Debrandification [LWN.net]

Debrandification

Posted Feb 5, 2009 23:28 UTC (Thu) by jspaleta (subscriber, #50639)
In reply to: Debrandification by sladen
Parent article: HP releases custom Netbook version of Ubuntu Linux (ZDNet)

I do not disagree with any of that. My point was that Canonical uptil now has been hard charging about making sure the Ubuntu brand is front in center in all of its OEM partner arrangements (that I am aware of.) The fact that HP isn't using the Ubuntu brand suggests that HP isn't partnering with Canonical to put a linux interface out the door. That has implications for Canonical's OEM servicing business. HP was the leading PC OEM in Q3 of 2008. If HP decided that Canonical OEM engineering services were not a good value, compared to in-house engineering to customize Ubuntu, that says something significant.

There's nothing inherently wrong with HP doing that, if they think they can sustain an in house effort, they are certainly free to start with Ubuntu as a base. They aren't the first company to take an existing distribution and customize it for their own goals. But that does have implications for Canonical as a business entity, as one of their primary revenue streams is meant to be OEM engineering services.

If HP feels confident enough to forego contracting with Canonical and can build their own customizations without paying Canonical for the engineering help, that could directly impact Canonical's business plans.
There are only so many OEMs.

OEM's empowered enough to build and sustain their own distributions make OEM customization services a harder sell. It will get even harder if HP's effort is successful and other OEM's try to mimic that success.

-jef

to post comments

Debrandification

Posted Feb 6, 2009 4:18 UTC (Fri) by xtifr (guest, #143) [Link]

Well, some would argue that Ubuntu is not much more than a rebranded Debian to start with. And since HP has been a strong supporter of Debian for many years, hosting Debian infrastructure, and even paying for my LWN subscription simply because I'm a Debian Developer with no other connection to the company...well...

Something seems cheerfully ironic about the whole matter. :)

(I do hope it stays cheerful, though. I'm not sure who I'd want to side with if it became less-than-cheerful, as I'm a big fan of all the parties involved.)

Debrandification

Posted Feb 6, 2009 4:34 UTC (Fri) by SEJeff (guest, #51588) [Link] (2 responses)

While not disagreeing with you my opinion is you are off the mark. If you
think about it, HP has a chance of doing it better than Canonical. They
certainly have more Linux engineers and much more experience with Linux.

In reality, this looks like a prettied up version of Ubuntu's netbook
remix. In fact looking at the video from Canonical demoing the netbook
remix and looking at the original article that zdnet links to the
screenshots are virtually the same. Notice the same mostly fullscreen
window with what looks like a metacity titlebar and buttons. It even uses
Tango icons for goodness sake. Chances are you won't ever find out but
there is a good chance this isn't Ubuntu branded and that is what Canonical
wants. Either way, Ubuntu gets attention because a tier 1 OHM is using
them. That can only be good in the long term for Canonical / Ubuntu.

http://www.canonical.com/files/video/netbook-screencast.ogg
http://www.downloadsquad.com/2009/02/04/hp-releases-netbo...
ubuntu/

Debrandification

Posted Feb 6, 2009 17:08 UTC (Fri) by drag (guest, #31333) [Link] (1 responses)

Ya... HP has a sort of long standing relationship with Debian going back a ways.

But, IMO, HP's efforts would be best spent getting behind Intel with their Fedora-based Moblin V2 project as a long term thing, instead of pursuing a Ubuntu fork much further.

Hopefully with a commercially oriented desktop focus Intel and friends can work with a distributions to help solve some long standing usability and API issues with the Linux desktop.

Debrandification

Posted Feb 6, 2009 17:18 UTC (Fri) by jspaleta (subscriber, #50639) [Link]

It's probably a somewhat of a mischaracterisation that moblin is Fedora based. My limited understanding is Moblin is a mismash of sorts between Fedora and Suse and new packages.

I think they qualify as a Fedora Remix under the updated trademark policy, but I don't think they would be comfortable calling themselves a Fedora Remix...so I'm a bit cautious about making that sort of claim for them.

-jef