PDA

View Full Version : Alternative OS for iPod Nano?




archre
Jan 31, 2012, 07:07 AM
Are there alternative OSs (like some Linux OS) for the current iPod nano? Thx



Carlanga
Feb 1, 2012, 08:47 AM
no

Julien
Feb 1, 2012, 10:52 AM
no

What are you talking about?:eek: I run Windows 7 Premium on mine.:D

Eddy Munn
Feb 1, 2012, 12:40 PM
Windows 95

mrsir2009
Feb 1, 2012, 01:10 PM
Nope, its a closed system.

archre
Feb 4, 2012, 09:02 AM
Yeah too bad. I used to run Linux on my old 1st gen iPod nano, but iPod Linux isn't really maintained any longer.

I really hate how restricted you are with the Apple OS on the nano. I'd like to customize it (new icons, custom watch faces) and make more use of the hardware (play doom, calendar, etc).
All this was possible with Linux on the nano.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8KQNAuk_G-o

mrsir2009
Feb 4, 2012, 01:53 PM
Yeah too bad. I used to run Linux on my old 1st gen iPod nano, but iPod Linux isn't really maintained any longer.

I really hate how restricted you are with the Apple OS on the nano. I'd like to customize it (new icons, custom watch faces) and make more use of the hardware (play doom, calendar, etc).
All this was possible with Linux on the nano.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8KQNAuk_G-o

Well the iPod Nano is designed for one thing and one thing only: To play music.

archre
Feb 4, 2012, 02:41 PM
Well the iPod Nano is designed for one thing and one thing only: To play music.

It might be designed to just play music, but as a matter of fact it is a small (and wearable) computer with Samsung ARM processor, 64MB RAM and a multi-touch display.
The processing power of this thing is considerably higher than my first Windows 95 PC with Pentium P54C 100MHz CPU.

So why would somebody not want use it for what it is capable to do?

chrf097
Feb 4, 2012, 05:41 PM
It might be designed to just play music, but as a matter of fact it is a small (and wearable) computer with Samsung ARM processor, 64MB RAM and a multi-touch display.
The processing power of this thing is considerably higher than my first Windows 95 PC with Pentium P54C 100MHz CPU.

So why would somebody not want use it for what it is capable to do?

Because most people who buy it just want an MP3 player, not some little guru linux watch? Just a wild guess.

archre
Feb 4, 2012, 07:09 PM
Because most people who buy it just want an MP3 player, not some little guru linux watch? Just a wild guess.

Apple wouldn't need to advertise it for that purpose, they'd just need to allow installing a custom bootloader. Think of Microsoft's Kinect for example -- many people only bought one to develop cool controllers/3d sensors/etc (a friend of mine developed a cool interactive graphics controller with it and I was close to buying one in order to develop some gesture MIDI controller). Same could have happened to the iPod.

chrf097
Feb 4, 2012, 07:33 PM
Apple wouldn't need to advertise it for that purpose, they'd just need to allow installing a custom bootloader. Think of Microsoft's Kinect for example -- many people only bought one to develop cool controllers/3d sensors/etc (a friend of mine developed a cool interactive graphics controller with it and I was close to buying one in order to develop some gesture MIDI controller). Same could have happened to the iPod.

Except that Microsoft did advertise Kinect to be used by developers.

Dagless
Feb 5, 2012, 06:49 AM
^ Only after hackers tore it apart. Much like the App Store and iOS, if hackers hadn't got there first who knows where we'd be right now?

Yeah too bad. I used to run Linux on my old 1st gen iPod nano, but iPod Linux isn't really maintained any longer.

I really hate how restricted you are with the Apple OS on the nano. I'd like to customize it (new icons, custom watch faces) and make more use of the hardware (play doom, calendar, etc).
All this was possible with Linux on the nano.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8KQNAuk_G-o

That looks entirely playable and enjoyable.

Carlanga
Feb 5, 2012, 09:25 AM
Yeah too bad. I used to run Linux on my old 1st gen iPod nano, but iPod Linux isn't really maintained any longer.

I really hate how restricted you are with the Apple OS on the nano. I'd like to customize it (new icons, custom watch faces) and make more use of the hardware (play doom, calendar, etc).
All this was possible with Linux on the nano.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8KQNAuk_G-o

You want to play Doom on the nano 6G? It would be impossible due to its size and it having no BT capabilities, my thumb would cover almost all the screen; calendar is a good idea if it had some kind of wifi or bt sync...

Also, apple is known for having a closed ecosystem.

miss.manson
Feb 5, 2012, 12:44 PM
You want to play Doom on the nano 6G? It would be impossible due to its size and it having no BT capabilities, my thumb would cover almost all the screen; calendar is a good idea if it had some kind of wifi or bt sync...

Also, apple is known for having a closed ecosystem.

Apparently it isn't impossible. There are videos of Doom being played on the Nano all over Youtube, so no, it's not impossible. A little uncomfortable and awkward IMO, but not impossible.

SimonUK5
Feb 5, 2012, 02:48 PM
Rockbox...

Carlanga
Feb 5, 2012, 06:08 PM
Apparently it isn't impossible. There are videos of Doom being played on the Nano all over Youtube, so no, it's not impossible. A little uncomfortable and awkward IMO, but not impossible.

Read my post again on why it's not possible again since I'm not talking about hardware power but controlling it. A little? It would be hugely uncomfortable and awkward that would make it impossible to play properly

archre
Feb 5, 2012, 08:15 PM
I agree that doom would probably be not the best application to run on a small touchscreen device, but I only used it as an example for what could be possible on the nano.

chrf097
Feb 5, 2012, 08:46 PM
^ Only after hackers tore it apart. Much like the App Store and iOS, if hackers hadn't got there first who knows where we'd be right now?



That looks entirely playable and enjoyable.

Except that they said they wanted people to develop for it even before the hacks rolled in. Did they instantly just give an SDK? No, but that doesn't mean they didn't want people to explore with it.