[mirumu]

Quote:

Originally Posted by bperboy /img/forum/go_quote.gif I do see your point. I believe I do agree with a previous poster that it is to get people to lock on to the Apple Music Store, but come on, just use iTunes for iPod transfers, and some other program if you like for music library management. They've never actively allowed you to use other programs either, and they've probably got sick and tired of dealing with peoples' Rockboxed iPods that need repair.

Yes, I wonder what the actual statistics on that are. I wouldn't blame them for not wanting to support Rockboxed iPods. I have to wonder how many people ask for support with software other than iTunes too. I work in a software development house and it sure is frustrating when a customer asks for support when they aren't using our products in the intended way. I mod stuff and use software in unsupported ways all the time but I don't expect the company to provide me support under those conditions.

 

[mirumu]

Quote:

Originally Posted by OverlordXenu /img/forum/go_quote.gif That's such bs. I can stick OS X on my PC, and it will be just as stable.

No you can't. OS X has drivers for the hardware Apple ships, a lot of common PC hardware will not work well with OS X. You can patch OS X to run on AMD hardware for example (I've done this myself) but it's not going to be especially stable or functional. The stability of OS X comes both from it's unix heritage and from tight hardware integration. This is achievable with other operating systems too but you need to stick to good and well supported hardware.

 

[vegaman]

Quote:

Originally Posted by shigzeo /img/forum/go_quote.gif it is not like anyone ever said you had to have an ipod. if you hate it fine and linux rules. it is cool, but not saying ipod sucks because it does not support linux.

Yes, I agree with you. I don't have to buy an ipod, I did just buy a 4G imod though, but I'll have no problems running that.
And I currently don't plan to be purchasing one of the new generation ipods, so it's no big deal to me. I just find it annoying that they'd do that, since there was unofficial support for it, but now they're making it unusable.

 

[drizek]

Quote:

Originally Posted by mirumu /img/forum/go_quote.gif No you can't. OS X has drivers for the hardware Apple ships, a lot of common PC hardware will not work well with OS X. You can patch OS X to run on AMD hardware for example (I've done this myself) but it's not going to be especially stable or functional. The stability of OS X comes both from it's unix heritage and from tight hardware integration. This is achievable with other operating systems too but you need to stick to good and well supported hardware.

No, you are wrong. OSX works just fine on any intel laptop. I had it on mine for a few months. It works exactly the same way that it does on a mac. No loss of functionality or stability whatsoever. This is just a myth that mac users keep making up to justify spending hundreds of dollars more for the same hardware.

 

[OverlordXenu]

Quote:

Originally Posted by mirumu /img/forum/go_quote.gif No you can't. OS X has drivers for the hardware Apple ships, a lot of common PC hardware will not work well with OS X. You can patch OS X to run on AMD hardware for example (I've done this myself) but it's not going to be especially stable or functional. The stability of OS X comes both from it's unix heritage and from tight hardware integration. This is achievable with other operating systems too but you need to stick to good and well supported hardware.

Apple is using regular PC hardware now. As long as your processor supports SSE3 (which mine does), you can run OS X fine. I don't why you'd want to, anything OS X does Linux can do better, and lots of things OS X doesn't do, Windows can do.

The best thing about OS X is its ability to run SMP threaded apps, support lots of ram, and support more than 2 cores. That first thing, Linux can do much better (faster), and the last things, any other *nix oparating system can do, as can Windows Sever 2003, Windows Server 2008, Vienna/NT 7, and 64-bit Vista can support memory correctly.

 

[drizek]

You don't even need SSE3. SSE2 works just fine as well.

 

[OverlordXenu]

Not to mention I hear-tell of an OS X-for-PC's being "beta tested."

 

[mirumu]

Quote:

Originally Posted by OverlordXenu /img/forum/go_quote.gif Apple is using regular PC hardware now. As long as your processor supports SSE3 (which mine does), you can run OS X fine. I don't why you'd want to, anything OS X does Linux can do better, and lots of things OS X doesn't do, Windows can do. The best thing about OS X is its ability to run SMP threaded apps, support lots of ram, and support more than 2 cores. That first thing, Linux can do much better (faster), and the last things, any other *nix oparating system can do, as can Windows Sever 2003, Windows Server 2008, Vienna/NT 7, and 64-bit Vista can support memory correctly.

I'm not about to get into an operating system flame war here, (you seem to be trying to start those regularly). I've seen too many of them over the years, I started seeing them in the 1980s and and honestly I am long sick of them at this point but your view of the differences is over simplistic. Having a very small and well supported set of hardware does make an operating system more stable. Don't take my word for it, try running OS X on your PC and see how stable it is. How well it runs will depend on how close your hardware is to a real Mac. drizek's laptop would apparently seem to be very close to one. I run all three major systems at home and administer a network of Windows and Linux machines at work. I'm well aware of their various strengths and weaknesses and your comparison is as shallow as it gets. The fact is that with modern hardware and emulation technology it just doesn't matter any more. Use what operating system you like. If you want to get into OS flamewars the members lounge is the place, I'm certainly not going to respond on the topic again in this thread.

 

[OverlordXenu]

My mantra is, every OS sucks.

 

[drizek]

No, my laptop is nothing like a Mac. I have a 2 year old intel laptop so it is on a totally different chipset. My cpu only supports SSE2 and I have an nvidia video card. My wireless card is also not supported by the default OSX configuration. However, drivers for all these things have been ported and everything works perfectly.

 

[Arainach]

Quote:

Originally Posted by shigzeo /img/forum/go_quote.gif it is not like anyone ever said you had to have an ipod. if you hate it fine and linux rules. it is cool, but not saying ipod sucks because it does not support linux. i have used macs for years and not hated origin for not producing ultima online for osx or os9 - i just used an old copy of windows for the sole purpose of gaming.

If the iPod was some new product, I would buy your argument. But the iPod is a rather old (in computer dates) product that throughout its entire lifespan has been usable by 3rd-party products and by Linux. Removing it now is a slap in the face.

 

[shigzeo]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arainach /img/forum/go_quote.gif If the iPod was some new product, I would buy your argument. But the iPod is a rather old (in computer dates) product that throughout its entire lifespan has been usable by 3rd-party products and by Linux. Removing it now is a slap in the face.

it is not removing support for linux. it never had support for linux. it was just hackable. it is not removing anything just securing its support for its hardware and software. i feel no remorse in this just sad that maybe a few individuals who enjoy linux and its geekiness are now left having to buy the competetion which after tinkering with for years, i have found to be flawed in too many areas to be truly worthy.

apple have never supported linux and probably never will so nothing is removed. just let it lie down and relax with the outcome of the inevitable. cheersie

 

[grawk]

My quick off the cuff guess is that apple did it in order to reduce support calls. I'd be willing to bet that the number of calls about corrupted databases and the like are from people using unsupported software on their ipods. Support is extremely important to apple.

I don't get the appeal of foobar and the like. I wouldn't object to having something along the lines of a pro line itunes available, but nothing stops you from playing your music with one program and using itunes to do the loads. As to linux support, whatever. Wouldn't you rather run some linux based dap anyway?

 

[westies]

Quote:

Originally Posted by nelamvr6 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Well, I wish the RockBox guys luck, I hope they can pull it off. they're pretty clever guys... But if they can't this spells the end of me and iPods.

QFT. Only reason I bought an iPod over a Zen Vision: M was because I could put rockbox on it.

 

[bperboy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by grawk /img/forum/go_quote.gif My quick off the cuff guess is that apple did it in order to reduce support calls. I'd be willing to bet that the number of calls about corrupted databases and the like are from people using unsupported software on their ipods. Support is extremely important to apple. I don't get the appeal of foobar and the like. I wouldn't object to having something along the lines of a pro line itunes available, but nothing stops you from playing your music with one program and using itunes to do the loads. As to linux support, whatever. Wouldn't you rather run some linux based dap anyway?

Exactly! Finally, a sensible person's opinion comes forth!