Decaflon

You can set your iPod to sync manually so then you can just drag and drop things from any library into yours. I grab things from folks all the time that way.

I second jensized comment...

Additionally, they still haven't gotten it into their heads that a large number of people use multiple computers.

Umm, I had 3 computers at one time and my 4G 20GB iPod connected and synced with them all, all the time. Your main issue seems to be that iTunes doesn't connect 1 iPod with multiple AppleID's.

You can set your iPod to sync manually so then you can just drag and drop things from any library into yours. I grab things from folks all the time that way.

How? I set it up in iTunes so that everything syncs manually. Did it for both my wife's account and mine. While it stopped the automatic syncing, it didn't stop me from needing to wipe out my player in order to get the music.

Also, there's that whole Amarok issue. I'm *seriously* not liking that.

our main issue seems to be that iTunes doesn't connect 1 iPod with multiple AppleID's.

Explain, please.

If you're on ONE account, everything will sync fine... if you're logging out and back in as a different user in Windows (or OS X) there is a totally different Library database associated with iTunes, thus it will not sync with an iPod linked to a different database.

I have a single account on my iBook with everyone's music/movies etc on it and manually sync all my music to my touch, all my wife's to her Shuffle and all my sister-in-laws to her shuffle. I couldn't do that if they all had separate logins on my iBook.

I use my iPod on about 5 different computers, 3 are mine.

You can't use the "sync" feature that way, but I never liked that anyway... especially since I only have 2 gigs on my nano. I can drag and drop other people's music... just not their DRM'd stuff. Though to be honest, I haven't tried the windows version, that may be a big difference.

I agree the DRM sucks. Bad.

Agreed all around Gnorb.

DRM blows but you can "fix" that legally by purchasing the songs then removing the DRM either by downloading another copy from a bitorrent tracker, burning and ripping or finding something that cracks FairPlay in-place. Or just use another source. You can import non-DRM music from other services as long as they're not WMA (not sure if that's even an issue anymore?).

iTunes stinks. I'm not sure if that's the part of me that detests Apple or not but I just cant get on with iTunes for Windows at all. I'm in Linux almost all of the time now so I either use Rhythmbox or Amarok to push things over to the my iPod (4th gen) and they're both just bliss compared to the bloatish nightmare that was iTunes.

This "intentional" corruption of your iPod DB is likely going to be the subject of quite a few anti-trust cases against Apple. I argued against Opera before (because MS being a monopoly now isn't anywhere near as bad as it was in the 90s, and/thus removing IE is less helpful to the consumer) but I can easily agree that Apple do appear to be taking significant steps to keep people using iTunes, even against their will.

Well you use Windows so I can recommend you a couple of good software to try out with your iPod. Winamp is one. Media Monkey is another. I personally haven't used Media Monkey but I hear its better than Winamp. I use Winamp to sync my players (I don't have or want an iPod but it should work the same way) because I've been using it all my life.

Try it out if you really get frustrated with iTunes.

Well you use Windows so I can recommend you a couple of good software to try out with your iPod.

Though I'd be willing to bet that all these apps are getting patches to get around Apple, once again.

Well, the point is if it works with what you have. I've always been utilitarian that way. I don't use something because I have to use it. I use something because I need to use it. With what I have, the iPod isn't so special and iTunes is a horrible piece of software bloat. Times like that, I like the alternatives.

About Apple's stranglehold on the MP3 market. Apple basically did something that many couldn't and still can't do: appeal to the public. The only reason why we see Apple's iPod instead of Samsung's latest and greatest MP3 is because the company jumped on the opportunity to take control of unpopulated territory and others are trying to squeeze in like New York City. If Apple suddenly said that all iPods would only play Michael Jackson music from 2008 onwards, they no longer appeal to the public (ok maybe some) and the product will go down the drain. The public, in fact, really does control every market.

I have a single account on my iBook with everyone's music/movies etc on it and manually sync all my music to my touch, all my wife's to her Shuffle and all my sister-in-laws to her shuffle. I couldn't do that if they all had separate logins on my iBook.

I guess that's where I get ticked off: the only database that should matter should be the one on my iPod.

*sigh*

Nevertheless, I think -- THINK -- I've finally found the manual feature which allows me to use multiple computers. It sure would've been nice if Apple included a fucking instruction manual with the iPod that actually explained this, instead of just a quick-start guide that didn't. (Then again, maybe it was missing from my package: I'll not ignore the possibility that this iPod was either returned or was simply an aberration.)
It still pisses me off that I can't seem to use it with Linux without "accidentally" corrupting the DB. And that there's no file browser on this damned thing so that I can simply see the file names, or play an MP3 file I just drop in.

@pickagun: I heard the same arguments during the Microsoft anti-trust trials. In fact, let me try it:

About [Microsoft]'s stranglehold on the [Desktop] market. [Microsoft basically did something that many couldn't and still can't do: appeal to the public. The only reason why we see [Microsoft]'s [Browser] instead of [Netscape]'s latest and greatest [Browser] is because the company jumped on the opportunity to take control of unpopulated territory... The public, in fact, really does control every market.

When you attain dominant position in a free market, that's one thing. When you use that position to drive others out of your market, that's called a monopoly. When Apple uses its dominance in the MP3 market to push iTunes by locking out other folks -- that, my friend, is a monopoly.

(And by the way, the Samsung e200 series isn't bad at all. In fact, I think instead of an iPod nano, I'll get one of those for my workouts. Maybe even run Rockbox on it.)

Anyway, I'll probably stick with this and see if I can *make* it work like I want. I guess I don't mind too much being trapped into using Windows. At least it's Windows XP, not Vista. (Of course, that's like saying that I'm OK with drinking a little arsenic, instead of drinking arsenic while sitting on a hot stove.)

Still grieving over my lost iRiver H320: best portable media system, hands down, ESPECIALLY when you installed RockBox on it. Simply phenomenawesometastic.

Edit: Just did a Google search on "using the 6g ipod 80gb on Fedora" and got the following:

It's like looking at a mirror that's pointed to another mirror.

I can easily agree that Apple do appear to be taking significant steps to keep people using iTunes, even against their will.

No one forces you to buy an iPod so there's not a valid basis against Apple on that front. If you dislike having to use Apple software to manage your Apple hardware, don't buy the iPod. It's not the only MP3 player out there.

A monopoly is EXCLUSIVE control of a commodity... and as long as there are other options, Apple cannot force you to use iTunes. If Apple owned 99% of the market and you had a choice between an iPod or a Zune and that was it... I could see there being massive upheaval.

I do have to say that having used iTunes on BOTH XP and OSX there is a MAJOR difference in the two and the copy I use on XP @ work sucks.

We should have another thread for the whole monopoly discussions if we're branching into the concept :)

Have you tried setting up iTunes in linux via wine or a virtualpc? I don't know if it plays well with wine, and I'm not sure that would help given the problems you had using multiple computers to begin with, but it's a thought.

Apple could do a lot to improve the DRM scheme, and the fair, legit use of it. Like a family plan. Technically the RIAA and MPAA tend to get ticked if you take a DVD to a neighbors and play it for them, but we all know that's ridiculous, so $#(*) them. It'd be great to have say 5 family members on the same plan, where they could download items the others have purchased... or re-download items they've purchased.

I'm looking forward to the day DRM is a footnote in wikipedia.

I think this is all more or less DRM stuff. Punish the masses for the crimes of a few. It's safer and easier for them to treat the whole as music thieves than it is to try and control the few.

That being said, it's the best out there and I've got no problems paying for music. I was recently married and my wife and I consolidated our iTunes libraries. I keep telling her we just need to use one account, but sometimes she'll forget my password and switch over to her account. But we haven't had any problems mixing and matching when adding music to our iPods. She had a first gen iPod up until Christmas. I got her a 80g classic and a shuffle. I've had the first video iPod since they came and have no need to upgrade.

I think this is all more or less DRM stuff. Punish the masses for the crimes of a few. It's safer and easier for them to treat the whole as music thieves than it is to try and control the few.

Nail on head. Points awarded.

This is the problem with... most of the business world.

It's safer and easier for them to treat the whole as music thieves than it is to try and control the few.

While that might work as an argument for physical media (eg CSS on DVDs), I'm not sure it carries to a digital world and the reasons for trying to employ DRM are far more sinister - they want people in a situation where they consider buying multiple licenses for different DRM providers.

Stick with me.. I'm not sure I've ever made this exact argument before, so I might get a little lost along the way.

DVDs can be lent to friends, sold on and traded because with their DRM, they can nicely adhere to the open-book theory: as there's only one copy per "license", only one person can consume it at a time.

But with digital files, you can create infinite copies from and therefore the company line has to be "we're just protecting ourselves from unscrupulous people". This is accomplished by tying that license directly and permanently to one identity (an iTunes account, here), meaning you lose all ability to move that license around like you can a physical copy.

Then there's interoperability. DVD's CSS, while fairly standard, uses patented and licensed technologies requiring people in the US (one of the few places where software and algorithmic patents are allowed) to buy a license for playback. This is included in the price of your set-top-box player hardware or the price of your software.

This clearly shouldn't be the case. If you sell a license to watch/listen to something, this license should cover all the required technology to view it, no? It's like selling somebody a car and not giving them the key.

In that same vein hardware vendors should implicitly be allowed to create hardware to deal with any DRM or codecs and not have to jump through licensing and royalty hoops (where many manufacturers get turned down).

My point is that between proprietary DRM systems and them being locked to one identity, many of the fair-use copyright clauses are infringed upon. Once you start buying into one technology (eg FairPlay) you're unable to move to non-Apple hardware and if you want to keep your iPod but want to shop elsewhere, you'll find that some DRM won't work for you, and thus you have to stick with iTunes, or, as the media companies hope (and people have done) you buy that media all over again.

Things are happening to dissolve DRM in electronic music with Sony BMG being the last of the major four labels to force DRM across their brand but we're really just getting started with all this again for digital video...

I just hope video rights-owners can learn something from music and see that people require some form of ownership of things they buy. If you've got to do DRM consider an open, royalty-free DRM schema that had the ability to be "lendable" and also permanently transferable; otherwise people are going to carry on using the less-than-legal sources that pay you squat.

Stick with me.. I'm not sure I've ever made this exact argument before, so I might get a little lost along the way.

Check.