Canonical's business model?

Posted Aug 20, 2008 13:55 UTC (Wed) by ofeeley (guest, #36105)
In reply to: Canonical's business model? by Hanno
Parent article: In defense of Ubuntu

Sure, but when they fade away what useful artefacts are left behind in the rubble? What
contribution has the large user base and the paid developers made to the pool of Free
Software?  That's really all that counts.

Canonical's business model?

Posted Aug 20, 2008 15:50 UTC (Wed) by dlang (guest, #313) [Link] (8 responses)

if nothing else what would be left from the rubble is the proof that a linux distro can be
made very user friendly and the code to do so.

as the article said, it's not that it was impossible for any other distro to do it, but no
other distro did. after the example of ubuntu, the other distros face higher expectations to
be considered user friendly.

on the other hand, if ubuntu is as much a freeloader with no added value as the critics claim,
there isn't anything of value for them to leave behind, including the code to launchpad that
you apparently covet so badly.

you can't have it both ways, either they provide nothing of value and are just a PR machine
(and therefor if they closed up today why should you care), or they are providing value in the
distro, which is entirely available to you (in which case the contents of the distro that you
have are valuable)

Canonical's business model?

Posted Aug 20, 2008 17:55 UTC (Wed) by ofeeley (guest, #36105) [Link] (7 responses)

I really don't see that Ubuntu is more "user friendly" than Debian or Fedora. As it stands it
just strikes me as marketing hype. Of course if you have some sort of metric showing that
Ubuntu implements some HIG or other better then that'd be interesting.

GNU/Linux distros are pretty much all on a par in terms of usability these days with the only
substantial differences coming in terms of release-cycles, rapid availability of upstream
changes, and the distro's practical, pragmatic contributions to Free software.

Canonical's business model?

Posted Aug 20, 2008 18:05 UTC (Wed) by dlang (guest, #313) [Link] (6 responses)

it's not that they modify the software to any HIG specs, it's that they made so much of it
'just work' 

yes other distros have closed the gap significantly, but ubuntu still seems to be leading.

this is the primary thing that is attracting people to ubuntu, and I'm saying this as someone
who is still running slackware on many of my personal machines. when I want to put linux on a
system that will be used by less technical people I select ubuntu (or a variant), I've tried
several other distros in the past and for all of them I've been in the situation of dictating
commands that the users write down on cheat-sheets to get things done, with ubuntu these same
users are managing to discover how to do things themselves. this is especially good for things
that I've never taken the time to do myself (the 'normal' user stuff like ripping CDs to copy
the music to a MP3 player, etc)

Canonical's business model?

Posted Aug 20, 2008 21:34 UTC (Wed) by Cato (guest, #7643) [Link] (5 responses)

Exactly - I'm just setting up an Ubuntu box for an elderly relative who used to use Windows,
and the great thing is that things mostly 'just work' - Flash, multimedia codecs, Java, etc,
are all installable with a few command lines available in a HOWTO on the Ubuntu forums.

The other major advantage of Ubuntu is the forums - they are incredibly active, but also very
well run, full of polite and helpful people. This is no doubt due to good policies and active
moderation, but it makes an enormous difference to people dipping their toes in the water...

Choice of distros is important and I would not want Ubuntu to become too dominant, but
breaking into the mainstream is even more important, to all distros and types of user.

Canonical's business model?

Posted Aug 20, 2008 22:57 UTC (Wed) by ofeeley (guest, #36105) [Link] (4 responses)

The great thing is that things mostly 'just work' - Flash, multimedia codecs, Java,

Well, as regards the Java part you can thank Red Hat for hiring the developers that worked on Iced Tea and the FSF for starting GNU Classpath.

As regards the other stuff you can explain to your elderly relative that the proprietary, closed-source Flash on Linux doesn't always work properly and may be responsible for exposing him to vulnerabilities.

Also, how is /you/ setting up your relative's box an example of Ubuntu being "easier" for ordinary users? You could probably just as easily set up a Debian, Mandriva, OpenSuSE or Fedora box and trivially install non-Free software. The interesting thing is whether the Free/Open software ecosystem will be able to evolve so that there is no need for dependence on closed-source or patent-encumbered stuff, or whether the cheaters in the population will cannibalize the common resources and then cause a population crash.

Canonical's business model?

Posted Aug 21, 2008 21:13 UTC (Thu) by Cato (guest, #7643) [Link] (3 responses)

It's great that Red Hat has put so much effort into Ice Tea, and we are all thankful for the
GNU projects.  It's also great that Ubuntu has put so much effort into usability.

As for Flash, I know it doesn't work perfectly, but what does in computers? Being able to use
YouTube and BBC iPlayer is a big benefit compared to the cost.

Setting up a PC is very different to using it - most Windows users simply turn the PC on which
has many apps pre-installed, but I didn't want to buy a Dell box with Ubuntu (didn't have the
spec I wanted), so I installed it myself.  In fact I have always configured extra applications
on the Windows box for this relative, so what I'm doing is really not much different.

I'm sure I could have used another distro, and have used many others in the past - I just
happen to like Ubuntu and I'm confident that it will be particularly easy to use, whereas I
can't say that for the other distros.  

A rising tide really does lift all boats - clearly Ubuntu needs to do more about working with
upstream, but it has done an enormous amount for Linux simply by making Linux easier to use
for the average person.

Canonical's business model?

Posted Aug 22, 2008 1:10 UTC (Fri) by ofeeley (guest, #36105) [Link] (2 responses)

Again, where's the usability?  The only things you pointed to the last time were the results
of Red Hat hackers' work on Java and then some dodgy Flash stuff and media codecs. The latter
are just as available in Fedora or Gentoo or whatever as they are in Ubuntu for those that
want that stuff.

I've used Ubuntu fairly recently (not out of choice) and am not blown away by any usability
differences between it and any of the other current major distros. I again invite you to point
to some metric so that this is not merely a yes-it-is-no-it-isnt exchange. Otherwise you may
as well merely shorten your post to "I have no problem with proprietary software and patented
codecs and I like the Ubuntu wallpaper."

Canonical's business model?

Posted Aug 22, 2008 1:22 UTC (Fri) by dlang (guest, #313) [Link]

it's lots of little things, the fact that the installer doesn't need to ask you a million
questions spread out over an hours time, but asks you a couple questions up front and then
goes and does it's thing is one of them. 

individually they are trivial, but togeather they make it easier for people who don't already
know where to go for everything.

you don't see the difference becouse you are already familiar with the tools and just go to
the right place. but if you were to setup two identical machines with different distros and
give them to people unfamiliar with linux, the _experiance_ (note, experiance, not
speculation) that people have is that Ubuntu generates less frustration and fewer questions
than the other distros.

you don't see it? ok, you don't. nobody is trying to force you to use ubuntu, you are free to
use the distro of your choice.

just do us all a favor and stop bad-mouthing the distro that others choose just becouse it's
not the one you like?

Canonical's business model?

Posted Aug 22, 2008 6:08 UTC (Fri) by Cato (guest, #7643) [Link]

I don't have the time or energy to defend my choice of Ubuntu any further - feel free to use
the distro you prefer.  Maybe it would be good to spend more time improving and evangelising
that distro rather than criticising Ubuntu?