| |||||||||||||
Fedora and long term supportFedora and long term supportPosted Oct 18, 2008 0:01 UTC (Sat) by sbergman27 (subscriber, #10767)In reply to: Fedora and long term support by kragil Parent article: Fedora and long term support
"""
You tried to avoid the subject (and kinda failed if I may say so). """
Indeed, he did. That's what people do when they've promised purple ponies in the past... and then some other distro actually delivers them.
(Log in to post comments)
Fedora and long term support Posted Oct 18, 2008 18:22 UTC (Sat) by smoogen (subscriber, #97) [Link]
One issue that I see a lot of is "Ubuntu is great! Everyone should use Ubuntu!!! It has a long term support plan etc etc." If one asks them "Do you pay for that Support?" I get back 90% of the time "Oh no.. they give it away for free!" which is nice, but only a short time outlook. A capitalistic/social commons needs a larger percentage of the people paying for its upkeep to maintain itself.
Unless you are paying Canonical, and convincing other Ubuntu users to pay for LTS.. you will not see it last. The reason LTS exists is because Shuttleworth is paying for people to work on fixing old crap. When Shuttleworth runs out of money (which depending on how much he had invested in the Stock Market/Icelandic banks could be pretty quick).. the free ride is over and people will have to find someone else to fix the stuff because most developers don't like trying to figure out if some 5 year old program can be fixed against some new style of attack.
So my main statement is if you are for Ubuntu. PAY FOR IT if you want to PROMOTE IT so it will be there 10 years from now.
Fedora and long term support Posted Oct 19, 2008 1:29 UTC (Sun) by sbergman27 (subscriber, #10767) [Link]
"""
When Shuttleworth runs out of money (which depending on how much he had invested in the Stock Market/Icelandic banks could be pretty quick).. """
While I certainly support the idea of investing in a distro one believes in, I don't appreciate the campaign of spreading Fear, Uncertain, and Doubt against Ubuntu. Regarding your specific concern, let me remind you that Mark's fortune was built upon knowing what to invest in and *when to get out*. He sold Thawte in December 1999. The dot-com bubble burst 3 months later.
I would like to see Canonical turn a profit. But the situation is not so dire as you make it out to be. If the worst should happen, and the paparazzi photos of Mark in line at the soup kitchen begin appearing in the supermarket tabloids (BTW, did you know that Britney is having Elvis' baby?) then the Ubuntu formula *will* be replicated. Because Ubuntu has clearly demonstrated a formula that attracts users better than the formulas used by other distros. Whether it is a formula that other distros want to follow is another matter. For example, it would be a terrible fit for Fedora. The Fedora devs want to present the bleeding edge of Linux development. They would never be happy cultivating a large user base. Some in the Fedora community seem to *think* that they would. But that is, in my opinion, a case of "be careful what you wish for".
Ubuntu attracts many users Posted Oct 19, 2008 3:49 UTC (Sun) by vonbrand (subscriber, #4458) [Link] So what? If the result isn't a self-sustainable business model, it is of no real importance. AFAIU, Ubuntu has yet to show a profit, even with its massive user base coupled with few full-time developers.
Ubuntu attracts many users Posted Oct 19, 2008 4:52 UTC (Sun) by sbergman27 (subscriber, #10767) [Link]
"""
even with its massive user base """
And the even more massive "sour grapes" phenomenon it has generated among fans of the less popular distros.
"""
Spoken like a true FOSS devotee.
Ubuntu attracts many users Posted Oct 19, 2008 17:44 UTC (Sun) by vonbrand (subscriber, #4458) [Link] """ If the result isn't a self-sustainable business model, it is of no real importance """ Some way of paying for build servers, distribution, bug handling, ... has to be found. Last but not least somebody will have to cough up the paychecks for a few key people. If all that is just "provided by $MECENAS, until his patience runs out", it is not a sustainable model.
Ubuntu attracts many users Posted Oct 19, 2008 20:45 UTC (Sun) by sbergman27 (subscriber, #10767) [Link]
"""
it is not a sustainable model. """
I get the impression that the FOSS community (or is it the RedHat/Fedora community?) is really reaching here. Who pays those bills for Debian? I guess Debian is "unsustainable". And has been for the last 15 years. Yes, Red Hat has found a way to make money... lots of it... from FOSS. I applaud them. And I am pretty much in the Red Hat camp. Used RedHat Linux from 4.2 on, 1997, use CentOS today, yadda, yadda, yadda... But Ubuntu is an impressive new force which is causing people to sit up and take notice. I wonder why we are so resistant to it? Could it be that we hate it when our friends become successful?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fb1uytt7zaM
Ubuntu attracts many users Posted Oct 20, 2008 10:35 UTC (Mon) by tialaramex (subscriber, #21167) [Link]
Debian pays its bills. There's no reaching here, Debian's model involves large numbers of volunteers. We know it works because - voila, Debian. But it's also clear that this model doesn't produce Ubuntu, it produces Debian. Which is nice, if you like that sort of thing.
But you can't say "I will take this distro's resources, and assert that it could be combined with this other distro's philosophy and produce this third distro's product" because there's no reason to believe that works.
The existence of Ubuntu doesn't prove that Debian style volunteers could produce a Fedora alternative but with long term support, any more than the existence of oil-rich Saudi Arabia proves that desperately poor Ethiopia could become lush green New Zealand.
Maybe that's not a great analogy, but hopefully it makes my point.
Ubuntu attracts many users Posted Oct 20, 2008 16:20 UTC (Mon) by sbergman27 (subscriber, #10767) [Link]
Either Debian is the Rock of Gibraltar or it is not. I think we can consider Debian to be reasonably permanent. Ubuntu, standing on the shoulders of Debian might be considered permanent in the way that, say, the Hawaiian islands are permanent. Sure, they might fall below the waves someday. But no one worries about visiting there or moving there. My analogy fails at the point that it does fall below the waves. Because Ubuntu has revitalized the concept basing distros upon Debian. Debian, due to Ubuntu, has regained its position as a substantial force in the Linux world. If Ubuntu were to fail, a new Debian-based distro would take its place. I am probably making myself look like a Debian fanboy. And I am not. I rather dislike Debian. I'm a Red Hat/CentOS/Fedora guy! But I like what Ubuntu has done with it. And now the world has seen what can be done with Debian. That genie cannot easily be put back into the bottle.
Shareware? Posted Oct 20, 2008 8:00 UTC (Mon) by michaeljt (subscriber, #39183) [Link]
That sounds a bit like shareware to me. While I like the idea of it, I would not feel happy depending on voluntary contributions to run a software business, since they are something that can come and go. For a business model, I prefer the idea of selling something that people would not have if they didn't pay for it. (Of course, free software has shown often enough by now that it can be sustainable even when it isn't a sustainable business model).
|
|||||||||||||