Okay, so here's a question. Why does Mac provide an iTunes for both the Macintosh computers and windoze computers but not for linux? Are they threatened by linux? Linux is a unix based OS just the same as Mac OSX I think. GTKPod is currently a very nice iTunes equivalent but it still doesn't offer the functionality that iTunes offers. I am still unable to load my video and pictures onto my iPod until the newest version of GTKPod is released for Kubuntu. Anyway, just wanted to get an understanding why MAC is being so stingy with their software. What is everyone's opinions/feelings on this matter.

Why doesn't Adobe supply Photoshop for Linux?
Why doesn't ?? port ACDSee to Linux?
AEC---Fasttrack
etc.
etc.

Because they do not see a market--a benefit to them. There is a clash of business models here that will take a while to sort out---oh, maybe 10-20 years....?

This is what I find very interesting for Macintosh. How is it possible for them not to see a market benefit from linux, an operating system that so much resembles itself. Mac is also unix based, as stated before, and is also pushing towards open source software. If anything, I think that not supplying iTunes for Linux is a business deterrent. They supply it for Windows, their biggest competitor, but won't give linux a thread of help. In my opinion, providing Linux with iTunes will further open the door for potential business and profit for the Macintosh corporation. Linux users will be more inclined to buy music through iTunes from Mac, and will also be more inclined to buy an IPOD knowing that it will be fully functional in the Linux OS. Transporting iTunes to Linux, to me, seems like a win, win situation. Any opinions?

You're right. I fully agree with your suggestion.

Steve does not care about people who use Linux... That is why I don't and wont use his products. I don't get the Ipod/Itunes junk anyway... there are many other way's I can listen to music.

KC

I've never run it but I read the latest MAC OS was based on Unix. If this is true it would be pretty easy for them to release something for Linux. Apple about went belly up not that long ago, I thought they were now out for all they could get. Maybe Steve does have something against Linux???????

Like what would he have against linux? Just because linux and Darwin are Unix-like doesn't mean Apple should see linux as sort of it's half-brother. They are both extremely different operating systems and two entirely different kernel designs.

iTunes for linux might be cool but since when haa people not porting software to our OS of choice stopped us?

Frankly, I'm suprised someone hasn't ported it by now, other then using ''work around software'' *cough* Code Weavers *cough* but that is still not open source.

Simple reason. Economics. Linux desktop software has a very low marketshare. When the number of linux users increases, then you migth see a change. By the way, apple itself has a very low marketshare of desktops, and microsoft views linux as a threat, so don't expect them to make it easy.

There is no problem of porting iTunes to Linux. It's MFC nased and I know MFC to GTK port. Anyway I do not like iTunes I have 3 iPods in house and even my kids prefer to use MediaChest. Of course we have no Windows, just Ubuntu.

МОСКВА, отличный ник

It's real simple:

1. Go out and buy an imac, $3,000

2. Go out and buy an ipod, $300

3. Next, buy a stereo adapter, $40

3. Now go buy a car adapter, $40

You never have to worry about compatibility again, priceless.

It's more about control than market share. On Win, they have all the big brother infrastructure they want, they get to see what you download to your iPod, watch the network traffic sometime. People on linux would'nt tolerate that bull$hit. And they have a lot of DRM stuff that linux people would hack. Just get a regular USB machine and avoid *pod

Just a theory:

I think Apple see itself as the outsider, rebelling against Microsoft. As Apple becomes more an more mainstream, they may be afraid that Linux could steal that place in peoples' minds. If that were the case, it wouldn't be a hard decision to make it as hard as possible for Linux people to use ipods.

Followup question:

I'm considering getting a Video Ipod equivalent. Any suggestions?

Well, first off, I just recently purchased an Ipod Nano with a 1 year warranty. After a couple minor fixes, I can use GTKPod to my heart's content. True, there may be other .mp3 players out there, but the ipod has a certain charm with an ingenious design. And to be honest, I would almost suggest going for an ipod over other mp3 players mainly because they are getting so popular. The more popular something is in Linux, gets the most support, which is another reason why I went with an ipod.

While I think iTunes would make things nice for Linux users (updating the ipod and listening to music) I can get by enough. Besides, I think Rhythmbox (pretty much an iTunes clone) has/getting ipod support. Like cs-cam said, we can get by without Apple's help.

Even though Apple has the Darwin kernel, and all their apps just seem to work, it's still proprietary software. You have to be a certain type of person to own a mac, windows, or a linux pc. Mac is for someone who doesn't like Windows but still wants the security of a fully operation system. Sometimes, people just like things to work out of the box, and sometimes that doesn't happen with Linux (and windows).

That's my