How is it confusing? The top of the README explains it.

> LibrePods allows you to use AirPods features that are exclusive to Apple devices. It implements the proprietary protocol used to exchange data between AirPods and Apple devices

And then has a table listing the features.

I wasn't aware they operated as baseline Bluetooth headphones by default on other devices, so even having read the readme it wasn't obvious.

How else did you think they worked

I assumed, like Apple's Airtags (which use Bluetooth LE), that they used some proprietary pairing that's incompatible with non-Apple devices.

Airtags can be scanned with your non-Apple smartphone's NFC reader which gives you contact info for the owner.

Beyond that, all tracker devices are proprietary. The Tile/Chipolo network only works with Tile/Chipolo; Samsung's SmartTag only works with the SmartThings app which is exclusive to Samsung phones; etc.

I just don't think the comparison is apt

New chipolos work in both Apple Find My and Android Find Hub. Most third-party tags seem to support multiple platforms now.

Warning: many don't support both at the same time (setting up for one disables the other until reset)

Loads of 3rd party tags that work on the other networks though.

That was the point they were making, not that they had some NFC extra-functionality

What are some examples of 3rd party tags? I know the Find My network itself has been hacked around with for a 3rd party tag. I've always dreamed of an open-source tag that integrates with all the major networks so I can put a little tag on my cat's collar and track his travels.

Ugreen tags work with both Google's Find network and Apple's FindMy network.

Do they work with the network or with the app?

If it's the first, that seems like they would be a vastly superior offering to AirTags, especially outside America, where people aren't so Apple-crazy.

I don't know, I have an android phone. I just know it says it's compatible with the airtag network on the box, so I suspect it's the first. Ugreen doesn't even have any specific app for these, so I assume it goes through the primary setup method.

Well there you go. I guess its not so proprietary after all.

But its still what he thought...

> How is it confusing?

Judging by all of the other comments that assumed otherwise, a lot of people either weren’t reading the README or weren’t parsing what it was saying.

:sigh:

There's very little point having a discussion about something where other people can't even be bothered to properly read the link that was submitted - and even more frustrating when that link was literally a README file.

I didn’t follow that either from the README and I read the README before coming to the comments.

I have only used AirPods on iPhone and didn’t realize there were special features.

Therefore like most I had zero context.

Did the subheading "AirPods liberated from Apple's ecosystem." and the first line of body text "LibrePods allows you to use AirPods features that are exclusive to Apple devices." not provide the required context? Or at least strongly hint that there is context that iPhone-only AirPods users might not know - and for whom this project is probably irrelevant?

Apparently too many people on this forum of "clever" people think "exclusive" means the whole functionality of Airpods, including audio, is restricted to Apple devices...

A limitation that would make a lot of economic sense for Apple to do!

No, it did not. I found the link interesting like anything else open source. Will I use it? No. But I didn’t pick up on any of what you said. I thought they reverse engineered AirPods so they can work on Android, Linux etc

Not that they can already be used on other platforms as just Bluetooth devices (nor did I know that there were special Apple only features because it’s not widely known that those feature are Apple only)

_A lot of times_ people comment based on the title alone. I think it’s more common than one would imagine.

Yeah. And that's sad.

Recently, for the first time in over 15 years here, I've wished often for a "block user" function, so I can gradually weed those zero-effort zero-contributing users out. (If I didn't read HN across 4 or 5 different devices, I'd probably write a browser extension to allow me to do that...)

How would you handle replies?

What happens if they’re the top or middle of a pivotal subthread?

I think I'd "behead" subthreads at posts by blocked users, so their posts and any replies under them get hidden for me. I'm happy enough to lose followup discussion and/or arguments against anything a user who I've caught out not reading the actual post and replying - and been annoyed enough at too add them to my blocklist. I _might_ miss some interesting discussion that way, but I'm fine with that to be the cost of me avoiding getting irritated by annoying posters.

(And the mood I'm in right now, I'd probably block top level posts by blocked users as well)

Thanks for your reply.

Edit: If it were me, it’d be cool as hell if you implemented a way to compare - like a toggle on/off - so you could see if there was anything worthwhile with just a skim!

But it is not me, and I still appreciate your sharing.

So far most of the "discussion" on this thread is why did he post this. He just posted what he thought others missed, if people find it useless it will further down the page. TLDR, I find the comments under that thread questioning why he posted even more pointless.

That's not why one buys the AirPods. These things go with me from the iPhone to Apple TV, to my MBP, to the Mini. There is better sound available for less, but the sound is the least of the story.

Unfortunately, somehow AirPods also at random go from my wife's iPhone to my iPad. And then when she "steals" them back switch to my Mac a minute later.

Doesn't matter that they are linked to her iCloud account/Apple ID and my devices are linked to mine.

Apple "it just works" smarts are very nice, until it doesn't just work anymore and you have no way to disable them.

It's the reason I switched to JBL earbuds with a touch screen case, where I can explicitly tell them what device to connect to.

I disable Bluetooth on iPhone when I'm ready to go running using Apple Watch with AirPods Pro. Otherwise it's a big pain in the butt with the phone insisting of me doing stuff when all I wanted to do was check AirPods Pro battery level....

I bought Airpods second hand because I got a good deal on them. I don't use Apple devices. This mod is useful to me.

The very first paragraph of TFA adequately explains this.

I know. That’s why I wrote the comment. I wasn’t responding to the repo, I was leaving some info for all of the other commenters who were confused about this.

If I remember right, there have been several Android applications that show the battery level of AirPods since at least 2021. For essential features in addition to being connected as an ordinary Bluetooth audio output and audio input device.

I've wondered since inception why AirPods case doesn't at least show a color indicator — red/yellow/green — for AirPods battery level.

The case inside does show a color if the airpods are inserted. You have to open it to check, which is a bit annoying.

You mean the outside? There's no interior light.

I cannot see my AirPods in my Linux Bluetooth device list, ever.

You have to put them in pairing mode first: For airpod pros: Open the lid, keep the earbuds in the case, double tap your finger on the case just below the green led, The led should start to flash white and the airpods now appear in the device list in linux so that you can pair with them. Non-pro have an physical button on the rear IIRC.