PJ's comment when she posted this story in newspicks
PJ's comment when she posted this story in newspicks
Posted Feb 6, 2010 3:58 UTC (Sat) by BrucePerens (guest, #2510)In reply to: PJ's comment when she posted this story in newspicks by coriordan
Parent article: Matt Asay becomes Canonical's COO
Uh-huh. I would feel really humiliated if I had put a lot of work into the "ubuntu community" right now. I feel odd enough regarding what they got from Debian. On the other hand, maybe people won't be so (unjustifiably) crazy about Ubuntu and we can get on with something community developed again.
Posted Feb 6, 2010 10:47 UTC (Sat)
by man_ls (guest, #15091)
[Link]
Posted Feb 6, 2010 13:48 UTC (Sat)
by danieldk (subscriber, #27876)
[Link] (5 responses)
I would feel really humiliated if I had put a lot of work into the
"ubuntu community" right now. Wouldn't that be a bit naive? They can play the whole 'we are free'
game, but in the end Canonical is, and has always been a for-profit
company. If that weren't enough, the the whole Launchpad episode should
have pointed that out. The same could be said of Red Hat, but the
difference is that they have built a lot of trust through their actions. I am not sure a community distribution could ever fill the role of
Ubuntu. One of the assets of Ubuntu (that they mostly killed afterwards), is
that it was a simple and consistent environment. Yes, you could install
nearly everything from Debian Sid afterwards, but it was just one desktop,
mostly one API, and a consistent selection of applications without overlap. I
think this is one of the primary reasons why OS X ran away with potential
GNU/Linux marketshare on the desktop. OS X provides a simple and
consistent environment, the look and feel is the same everywhere, and
there is only one major API. I do not think a community distribution could
not make such an environment, since it requires touch choices that not
everybody is going to like. The result is that nearly no distribution has a clear vision, is a mixture
of applications with inconsistent user interfaces, at least five widget
toolkits, with a new sound server every year. Yes, it is freedom, however,
not something that will capture a significant part of the mainstream.
Posted Feb 6, 2010 14:53 UTC (Sat)
by coriordan (guest, #7544)
[Link] (4 responses)
On software patents, Canonical is one of the only useful corporate friends we have!
They filed a great brief for the European Patent Office's software patent consultation in 2009, and Mark Shuttleworth has made good statements against software patents in the press (including vowing never to sign a patent deal with Microsoft, and calling their actions racketeering).
Most of our corporate friends do nothing, and some take Microsoft's side against us. So I hope this appointment won't change Canonical's software patents stance.
Here's the info I've gathered about Canonical:
Posted Feb 7, 2010 5:22 UTC (Sun)
by wtogami (subscriber, #32325)
[Link] (3 responses)
Oh please. Canonical began fighting software patents only in 2009? Red Hat has been at this for years, as one of the leading sponsors and voices in the fight to defeat sofware patents in the European Union back in 2006.
http://en.swpat.org/wiki/Red_Hat
Posted Feb 7, 2010 10:14 UTC (Sun)
by coriordan (guest, #7544)
[Link]
But my point is that Canonical has helped. Since most of our friends don't help at all, that makes Canonical special. We have very few helpful friends, so I hope we don't lose any.
Posted Feb 9, 2010 13:13 UTC (Tue)
by wookey (guest, #5501)
[Link] (1 responses)
You can be critical of their free software contributions and business practices if you like, but they have been very solid to date on swpats, and I see no reason for that to change in a hurry as MarkS is fairly vehement on the subject (as all right-thinking people should be).
Posted Feb 9, 2010 20:27 UTC (Tue)
by coriordan (guest, #7544)
[Link]
Do you know if Mark's speech was recorded and put online?
Posted Feb 6, 2010 17:03 UTC (Sat)
by MattPerry (guest, #46341)
[Link] (5 responses)
It's hardly unjustified. Ubuntu is polished with a focus on ease of use which is something that most other distros lack. Just compare what is installed in Ubuntu versus Debian. A default Debian desktop is a mess. Just how many CD burners and word processors does one need in the default install? Just pick one and let the user install a different one later if they choose.
Posted Feb 7, 2010 5:02 UTC (Sun)
by clugstj (subscriber, #4020)
[Link] (1 responses)
Posted Feb 7, 2010 7:15 UTC (Sun)
by MattPerry (guest, #46341)
[Link]
That's because the parent had no meaningful information for me to dispute. Bruce will need to elaborate on his comments for someone to give any meaningful response. For example, why does Bruce feel that Ubuntu's popularity is unjustified? Have Canonical or Ubuntu supporters done something unethical to artificially inflate the popularity of the distro? If so, I would like to hear about it.
Why does Bruce feel odd about what Ubuntu got from Debian? As long as the licenses are respected then the Ubuntu team is free to use the software as they see fit. That is one of the costs of freedom; users may use your software in ways that you do not approve. If that's a problem then you should have been more careful in your licensing.
I see the popularity of Ubuntu as an indication that Canonical and the Ubuntu community have done something right. Something was lacking in desktop Linux distros and Ubuntu filled that void. Even though other distros have improved in the meantime, Ubuntu continues to enjoy the first-mover advantage.
Nothing is stopping a community distro from achieving the same level of popularity. Talk is cheap. It's going to take strong leadership, a solid vision, and enough differentiation for a new distro to position itself as a viable alternative. Ubuntu had all three of those qualities to bring it to where it is today. I'm not confident that a community distro can focus itself well enough to overtake Ubuntu. There are too many stakeholders and decision makers with conflicting agendas.
Posted Feb 7, 2010 5:55 UTC (Sun)
by interalia (subscriber, #26615)
[Link]
Posted Feb 7, 2010 11:51 UTC (Sun)
by juliank (guest, #45896)
[Link]
Posted Feb 8, 2010 18:45 UTC (Mon)
by ballombe (subscriber, #9523)
[Link]
A COO just needs to tend to day to day operations. I don't know what that means exactly for Canonical, but I would guess it's about moving boxes and counting licenses. Now, if we were speaking about a CEO, a CIO or even a CLO (executive, information or legal; this CxO business is becoming quite silly by the way) you might be right, but in that post a solid businessman is all that is needed, right? Or am I missing something?
Not so fast
PJ's comment when she posted this story in newspicks
PJ's comment when she posted this story in newspicks
http://en.swpat.org/wiki/Canonical
It's a public wiki, so if I've missed something or got it wrong, feel free to edit.PJ's comment when she posted this story in newspicks
> corporate friends we have!
This page contains some insinuations that may be misleading or inaccurate but it does point out some real context.
PJ's comment when she posted this story in newspicks
PJ's comment when she posted this story in newspicks
PJ's comment when she posted this story in newspicks
PJ's comment when she posted this story in newspicks
> Ubuntu and we can get on with something community developed again.
PJ's comment when she posted this story in newspicks
PJ's comment when she posted this story in newspicks
PJ's comment when she posted this story in newspicks
PJ's comment when she posted this story in newspicks
Actually, it's almost the same as Ubuntu's; and both have one application
per task; with the exceptions in Debian of WWW browsing (iceweasel +
epiphany) and ripping audio CDs (sound-juicer + rhythmbox). But the Debian
desktop has a bit more applications, depending on how many CDs you use to
install it. We're also getting (or pulling) much stuff back from Ubuntu,
like update-manager or the Software Center.
PJ's comment when she posted this story in newspicks