iTunes For Linux, Thanks To CodeWeavers 352
pizen writes "The folks over at CNet have the scoop that a new version of CrossOver Office (3.1) now supports Apple's iTunes. The preview version of the software is being tested and is currently only available to current CodeWeavers customers. They expect a final version to be available later this year." Reader snowtigger contributes a link to this screenshot. White demonstrated iTunes on a Linux machine at OSCON as well; a rendering glitch marred that demo, but he was still able to demonstrate playing back a song which he'd purchased from iTMS using iTunes on Linux.
Finally!!! (Score:5, Interesting)
This is has honestly been the only reason that I still boot up in Windows.
Also seems I not the only one:
"iTunes has been our No. 1 most requested application," CodeWeavers CEO Jeremy White said in a statement.
And presumably a free open source version cannot be far behind? Now, if I can just take this opportunity to ask the iTunes people to please add some (a lot) more to their back catalogue then the world will become perfect.
Re:Finally!!! (Score:4, Informative)
Also don't forget (Score:3, Interesting)
I love being able to use embedded quicktime in firefox in linux =) It rules.
Re:Finally!!! (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Finally!!! (Score:3, Insightful)
just use it for a couple of days...see if you don't love it
try out the tag editing also
Re:Finally!!! (Score:2)
Re:Finally!!! (Score:5, Interesting)
I love the search capabilities.
I love the 'smart playlist' which can filter songs by number of times played, last played, ID tags, and ratings.
I love not needing to worry about organization. It's like not caring which track, sector, and platter my data is on; there's no need to care when the OS takes care of that detail. All I need to know is enough meta-data for the OS to find the file.
Sharing is cool, streaming is cool, and so is the music store!
Re:Finally!!! (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Finally!!! (Score:3, Informative)
I understand that you may want to keep your own organization for your music files, but it so happens that your set up is identical to the one used by iTunes!
Yes, in the iTunes folder you will find a subfolder called iTunes Music. In it, every artist has one folder, with a subfolder for each album. Additionally, there is a
Re:Finally!!! (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Finally!!! (Score:2, Insightful)
Personally, I use Winamp 5, which I think has a much better interface than iTunes, but its the same concept with its media library. I used to have all my music in folders and run them from there. But then I started using Winamp 5 and really liked the media library once I sta
Re:Finally!!! (Score:5, Funny)
WinAmp has always had a non-standard small, confusing and cluttered interface. It tries to have every control available to you within the space of a postage stamp on screen, and the effect is woeful.
From the sound of it you've never used iTunes. And iTunes "catching up" yeah... must be tough catching up with the full quality built in cd ripping to MP3 AAC WAV etc. that WinAmp does. Oh and catching up with the one click CD burning that WinAmp does. Oh and the online music sotre integration that WinAmp has. Oh and the easy interoperability with my iPod that WinAmp manages.
Seriously though, all the WinAmp features you've mentioned have been done in iTunes for years.
Go download it and give it a whirl.
Re:Finally!!! (Score:4, Interesting)
The Winamp playlist is much easier and more powerful than what iTunes has. iTunes' "Party Shuffle", gives you some of this functionality, though, but before they added that, there was nothing to match it.
Seriously, download Winamp and give it a try. I have compared with the latest iTunes, and I find Winamp to be more feature-rich and flexible. A bit more for "power-users" though, so I can see why some people may not like the interface.
Not to say iTunes sucks or anything, its a great player, and should satisfy most people. If I owned a Mac, I'd probably be using it. But I simply find Winamp 5 to offer more powerful features and a more useful interface.
As for the iTunes feature you mentioned...
BTW, Winamp does have ripping/burning in the Pro version, but that does cost $15 and I can't vouch for it. There is also an iPod plugin, but I can't vouch for it because I'm not willing to buy that overpriced, overrated player.
I don't particularly see having an online store integration as a good thing when you are locked into one store for that integration.
Re:Finally!!! (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Finally!!! (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Finally!!! (Score:2, Funny)
So which of these features is iTunes missing now?
Re:Finally!!! (Score:3, Insightful)
I didn't spend days rating and organizing my songs for nothing. Until some free (as in speech) app comes along that can import *all* my iTunes ratings and organization I wont be switching from my Mac or Windows PCs.
Re:Finally!!! (Score:5, Interesting)
-schussat
Futurama Quote applicable (Score:4, Funny)
Bender: What better way to celebrate our success than by me showing Bubblegum this globetrotters uniform I made myself.
BubbleGum: Let me see.
Bender shows him his uniform.
BubbleGum: Hello lawsuit *rubs palms*.
Re:Futurama Quote applicable (Score:2, Insightful)
If Apple can sue because some talented hackers managed to get iTunes to run under Linux, then MS can sue because they've gotten Office to work.
One day you'll realise the lawsuit isn't the answer to every problem.
Wow. (Score:3, Insightful)
Wooohoo.
Re:Wow. (Score:2)
This is a good thing (Score:5, Interesting)
While some of the open source projects out there have been doing a great job emulating iTunes, none have yet to duplicate the easy of use and great interface that Apple gives us. I wouldn't say this is the only reason why I use Windows, but I would say that while in Linux, I rarely listen to any of my music because I find it too difficult.
Thank you code weavers, and I will be looking forward to the release.
Re:This is a good thing (Score:3, Informative)
Re:This is a good thing (Score:5, Informative)
All is not lost however, you can turn off ID3v2 support in XMMS under the MP3 decoder options. XMMS will then read the song information from the ID3v1 tags and your problem will be fixed in a snap.
Re:This is a good thing (Score:5, Informative)
Re:This is a good thing (Score:2, Interesting)
As for Zif, I did give it a try, but I kept having problems with i
Re:This is a good thing (Score:2, Interesting)
Alsa? Oss? Esd? Artsd? Jack? Jackit? Wtf? How does one know that you need xmms-alsa.rpm installed when you play music in KDE with this sound system thingy enabled?
And it used to be isapnp+sndconfig. Hell, I used to not listen to music because it was too difficult in those days.
Of course, I do not know if this is the grandparent poster's point. I-tunes is certainly not going to change this situation, and you have pointed out some nice alternatives for sure.
Re:This is a good thing (Score:5, Insightful)
And this is why the gulf between Linux and Mac OS is so wide. "It's so easy, just do this and this and this. Oh, you mean you want it to just work?"
Whether it's because iTunes tagged the files unconventionally, or because the XMMS is broken /inferior, the simplicity of iTunes didn't translate to the original poster's Linux environment.
iTunes has plenty of room for improvement, but it's a solid app., both on Windows and OS X.
I don't blame the OP for missing it.
on Linux? (Score:4, Informative)
You mean that he purchased from iTMS using iTunes on Windows on Linux?
Re:on Linux? (Score:2)
Re:on Linux? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:on Linux? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:on Linux? (Score:2)
Re:on Linux? (Score:3, Informative)
VMWare is in a totally different class. VMWare _is_ an emulator/virtual machine and will _emulate_ hardware in software.
gtkpod? (Score:2, Informative)
Re:gtkpod? (Score:2)
Yeah.
GtkPod is not a music store (Score:3, Informative)
AirTunes? (Score:4, Interesting)
Cheers,
Ian
"The Hard-Bodied Sounds of the Gay Circuit..."? (Score:3, Funny)
Re:"The Hard-Bodied Sounds of the Gay Circuit..."? (Score:3, Informative)
1. There's two title bars. The windows one with the "_ [ ] X" buttons and then the (X)(-)(+) one from the Linux.
2. How do I know the second title bar is Linux? The controls are on the right side.
Screenshot Confusion (Score:5, Funny)
Then I realized what I was thinking, and felt dumb.
Re:Screenshot Confusion (Score:3, Interesting)
Hidden Significance (Score:3, Interesting)
The same would, of course, also go for any successful attempt to run Windows Media Player under Linux.
DRM is a pipe dream. There is a fundamental physical reason why it will never work, though a formal mathematical proof escapes me right now. It's time to stop trying to do the impossible, even if that means having to swallow the unpalatable.
Re:Hidden Significance (Score:5, Informative)
Don't tell anybody, but this happens under Mac OS and Windows also.
Just because you can re-route audio that doesn't mean you are breaking the DRM. Apple knows about all of these methods and has only done a pro forma job at closing them off. Basically, Apple needs to be able to tell the RIAA "We're making sure the music is uncopyable." so that the RIAA will continue to sign distribution contracts with Apple.
Don't make a big deal that you can create DRM-less copies of iTunes Music Store Music and its most likely that Apple won't bother you. Remember that Steve Jobs was the one who said [macobserver.com], "Every security scheme that is based on secrets eventually fails."
Re:Hidden Significance (Score:3, Insightful)
Yes it does. Maybe the RIAA isn't aware of it yet, or just hasn't reacted because it doesn't consider the threat either immient or solvable. But it IS breaking the DRM. It's a way you can get a perfect digital copy with no analog degradation, which is exactly what the RIAA moans about.
DRM today is in an embryonic state- there are many ways to break or avoid it, and this is just one of them. But the foot is in the door. We
Re:Hidden Significance (Score:2)
You can already de-DRM iTMS songs with Hymn [hymn-project.org]. If you don't like leaving your Apple ID in the file, it's probably not a big deal to modify the Hymn source.
I'd caution people authorizing iTunes under Wine (and Windows, for that matter) to be aware of the DRM scheme, so that you don't accidentally lose the right to play your songs. You can authorize up to five computers, and you may unwittingly reauthorize the same computer multiple times with no clear wa
Re:Hidden Significance (Score:2)
Re:Hidden Significance (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Hidden Significance (Score:3, Funny)
> will never work, though a formal mathematical proof escapes me right now
I've got one, but it's too big to be contained in the margins of this site.
Re:Hidden Significance (Score:2)
iTunes currently does not do this, but it would be a trivial change. And given Apple's propensity for starting with what they would like to appear as "kinder, gentler DRM," then turning the screws [typepad.com], I wouldn't be surprised to see that change come down the line--it would have the dual effect o
Heh I have been saying this for a long time (Score:4, Interesting)
Everybody doing Apple's work for them (Score:4, Funny)
First Real makes their player compatible with the iPod. Now someone makes iTunes available on Linux.
Apple hardly needs to do a thing to improve iTunes. Their competitors are doing it all for them.
Peace be with you,
-jimbo
Re:Everybody doing Apple's work for them (Score:3, Insightful)
--
One step forward, and two behind (Score:4, Interesting)
Why iTunes? (Score:2, Interesting)
I would argue that ITMS, while convenient, isn't that gre
Re:Why iTunes? (Score:3, Insightful)
It's more mature.
It's more convenient.
It's *still* free
It gives you more capabilities with downloaded music:
Burn on 7 CDs before needing to alter your track order
Stream to 5 computers
Did I mention burning to CD was free?
You are right, Linux programmers *should* try to write a better iTunes. They haven't yet. Taking a look at Juk features... you do realize that 90% of the features they tout on their website was first implemented by iTunes? Inline search, tree view mode (though implemented as colum
No iPod support yet (Score:4, Informative)
http://crossover.codeweavers.com/pipermail/announ
Hopefully it will be added soon so I can rid myself of Windows once and for all.
Re:Linux is about open standards (Score:5, Informative)
It's running whatever software Apple offer. No DRM is being tampered with.
I think they will worry far more about RealNetworks than this.
Re:Linux is about open standards (Score:2)
Re:Linux is about open standards (Score:2, Insightful)
"
Because Apple is making a significant amount of money out of it?
Re:Linux is about open standards (Score:4, Insightful)
Theoretically one could explain that it is easier to bypass DRM on Linux than on Windows, but as we now have things like a commercially licensed PowerDVD for Linux [slashdot.org] and Hymn [hymn-project.org] for Windows, I think that argument won't really hold any water.
Re:Linux is about open standards (Score:5, Informative)
Contrary to popular belief, you don't have an inherent right to music, just like the RIAA has no right to sales. Listen to non RIAA bands, or go out and make your own music.....
I should have a right to the music I have paid for though. That's what anti-DRM people are usually complaining about.
Re:Well, it saves Apple some work! (Score:5, Insightful)
Just because there might be BSD stuff underneath everything on MacOS X doesn't mean everything directly uses the BSD APIs...
Re:It's still all unix (Score:5, Informative)
No, they aren't. X11 is completely separate from Aqua/Quartz. One of the many reasons why you need either Xfree86 or Apple's modified X11 to run X applications. Additionally, like the grandparent said, iTunes is based on Carbon, which is separate from the BSD subsystem. For the most part, OS X uses BSD for its kernel and services only: all Mac OS X native programs are written in Cocoa, Carbon, or Java.
Re:It's still all unix (Score:3, Informative)
Cocoa apps are, in theory, not hard to port over to GNU Step unless they use a lot of the new features. GNU Step apps can usually just be tweaked a bit and recompiled as Cocoa apps.
That's all well and good, but like the parent said, iTunes is writ
Re:It's still all unix (Score:3, Informative)
<pedantic>Actually, Cocoa, Carbon and Swing are the frameworks you can use. Java, Objective-C, AppleScript, Python and Perl (and more every day) are languages you may choose from in order to target those frameworks.</pedantic>
Cocoa and Carbon are both considered 'native', though. For a new project, the only real choice is wether you want to go procedural and target Carbon or OO and target Cocoa. Legacy code bases will natu
Re:It's still all unix (Score:4, Informative)
Actually, it's still in carbon. Very easy test: attempt to execute an operation that would normally hang Finder (emptying the trash, etc.). Notice the wait cursor you get (hint: it'll alternate between the pinwheel and the stopwatch). Unless the developer has added the stop watch resource into the program (which Apple hasn't), the stopwatch is a legacy wait indicator from OS 9 and Carbon.
Re:It's still all unix (Score:3, Informative)
Wow - you're right. I could have sworn I heard Apple trumpeting about that change, but I seem to have mixed one of those silly rumors with real life. Damned pre-coffee posts.
That only strengthens my original point, though - with the only difference being that Apple hasn't moved any of their applications from one framework to the other. Apple themselves treat Carbon and Cocoa as equals and the proof is in the Applications they develop.
Re:It's still all unix (Score:3, Interesting)
The Cocoa Finder has been a perennial rumor in the Mac community since OS X was launched, as though a Cocoa rewrite were some sort of magic spell that would solve all the problems in the <10.3 Finder with no further effort. In 10.3 it's just a much-better-written Carbon app.
There's an even simpler test for Carbon/Cocoa-ness: It's possible to use most Cocoa controls while a window remains in the background by holding down Command while clicking. If you can manipulate a window without brin
Re:It's still all unix (Score:5, Insightful)
iTunes doesn't, so you're wrong here. It uses Carbon, a completely different and very large API ported to Mach from MacOS. I doubt highly it touches the BSD server much.
and OSX's fancy graphics are still X11 based
Wrong. Quartz is essentially a display PDF renderer, written from scratch and having nothing to do with X11.
and music devices and disks are still
Wrong. 0 for 3. Thanks for playing "Slashdot pundit who doesn't know what he's talking about".
Re:It's still all unix (Score:2, Funny)
Isn't that America's favorite game show?
Re:Yuck... (Score:4, Insightful)
Uh, no. I'm not sure how you reached that conclusion. The point is that MacOS isn't FreeBSD with an Apple window manager slapped on top, as Slashbot dimwits all seem to believe.
Well.. maybe not.. but how hard can it be for Apple to do a carbon copy for Linux, like they've done for Windows.
Probably just about as hard to make, although a lot harder to support. But for 1% of the desktop market instead of 97%, "no harder to make" isn't necessarily a winner.
Re:Well, it saves Apple some work! (Score:5, Informative)
Oh and the parent is moderated interesting! No it's not it's rubbish. Repeat after me Aqua is not X! CoreAudio is not ALSA (or OSS)!!!
Yes Mac OS X has got BSD kernel, but 95% of things above that level (exlcluding OpenGL) are proprietary Apple stuff and so a nearly full blown port is requeried from Mac OS X to Linux! Nowadays programs like iTunes use more then fopen(...); and printf(...).
Re:Why would I use it? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Why would I use it? (Score:3, Insightful)
People generally want to use the best if they can, right? Now you (and other Linux-folk) can.
The real question is... Why wouldn't you use it? It's free, it's powerful, it's easy, it's simple!
Re:Hmmm (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Hmmm (Score:3, Informative)
Talk about your erroneous, false conclusions. I wasn't referring to iTunes as an alternative to Kazaa, but I was pointing out that it's funny that so many people are excited about the opportunity to buy low-quality DRM'd music on Linux (like their Windows counterparts).
Re:Hmmm (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Hmmm (Score:5, Funny)
Good, I knew you could do it.
Re:Hmmm (Score:3, Insightful)
--
That is so silly. (Score:5, Insightful)
First of all, it claims that Apple basically does nothing to reap its one-third cut of the price of a song on iTunes. What about the front-end costs of bulding the iTMS backend, developing the client application (for multiple platforms) and the ongoing costs of the bandwidth? I guess that's "basically doing nothing"?
Secondly, if a recording artist is making 11 cents per song on iTunes, isn't that 11 cents that the artist would never otherwise receive? I mean, an artists' overhead for selling on iTMS ought to consist of: (a) rehearsal and studio time, (b) mixing services, (c) hiring session musicians and maybe a famous producer or something, and (d) marketing. The label gives them an advance for all that stuff, and takes it back (and then some) in their 53 cents per song cut of sales on iTMS.
So, once the artist has paid back the label for any advance money, every 11 cent per song sale on iTMS is pure profit, right? The artist has no ongoing expenses for selling on iTMS, right?
And Apple has lots of really expensive ongoing overhead, right? And Apple says they're barely breaking even on iTMS today, right?
So how is Apple screwing artists?
Re:That is so silly. (Score:5, Insightful)
You're absolutely right, Apple is not screwing artists. To all you downhillbattle trolls, see if you can grasp this concept: iTunes makes their deal with the entity that holds the rights to the song. If the artist signed their life and rights away to the label, then they have no choice as to how the music is distributed and what cut they take. It's a terrible shame that the music labels do proudly and routinely screw over their artists, but it's not Apple's responsibility to take a stand and start the revolution, no more than it's Tower Records' or Amazon.com's.
Now, there are artists on iTunes who aren't on a major label and take a bigger cut for themselves. If you support them-- or similar DIY business models-- then maybe, just maybe more and more will realize that they don't have to be a part of the RIAA machine.
Re:Hmmm (Score:3, Insightful)
Most artists have up-front contracts with their labels, paying them millions in advance. Musicians don't make their profits from album commissions.
--
Re:What's so good about iTunes? Not a troll. (Score:5, Informative)
Things that you can do anywhere but are particularly easy, pleasant, or automatic in iTunes:
o Searching for songs
o Manipulating playlists
o Consistent sound quality/volume
o Smart playlists
Other nice things that some people use:
o AppleScriptable (OK, only applies to Macs but extremely useful nonetheless)
o Album art
o Rate your songs
Just a few thoughts...
-Rob
Re:What's so good about iTunes? Not a troll. (Score:5, Informative)
Re:What's so good about iTunes? Not a troll. (Score:3, Interesting)
Wrong. The ONLY way to do it was through AppleScript. You could create the playlist, but it would always have the same 20 minutes of music. I needed to script a way to remove all songs from the playlist so iTunes got the hint that I wanted 20 minutes of random
Re:What's so good about iTunes? Not a troll. (Score:3, Informative)
Also, AAC and transcoding (Score:3, Informative)
Re:What's so good about iTunes? Not a troll. (Score:2)
And I don't understand what you mean that lame and ogg don't do classical. Can you point me to websites that show this? Or is this just opinion.
Let me know
Re:What's so good about iTunes? Not a troll. (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:slightly off topic, but... (Score:5, Interesting)
Which OS? I used to use Tag&Rename [softpointer.com] when I ran my music stuff under Windows - excellent program. Don't know for Linux, and under OS X I just use iTunes to manage stuff.
Cheers,
Ian
Re:slightly off topic, but... (Score:3, Informative)
Re:slightly off topic, but... (Score:2, Informative)
it worked out the correct id3 tags perfectly
Re:really (Score:5, Insightful)
Only if you like and will listen to every single song on that hypothetical CD. If you'd rather pick and choose every track to make sure there's no dead weight that you'll always skip over, then $1 is a perfectly good price point.
Come to think of it, $1 per song is a complete rip off. If they were ogg encoded, I might give it some consideration at
With how pervasive MP3 is these days, it's going to take a hell of a lot of catching up before anyone will give a damn that a relatively miniscule group of people won't listen to music that isn't ogg encoded.
Re:really (Score:3, Insightful)
If $1 a song is too expensive, it should come down, unless online operators start colluding. Still, it is cheap, in Europe we pay a lot more.
Remember also Apple are only making a small profit at the moment. At $.50 they would lose money. If you have no interest, don't buy. I don't. Just accept you aren't part of their target market. I'm puzzled why people need to keep saying they wouldn't buy something, just don't buy it.
Re:really (Score:3, Informative)
iTunes is free (like Juke)
iTunes is on v4.6 with the accompanying stability and polish
iTunes has sound normalization
iTunes has song ratings
iTunes plays CDs, internet radio, and streaming music from other computers
iTunes rips songs
Unless there's a version of Juk I don't know of... Juk doesn't rip songs or play CDs?
Re:really (Score:2, Insightful)
I've always considered $1 for a good song to be a great deal when thrift store record shopping. If the album contains 1 good song (good being a relative term) then I've done pretty well. Even better if I average that ratio over the course of a day's finds.
Now with iTMS, I am pretty much guaranteed that ratio. I know what song I'm getting and its usually one I've been wanting f
Re:big whoop (Score:2)
Re:Good clone (Score:2, Informative)