do is re-tune Apache to serve more simultaneous requests.
That is one of the harder things to do, believe it or not -- you're venturing into the realm of a more fully-featured content management system at that point. What if your content changes on a regular basis? What if, like Slashdot, the comments are dynamic?Not out of the box it won't. Read your own httpd.conf and look up "MaxClients" and "KeepAliveTimeout". Out of the box, MaxClients is set to 150, and KeepAliveTimeout is set to 15 seconds. Once you hit the 150 MaxClient threshhold, the performance of your webserver will be terrible, because you'll be waiting 15 seconds between unique client requests.
Re: Learn to be a Luddite (Score:3, Interesting)
Thanks for sharing your expert knowledge of httpd.cond.dist.
Re:Learn to run a website (Score:3, Funny)
http://apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?
This Web site is using dynamic content with Perl. Already we know the site isn't set up for high concurrency. Plus, it's using open source software, so it can't possibly be up to the enterprise standard of robust scalable architectures.
sid=02/12/31/175213&
It also appears that the main content is being loaded from a database by ID number. New flash: Why not a flat file? Hell-ooooo, haven't they ever heard of CSV?
mode=thread&tid=106
And it looks like the programmer decided to respond to a user action on every request. Call me an old relic, but I do miss the days when every programmer didn't have to worry about some stupid "UI" and instead concentrated on what computers were intended for: outputting incessant streams of meaningless data.
If this guy expect this site to hold up to the Awesome Powers of the Slashdot Effect, he'd better think again.
Re:That's Great... (Score:1)
ooh. you could be all of 24 (or all of 14, for that matter). bet you know all about the world and it's [sic] "philosophy" before Steve Jobs, huh? how is it possible the world hasn't yet bowed to your wisdom, mr. anonymous coward?
Re:alternatives (Score:3, Insightful)
I really like the looks of the iPod but I refuse to pay that much money for it right now. Maybe when I find a new job but even then it will be a serious decision.