Canonical seeks profit from free Ubuntu (ZDNet) [LWN.net]

Canonical seeks profit from free Ubuntu (ZDNet)

Posted Oct 7, 2006 9:30 UTC (Sat) by drag (subscriber, #31333)
In reply to: Canonical seeks profit from free Ubuntu (ZDNet) by thebluesgnr
Parent article: Canonical seeks profit from free Ubuntu (ZDNet)

What I would do if I was Shuttleworth is concentrate on Free-as-Beer Linux desktop and support elements.

I think that if he can get a desktop setup similar to Microsoft's small business server setup then that would be great.

Say it has two parts. Ubuntu SMB server and Ubuntu SMB client.

The server...
* Imap email
* Groupdav/Caldav calendering.
* Webdav document management.
* Secure SSL/TSL LDAP (either self-cert, or install option for working with a CA. Also provide documentation on how a company can setup it's own CA) For authentication, user accounts, address books, machine configurations, etc. Maybe with Kerberos if that makes sense, I am not sure if it does.
* File sharing.
* Web-based management console.

Options for Filtering web proxy. Anti-virus, Anti-spam, Windows client integration.
Also maybe support for 'roaming profiles' Linux-style with network'd home directories.. maybe secure it with NFS over OpenVPN? Since you're doing the CA stuff already...

Then with apt-proxy or a local caching deb mirror would be nice. So administrators can drop in custom software packages for large scale deployment and have a chance to test out new security fixes or package updates before they let them on their local mirror.

The client..
* Just a default standard nice Ubuntu install, but with user accounts and stuff preconfigured to work with the SMB server.
* Tie into the shared desktops.

Options for creating a default sample install and have that configuration uploaded to the server. Sort of like how you can do that with Cisco routers. Just a nice 'which additional packages' selection file and /etc/ configuration options.

Also be able to create defaults for adding new users and updating older accounts. Stuff like 'I would like a SMB share on their desktop by default' type stuff.

And maybe other stuff would be cool.

The idea being that if I can just waltz into a room with 30 desktop machines and 1 server machine I should be able to pop in a cdrom into the server press enter.. enter.. hostname.. timezone... yes.. yes.. enter.. and have that done. Then go and pop install cdrom in the desktops and press enter... hostname... etc etc. And have it 'Just Work'.

The most I may have to know is what a 'CA', unless I wanted to use the default for 'self cert' is and what a 'user account' is. And that would be about it. No having to edit /etc/nsswitch.conf or any of that sort of thing.

I think that is something that Ubuntu could do that they are in a unique position to do. The real great thing that Ubuntu does over something like Debian is have a great and easy to use Default Install.

If they can translate it to that 'workgroup' style install then that would be GREAT.

I don't expect anybody to follow what I say exactly.. But I am sure there is a default setup that is sane that would make sense for a small to medium workgroup of computers. It doesn't have to be perfect or do everything that everybody wants done, it just has to give a good base for people to work with.

Now stuff like this is perfectly possible to setup using Debian, or current Ubuntu, or Slackware or whatnot.. It's just that it's very difficult to setup, there is little documentation, everything is in little packages and there are dozens of configuration files and many little things that can go very wrong. Like not having DNS setup correctly can cause mysterious problems that will send people screaming. Having the entries in the wrong order in /etc/nsswitch.conf can cause machines to hang while booting up.

But if you can get a default install going.. Then it's actually pretty easy to use. Then people can look at it, see how it works, and all of a sudden they know how it works, how it is setup, and how to use it. It's much much much easier to learn things like LDAP if you have something that works first.

Otherwise you end up having to learn how to use it before you can even begin or even have anything to tinker with.

There are nice groupware projects. Web front ends for managing ldap. Samba file sharing and Windows support. Just nothing aviable to 'bring it all together'.

So this way people wanting to setup a 'Linux server' at home to go with their Linux or Windows desktop can end up having something that is very powerfull and works right out of the box. It'll help convince people how powerfull Linux can be and it can work fine for small businesses and large businesses and isnt' going to give them big increase in administration costs that Microsoft FUD says it will.

I don't think that this is something that Redhat could do. They don't understand the desktop if it walked right up and slapped them in the face. Novell could do it, and DOES do it, but it costs and they want support for their propriatory stuff. Debian couldn't do it, they have everything and it works and it doesn't require any patches or any special hacks and they have sample configs and everything.. but they simply are very focused on creating a do-all system. Slackware can't do it, it's just one guy. All those 'other' smaller distros lack the man power and budget to be able to get people in one place and setup a room full of computers and get it working. Mandriva? I doubt it. Linspire/Freespire? I don't think they are smart enough.

But Ubuntu? I think that they can do it and do a very good job of it.

(Log in to post comments)

Canonical seeks profit from free Ubuntu (ZDNet)

Posted Oct 7, 2006 20:14 UTC (Sat) by holstein (subscriber, #6122) [Link]

Looks like Ubuntu's people are already thinking about this... :)

On the wiki:
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuDownUnder/BOFs/UbuntuForSma...

And in the forums:
http://www.ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=191858

Canonical seeks profit from free Ubuntu (ZDNet)

Posted Oct 8, 2006 10:03 UTC (Sun) by oak (subscriber, #2786) [Link]

Hm. This seems much more far-fetched than what was requested above.
Above would basically be thin client stuff with SMB support out of
the box on a live/install-CD.

In the thread there was a nice idea about centralized (client) updating
which I like a lot and think kind of mandatory, but the
UbuntuForSmallBusinesses page seemed to be mostly aimed for providing
the software for the clients. I think that's bit of a mistake, the goal
should be first to get even the normal Linux Office stuff to work nicely
in an environment where files are on network NFS/SMB shares, most apps
run from a server, services are found automatically from the network
and done so that it _works_out-of-the-box_.

Canonical seeks profit from free Ubuntu (ZDNet)

Posted Oct 9, 2006 13:58 UTC (Mon) by holstein (subscriber, #6122) [Link]

I did some more reading in Ubuntu's forum, wiki and Launchpad.

The forum thread show that there is a lot of interest for something simpler to setup for SMB environment, even if there is a lot of opinion (and confusion) about what this imply.

Myself, I think that the best way to achieve that goal indeed lie in default settings that works out-of-the-box.

But I don't think that this would need to conflict with actual packaging "best practices" of not necesserily starting complex stuf with almost surely bogus default settings (like samba, MTA, etc). I think that a SMB setup could be done in a separate bunch of packages that could pull their needed dependancy with working default settings.

Something like a ubuntu-sbs-* class of packages. Say you want to share files with Samba. You would go for a "apt-get install ubuntu-sbs-fileserver"; this would pull a ubuntu-sbs-base that will add things nededed for the auto-discovery of services by the client (be it DNS trickery, Bonjour-Rendezvous-Avahi, etc.), and of course Samba/NFS for the actual sharing. I guess that for all of this to work perfectly, akind of ubuntu-sbs-client that help the client side would also be needed.

This way, easy setup could be done without interfering with the normal way of packaging but by allowing a default configuratioin that could be thought as a whole.

Would that make sense? I would think that this could make the problem a "simple" matter of packaging.

Canonical seeks profit from free Ubuntu (ZDNet)

Posted Oct 9, 2006 22:08 UTC (Mon) by drag (subscriber, #31333) [Link]

I think that approach conflicts with the Debian method of packaging.

For instance you will end up with situations were the SMB package aviable for 'SBS' version will be newer or later then the SMB package for everything else.

So it'll end up being a bit of a mess. I can think of maybe a dozen other small PITA things that this would cause.

The easiest way, I feel, is just to go with a seperate branch of Ubuntu. Like how they already do with Kubuntu vs Xubuntu.

Also realise that all packages such as your MTA or when you install Samba come with a default configuration anyways. So it's not like my idea would change anything.. it would simply require the default configurations changed so that they work together as a coohesive unit instead of making administrators configure them to do so.

It's a subtle difference, but the way it is now requires that administrators know how these things function before they can use them.. That is they have to learn how to use software before they can use it.

This conflicts with the fact that the majority of people don't know how to use the majority of software. They usually learn by example and configurating something that already works. Having something that works-out-of-the-box, while not nessiciarlly doing exactly what they want, makes the whole experiance much more productive.

That is one approach and is something that Ubuntu seems good at: Which is taking one default configuration and making it work.

That's why originally Ubuntu was _only_ Gnome, _only_ with the trash applet on the panel, etc etc. It 'just worked'. This contrasts with Debian method which is to offer you the world. If you don't know what 'Gnome' is or 'KDE' how should you know which to choose and which add-on packages make the experiance more positive?

So with Ubuntu new users are presented with something that works.. vs Debian were they would often end up at a command line prompt after struggling around with packages for a couple hours. And this difference is crucial because that was the only realy major major difference between the gnome stuff that Debian offered and the gnome stuff that Ubuntu offered.

There is another possible approach however. Which is realy close to what your talking about is called 'Componentized Linux' and is campioned by Progeny http://www.progeny.com/ .

http://componentizedlinux.org/index.php/Main_Page

Progeny is another corporation based around working with Debian originated distros, similar to Canonical in that way. However they've been around much longer and do contribute and work directly with Debian (having several debian devels on staff, I beleive)

But they are not aiming at community oriented desktop system like Ubuntu is. What they do is when a corporation or university or whatnot wants a custom linux operating system for their own purposes. Say a corporate branded distro with a specific configuration for use in embedded device, for instance. But say that corporation lacks the nessicary resources or whatnot to do that in a timely manner and in manner that is sustainable.. Well they go to Progeny and Progeny will make them one based off of Debian.

They developed the concept while working with Debian providing these specific configurations and such.

The idea behind 'Componentized Linux' is that instead of just dealing with individual software packages your dealing with 'componates' which are a entire slew of packages configured to work in a specific manner.

As a for instance.. Say you wanted to have a distro that integrated well into a Active Directory environment. So you would install the 'core' stuff (which would be Debian Stable, basicly) and then the 'Windows AD integration' componate which would setup what you'd need for windows file and print sharing with user authentication tht ties into AD.

Or say your Mepis and want to have a commercial user-friendly system. Then you would install the Core and then develop a 'Mepis Gnome' componate to add on to that. Same thing with Linspire and all that.

So you gain extra compatability to.. So if you like Mepis, but you need AD, then you install the 'Mepis Gnome' componate, and the 'Windows AD integration' componate, and your good to go.

And other commercial systems based on DEbian are encouraged to praticipate so users not only get to pick and choose which componates they want for whatever purpose they want.. They also don't loose any compatability between third party software. So if somebody packages a program for Linspire, for instance, it will work fine in Mepis or Progeny distros also since they are all standardizing around the same software.

The major downside is that it depends on Debian and the timely release of new stable versions.. which hasn't happenned yet or even CLOSE. They are almost as bad as Microsoft when it comes to delayed operating system launches.

But even if Debian released stuff on a timely manner this would not work for Ubuntu because in the past Ubuntu has shown that they have little desire to work with other commercial vendors and such. Which I don't have a problem with, it just means that I don't think that Ubuntu would have the resources to do their own 'componamentalized Ubuntu' approach. I think for Ubuntu the 'default configuration that works' approach is better.