iPods unblocked from syncing with Linux

As we recently reported, the latest batch of iPods brought with them a few changes that weren't exactly evident at first glance, not the least of which was the ability to sync with third party apps. That proved to be especially problematic for iPod-loving Linux users, who had gotten used to apps like gtkpod and Amarok to sync the players with their OS of choice. As expected, however, that blockage now appears to have been cleared by some enterprising Linux users, and the iPod classic (and seemingly other new other new iPods as well) is now back to its Linux-syncing ways. For the time being, that unfortunately still appears to be a somewhat complicated process, although we're sure some less time-intensive solutions will be arriving before too long.

[Via Digg]

[Fanboy Flamebait @ Sep 17th 2007 11:28AM]

In other news, MSFT gets a big fine for behaving like this. I realize this sounds like a troll for a flamewar, but I really mean to ask this seriously. Is this behaviour any less reprehensible than MSFT's?

[Alan Partridge @ Sep 17th 2007 11:37AM]

No not really, BoingBoing had it right when they said "This is the soul of anti-competitiveness" and is what happens when a company is too successful for its own good. Companies behaving in this way is BAD for the consumer, ie us

http://www.boingboing.net/2007/09/14/new-ipods-reengineer.html

[david @ Sep 17th 2007 2:17PM]

Actually it is different. M$ goes out of their way to intrude into "your" personal space, runs the PC world, doesn't let anyone stand a chance creating a newer and better application before stealing it, blah blah blah. All the linux guys had to do was alter the current software to use the iPod. I'm sure they could have blocked it a lot more if that was their intent. Updating their code is not blocking linux users "on purpose." Of course this is all speculation either way.

[systemdowned @ Sep 17th 2007 5:12PM]

Apple wants to be Microsoft so bad. When will people learn they are just as bad? Everytime someone wants to tell me how "pretty" the GUI is and how stable it is, I just keep thinking about how the GUI offers no practical functionality (the dock is a joke), and how OSX kept crashing on my friends MAC. Also, it ate one of his DVDs, (and he's not the only one with this problem as their are websites dedicated to this issue.) And networking is a bitch. Finder kept crashing the entire OS when trying to network.

Everytime I see someone with an iPhone or iPod I just keep thinking what a tool they are.

I'm a linux guy myself.

end rant.

[ke @ Sep 17th 2007 11:29AM]

Bad Read link :p

[Jonathan Keim @ Sep 17th 2007 11:36AM]

The whole "read link" website is down

[Balzac2m @ Sep 17th 2007 11:29AM]

Read-Link says:
"No input file specified."

And that was fast =)

[babyface @ Sep 17th 2007 11:33AM]

Good news and a great job to all working on removing this limitation. I love Amarok and it makes a great pair with the iPod. iTune blows so much in comparison. So let me use this opportunity to extend my middle finger to Stevie.

[Xavier Gill @ Sep 17th 2007 11:41AM]

The Digital Millennium Copyright Act makes it illegal to "circumvent an effective means of access control" so Apple have made criminals out of people who just want to use a product, that they've paid for and own, in a way thats best for them.

[t-bone @ Sep 17th 2007 2:03PM]

@Xavier Gill: In other words, their pissed because they don't meet the requirements to easily use an iPod by their own choice and suddenly it got harder. I have no sympathy for those that exploit products and then get locked out.

[Yoshi Likes Boys @ Sep 17th 2007 11:43AM]

Hashing != Access Control.....ugh.

[lassi @ Sep 18th 2007 4:10AM]

it is if you use it for that. they used hashing as access control to ensure(badly in retrospect) that only itunes was able to copy files to the device. they do it why? because they want people to use only itunes, and they want you to download quicktime too when you download itunes. no, it wasnt a hash to ensure just that the db hasn't corrupted on it's own - that would have been hacked in a hour - but they deliberately went an extra mile to make it harder, while still not having to go through full rewrite of the software on the pod...






and sparks.. "I will almost guarantee you that the functionality in Amarok which allowed you to connect an iPod to almost anyone's machine and copy music on without resynching the library probably brought heat onto Apple from the content providers" that's why there's drm that prevents you from doing that and actually this hashing of the _db_ has _NOTHING_ to do with that, you could always copy the songs off from the device(you couldn't play drm'd shit on wrong device of course) and still can without any tool expect copy. don't make up excuses for apple, it's apples job.

[Paul @ Sep 17th 2007 11:46AM]

Does this mean I'm going to be able to manage my iphone's tunes from my linux PC?

[Ian H. @ Sep 17th 2007 11:55AM]

Is someone working on something like this to allow the use of 3rd party apps on Windows?

[Chris @ Sep 17th 2007 12:42PM]

Win Amp has a plug in that allows ipod support

[Q-bert @ Sep 17th 2007 11:58AM]

So, to sum up: A file format that was had been previously hacked is changed by the owner of said file format. Previous hacks break. Conspiracy theories appear about "why" the file format was changed. People whine for a few days about the extra work involved to hack it again, then proceed to do just that. Everything goes back to the way it was before.

Um, why were we talking about this again?

[phil @ Sep 17th 2007 6:02PM]

>> Um, why were we talking about this again?

Because it's indicative of how our Digital Rights are being eroded, with people like you leading the way. So it's not that you can sync the iPod now that hackers fixed it, rather Apple has made it known that it is not the open friendly company it once billed itself as. You realize that this is a restriction that was not previously present, right? That's limited your rights to something you buy, and that's not cool.

More info/my rant here:
http://lefttochance.com/?p=9

P

[mhc @ Sep 17th 2007 12:17PM]

Does this apply to the iPod Touch as well?

Doesn't the hacks require access to the file system (and has this been achieved on the Touch)?

[Dale @ Sep 17th 2007 12:29PM]

If only the iPod wasn't the only commercially available MP3 player. Then instead of complaining, consumers would be able to use purchase power to tell manufacturers that their methods are unacceptable.

I know, I know, I'm living in a dreamworld.

[wrabbit @ Sep 17th 2007 12:34PM]

Was there ever any doubt? :)

[Roberto @ Sep 17th 2007 12:35PM]

I've never met a Linux hacker who didn't like a difficult challenge. Working on the "iPod lockout" must have been the sweet highlight of their weekend.

[Andrew Davidson @ Sep 17th 2007 12:46PM]

Apple deserves every hack coming to it. The iPhone deserved it (why AT&T Steve, why?) and now this. God bless you, Tux.

[Sparks @ Sep 17th 2007 7:39PM]

Apple has also been pretty up-front that they would love a world where music could be bought without DRM and everything played together nicely. However, they also have to live in a world where the companies they are partnered with -- who provide the content (or in the case of the iPhone, the connectivity) -- threaten to pull their side of the deal if Apple does not keep things locked down.

I will almost guarantee you that the functionality in Amarok which allowed you to connect an iPod to almost anyone's machine and copy music on without resynching the library probably brought heat onto Apple from the content providers. "This must sync to only one library; if people can just pull music off of their friends' machines, that promotes piracy! Fix this, or we will pull our music after the next renewal."

Granted, we have no real way of knowing whether Apple would put their money where their mouth is if given the free reign to open everything up; they might quite happily sit on everything and lock stuff down. But there is some evidence (from their work on zeroconf and other open protocols, as well as their contributions to open source projects) that they might actually mean what they claim.

But at least right now, not all of the blame can be placed on them. (Just as not all of the blame for DRM issues with Windows can be placed on Microsoft, either.)

[Kragmose @ Sep 17th 2007 12:48PM]

Apple blocks something, someone unblock it. They restrict acces, someone hacks their way in. Wake up and smell the present, Steve.

[Rob @ Sep 17th 2007 1:55PM]

The "Read" link is suffering from a mild case of "The Digg Effect" so here's a version from the Coral Cache:

http://www.monroe.nu.nyud.net:8080/archives/110-iPod-Classic-Will-Be-Supported.html

I wish they could crack DAAP too, Ever since the update to iTunes my Xbox Media Center won't find my iTunes share. I'm sure if this came to light here in the UK Apple could get into trouble, the BBC had pressure from the UK government to make their software compatible with Linux, I'm sure specifically preventing 3rd party apps working with your hardware and/or software breaks at least one law.

One of the most annoying things about the iPod is that you can't normally plug it into anyone's computer and drag music to it, it has to be connected to YOUR iTunes to work properly, programs like Amarok allowed this and Apple are trying to shut them out.

[Julian Bond @ Sep 17th 2007 2:27PM]

So now the next question. Why did Apple include a hash in the database tied to the specific iPod it's on?

And is iPodLinux and Rockbox still a possibility on the new iPods or are they locked out permanently?

[Constable Odo @ Sep 17th 2007 2:36PM]

Why not buy the Creative Zen Vision W? It's a fine PMP with more playable formats and such. Why bother with hacking the iPod Touch when the Zen W is ripe for the picking.

[jemaze2004 @ Sep 17th 2007 2:44PM]

f/u to Q-bert's comment: So, they take an open DB format and restrict access to it....hmmmm, maybe because it is also used by the networkable iPhone so the open DB would be a security threat?

[huh @ Sep 17th 2007 10:00PM]

I'm not sure about the Zen Vision W, but the previous models in that line weren't Linux or Mac compatible, special hacks had to be developed (like the iPod). The best players if you want to have a simple drag and drop world don't require special protocols (and why should they?)

[Xew @ Sep 17th 2007 10:20PM]

shouldn't it be iPods blocked from syncing with linux? When I read the title I thought you guys have a solution to it already... :S

[Markus Canada @ Sep 20th 2007 12:55AM]

I doubt this was really an "anti-linux" move by Apple. I don't think they give much thought to the Linux market. The addition of SHA1 hashes to the iPod database was almost certainly i)a (new) way of ensuring that digital media you put on your iPod could not be transfered to other computers (by locking a particular iPod DB to a particular instance of iTunes) - nothing new, most previous iPods were designed to restrict the transfer of music from iPod to computer - AND ii) a way of softly "forcing" iPod owners to make use of the iTunes store rather than other sources of digital media. The effect the hash had on Linux users (and any non-iTunes access to the iPod DB) was just a side-effect, maybe a desireable one from Apple's point of view, maybe not. I think Apple's true motive is preventing competition with the iTunes music store, but more generous people might say it's a way for Apple to protect "digital copyrights" or some other nonsense.

In any case, Linux users should keep their eyes on the gtkpod development news if they don't want to mess about with hashes every time they alter their 6th Gen iPod Classic databases. Sooner or later a new version of gtkpod will be released which places all the messy work back into the background, and nobody will remember what the fuss was about.

Greetz to the gtkpod team, you guys are awesome.

[Paulie @ Sep 24th 2007 3:59PM]

Donald, Dude.
next time you post an article, you might think about scanning it for readability before you submit it.

>> iPods unblocked from syncing with Linux
>>
>> As we recently reported, the latest batch of iPods brought with them a few
>> changes that weren't exactly evident at first glance, not the least of which
>> was the ability to sync with third party apps.

The title and the first line of the article made it sound as if Apple had made iPods more accessible. Go on Apple, help teh linux...

>> That proved to be especially problematic for iPod-loving Linux users, who
>> had gotten used to apps like gtkpod and Amarok to sync the players with their
>> OS of choice

What? Linux people aren't happy with this change of heart? My brain started to hurt a little bit.

>> As expected, however, that blockage now appears to have been cleared by some
>> enterprising Linux users,

Who, what, wtf? My dull brain eventually worked out what you meant but I think Engadget owes me a few braincells which got killed'd during the whole palaver.

Mr P