When Will Apple Notice Linux?
One thing has always puzzled me about iTunes, why isn’t it available for Linux? Now, I don’t mean “why doesn’t it run on Linux” (because with some 3rd party emulation it will run just fine) but rather, “why doesn’t Apple support it?” It seems to me that Apple is missing out on a golden opportunity. The Linux market can be looked upon as an untapped market as far as media goes. You see, if you use Windows you have two choices for purchasing music online, Apple and then everybody else. If you are using a Mac then you just have one choice, Apple. But if you are using Linux, you don’t really have any choices to legally buy and download music do you? (to all of you Linux readers out there, if there is a service out there like that please let me know, I looked but didn’t find any)
If you use Linux, you are left out of the party. Now, I am quite sure that there are more than a few Linux users out there who enjoy listening to music on their computers. And, I am also willing to bet, that they don’t all go out and buy hundreds of CDs to get all of their favorite songs. Let us further assume that they aquire their music in somewhat less than legal means, shall we? If all of that is true, then you have market conditions that looked exactly like those that preceded the ITMS. And since iTunes and its Music Store have been very popular with the general public, why is there any reason to think it won’t be just as popular on the Linux side?
So, when I go to Apple’s site and click on their “download iTunes” link, I want to see three options, one for Mac, one for Windows and one for Linux. Of course, the ramifications of such a move would be tremendous, and I’m not just refering to buying songs, music videos or TV shows. If Apple were to make this move and port iTunes and Quicktime to Linux it would vastly improve Linux’s credibility.
That isn’t to say Linux isn’t credible, it is. But the fact remains that the main software companies out there don’t generally make software for Linux. Adobe doesn’t make any of its graphics tools (Photoshop, Illustrator, etc.) for Linux. I think we can all forget about Microsoft doing anything to help Linux, regardless of how much money it might make them. Broderbund, Corel, Intuit, Blizzard, Seirra and the rest all don’t make Linux compatible products. Why?
Well, there are several reasons, but most of those excuses would disappear if the Linux community could just get one main player on board. If just one recognized Linux as a true player then chances are good the rest will follow. However, just about all of these software developers earn most of their money from applications that run on Microsoft operating systems. So they probably won’t be tripping over themselves to be the first to legitimize Linux. Because if they do there is always the chance that Microsoft might retaliate for such a move, and what company really wants to risk that? Or rather, which company could do it with the least negative reprecussions.
Apple is the logical choice. If they lead the way then the other players can rationalize it by saying “Well, Apple is hot and if they are supporting Linux maybe that is because they see something we don’t. Maybe we should get on-board.” And so if one comes then two will come and then three, then four, till most of the major players are realizing that money can be made selling their products to Linux users.
But wait, before you penguin lovers out there warm up your flamethrowers let me make this one thing clear. I am aware that there are plenty open-source applications that currently fill most of these needs. If you don’t want Photoshop, use GIMP. Don’t want MS Office, use OpenOffice. Don’t like iTunes, use X Multimedia System. Yes, there are free, open source alternatives to proprietary, closed source, actually-cost-money software. I am not disputing this. However I am saying that without the backing or support of the major software companies Linux on the desktop will never reach anything other than its current, uber-geek, niche market. To make it to the big time Linux needs mainstream applications. If for no other reason than to make the transition easier for new users. Instead of forcing them to use the tortured interface that is the GIMP why not let them use Photoshop, since that is what they are comfortable with? It might mean that fewer people use GIMP, but isn’t that an acceptable loss if more people use Linux?
There is, however, another small hurdle to jump before anything like this can happen and that is the philosophical barrier that exist for many Linux users. First, Linux is still seen as a kind of special club for all of the really smart computer users out there. Allowing Adobe & friends to play in their clubhouse kind of reduces the mystique of their little world. So, if the Linux community is really serious about expanding on the desktop then they are going to have to come to terms with the idea that a lot of non-technical, non-programming people will be using Linux. This brings me up to my second point, attitude.
There have been plenty of times that I have encountered the arrogance of the Linux community. It most often comes out as some version of this notion: “if you aren’t smart enougth to use Linux then maybe you should go back to Windows.” Another common attitude is linking “easy to use” with “selling out”. Making software easy to use requires that you limit the number of features, something most die hard Linux advocates are loath to do. And yet it is something that must be done if Linux really wants to reach the masses. So, if the penguin really does want to go mainstream then they are going to need the support of the major software companies and the current Linux user base has to be ready for the impact of the non-technical user. Ubuntu is on the right track as far as this latter point goes, but they still have a long, long way to go.
So, perhaps someone needs to buy Linus Torvalds a plane ticket to Cupertino, California. Who knows, maybe if he asked Steve Jobs nicely if he might consider making iTunes available to three operating systems instead of just two. And maybe then, finally, the ball can start rolling for the Desktop Linux.
del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Slashdot
StumbleUpon
Comments
Maybe the headless servers have no need to listen to music.
Sometimes I think these kinds of articles are just written to fill some still empty HD-space before somebody else puts the Paris Hilton video on it!
Sure, Apple could put out Linux-versions of some of their technologies.
I could also sew a button to my cheek and hang a towel from it.
The question in both cases would be: why?
Much of the recent success of OS X in *NIX-circles comes from the fact that OS X has all the geeky underpinnings with all this nice multimedia shiny on top. This influx from the propellerhat-crowd can only strenghten the Mac-platform in the long run. It’s good for Apple and it’s good for the Mac-community as a whole when guys like Jamie Zawinski bring their expertise and start coding in XCode.
So why exactly should Apple put out Quicktime for Linux and send these guys back to their Debian? The more Linux users switch to OS X the better.
hitoro,
: ) Yes, the headless servers probably don’t need to listen to any music. However, anyone trying to use Linux as their main desktop might want to listen to some tunes.
Jens_T,
Sorry to disagree with you but I can’t see how exposing the Linux world to Apple’s technology (and making money off it at the same time) is a bad thing. If they really like Quicktime and iTunes then that will lead them on to buying a Mac.
James,
all sarcasm aside, I fail to see how providing technologies that are missing from Linux to the the Penguin crowd would entice them to go out and buy a Mac. Really, most of the stories of the Linus-to-Mac-switchers center around on being fed up with the GUI-mess and the abysmal multimedia support on Linux. If iTunes, Quicktime et al suddenly worked on their beige boxes, why would they switch? It’s the absence of those features that drives people to the Mac.
I suspect that Apple’s failure to port iTunes (or any other application) to Linux stems from three factors:
1. With finite resources, Apple has its hands full keeping its software cutting-edge or competitive on OS X and on Windows itself. Apple could allocate some development resources to the Linux platform, but not without pulling these resources from an existing project with a higher priority and higher return on investment.
2. Economics. Linux as a server platform is one thing, but on the desktop it’s simply not viable yet—even as we recognize it has taken many strides in this direction over the years. The Linux desktop platform remains stuck in that conundrum of requiring more consumer software to be a viable while at the same time needing first to be viable before developers of consumer software will support it.
3. One of Apple’s big selling points is that OS X is the best of UNIX plus the best of desktop and consumer software. The idea is that one can have his cake and eat it too. Not so with Linux or any other platform in the UNIX, GNU, or Linux family. Under OS X one can run the full panoply of Linux applications (under the command shells and also under X11). So, as the thinking goes, since the user can have a reasonable “Linux-like” experience on a Mac, why would Apple go out of its way to let Linux users have a “Mac-like” experience on Linux?
Apple doesn’t want to give up a key competitive edge—especially not at this time when it’s migrating to Intel. What compelling reason would the non-Windows markets have to go with Apple if Apple makes it easy to have full access to its software on other non-Windows platforms?
Producing software for Windows is a different matter because that installed base is huge and entrenched. But Apple still has realistic hopes of winning over the non-Windows crowd, and thus it behooves the company to make the case for OS X as compelling as possible.
I regularly see a (totally stereotypical, sad but true) Linux guy, complete with belly, beard & Tux-T on the subway, and he’s about the only person I know with a high-end Creative (I guess) DAP in his shirtpocket. Do Linux people really buy iPods? ...I’m sure this guy also packs a Sharp Zaurus somewhere in his checkered overshirt… maybe I should flash my Newton next time I see him, got a baaaad eye last time I had my “Think Different” Polo on for fun.
I think the point here is that iTunes and the itms were designed to sell ipods maximally. It is actually a big departure for apple to make their software available for a rival OS and justified because it was absolutely necessary for the success of the ipod to provide the same essential system on windows as on macs. Factors already mentioned such as the probable reluctance of Linux users to use such main-stream pieces of frippery as ipods, and the anyway very small user base, would probably make the development of a linux version near-to-un-economical. My impression is also that Jobs is not too keen on Linux: it is somewhat counter to his vision which relates to ease of use. I could be wrong about all this, and may be kicking myself on Tuesday… but I doubt it’s in the pipeline for any time soon.
Which Linux?
There are dozens of variations, different kernels, different sound architectures, different GUI layers.
Apple (or Adobe, or anyone else) can’t just release an “iTunes for Linux”, it’d have to be “iTunes for this-vendor’s Linux on that list of platforms using kernel at least and the libraries a, b, d through k installed, packaged using blahblahblah”. Yeah, there’s support & customer relations HELL.
Seriously, love Linux, but there are darn good reasons there’s no shrink-wrapped software for it.
For a free piece of software that is only part of a sales chain iTunes is never going to get brought over to Linux. Heck, it’s only on Windows ‘cause that dominates the market, and to do so Apple brought along chunk of MacOS to run it under.
If Apple has yet to, after all these years, make the trivial changes required to get QT Player to run decently on a modern Windows install (compare QT Player on Windows playing material to any other Windows media player, all of which support Overlay, running the exact same material through QT’s own codecs - night & day difference!) they’re not about to go futzing with a third platform.
Besides, the reality is the list of folks who only have Linux/don’t have access to Mac or Win is 4 fellas deep in the technology woods busy posting to Slashdot how’d they’d never buy anything from iTunes ‘cause it’s too corporate / DRM’d / popular / easy-to-use / costs actual money / isn’t in some obscure format only they care about
Great for them! The other 99.9999% of the market has access to a supported iTunes environment, is generating a cash flow, and would like more features/better services NOW.
Maggard, you make some excellent points. I should have been savvy enough to think of them, but I didn’t.
Talk about Linux community arrogance is ironic, considering that I (and many others) have asked Apple on their Quicktime forums on numerous occasions in the past for even an ABSOLUTE BASIC Quicktime client. I didn’t even care if they actually supported it or not (and I said as much), I just wanted to be able to view the various Quicktime exclusive content that is so common on the net. I’ve never seen a response to these requests. Now don’t get me wrong, I think that lack of response is just fine because Apple is an independent company that is and should be free to do (or not do) whatever it wants, but I am also free to do what I want, and I hope people don’t expect me to drop Linux just because Apple thinks that I am not worthy of support or even acknowledgement.
Anyway, not having an official Apple quicktime (or Microsoft Media) client is fine, I just use MPlayer (http://www.mplayerhq.hu). And not having an official Apple iTunes client is fine, I simply bought a very nice non-Apple Linux-supporting MP3 player (http://www.iaudio.com) and I buy my music in CD form and from independent non-DRM’d MP3 vendors like http://www.Zunior.com.
Linux users like me will get by without Apple, just as we have always gotten by without Microsoft. If that hurts Linux’s chances at dominating the world’s desktop so be it. I happen to think we’re doing well enough without them.
So “kynada” at linux.com thinks Linux users are painted as arrogant (where does that come from?) while pointing out he has repeatedly asked Apple to port QT to Linux (which one?), though he doesn’t really need it from them as there are perfectly good QT alternatives, he really just wants to use it to watch material from the Apple supported movie-trailer sites, and would never use iTunes (which was really the topic here), and apparently doesn’t have access to a Mac or Windows as alternatives.
Oh, and he’s comfortable his points do nothing for the Linux platform, apparently oblivious that they do a lot for the Mac one, the platform that Apple originally developed QT to showcase and sell more units of, the one many of his companions are migrating to for it’s stability, reliability, and *nix-compatability…
But hey “kynada”, great dedication there and good luck with all that, you’re a super salesperson for MacOS X.
There could be positives, but for the HUGE amount of resources needed to bring the QuickTime framework and iTunes app to Linux, I’d much prefer to see Apple work on making Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard competitive with Windows Vista. (Arguably Tiger already is, but I’m sure you’d agree that there is certainly room for improvement.)
[Hey James, here’s an article idea for you: head on over to the CES keynote segment which shows Vista’s interface and give us your thoughts!]
“Headless servers don’t need music”? That’s funny, and it shows you’ve not been a part of the Linux progress for several years. InfoWorld, a year ago, reported t"Headless servers don’t need music”? That’s funny, and it shows you’ve not been a part of the Linux progress for several years. InfoWorld, a year ago, reported there’s twice as many Linux **desktops** as there are Macs. I can find the URL, if you like.
At home, my workstations are just simple installs of Fedora Core 4. I use LDAP and NFS to provide Single-Sign-On (SSO) for all the machines in the house. People can change seats and take their data with them. It’s my core, headless server that holds all the user files, music, and movies.
It makes machines disposable; “Stewie” was purchased for $30; it’s an old Compaq P3. Windows can’t run on them anymore, so they’re dirt-cheap. Love that hardware-churn. Can’t wait for Vista!
No, it’s not a typical “collection of desktops”, but it’s very robust, simple, cheap, and everyone loves it. Even the neighbors want in! They’re buying the twisted-pair, now.
I buy every CD and rip them into the collection. I have a whole shelf of CDs collecting dust for just one reason- to free me from prosecution, should the Fed come a-knockin’.
There are re-sale stores with CDs for only $5 or so, legitimate, so I can wait for iTunes.
The author’s right. They’re missing out on a goldmine.
My suggestion? Sell OS/X as a proprietary interface for Linux (Think: Gnome/KDE). And keep making some of the best hardware on Earth. Get all the Linux folks, and the converting PC folks, too. Mac folks couldn’t care less what OS is there, and they won’t need to.
AND FOR ONCE EVERYONE IN COMPUTING CAN DEVELOPE FOR A COMMON PLATFORM, IN FREEDOM. Wouldn’t that be cool? I’ve been dreaming about it since 1978…here’s twice as many Linux **desktops** as there are Macs. I can find the URL, if you like.
At home, my workstations are just simple installs of Fedora Core 4. I use LDAP and NFS to provide Single-Sign-On (SSO) for all the machines in the house. People can change seats and take their data with them. It’s my core, headless server that holds all the user files, music, and movies.
It makes machines disposable; “Stewie” was purchased for $30; it’s an old Compaq P3. Windows can’t run on them anymore, so they’re dirt-cheap. Love that hardware-churn. Can’t wait for Vista!
No, it’s not a typical “collection of desktops”, but it’s very robust, simple, cheap, and everyone loves it. Even the neighbors want in! They’re buying the twisted-pair, now.
I buy every CD and rip them into the collection. I have a whole shelf of CDs collecting dust for just one reason- to free me from prosecution, should the Fed come a-knockin’.
There are re-sale stores with CDs for only $5 or so, legitimate, so I can wait for iTunes.
The author’s right. They’re missing out on a goldmine.
My suggestion? Sell OS/X as a proprietary interface for Linux (Think: Gnome/KDE). And keep making some of the best hardware on Earth. Get all the Linux folks, and the converting PC folks, too. Mac folks couldn’t care less what OS is there, and they won’t need to.
AND FOR ONCE EVERYONE IN COMPUTING CAN DEVELOPE FOR A COMMON PLATFORM, IN FREEDOM. Wouldn’t that be cool? I’ve been dreaming about it since 1978…
Wow. Love the registration system on this site. I spent 20m composing a message, then had to cut-n-paste once I felt sure I was really logged in.
To top it off, an accidental double-click screwed up the text! I give up; it’s too big to re-post; sorry.