User: Password:
|
|
Subscribe / Log in / New account

Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Mark Shuttleworth goes on the offensive against his critics before disclosing that Ubuntu 14.04 will be named "trusty tahr." "Mir is really important work. When lots of competitors attack a project on purely political grounds, you have to wonder what THEIR agenda is. At least we know now who belongs to the Open Source Tea Party ;) And to put all the hue and cry into context: Mir is relevant for approximately 1% of all developers, just those who think about shell development. Every app developer will consume Mir through their toolkit. By contrast, those same outraged individuals have NIH’d just about every important piece of the stack they can get their hands on… most notably SystemD, which is hugely invasive and hardly justified. What closely to see how competitors to Canonical torture the English language in their efforts to justify how those toolkits should support Windows but not Mir. But we’ll get it done, and it will be amazing."
(Log in to post comments)

Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 18, 2013 18:06 UTC (Fri) by moggers87 (guest, #86573) [Link]

I'm not sure the "not invented here" comment was warranted - RHEL 6 uses Upstart, as did a few Fedora releases. Maybe the move to systemd was political, but I've not been aware of anything like that until this post.

Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 18, 2013 18:34 UTC (Fri) by rahulsundaram (subscriber, #21946) [Link]

Right. The blog reeks of projection. systemd (not systemD or whatever) developers (unlike Mir) talked to upstart developers quite a few times before the decision was made and even a cursory look at both would show that they are entirely different designs and technical differences between them, regardless of your preferences.

That being said, Mir is developed for their Unity strategy and nothing else and it makes sense for them to want to tightly control it.

Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 18, 2013 23:08 UTC (Fri) by jubal (subscriber, #67202) [Link]

Oh, they did talk, in their usual lovely manner.

Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 18, 2013 21:41 UTC (Fri) by smurf (subscriber, #17840) [Link]

The phrase "Pot. Kettle. Black." comes to mind here.

It does not seem to fit Mr. Shuttleworth's mindset that maybe, just maybe, there are sufficient technical reasons for RedHat to switch to systemd?

And then there's the Tea Party reference. Sorry, but that idea doesn't work. At all. All you're doing here is to give me one more reason to NOT recommend Ubuntu to anybody who'd want to install a free OS.

Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 18, 2013 23:04 UTC (Fri) by Zizzle (guest, #67739) [Link]

Agreed.

Seems like a pretty bad idea to be so polarizing and cause such a divide if you want to attract any community support.

If he wants Ubuntu phone to be successful he needs to the early adopters and tech advocates on his side. Not to mention techies to write apps. And I think anyone who takes an objective look at the birth of Mir would conclude it wasn't necessary.

Insinuating that the people behind Wayland (who are mostly also from X land) are like the Tea Party turns me off from Ubuntu even further.

Childish dictator can keep his little sand pit, and I'll recommend people stay away from Ubuntu.

Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 19, 2013 11:15 UTC (Sat) by ewan (subscriber, #5533) [Link]

"if you want to attract any community support"

He doesn't. Ubuntu's track, under Mark's direction, has been very strongly away from being part of a community, to a very much 'cathedral' style development model. He doesn't mind using 'community' resources when it's convenient for Canonical, but it's clear that Mark sees that community as people orbiting around Canonical, not as something that Canonical is a part of.

Shuttleworth: <whatever>

Posted Oct 21, 2013 12:51 UTC (Mon) by gvy (guest, #11981) [Link]

Yes unfortunately, just remember edgy artwork team's results in bitbucket contrary to as promised.

What I dislike most about Mark personally is that he's *that* ludicrous. It is *not* polite or good to avoid harsh words but rather to avoid actually *dealing* damage.

Linus' honest barking attitude is so much less evil than this pseudo-politically-correct crap.

You want to roll on your own for control and world domination? Fine, tell so and go ahead. But *don't* try to feed "humanity", "competition", "freedom" meme down our throats, you're no better than neocons trying to "bomb for peace" then.

Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 19, 2013 13:28 UTC (Sat) by ballombe (subscriber, #9523) [Link]

In that case, it is rather "Pot. Shuttle. Black."

Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 18, 2013 22:09 UTC (Fri) by johannbg (subscriber, #65743) [Link]

There was nothing political about the move to systemd and we had to work hard to pass it through the community and FESCO.

Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 21, 2013 21:10 UTC (Mon) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link]

I'd say (as an interested observer) that if there was anything political, the politics made it *harder* for systemd to get in, not easier.

Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 18, 2013 18:30 UTC (Fri) by yokem_55 (subscriber, #10498) [Link]

Wow. Referring to the Wayland folks as the "Open Source Tea Party". WTF.

Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 18, 2013 18:43 UTC (Fri) by mmcgrath (guest, #44906) [Link]

eh, it's important to remember that Mr. Shuttleworth is a politician. I don't mean that as a pejorative. He chooses his words carefully, he gets the attention he needs when he needs it and uses that momentum to accomplish his and his companies goals.

Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 18, 2013 19:22 UTC (Fri) by ovitters (subscriber, #27950) [Link]

I've read a few reviews about the latest Ubuntu. One from Ars Technica, one on Tweakers.net (Dutch site). Both of these reviews talk for a *very* long time about Mir. I guess that seeing that reviews about your latest product only being about something that was delayed is upsetting. This coupled with them (IIRC both) referencing the *technical* analysis done by mjg59.

If you time your releases every 6 months, then some of them will be more awesome than others. IMO regular releases are way better than feature based ones. But aside from Mir, 13.10 doesn't seem that exciting (IMO). Which is ok, but if you make a lot of noise about Mir, then delay it, well, people will instead write about that.

Having Mark say that things are done on political grounds will ruin any last cooperation IMO. Really impolite. This while I still don't understand the technical reason for Mir (or keeping it secret).

Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 19, 2013 10:11 UTC (Sat) by deepfire (guest, #26138) [Link]

The KDE's stance of "Will support Windows, won't support Mir" is far, far more political, and disgusting, IMO.

That was the most significant escalation of animosity in the whole affair, AFAICT, as a bystander.

Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 19, 2013 12:19 UTC (Sat) by deepfire (guest, #26138) [Link]

Alright, it turns out that Kwin (which won't accept patches supporting Mir) is the only KDE piece that doesn't support Windows, as per what Margin Graesslin said on G+.

Still, it's lovely to see how everybody interprets that as "Mir is so pariah KDE won't even touch it". And that perception clearly plays against Ubuntu. No wonder Shuttleworth reacts.

Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 20, 2013 3:11 UTC (Sun) by ovitters (subscriber, #27950) [Link]

So the thing to do would be to contact and have a discussion about it.

E.g. before deciding on Mir, maybe talk to Wayland about what's possible. Before criticizing KDE, maybe discuss if your viewpoint is maybe missing something, etc.

The way he responded is unacceptable.

Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 20, 2013 8:30 UTC (Sun) by deepfire (guest, #26138) [Link]

ovitters, I agree that the way he reacts is a problem.

But you don't solve problems by repeatedly classifying actions of the
opposite side as "unacceptable" -- nothing ever changes this way.

And as we can see, nothing really changed, indeed -- Mark continues
on his tradition of ill-researched provocative statements.

The debate proposed by Aaron is a way ahead and, I'm sure, judgements like
"unacceptable" are going to be put aside for the moment.

Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 20, 2013 18:54 UTC (Sun) by ovitters (subscriber, #27950) [Link]

Ubuntu has a Code of Conduct. He doesn't seem to follow it. That's bad. Being totally up front that his behaviour is not good is what people should be doing.

This has nothing to do with if he should be able to develop Mir, etc. Anyway, I'm more used to being totally direct and criticizing/voicing really loudly what you think is bad. No matter if the person is a close friend or not. Actually, for close friends I'd hate if they keep their opinions to themselves. I've seen people be amazed that we can criticize everything about someones opinion. Then afterwards discuss where we're going to have drinks.

If I say the behaviour is unacceptable, then it doesn't mean imply more.

Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 20, 2013 19:52 UTC (Sun) by deepfire (guest, #26138) [Link]

Apropos CoC -- absolutely agreed.

Apropos being direct/keeping opinions to oneself -- friends are people who give us/expect us giving them benefit of the doubt, because of our mutually shared history. This allows us to be direct, to express ourselves with no hesitation. Even that bond can be stretched, though.

Then we have pathological situations -- and all prolonged conflicts are, by definition, pathological.

What we have here with Ubuntu (as a whole, not just with Mir) is a pathological situation.

In such situations skins are thin, on all sides -- and unless you want to further the conflict, you should be very careful of what you say.

Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 19, 2013 12:22 UTC (Sat) by gilboa (guest, #23856) [Link]

Let me start by pointing out that given the fact that you repeated the "KDE supports Windows but doesn't support Mir" argument at least 3 times, I'd drop the "I'm just a bystander" claim.

Canonical decided to ditch Wayland and invent Mir instead. No problem, its their right.
However, the same "Its their right" goes for Intel and KDE who decided to point the middle finger at Canonical, refusing to spend/waste resources on Mir.

1. You can't have it both ways. Either Canonical had no right to make a political (?) decision and drop Wayland. Or KDE and Intel have every right to make the *same* political (??) decision.
2. When you become a grown up (as opposed to being a 3 y/o), you come to terms with the fact that you, and you alone, must take responsibility for your own decisions. Its high time Canonical &friends grow up.

- Gilboa

Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 19, 2013 12:57 UTC (Sat) by deepfire (guest, #26138) [Link]

> Let me start by pointing out that given the fact that you repeated
> the "KDE supports Windows but doesn't support Mir" argument
> at least 3 times, I'd drop the "I'm just a bystander" claim.

I don't even use Ubuntu : -)

> 2. When you become a grown up

When the dust clear, we will have to live on. Canonical made some dubious statements wrt. technical benefits of Mir vs. Wayland, that's for sure. It is now seen that they, indeed, chose to fork due to control issues. Fine.

What is not fine, however, is the continuing pointless animosity towards Ubuntu. It would be better if Mark would somehow admit his mistake (of technical judgement), that much is true. But shouldn't the grief stop already, and give way to voluntary, mutually benefitial cooperation?

(BTW, see above my retraction wrt. the "Will support Windows, won't support Mir" point)

Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 19, 2013 14:42 UTC (Sat) by ovitters (subscriber, #27950) [Link]

Having two display managers is not beneficial. That's what people are saying. I still don't understand why Mir is made. Could've been done with Wayland IMO. As there is no obligation to help out, people are making that very clear. Why help complexity? IMO mostly people are not understand the reason behind Mir. Then various are just completely ignoring Mir and working on Wayland.

And the incorrect statements about Wayland did *not* help. They're still being repeated in various places. Needing correction every single time. Same for this "only reason is political".

Anyway, after dust has settled, things will go the same way as before. Except more corrections are needed regarding political reasons.

Maybe this blog is some hint that Mir is progressing slower than Wayland. :P

Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 19, 2013 15:46 UTC (Sat) by deepfire (guest, #26138) [Link]

> Having two display managers is not beneficial. That's what people are saying.

Different people have different viewpoints.

The very bitter debate right before our eyes shows how much promise there is in the idea of Canonical having a voice in Wayland development.

And they even wanted to try, at some point.

Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 20, 2013 3:09 UTC (Sun) by ovitters (subscriber, #27950) [Link]

Different people have different viewpoints. However, if those people who don't see the benefit are the low level stack + toolkit people, maybe you want to listen or at least discuss before deciding something.

Regarding the second bit, there was no bitterness except incorrect statements made by Canonical. Meaning, this proves nothing. Canonical indeed said they wanted to try, but they never did anything substantial.

Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 20, 2013 8:36 UTC (Sun) by deepfire (guest, #26138) [Link]

You do not know what you do not know, as their sense of competence blinded them : -) Tell me people rarely fall for that trap : -)

It is unclear how much on the way of Wayland adoption they tried -- I don't think you can say that they never did anything substantial.

I do think that your negative perception of them clouds your judgement, though -- you're past doubts about them.

Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 20, 2013 13:04 UTC (Sun) by Felix (subscriber, #36445) [Link]

> It is unclear how much on the way of Wayland adoption they tried -- I
> don't think you can say that they never did anything substantial.

When a company seriously considers building a new (incompatible) display server I'd assume they are willing to spend a few hundred k to get some time with the existing devs (contracting, meet a conference, phone calls, ...) so you're really sure that you're going the right way. But from what is known publicly they did not talk to any of the current Wayland developers before. I trust in what the Wayland devs are saying in this regard.

THAT is from my point of view main failure of Canonical. I assume it was done that way so they do not risk the big "surprise" effect they were aiming for.

Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 20, 2013 19:02 UTC (Sun) by ovitters (subscriber, #27950) [Link]

You're assuming my criticism is fully negative. I think Canonical and Ubuntu have done and are doing a lot of great things. Irrespective of that, I think they're handling a few things badly. I've voiced both (the good, the bad). This article is about something which I think is bad.

Anyway, they haven't done much work on Wayland. As voiced by Wayland developers. As noticed by GTK+ maintainers. As highlighted by the incorrect assessments regarding Wayland in the Mir announcements. It seems that a few people did know, but they seem to not have been involved in the Mir decision.

I've been trying to understand the more technical reasons behind Mir various times. I've asked if Mir was meant for GNOME. Initially that was a clear no. Suddenly a few months later, we were questioned why we did not consider it. While at the same time the same message was given, priority is on Unity. There are some technical differences, but I still don't get it. It still seems distribution specific, I don't get why Kwin is questioned, I assume it is the same thing, people not talking to eachother and not fully understanding things. Leading to mixed messages to non-Mir people.

Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 19, 2013 18:23 UTC (Sat) by mgraesslin (subscriber, #78959) [Link]

deepfire already mentioned it: KWin does not and will never support Windows. Or as I state it "I'm proud to maintain the only part of KDE which will never make it to Windows" (there are other parts like screenlocker, kdm, klipper, basically everything that is in the if(not win32) section of our CMakeLists.txt).

For the discussion about Mir and KDE only KWin is relevant and thus the argument is pretty mood. It doesn't matter that Qt is well designed so that Kate just works on Windows, it will by that also just work on Mir. In fact all the Windows efforts in the application help that the applications will also work under Mir. After all it ensures that the X specific code goes into an if (x11) block.

Last but not least it's quite funny that Mark picked KWin and me for the Windows argument. Given that I'm a known opponent to KDE supporting anything except a well defined Linux stack (which includes systemd - just for the record). I just googled and found a blog post from 2011 about that topic: http://blog.martin-graesslin.com/blog/2011/08/thoughts-ab...

Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 18, 2013 20:49 UTC (Fri) by tjc (guest, #137) [Link]

> Wow. Referring to the Wayland folks as the "Open Source Tea Party".

I'm still trying to connect the dots on that one -- it seems like a specious analogy to me.

Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 19, 2013 3:04 UTC (Sat) by drag (subscriber, #31333) [Link]

Unless he really thinks that Mir is the equivalent of the Federal Bank in the USA or something like that I guess.

Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 19, 2013 13:53 UTC (Sat) by Trelane (subscriber, #56877) [Link]

he clearly read the politico article and meant that they are better informed about science.

Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 20, 2013 19:37 UTC (Sun) by Tov (subscriber, #61080) [Link]

Well. He did not refer to "the Wayland folks". He referred to lots of folks attacking the project on purely political grounds. I do actually not see Shuttleworth attacking Wayland anywhere, whereas people seem to be crawling out of the woodwork and of stumbling over each other to badmouth Mir at any chance. And now after months of commotion Shuttleworth aired a couple of sentences in response...

Where did the the competition friendly open source movement go?

Shuttleworth and his "Mir" fetwa

Posted Oct 21, 2013 13:09 UTC (Mon) by gvy (guest, #11981) [Link]

It's stupidity and ego not competition, and creating hordes of fanboys who would insist that white is black and vice versa is well known in history but not as something positive.

Just in case you didn't really think about it, those foreign wahhabi fanatics who destroy people and infrastructure of Syria *now* were also told that they're "freedom fighters", that they "fight for the great good" etc. But both what they do and what you do *is* evil: they kill and you lie.

Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 18, 2013 20:29 UTC (Fri) by robclark (subscriber, #74945) [Link]

> What closely to see how competitors to Canonical torture the English

shuttleworth is a competitor to canonical?

Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 18, 2013 22:59 UTC (Fri) by deepfire (guest, #26138) [Link]

To be fair, you preferred a retort to an actual response to his assertion.

Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 18, 2013 23:43 UTC (Fri) by jspaleta (subscriber, #50639) [Link]

But a witty retort. More importantly a solid retweetable retort.

I'm not good at the retweetable retorts.

Look, there really isn't much in the blog post worth engaging Shuttleworth over. Once you strip out the overtly scandalously petty salvos at "competitors" (and I dare say Shuttleworth continues to misunderstand who is actual competitors are... hint: its actually Google) what are we really left with?

A depiction of how fully Canonical as pivoted over to a mobile platform focus in the last year. That's were the concentration is for them. That's what strategically matters for them now. That's where the engineering resources are going. Enterprise? Cloud? Desktop? footnotes.

So take all the defensive posturing against shadowy (pun-intended) boogeymen competitors with a grain of salt. The reality is, Canonical isn't gearing up for a fight with Red Hat, that fights been over for a long while (even for cloud where Red Hat is a huge openstack contributor), Canonical is gearing up to take on Google in mobile and attempt to scratch out a piece of Android marketshare for itself.

All of this back and forth about Mir or systemd or whatever NIH Mark wants lay at Red Hat's feet is a huge distraction. Google didn't care about being blamed for NIH when they burned down the traditional linux userspace and built Android. They just frelling did it and built their platform and owned the decision. They did business.

I think Shuttleworth suffers from the same character flaw that I do.. he likes a good argument. He relishes it. And we indulge him far too often for his own good, or ours.

For Canonical right now that must absolutely be laser focused on delivering a mobile platform that can compete head to head with Android. It really doesn't matter any more if Mir or Wayland is technically better or if upstart or systemd are technically better. It really doesn't matter if the click packages are a twisted monstrosity of the dpkg tenants instead of a clean engineered solution for application installs over a mobile image.

For Canonical right now, they've made their technology stack choices and its time to start painting the story of how their platform brings benefits to mobile users over Android coupled with Google Play. If they can't walk away from the comfortable battlelines they have drawn with the shadowman, they are never going to learn how to stand their ground with Google.

The hardest thing in Shuttleworth's blog for me is the lost opportunity for him to stake his ground and boldly tell Google that he's coming for their marketshare. Instead he's taking potshots at Red Hat who appear absolutely irrelevant right now for the personal mobile devise marketplace that Mir has been designed to attack as a replacement to Google's surfaceflinger.

I just don't get it. The Mir wayland comparison isn't actually fundamentally that interesting. Its the Mir surfaceflinger comparison that really matters. Its the Android/Unity8 platform comparison that really matters. Everything else is a sideshow. And maybe that's the point. Maybe the U platform actually doesn't measure up to Android competitively yet so Mark needs to throw up the sideshow to keep the fighting spirit alive. The fight with Android in a head to head matchup is going to be tough and uncomfortable invasion onto Google's home turf. The running skirmish with Red Hat, well-established ground across a well-defined political border that feeds existing nationalist/tribal identity.

Meh. I look forward to seeing what Canonical hauls out as a map navigation app on their phone platform to compete with Google Maps.

Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 19, 2013 0:09 UTC (Sat) by luto (subscriber, #39314) [Link]

Meh. I look forward to seeing what Canonical hauls out as a map navigation app on their phone platform to compete with Google Maps.
At the rate that Google has been regressing non-speaking navigation in the maps app, this may be easy for Canonical.

(Once upon a time, I could get directions somewhere and then call the destination. Or easily find a list of turns. Good luck doing that now without six or seven extraneous taps, a few network roundtrips, and losing your place in the directions.)

On the other hand, at the rate that Unity has made life complicated for power users, it just may be a fair fight.

Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 19, 2013 14:47 UTC (Sat) by mathstuf (subscriber, #69389) [Link]

Once, I had the Maps app crashing any time the screen was on while navigating and even a reboot didn't get it to stop (it had worked for the last 10 hours of navigation…). I downgraded it to the stock version and have been happier ever since. It still works, has the ruler Lab plugin thing available, and most of the features which have been ripped out for whatever money-grabbing scheme Google has behind it. I doubt I'll be updating Maps permanently unless something major gets fixed. At least with Maps I *have* a backup version to use…

Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 19, 2013 9:07 UTC (Sat) by misc (subscriber, #73730) [Link]

Since Google has a customer/provider relationship with Canonical ( maintenance of Goobuntu, and Google did ask to Canonical to send some consultant for the start of chromeos ), it would be unwise for Shuttleworth to start a fight with them.

Maybe the whole idea of such blog post is to give to Ubuntu advocates the needed rhetorical tools to explain Canonical decision, and in this case, enough reasons to explain mir "failure" ( even if I do not think that's a failure ).

So he want to give people something to say on the web, so the whole Ubuntu phone stay in the mind of everybody

Or maybe he attribute the failure to integrate Mir desktop and the lack of support from industry to the lack of cooperation from others ( the intel/mir issue, for example ), and he also see the systemd integration as something that he didn't planned and required resources to reimplement some APIs instead of working on the insanely tight schedule he decided to have.

IE, maybe he is just in "blame others for my problem" mode.

Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 19, 2013 17:50 UTC (Sat) by jspaleta (subscriber, #50639) [Link]

But see... Canonical has actually started a fight with Google already, its too late now. Canonical's mobile strategy requires going toe-to-toe with Google and winning both device manufacturers and customers away from Android. Ubuntu for phones strategy goes for the heart of the Android marketshare. Canonical isn't saying hey look we'll coexist nicely with Android devices as a desktop OS. Nope they are making the convergence play and they want to push Android out of consumers lives and replace it with Ubuntu.

Man they even were so bold as making the Nexus like their dev platform and encouraging people to wipe Android off Google's own branded phones... not a 3rd party carrier phone..but the Nexus line. That a direct confrontation with Google. Our OS is better than your OS on your own branded products.

Google isn't going bother engaging is petty squabbles they are going to execute and they are going to make it as hard as posible for Canonical to gain any traction at all in the marketplace. Its going to be a really tough first year for Canonical's mobile push in 2014.

Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 20, 2013 12:24 UTC (Sun) by AlexHudson (guest, #41828) [Link]

The Nexus choice wasn't about going after Google; they needed a dev platform that was easily available, powerful enough to run the software and (most importantly) relatively cheap. That rules out everything bar the Nexus 4 pretty much.

I doubt Google give two hoots about it; Cyanogen is probably the more pressing de-platforming risk. But looking at it from that perspective - whether Google care - actually highlights for me what a proposition Canonical have. It genuinely feels laughable that they could make any kind of inroad into this space. I don't think they understand the competitive landscape or market dynamics - and to be fair, that's not a criticism of them, Nokia don't and Blackberry/RIM don't either - and I can't see where their traction will come from. They're already way late to the party.

Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 20, 2013 14:00 UTC (Sun) by khim (subscriber, #9252) [Link]

I doubt Google give two hoots about it; Cyanogen is probably the more pressing de-platforming risk.

Both Cyanogen are Ubuntu are minor issues. What Samsung is doing is major issue: it tries to establish it's own “ecosystem” which may lead to separation from Google's mothership in the future. So far Samsung is not too successful (not many prefer Samsung's store to Google Play store) but it has money and patience to pull it of eventually.

Cyanogen does not try to create it's own ecosystem (indeed: huge efforts are made by it to actually join the Google's “ecosystem”!) and in reality it does not look all that different from other Android vendors (from Google's POV, at least) and while Ubuntu may theoretically be a major problem in the far future it's offers are so disorganized and confused right now that it's impossible to even say what it's plans are going to be.

They're already way late to the party.

That's why they are trying to jump to the next party. Smartphone world is mapped and covered: it belongs to Android and iOS and this situation is basically untouchable right now. But next stage will be convergence of desktop and mobile. Here we have two mediocre players (Andoid and Windows) which hold “half of a loaf” each (Windows has desktop while Android has smartphone; both Windows phones and Adroid “desktops” exist but in both cases these are early, not very capable and very popular models). Apple is in best position, but even Apple does not have the whole loaf: it has two halves which are currently disjoint and must be connected somehow.

This, indeed, opens up some window of opportunity for the Ubuntu, but I'm not sure I see the coherent offer which may grab people's attention. It looks more like mindless “throw everything at the wall to see if it sticks” trashing. Samsung can afford such behavior (after all his devices bring solid profit even if all it's addons are not really used by users), but I'm not sure if Ubuntu can afford to do that for very long: this party will be well underway in a couple of years, too.

Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 19, 2013 9:48 UTC (Sat) by deepfire (guest, #26138) [Link]

> Look, there really isn't much in the blog post worth engaging Shuttleworth over.

At the very least, there is "won't support Mir" vs. "will support Windows",
which I _hoped_ people would notice. Because that's what KDE's stance actually is.

Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 19, 2013 23:32 UTC (Sat) by jspaleta (subscriber, #50639) [Link]

You need to back away from the assertion concerning KDE's stance concerning Mir and Windows.

Its be covered in other comments in this thread... but I'll sum it up.

It is incorrect to say that KDE won't support Mir
It is incorrect to say that KDE will support Windows better than Mir

It is correct to say that Kwin won't support Mir
It is correct to say that Kwin won't support Windows

There is a difference between Kwin and KDE. And moreover Mark fundamentally knows this. He event talked about the impact Mir actually has on developers.... just the shell devs...not the application devs. And while even that is inaccurate to a degree (many applications have raw X calls that need to be fixed to support either Wayland or Mir) the gist is KDE will support Mir through KDE's reliance on the Qt toolkit. And here's the shocker... just like how they achieve support for Windows!

For most of KDE, support for Mir shows up automatically in the Qt toolkit support. In fact it could be argued that the way KDE is architectured as a project is what makes it possible for them to support both Windows and Mir equally as they must abstract away X11 specific calls to run on Windows already. Mark KNOWS this. So it makes he implied swipe at KDE for supporting Windows and not Mir just bizarro...absolutely bizarro.

Its only the shell developers that's really impacted. And in this case of KDE, its really only Kwin development that is impacted directly. And again Kwin supports neither Windows nor Mir. Completely consistent decision-making. Not what Mark really wants to see, but its really not a huge problem either... as Canonical can help the Kubuntu team maintain the Mir-enablement patchset downstream even if the Kwin upstream doesn't want to carry it.

So Mark is... well... off the mark in his assertion that KDE supports Windows more fully than Mir. Its factually untrue. And more than that, it not even a significant technical problem. Canonical and the Kubuntu team can solve this for all existing Mir enabled systems without Kwin upstream buy-in.

I won't get into whether Mark is deliberately being factually untrue or not in his oblique assertion about Windows being better supported than Mir. Calling him a flagrant liar isn't going to make the situation better, nor will it prevent him from making the same sort of inaccurate implied jibe again and again.

But right now, he's not the problem. The problem is you have repeated his assertion as if its fact. That's the problem. That's the problem with a lot of the stuff Mark throws out there, many people too easily just assume he's speaking something close to factually correct. And as a result a lot of energy and good will is burned up stamping out the misinformation disseminated from his soapbox.

So I'm telling you right now, for everyone's sake, stop repeating the crap Mark says. Its usually highly inaccurate. And it's the repetition of misinformation as fact that creates the perception gap and reinforces the us versus them mentality. Please, I implore you, disregard anything Mark Shuttleworth says about anything not happening inside the Canonical fenceline.

Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 20, 2013 0:18 UTC (Sun) by deepfire (guest, #26138) [Link]

Jef, yes, I did above -- https://lwn.net/Articles/570914/

Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 20, 2013 0:21 UTC (Sun) by deepfire (guest, #26138) [Link]

Jef, also about being more careful in future with what Mark says -- I will.

His words passed my surface investigation, which obviously wasn't a very good one.

Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 19, 2013 9:57 UTC (Sat) by deepfire (guest, #26138) [Link]

> The reality is, Canonical isn't gearing up for a fight with Red Hat,
> that fights been over for a long while (even for cloud where Red Hat
> is a huge openstack contributor)

A moot point. SteamOS supports Ubuntu only. And, AIUI (feel free to correct me), Ubuntu is still the desktop distro #1.

What fight it's losing is not desktop adoption -- it's developer mindshare,
and that's where they feel vulnerable to what they perceive as attacks
driven by animosity.

And for a good reason -- see the "Will support Windows, won't support Mir" point.

Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 20, 2013 0:54 UTC (Sun) by rahvin (subscriber, #16953) [Link]

SteamOS supports only Ubuntu? I'd like to see a source on that because AFAIK there have been no affirmative details on what SteamOS is or supports. Steam beta Linux support was initially only deployed officially for Ubuntu but it's expected that the details for SteamOS will not be distribution specific and could even be it's own distribution.

So again, lets see your source that SteamOS is Ubuntu only. That would frankly surprise me.

Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 20, 2013 1:21 UTC (Sun) by deepfire (guest, #26138) [Link]

Crap, that was a writeo -- I did indeed mean to write "Steam", not "SteamOS".

I'm sorry for the confusion.

Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 20, 2013 1:23 UTC (Sun) by deepfire (guest, #26138) [Link]

Also, see above my retraction on the "Will support Windows, will not support Mir" controversy -- Martin was graceful enough to once again clear that issue.

Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 21, 2013 11:29 UTC (Mon) by k3ninho (subscriber, #50375) [Link]

If this is the case, then Mark should be paying for developers to go into Samsung, HTC and other handset developers to support their devices and to do board bringup. This would help these outfits to integrate with the wider kernel community. Ubuntu-friendly devices will need that integration, and Mark is almost uniquely able to make it happen, if he were to bring about the sharing ecosystem that has benefitted many other Linux contributors.

Canonical is set up differently, however, so can't presently do this. I don't know of another Unix vendor who has survived as a reseller in competition to the existing community. The alternative is that they are doing this, but can't talk about it yet (such a thing would have GPL compliance interests asking serious questions soon after any announcement).

The Juju packages for cloud installation and the upcoming image-based update system are good steps on the road to containerised apps for conventional use, and they do give Ubuntu a techincal edge. This works because cloud providers are working in opposition to the vertical integration of mobile handset manufacturing.

K3n.

Shuttleworth: Coward, Before, Google...

Posted Oct 21, 2013 13:21 UTC (Mon) by gvy (guest, #11981) [Link]

> The hardest thing in Shuttleworth's blog for me is the lost opportunity
> for him to stake his ground and boldly tell Google that he's coming for
> their marketshare.
Well put.

Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 19, 2013 1:50 UTC (Sat) by robclark (subscriber, #74945) [Link]

> To be fair, you preferred a retort to an actual response to his assertion.

your point being? If there was something actually worth responding to, then maybe it would have got more than a retort. But on a *technical* level, this whole wayland vs mir thing has been beaten into the ground several times already. The rest to discuss is all politics and that doesn't merit more than a retort.

Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 19, 2013 9:45 UTC (Sat) by deepfire (guest, #26138) [Link]

My point is that he had a point.

His point was that certain technological communities, like KDE, are more eager to support Windows than Mir.

Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 19, 2013 10:35 UTC (Sat) by csamuel (✭ supporter ✭, #2624) [Link]

He mentioned KDE precisely once, to thank their team (and those for the other *ubuntu flavours) for their work in the release.

Why should KDE support Mir? It's just more work for them for no significant benefit.

On the other hand getting KDE going on other OS's (not just Windows) gets them more users and introduces more people to FLOSS ad its philosophies.

Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 19, 2013 11:18 UTC (Sat) by robclark (subscriber, #74945) [Link]

> His point was that certain technological communities, like KDE, are more eager to support Windows than Mir.

To be fair, I don't follow KDE that closely..

But that said, I think you grossly underestimate the size of the windows marketshare vs mir. Making a decision like that based on $benefit / $cost, it seems reasonable to come to the same conclusion as the KDE community.

Anyways, the whole whining over other projects not wanting to carry support for his custom window system has been discussed plenty already. Canonical didn't *have* to choose to diverge from the rest of the linux desktop ecosystem, but it was their choice. And likewise other projects don't *have* to decide to carry support for mir, it is their choice. Stop crying.

Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 19, 2013 12:21 UTC (Sat) by wertigon (guest, #42963) [Link]

Yes, it is a cost/benefit ratio. But, supporting Mir isn't so much of a deal as it and Wayland are very similar. I believe one or two programmers could do most of the grunt work as a 3-month project - even less if Canonical is the one supplying patches to KDE!

But oh well. Boneheaded move, RIP Kubuntu, you shall be missed.

Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 20, 2013 3:15 UTC (Sun) by ovitters (subscriber, #27950) [Link]

It is very annoying as maintainer to support something that you cannot support. If you don't run Ubuntu, then you cannot properly support or maintain (at all) something specific for that distribution. If distribution specific, then the distribution has to maintain it. Nothing bad about that.

That KDE component is IIRC mainly maintained by 1 person. You're talking about 1 or 2 extra programmers? Wtf?

Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 20, 2013 6:58 UTC (Sun) by mgraesslin (subscriber, #78959) [Link]

Luckily KWin is not a one-man show. But yes, we only have one full-time resource on it and even that is not only working on KWin but all over the kde-workspace code base. I think this week I have not even touched the KWin code base.

Anyway I expect that you need more than three person months and that's something we don't have. Period. We don't have to discuss it, we don't have the development resources to implement Mir support even if we wanted to.

Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 22, 2013 22:45 UTC (Tue) by jspaleta (subscriber, #50639) [Link]

The inverse question is more interesting to me....
How much work would it take to port Unity8 as a shell to use Wayland instead of Mir.

Considering how many other pieces of the stack are going to have to be downstream patched to build up distribution level Mir support, outside of Ubuntu...for anyone working inside the scope of another distribution, who would like to get Unity8 up and running, this seems the salient question.

I don't really see a future where Mir backed Unity8 is going to find its way into Debian. But Wayland backed Unity8, that could happen and the patchset would only have to be in Unity itself not in other projects. Only question is how hard would that actually be to achieve?

I'm not saying that Canonical is going to invest in that, but if Unity8 as a shell is popular, it's something I can see externals, especially debian devs, potentially investigating and attempting.

-jef

Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 19, 2013 13:01 UTC (Sat) by misc (subscriber, #73730) [Link]

On the other hand, there is around 0.00001 % of computer in the world running Mir, and a rather large amount running a version of Windows. People should forget that Linux on the desktop is still almost nothing since years.

So just on statistics alone, it fully make sense to have more people eager to work on Windows than on Mir. unlike Mir at the moment, Windows has stable and well know APIs.

Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 19, 2013 15:13 UTC (Sat) by deepfire (guest, #26138) [Link]

Your words betray a mindset with no future in consideration.

Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 20, 2013 3:16 UTC (Sun) by ovitters (subscriber, #27950) [Link]

If it would be popular, you could add support at that time. Way more practical.

Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 20, 2013 8:39 UTC (Sun) by deepfire (guest, #26138) [Link]

That is not how the original policy statement goes -- it goes about no single-distribution support, no matter the popularity. Windows is popular, KWin does not support it.

Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 21, 2013 10:28 UTC (Mon) by ovitters (subscriber, #27950) [Link]

BTW: Thanks for providing alternative points of view in this article + comments. Quite boring if everyone has the same thoughts plus could maybe end up as an echo chamber.

Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 20, 2013 10:05 UTC (Sun) by misc (subscriber, #73730) [Link]

If you take a closer look at history, you will see that attempt to replace X are not that uncommon ( like Y http://developers.slashdot.org/story/04/02/19/1628204/y-w... or fresco ), and so it fully make sense to wait.

In the future, if Mir is really adopted widly, I am sure the stance will change. But Canonical has the reputation of being agile, which also mean dropping stuf quite fast. On the top of my head, there is the bazaar/baz vs bzr stuff ( https://mail.gna.org/public/dvc-dev/2007-05/msg00001.html ) in 2007, there is the old story of xsplash vs plymouth ( in 2009 ), the numerous rewrite change of unity ( gtk to qt to compiz to mir ). Or just the change from Eucalyptus to openstack, the drop of a whole specialised architecture for the dell mini 10.

After all, Mark told in the past that wayland was te way to go:
http://www.markshuttleworth.com/archives/551 , even saying:
"and we evaluated the cost of building a new display manager, informed by the lessons learned in Wayland. We came to the conclusion that any such effort would only create a hard split in the world which wasn’t worth the cost of having done it."

So I can fully understand that people decide that dust settle before doing anything, given the fast moving target that Ubuntu has become. Taking in account the future when experience show that you can hardly predict anything about the move of Canonical is believing they are gonna totally change, which is unlikely to happen.

Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 19, 2013 9:04 UTC (Sat) by tzafrir (subscriber, #11501) [Link]

I did like his T party (as well as his S party, R party and so forth).

Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 19, 2013 14:32 UTC (Sat) by Company (guest, #57006) [Link]

It's S Club Party

Torturing the English language

Posted Oct 20, 2013 18:29 UTC (Sun) by charlieb (guest, #23340) [Link]

>> What closely to see how competitors to Canonical torture the English
>> language
>
> shuttleworth is a competitor to canonical?

When it comes to torturing the English language, I would say Shuttleworth is one of those torturers - unless he was misquoted. Should that really read "Look closely to see how ..."?

Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 18, 2013 21:47 UTC (Fri) by djzort (guest, #57189) [Link]

Shuttleworth should spend more time developing software that people want and less time watching John Stuart and MSNBC.

Still, aside from alienating all his conservative and libertarian customers, displaying his ignorance of politics he disagrees with, confirming his disdain for his critics and his inability to empathize with their point of view - he has provided an amusing comparison.

I guess if critics of wayland are the Tea Partiers, then Wayland must be like Obamacare, Shuttleworth must see himself as Obama and his supporters must be Occupy Wall Street and/or other Soros/Union backed astroturfed groups.

The mentality of "Canonical knows whats best" is what has been undermining it for years now - and now we know where that attitude comes from.

Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 19, 2013 2:32 UTC (Sat) by el_presidente (guest, #87621) [Link]

You're making his comments sound sane.

Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 19, 2013 10:06 UTC (Sat) by deepfire (guest, #26138) [Link]

The man actually has points worth answering to. And yes, he is not as affected by the modern disease of "political correctness" as you would have preferred, it seems.

Shuttleworth _is_ demonised by the community, to the point of not being considered worth parsing -- people seem to apply "quick scan, trigger on buzzwords" approach to reading what he writes.

Look at it like this -- his universe is isolated to a degree, which makes it harder to empathise. But at least that isolation is not as impenetrable as what we have with Google.

Animosity will lead to mutual isolation and further misunderstanding.

Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 19, 2013 11:29 UTC (Sat) by khim (subscriber, #9252) [Link]

Look at it like this -- his universe is isolated to a degree, which makes it harder to empathise. But at least that isolation is not as impenetrable as what we have with Google.

And that is exactly the problem. Google made it perfectly clear that it does it's own thing totally separated from anything else. That's perfectly fine, accepted and tolerated thing. People may joke about “vi vs emacs” or “Idea vs Eclipse”, but they wouldn't ask these to “join forces”: even if theoretically these are similar products they were different from the very start and they are clearly seen as “fair competitors.” Project A does not give anything to project B, but project A also does not take anything from project B, either! That's “fair.”

But Shuttleworth is not doing that! Instead he takes existing thing and creates a fork which suits his needs. In effect he splits community and pulls sizable portion of it aside. Project A does not give anything to project B, but project A still takes stuff from project B! Think “Intel & Mir story”: Shuttleworth does not want to discuss the design decisions of Mir with “mainstream” (X and Wayland) guys yet he still expects that they will support his creation? How crazy can you get? That's “totally fair!”

Forks are like self-determination rights: they are important to to keep projects honest but they are supposed to be created only when they have solid justification behind them. Ubuntu creates forks willy-nilly which is seen as a problem.

What's so strange or complicated about that?

Animosity will lead to mutual isolation and further misunderstanding.

Sure, but that's Shuttleworth's and Ubuntu's choice, not anyone's else.

on purely political grounds / NIH ?

Posted Oct 19, 2013 3:49 UTC (Sat) by amtota (subscriber, #4012) [Link]

> When lots of competitors attack a project on purely political grounds
> ... those same outraged individuals have NIH’d

Well, let's get some facts straight: Ubuntu has repeatedly re-invented the wheel (appindicator vs statusicon, mir vs wayland, etc) and every single time it's an API nightmare. That's not political, that's just facts.
Forest for the trees?

on purely political grounds / NIH ?

Posted Oct 19, 2013 10:00 UTC (Sat) by deepfire (guest, #26138) [Link]

Meanwhile you give Google green light for reinventing _everything_ but the kernel?

on purely political grounds / NIH ?

Posted Oct 19, 2013 11:36 UTC (Sat) by khim (subscriber, #9252) [Link]

Nope. Google did a few forks and all of them were lamented by the appropriate parties. Apache Harmony went extinct which closed question of that fork, but discussions about kernel are still alive and we all know how Oracle reacted to the attempt to fork “it's” community, right? It found out (for it's dismay) that it does not have ownership rights over Java users but nonetheless this schism (between Oracle's “Java” and Google's “non-Java”) runs quite deep.

Everything else? Google did that “from the scratch”… and that's a-okey.

Attitude towards Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 19, 2013 10:15 UTC (Sat) by JMB (guest, #74439) [Link]

Quite interesting how people react ... even on LWN.
On last DistroWatch Weekly there is a Feature Story
http://distrowatch.com/weekly.php?issue=20131014
in which it is pointed out that MIR can only provide
choice - if it is a bad idea it will vanish (costing
money of the man whose words are so badly taken here)
and if its a great thing the entire community will
win.
Personally I don't like DEs like KDE4, GNOME3 and Unity
myself - but from these three Unity looked at least as
if it can suit people when it got ripe.
I looked into developers discussions available on the
net and found GNOME developers guilty for the split.
But after promising to make Unity configurable with Focus
follow mouse on top of the list I waited for the 2nd
release with Unity and it was not implemented - so I
switched to Xubuntu.
Canonical is not RedHat - and concerning desktop usage
it is not helpfull that a RH-CEO said Linux is not
ready for the desktop which it was since 1994 (I can
proove that - especially compared to M$ products of the
same time).
And the problem of this news is MIR is not ripe in the eyes
of the developers and users complain? What _is_ the problem?
If it would be ripe people would not notice the underlying
MIR, as speed improvements are only possible for native usage
(not via XMIR) as several people pointed out.
The only people who could complain are developers - as they
do not get neccessary feedback to improve - quite decisive
for the upcoming 14.04 LTS `Trusty Tahr'.
And for the developers of graphic stack - so developers should
complain about e.g. Intel not wanting MIR-related drivers (and
thus bug reports) and with that maybe users may support
pressure on graphic developers (which is long due -
NVidia/AMD's bad role in the game anyone?).
But Cannonical has high interest to get it out ASAP - so
it is their concern what is best.
And Mark Shuttleworth is the one to talk about it as it is his
money which is spent ... and his saying ... and his personal
engagement (plus that of many more ... no doubt).
Ubuntu started the Linux desktop for the masses - no other
distro did that - just the reality and so envy is high.
We all can be happy it is around - to be used, tested, getting
best practices/lessons learnt for other distro developers.
Or if you don't like it discussing and hating it. ;-)
Ubuntu/Canonical was blocked since day 1 - a clear fact.
Even Linus Torvalds had to make clear that kernel problems
with Ubuntu do matter due to its users (even kernel hackers
among them) as people affiliated with other distributions
were not happy helping them (argument: pay your own kernel
developers - the argument is understandable - but still
not nice).
In the end it is all politics - even engaging in Linux.
Many (maybe all) readers of LWN are guilty in this respect,
aren't we?
I hope that Canonical/Ubuntu got the success it deserves.
And it really does so.
To all people emotionally engaged (like me) - do breathe
and smile!
I enjoy Xubuntu 13.10 - even the bug reporting part -
and look forward to Xubuntu 14.04 LTS.

JMB

P.S.:
One thing is to blame: Ubuntu bug #1 should not have
been closed but should be re-opened - if you don't
now why follow the kernel developers more closely and
look at the HW you can put your distro of choice on it
without obstacles or not functional HW components.

"There is no surer way to ruin a good discussion than
to contaminate it with the facts." -- Cecil Adams

Attitude towards Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 19, 2013 12:11 UTC (Sat) by khim (subscriber, #9252) [Link]

Canonical is not RedHat - and concerning desktop usage it is not helpfull that a RH-CEO said Linux is not ready for the desktop which it was since 1994 (I can proove that - especially compared to M$ products of the same time).

I don't know how can you still prove that when it's obviously not true. An OS by itself is worth nothing. It does not matter how fluid are animations in said OS or how clever architectures is in it's core: if it's not supported by third-party developers it's DOA. Think OS/2, think webOS, think BlackBerry 10. Linux distributions were made to basically exclude most third-party developers—which in turn made Linux unsuitable for a desktop. This was tested by netbooks arrival and subsequent death: they arrived with Linux, people hated them because they had no application to use with them, they switched to Windows which people loved but it made it possible for the Microsoft to finish them (Windows XP was pulled out and Windows 7 was too heavy for these lightweight devices).

Server story was different because users there had no sensible choice: “big UNIX” died and left the void behind which was much easier to fill with Linux than with Windows. Salary situation also helped: on desktop you basically need to pay as many salaries to the office workers as you need to buy licenses and salary for even janitor dwarfs the price of even the most expensive version of Windows but with server one admin (with one salary) can administer hundreds and thousands of computers (many of these will be virtual but they still will need a license). Server licenses were also traditionally significantly more expensive which only made the situation more dire.

Everywhere else Linux succeeded because distributions were not there to affect it's success (but of course people took Linux which offered “full control” then immediately turned and tried to impose similar “my way or the highway” rule… where third-party applications were not important that worked, where they were important it flew like lead balloon… till Android, at least).

Now Ubuntu (ironically enough) and Steam are trying to do something about it, but since they are doing it by forking the community they are not loved for that.

Attitude towards Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 19, 2013 13:17 UTC (Sat) by lsl (subscriber, #86508) [Link]

> it's not supported by third-party developers it's DOA

That's obviously not the case for Linux. In fact, many projects have Linux as their primary target nowadays. In addition, basically all software originally written for other Unix variants was ported to Linux. We have tons of nice software.

> to basically exclude most third-party developers

The only kind of developer feeling excluded from Linux development are those that want to tightly control everything from source code to distribution to what the user can do with their software. Such demands are obviously not a good fit with the wider Linux and Open Source commmunities and, naturally, it shows.

Attitude towards Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 19, 2013 15:22 UTC (Sat) by khim (subscriber, #9252) [Link]

That's obviously not the case for Linux. In fact, many projects have Linux as their primary target nowadays.

Really? On desktop? Which ones? Yes, there are some “me too” projects (GNOME/KDE which started as imitation of CDE which was just a rehash of Workplace Shell), but most other projects (Firefox or Eclipse) target Windows first, MacOS second and Linux last (if at all).

In addition, basically all software originally written for other Unix variants was ported to Linux. We have tons of nice software.

Well, yes, we do. Some software-development tools were developed for Linux first and then ported to Windows and MacOS. GIT is one example. But all that software is not designed with desktop user in mind. It's side-effect of support of server-centered ecosystem. Yes, it's usable on desktop, too, not the next layer is missing.

The only kind of developer feeling excluded from Linux development are those that want to tightly control everything from source code to distribution to what the user can do with their software.

IOW: most developers out there. Your point?

Such demands are obviously not a good fit with the wider Linux and Open Source commmunities and, naturally, it shows.

It shows, all right: you can see more MacOS devices on FOSS conferences than laptops with Linux. If it's not definition of failure then I don't know what is.

Attitude towards Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 19, 2013 18:00 UTC (Sat) by JMB (guest, #74439) [Link]

I see things very differently.
# from former comment:
> Linux distributions were made to basically exclude most third-party
> developers.
No, they give complete OSs incl. applications - M$ never was willing
and capable to do that.
But any company could make programs - free or proprietary - and won't
get obstacles like all the competitors of M$ blown out of the water.
> ... big UNIX" died ...
Not at all - I had been administrator for AIX/HP-UX/Solaris/Linux/...
for more than ten years and there is no death of proprietary Unices
at all. Especially concerning IBM's AIX.
> Now Ubuntu (ironically enough) and Steam are trying to do something
> about it, but since they are doing it by forking the community they
> are not loved for that.
Why ironically. Mark Shuttleworth announced Ubuntu to work on
special aspects Debian lacked (short release cycles incl. recent
kernel, X etc., clear focus on the user and usability) and from
my point of view this was the right thing to do - and they got
success.
Look at desktop distos today - most users are on Debian or Ubuntu
derivates - user base of SuSE or Fedora is quite small.
I don't think this is a controversial subject, is it?
What do you mean with forking the community.
Sorry, but I don't regard GNOME a community project.
Users complained and got rejected, even Linus and other
well known people had problems and were told to change
their workflow.
I really get angry if people tell me how I should work after
20 years Unix/Linux expertise. And when I get angry I move
along and give appropriate advice to those who ask for it. :)
And look at who is driving Wayland and why. Which companies
do support them? Do they have desktop focus?
If they win Ubuntu will sure use it - and if Mir would prove
to be superior I don't think Canonical would stop competitors
to use it - otherwise they would be in trouble.
But of cause they have plans to fulfill and may have reason
for doing development of key part of their strategy on their
own. Why should anyone hate choice - but must voices are
clearly against it. Why? Technical reasoning? Or just affiliations
with competing parties?
I think the Linux community would have a problem if Ubuntu and
Mint would not exist - and many know that.
# precious comment:
>> That's obviously not the case for Linux. In fact, many projects
>> have Linux as their primary target nowadays.
> Really? On desktop? Which ones?
I agree on that - Adobe rejected it, selling old games on Linux
was also no hit (Loki anyone) and many say market share is too small.
As if Mac would have more machines. But on Linux you have choice.
If a SW vendor makes ports to Linux you may not be regarded as
premium partner for OS vendors (you may know who misuse their
position - with Linux as their only competitor) the same way
HW vendors can not deliver pre-installed Linux without losing the
ability of delivering other OSs to competing prices.
> ... but most other projects (Firefox or Eclipse) target Windows
> first, MacOS second and Linux last (if at all).
From my perspective several companies have changed their mind.
Mozilla really was `beaten' by Linux fans for support - but
I don't see such problems right now - are you sure of that point
being valid right now?
> ... But all that software is not designed with desktop user in mind.
Linux was written for desktop use by Linus Torvalds, GNU project is
also not server focussed.
I started introducing Linux as desktop OS at university institute
in 1995 - more than competing with other solutions.
Later I worked in industry and Linux was used in e.g. automotive
domain as professional desktops for engineers.
So it _is_ suitable for professional workstations (desktops).
And there is SW with desktop users in mind next to Linux itself,
e.g. LibreOffice, Firefox, Chrome, Gimp, Gnumerics, Abiword, ...
many of those being more than competitive with `professional
variants'.
Gaming seems to improve ... maybe ... but we will see later.
> It shows, all right: you can see more MacOS devices on FOSS
> conferences than laptops with Linux.
May be - I know of several Linux/Unix administrators using Mac things.
Most are not willing to work privately on configuring/fixing things
(even though they should be able to) or like the envy card (you now:
my laptop, phone, etc. is more expensive than yours argument). :)
That's the point for Ubuntu's bug #1 - where are the vendors selling
Linux pre-installed for private use (not business) - most HW is hard
to get Linux on (BIOS successors etc.) - support is sometimes excluded
when installing Linux (I had my experiences with - ironically - a Dell
laptop around 2001) - which is still the case for several vendors.
As Android is not built to be self administrated (but as proprietary
SW) it is not a huge difference that it runs Linux (at least in my eyes).
But one can install mods to get there ...

Attitude towards Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 19, 2013 19:01 UTC (Sat) by khim (subscriber, #9252) [Link]

I don't see such problems right now - are you sure of that point being valid right now?

It's not valid right now simply because most innovations in browsers have not touched platform-dependent code. But last time that happened (with WebGL incroduction) Linux was left behind. And I'm pretty sure if WebCL will be introduced it'll be introduced on Windows (and may be MacOS) before Linux. Linux is just not the focus for web browser makers. ChromeOS is important platform for Google, Linux… not so much.

Linux was written for desktop use by Linus Torvalds, GNU project is also not server focussed.

Sure, but things like terminal-independent display support are desktop of quarter-century ago. Today's desktop is about many different things, but command-line niceties is not something Joe Average User expects.

As Android is not built to be self administrated (but as proprietary SW) it is not a huge difference that it runs Linux (at least in my eyes). But one can install mods to get there ...

Bingo. Situation with mobile-centered (and mostly Android-centered) world reminds me about situation with PC from 35 years ago. Remember? Back then Allen used PDP-10 with Intel 8008 emulator to develop the infamous BASIC! And for years after that minicomputers of various sorts were used to develop software for the personal computers (especially for 8bit ones which were not powerful enough to run full-blown development environments). And sales of minicomputers and workstations have grown for years after introduction of PC! But eventually PC became powerful enough to make workstations obsolete and dead—and history is repeating itself with Android today…

That's why Canonical is so desperate with it's “convergence” plans: it's pretty clear that window of opportunity is shrinking. In 3 to 5 years either Android or ChromeOS will be ready to take over the desktop—and if they'll take over then Ubuntu will die in 10-15 years. RedHat is not in danger because neither Android nor ChromeOS make much sense on a server but Ubuntu is in grave danger. Yet GNOME/KDE/Wayland developers are acting as if they have all the time in the world. Thus I can understand the frustration which brought up Mir project, but I'm just not sure this way Canonical will be able to offer something usable faster.

Attitude towards Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 19, 2013 22:36 UTC (Sat) by leifbk (subscriber, #35665) [Link]

In 3 to 5 years either Android or ChromeOS will be ready to take over the desktop—and if they'll take over then Ubuntu will die in 10-15 years. RedHat is not in danger because neither Android nor ChromeOS make much sense on a server but Ubuntu is in grave danger. Yet GNOME/KDE/Wayland developers are acting as if they have all the time in the world. Thus I can understand the frustration which brought up Mir project, but I'm just not sure this way Canonical will be able to offer something usable faster.

That's a pretty interesting point of view, but I believe that you're wrong.

In 10-15 years time I'm certain that the traditional desktop will be replaced by tablets for most of the «casual PC users», say about 90-95 percent of the current desktop users. But there will probably still be a minority who needs the power of a desktop system, a good keyboard and a big screen. This group will to a large extent correlate with the creators of the contents that the casual users consume.

I don't believe that these «power users» will ever want to replace their desktop with a version of Android, ChromeOS, or Unity. They will want a full-fledged desktop like the present KDE, OS/X, or maybe even Windows if that will exist 10-15 years from now. You see, we power users want a desktop that accomodates our workflow, with 10-20 applications open at the same time, and a taskbar (or something) to select between them.

Attitude towards Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 20, 2013 0:10 UTC (Sun) by khim (subscriber, #9252) [Link]

I don't believe that these «power users» will ever want to replace their desktop with a version of Android, ChromeOS, or Unity.

Sure, but why do you think it'll make any difference to the outcome?

They will want a full-fledged desktop like the present KDE, OS/X, or maybe even Windows if that will exist 10-15 years from now.

Really? Have you looked on OS/X and/or Windows lately? They try very hard to merge experience of OS/X with iOS and Windows with Windows Phone. KDE may or may not offer experience similar to what you have today, but if all major browsers will go away, if all the productivity suites, CADs and other specialized programs will go away… they will have no choice. I'm pretty sure many hardware designers preferred SGI Indigo to cheap Dell computers, but when AutoCard dropped IRIX support… they had no choice but to switch to Windows, right?

You see, we power users want a desktop that accomodates our workflow, with 10-20 applications open at the same time, and a taskbar (or something) to select between them.

Right. And that's why Android's PC offers remote with separate button which can do exactly that. Sure, experience today is not as smooth as it's on the KDE or GNOME, but it's surprisingly usable already and if such devices will become popular both Android itself and Android programs will be adjusted to work fine in this environment.

It's relatively easy to add some gimmicks to Android (like Samsung's multiview) but it's much harder to convince application writers to target new platform. That's where 10-15 years are coming from: undoubtedly there will be many holdouts which will keep established desktop platforms alive (old UNIX workstations have died off just four years ago, believe it or not), but they will become “dying off dinosaurs” relatively quickly (again: just like it happened with UNIX workstations).

Attitude towards Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 20, 2013 1:05 UTC (Sun) by rahvin (subscriber, #16953) [Link]

I don't believe that these «power users» will ever want to replace their desktop with a version of Android, ChromeOS, or Unity.
Go look on Amazon at their top selling laptops. You will find a chromebook in the top 5. Last I looked it was number one. Number one selling laptop from the largest internet retailer. Techies (including me) keep writing off chromebook but the sales speak otherwise. Apparently there are lot of people that don't care about windows.

Attitude towards Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 20, 2013 16:47 UTC (Sun) by jengelh (subscriber, #33263) [Link]

>In 10-15 years time I'm certain that the traditional desktop will be replaced by tablets for most of the «casual PC users», say about 90-95 percent

Well, even in Star Trek's 24th century, they still have the 13" notebooks, PADD tablets don't entirely take over, certainly not to 95%. :)

In fact, I would rather predict that tablets will die out. Netbooks become lighter, screenfoldable and touchable, so that ultimately, they will swallow up tablets, and the choice which gadget to carry around boils down to screen size, i.e. volume you are willing to carry. A mobile can disappear in your pocket, but a tablet/netbook does not.

Attitude towards Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 21, 2013 9:06 UTC (Mon) by aleXXX (subscriber, #2742) [Link]

> Really? On desktop? Which ones?

E.g. Pre-Stack Pro ( http://sharpreflections.com ), a commercial application for seismic data processing and analysis. Ok, it comes from a HPC-background, where Linux rules anyway.

Btw., we are looking for developers.

Alex

Attitude towards Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 21, 2013 0:39 UTC (Mon) by Arker (guest, #14205) [Link]

"Linux distributions were made to basically exclude most third-party developers—which in turn made Linux unsuitable for a desktop"

That's absolutely the reverse of the truth.

"This was tested by netbooks arrival and subsequent death: they arrived with Linux, people hated them because they had no application to use with them, they switched to Windows"

Nonsense. I have one of those early netbooks and it works great - after you roll your own linux distro. The problem with them was that everyone expected the manufacturers to roll a usable distro to ship on them and that never happened! The manufacturer obviously hadnt bothered to hire a single person that understood linux to any degree (or if they did hire such a person, they didnt let him make the decisions.)

Linux was an excellent *Workstation* OS (that's for real computers, not toy desktops) way back in the early 90s when I first ran into it. Chatter to the contrary is just ignorant.

Attitude towards Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 19, 2013 12:54 UTC (Sat) by misc (subscriber, #73730) [Link]

> Canonical is not RedHat - and concerning desktop usage
> it is not helpfull that a RH-CEO said Linux is not
> ready for the desktop which it was since 1994 (I can
> proove that - especially compared to M$ products of the
> same time).

Well, you should prove, but in the mean time, there is :
http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/92905/Q_A_Red_Hat_...

So in 2004, we have the CEO of Red hat who said "yes" to the question
"You're confident the time is here for companies to run Linux on the desktop?"

The next day of the publication, Canonical was founded, according to Wikipedia. That's of course a coincidence for sure, but the timing was quite nice.

Red Hat didn't choose to develop the desktop product ( even if it exist:
https://www.redhat.com/apps/store/desktop/ ), and later, Mandriva, Lycoris, etc all went to bankruptcy, most of them being focused on desktop, so I would say that history showed that the choice of going on servers proved right for Red Hat.

> Ubuntu started the Linux desktop for the masses - no other
> distro did that - just the reality and so envy is high.

Sure, you may be a bit too young to remember Suse around 15 years ago, who was sold in regular shop, in simple boxed sets. Or Mandrake/Mandriva, who were the kind at that time around 10 to 12 years ago, at least on desktop.

What Ubuntu did was to be on the right moment to put money at the right place, that's already a achievement of course, but this must not forget they used the foundation made by others ( like Debian ), piggybacking on the maintenance of the platform done by the competitors ( since Canonical mostly saw themself as integrator first and didn't really had the resources to share the load in the first place ).
And guess what, after soon 9 years, it still isn't sustainable.

So Canonical just demonstrated that if you throw enough money, you can pretend to have changed the world, despite having still almost no one running Linux on the desktop, unless if we count Android.

Attitude towards Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 19, 2013 18:27 UTC (Sat) by JMB (guest, #74439) [Link]

I looked at sources for `Linux not being ready for the desktop'
but could not find it in the hard way I remember it.
But one may look at:
-
11/2003 - "Red Hat CEO Matthew Szulik [said] that Linux was not
ready for ordinary home users":
http://www.onlamp.com/pub/wlg/3965
-
03/2009: - "Red Hat's CEO Jim Whitehurst pointed out several
issues with running Linux on the desktop, including financial
concerns the company has as a Linux vendor."
http://www.infoworld.com/t/platforms/red-hat-ceo-question...
-
08/2011: "Jim Whitehurst, CEO of Red Hat, has another year in mind
for the Linux desktop though: Never. Oh, and the Windows and
Mac desktops? Get ready to say good-bye to them soon."
http://www.linuxtoday.com/it_management/2011081900441NWDTRH
-
and to join SuSE to the party:
-
03/2009: "Linux still not ready for desktop, says SuSE CEO"
http://edition.cnn.com/2000/TECH/computing/03/02/no.linux...
-
The companies making money with Linux distros were not really
enthusiastic and provide little to get Linux to the masses
while it was superior to proprietary OSs on the desktop even
in 1995 (IMHO).

Attitude towards Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 19, 2013 18:42 UTC (Sat) by rahulsundaram (subscriber, #21946) [Link]

"The companies making money with Linux distros were not really
enthusiastic and provide little to get Linux to the masses
while it was superior to proprietary OSs on the desktop even
in 1995 (IMHO)"

That opinion is certainly not shared even among seasoned Linux desktop developers. I have been using it on the desktop all along but not as a commercially viable option, Red Hat and SUSE both have invested very heavily into desktop technologies over the years (Red Hat for infrastructure and SUSE for applications historically) but their focus is not consumer desktops. Canonical was only using it a gateway to get into other markets and now they have shifted their strategy to mobile. I will continue to use it for the foreseeable future but anyone who thinks there is a sudden surge coming up at this late hour is delusional.

Attitude towards Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 21, 2013 9:27 UTC (Mon) by torquay (guest, #92428) [Link]

    Red Hat and SUSE both have invested very heavily into desktop technologies over the years

Eh? While contributions to desktop area are by default quite visible, the amount of effort put in by RH and Suse is (and was) tiny compared to the effort both companies put into the server stack (which includes the kernel and openstack). The desktop makes bugger all money for RH, and because of that they don't bother putting serious resources into it.

Attitude towards Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 21, 2013 11:46 UTC (Mon) by rahulsundaram (subscriber, #21946) [Link]

Not in comparison with say the army of kernel developers but there are dozens and dozens of desktop developers at Red Hat and SUSE and they make a sizable amount of income from some major desktop/workstation type deployments on a regular basis.

Attitude towards Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 19, 2013 18:44 UTC (Sat) by JMB (guest, #74439) [Link]

This is also nice, but real source not available:
-
RedHat:with morons like this who needs competition
"Red Hat's chief executive [Szulik] has said that Linux needs
to mature further before home users will get a positive experience
from the operating system, saying they should choose Windows instead."
http://discuss.fogcreek.com/joelonsoftware3/default.asp?c...
-
Please don't get me wrong - I like RHEL on servers.
It is their business - and maybe there might be a business
case in claiming Linux not ready for desktop - and even
advertising Windows instead ... who knows.
Please note that big Linux companies get more money out of
Linux than they spent - so this is no charity field at all.
And that's OK.

I just wonder why people should hate Canonical/Ubuntu
for Unity/Mir while others do GNOME 3, KDE 4 (and they
have supporting users like Unity has) and such
advertising as mentioned above ...
Especially as it was Ubuntu and its community/users who
proved that Linux is ready for Grandma. :)

In the end it is good to have so many people involved even
if opinions may differ essentially.

Attitude towards Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 20, 2013 4:16 UTC (Sun) by bojan (subscriber, #14302) [Link]

All these are still true, of course. There is no such thing as "Linux desktop". It is all just a fragmented mess, like it always was. Until there is one stack that "won", it won't be ready.

In proprietary world, such things are decided by somebody within each company that ultimately points to what will be _the_ next version. Unfortunately, in the open source world, no agreement has been reached (and is unlikely to be any time soon). Now, whether a company like Google does that by force, we'll see.

More compromise, less "my way or the highway" may actually produce a "Linux desktop".

Attitude towards Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 20, 2013 5:34 UTC (Sun) by Neowin (guest, #93001) [Link]

There is clearly defined "Ubuntu Desktop", though.

Attitude towards Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 20, 2013 21:53 UTC (Sun) by bojan (subscriber, #14302) [Link]

I doubt that Ubuntu actually have engineering depth to pull the big one off.

Attitude towards Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 21, 2013 15:31 UTC (Mon) by zlynx (subscriber, #2285) [Link]

Even Windows does not have "one stack." It has at least three: Win32, MFC, and WPF.

Linux developers need to do just what Windows developers have done for years: target Windows XP. Or in Linux terms, the Gnome or KDE from one or two years ago. Or the oldest supported version of the stable server distributions such as RedHat Enterprise and Debian.

Don't target the latest versions because those are not available across everyone's Linux system.

Attitude towards Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 21, 2013 23:27 UTC (Mon) by bojan (subscriber, #14302) [Link]

> Even Windows does not have "one stack." It has at least three: Win32, MFC, and WPF.

All of which are targeting Windows.

Versions change, APIs and toolkits get improved, added and replaced - I'm not disputing any of that. Yes, freedesktop.org was an attempt to unify all of that stuff on Linux. Didn't work to a large degree. We still have more desktops than you can poke a stick at.

Windows commands large chunk of the desktop space. The rest is mostly Mac. Everybody knows what these are (versions notwithstanding).

Linux, with its single digit percentage desktop penetration finds it useful to have KDE, Gnome, XFCE, LXDE, Mate, Cinnamon, Enlightenment and what not (I'm sure I forgot a few).

I mean, is there really no way to provide one flexible and customisable Linux desktop that would suit most of us? Something that third party application writers can target as one thing? Something that actually answers to the name "Linux desktop"? Apparently not.

Attitude towards Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 22, 2013 0:17 UTC (Tue) by khim (subscriber, #9252) [Link]

I mean, is there really no way to provide one flexible and customisable Linux desktop that would suit most of us? Something that third party application writers can target as one thing? Something that actually answers to the name "Linux desktop"? Apparently not.

It's done already. And before you'll say “hey, but it's mobile, not a desktop” please look here or here. Sure, it's not full-blown developer's desktop. Yet. But it's obvious that this milestone will pass, too. Eventually.

It's not perfect, some may even say it's more awkward then Unity or GNOME3 (and that is not easy to achieve), and some things are, indeed, are too difficult, but it's surprising how usable it already is—and as I already wrote it's much harder to scale stuff down rather then up.

Think window management: we have bazillion options on Linux and quite a few paradigm on Windows and MacOS. And it's not easy to change them—people start complaining (and forking if it's traditional GNU/Linux). But since Android does not have a window management (except for a few rare experiments on a select few devices here and there) any window management will be easily accepted. Just don't expect anything silly (like FFM) because whatever solution will be picked it should be supported on a tablet or a phone, too!

P.S. It'll be interesting to see if tablet history (with serious redesign and closed-source Android 5.x which will play role of “Honeycomb for desktop”) will be repeated in this case, too, or if Google will just add laptops/desktops in a new profile in Android 4.7 without major rework of anything. Make your bets!

Attitude towards Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 22, 2013 0:27 UTC (Tue) by bojan (subscriber, #14302) [Link]

> It's done already.

Yeah, I know what you're saying. I talked about that myself in a few posts. It may be the case that Android takes over everything Linux on mobile and desktop.

The "proprietary" trend is worrying though. It would be like OS X in that regard. Open source when it suits Apple to say that in a glossy brochure, but otherwise a closed off thing. That sucks. I may as well just run Windows - it would be no different.

What I really meant was the "real" Linux desktop desktops of today being one thing. You know - as part of your typical distro of yore.

Attitude towards Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 20, 2013 3:18 UTC (Sun) by rahvin (subscriber, #16953) [Link]

Without Shuttleworth continuing to pump his personal fortune into Canonical they would be out of business just like all the other desktop Linux distributions. Don't attribute his personal willingness to throw money at Canonical as a validation of their model.

Attitude towards Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 21, 2013 10:19 UTC (Mon) by ovitters (subscriber, #27950) [Link]

Seems more that the intention is that Ubuntu is everywhere. Any money coming in I assume is spend on expanding. You do see a lot of Ubuntu deployments. If those deployments are in a business, then usually they want some form of support. I'm guessing their revenue is doing just fine. Any income is directly invested again. But those investments have to materialize so that the generated can be invested again. There are enough Ubuntu deployments to suggest that they should be ok to break even if they wanted to.

Attitude towards Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 22, 2013 3:39 UTC (Tue) by rahvin (subscriber, #16953) [Link]

I'm guessing their revenue is doing just fine.
So you assume they are making money when there have been plenty of new articles about Shuttleworth continuing to pump his personal fortune into the company in the hope of some future payoff.

http://www.internetnews.com/blog/skerner/canonical-ubuntu-linux-is-still-not-profitable.html
Back in 2008, when Canonical was still ramping up as big Linux player - Mark Shuttleworth told me that his company was not cash flow positive. At the time, that made sense, after all what startup is immediately profitable.

Fast forward to 2013 and during a call announcing Ubuntu for Tablets and Shuttleworth once again said that his company was still not profitable.
All the evidence including statements by Shuttleworth indicates that Canonical has never even been cash flow positive. There was an article a while ago, where he said he wasn't going to keep dumping his personal fortune into the company and that it would need to be cash flow positive soon. I'd suggest not guessing on it, I found the above quote in the first page in a google search. And if you think that's too old, try the other link that was also on the first page.

http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2013/08/why-ubuntus-creator-still-invests-his-fortune-in-an-unprofitable-company/

Canonical hasn't made money and just like every other "desktop" Linux distribution would have long ago gone out of business had it not been for a wealthy benefactor pumping his personal fortune into the company. The fact that the company is still around is NOT a validation of the Ubuntu "model".

Attitude towards Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 22, 2013 7:47 UTC (Tue) by ovitters (subscriber, #27950) [Link]

From the Arstechnica article:

What may surprise some people is that Canonical could be profitable today if Shuttleworth was willing to give up his dream of revolutionizing end user computing and focus solely on business customers.

Revenue is not profit. Cash flow negative could mean that they're expanding / investing a lot. Private company so who knows, above gives a good hint that it is a concious decision. I heard that Canonical has a lot more employees, though that's a bit old info. Mir development team is reportedly pretty big.

Attitude towards Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 22, 2013 15:20 UTC (Tue) by rahvin (subscriber, #16953) [Link]

So surprisingly if they dumped the Linux desktop(of course they'd have to dramatically cut staff) and focused on servers they'd be profitable . Just like all the other Linux companies. Color me surprised. Dance around it all you want, they aren't profitable, and haven't ever been. Without Shuttleworth to be the little piggy bank they'd be out of business just like every other desktop Linux company. Either that or they'd be a MUCH smaller company focused on the server market, just as the article quotes Shuttleworth right below the bit you quoted.

Attitude towards Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 22, 2013 15:42 UTC (Tue) by ovitters (subscriber, #27950) [Link]

I mentioned initially that I said that they're investing everything again. Arstechnica backs up what I said. If you have a different opinion, please clarify instead of "Dance around it all you want" as that is too vague to respond to.

Attitude towards Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 21, 2013 18:56 UTC (Mon) by branden (guest, #7029) [Link]

Hey JMB,

Do you think you could do the equivalent of

:set textwidth=10

before posting your future comments?

It would really help the page flow in LWN's comment threads.

Thanks.

Sounds like just more horseshit...

Posted Oct 20, 2013 2:07 UTC (Sun) by bojan (subscriber, #14302) [Link]

Remember this:

http://www.markshuttleworth.com/archives/551

But, I guess it was just too hard to actually work with others to get things done. So, once again, a NIH from Ubuntu. What's new?

As for systemd, I have no idea what the fuss is. It was designed to solve problems that upstart got wrong. It works pretty well and is actively maintained.

Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 20, 2013 5:40 UTC (Sun) by Neowin (guest, #93001) [Link]

Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 20, 2013 8:42 UTC (Sun) by deepfire (guest, #26138) [Link]

You are rude _and_ pointless.

Enough

Posted Oct 20, 2013 9:01 UTC (Sun) by corbet (editor, #1) [Link]

I've been watching this particular tentacle for a while, but it's really just more of the same. If it's your desire to fling childish insults at others, could you please go do it somewhere else?

+1

Posted Oct 21, 2013 17:29 UTC (Mon) by gvy (guest, #11981) [Link]

Not sure about this one but we're better off being aware of Microsoft Student Partners sect -- the link leads to a major Russian FLOSS site wiki page mostly written by me as a convenient moderatorial shortcut, google translation is relatively legible (with the following rough substitutions: shvabodka -> freebiedom, vosmerochku -> eight, semerochki -> seven).

See also this heads-up in English that I had to find out pretty accurate based on experience as the Kiev OSDN conference team member and a speaker/visitor at several more.

PS: Jon, sorry for mild trolling on LWN across the years -- I'm grumpy but actually do try to understand what's really going on.

Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 20, 2013 10:52 UTC (Sun) by cortana (subscriber, #24596) [Link]

Perhaps it is time to send this particular sock puppet the way of slashdot and reddit?

Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 21, 2013 8:50 UTC (Mon) by henrikb (guest, #58898) [Link]

Insults aside, it was an interresting link. I would love to see a public debate between Aaron and Mark.

Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 21, 2013 14:21 UTC (Mon) by tjc (guest, #137) [Link]

Maybe, maybe not. It would probably be more heat than light, to use a threadbare metaphor. Or "agreeing to disagree", if they are gentlemen.

It's quite interesting how similar the Wayland vs. Mir debate is to the Gnome vs. KDE debate of some 15 years ago.

Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 23, 2013 14:59 UTC (Wed) by ortalo (subscriber, #4654) [Link]

Well found parallel.
It remembers me one of my personal thoughts at that time: "As soon as we (as a community) will be able to stop arguing about GUIs, it will be the time for the linux desktop (or more precisely the OSS-desktop)."
Unfortunately, 15 years and a generation later, no change on this front; and I still do not have any idea of why the computer "look-and-feel" is such a hot topic for us geeks and engineers.

Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 23, 2013 15:13 UTC (Wed) by dlang (subscriber, #313) [Link]

please point at any field where 'look and feel' is not something that gets argued over.

I can't think of any.

Shuttleworth: Yor request for payment

Posted Oct 22, 2013 9:15 UTC (Tue) by glaesera (guest, #91429) [Link]

OK, there you go:
As you seem to be living on welfare right now, I suppose under normal circumstances in the western world you should have more than enough for your daily needs.
I do not think it is necessary, to give you extra money at this time.
But please be so kind to take a few words from me:
Being right-wing is OK really in my opinion, as long as the Tea-Party of Open-Source, as you like to call them, are honest about their political views. It is better to be honestly and openly right-wing, that being secretly ultra-right, for example, because this make political public discourse possible.
You have the opportunity to test the latest Stable software versions beginning from April 2014, way before Debian has them. Enjoy !
Until then, please do some beta-testing for 13.10, if possible, and get yourself that teleworking-job, you do not truly want!

Shuttleworth: Yor request for payment

Posted Oct 22, 2013 9:18 UTC (Tue) by glaesera (guest, #91429) [Link]

I would like to thank all the Mozilla-developers for making that excellent realtime spell-checking possible in Firefox for me and others.

Shuttleworth: Yor request for payment

Posted Oct 22, 2013 11:50 UTC (Tue) by hummassa (subscriber, #307) [Link]

<colossal cave adventure mode>
You are in a maze of supposedly-ironic, wannabe-smartass, usofan-centric, hermetic references, all alike.
</colossal cave adventure mode>

Ignoring the fact that welfare in most of the western world is not "enough", care to explain what was your intention with this post? Because I couldn't really parse it.

Shuttleworth: Quantal, raring, saucy…

Posted Oct 22, 2013 22:11 UTC (Tue) by jfebrer (subscriber, #82539) [Link]

It’s really sad to see Mark acting like Mourinho and taking the role of the negative leader, he only missed Mourinho’s famous quote “¿Por qué?”.
But I think it’s more an internal message to the Ubuntu crowd where he tries to justify why Mir, being so wonderful, wasn’t ready for the new release, and a negative leader never takes responsability for his mistakes.


Copyright © 2013, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds