Submitted by Yesterday, Linspire and Canonical issued a joint announcement that Linspire would begin to base its distributions on Ubuntu rather than Debian, and that Ubuntu users would be able to use CNR to install proprietary applications and drivers, starting with the Fiesty Fawn release. Linspire is just the latest distro to switch from Debian to Ubuntu, though it may be the highest-profile distribution to do so. Are other distros in talks with Canonical? Steve George, Canonical’s director of support and services, says that Canonical is in talks with other vendors, and says, “I think you’ll see some announcements next week about other people using us as a platform.”
Maybe one day the whole thing will be called Ubuntu, and we will start complaining about the way too many Ubuntu distros out there. After all, who talks about UNIX these days when describing Linux?
So the real question is: when will be the year of Desktop Ubuntu?
Edited 2007-02-09 23:21
Let’s hope not. I don’t have anything against Ubuntu. I simply don’t like it therefore I don’t use it. But this “Any Linux you want, as long as it’s ubuntu” movement is leaving a really bad taste in my mouth.
“But this “Any Linux you want, as long as it’s ubuntu” movement is leaving a really bad taste in my mouth.”
Absolutely. Just in case Ubuntu takes over, I have already OS X as an alternative (and very good) solution.
Just in case Ubuntu takes over, I have already OS X as an alternative (and very good) solution.
Switching because you found something that really helps you better is one thing. Switching just because you want to be “cool” and not use what others are using is another.
“Switching because you found something that really helps you better is one thing.”
That is is certainly the case.
“Switching just because you want to be “cool” and not use what others are using is another.”
It has nothing to do with being “cool”. I don’t like Ubuntu, what can I do. So in the extremely unlikely case that all Linux distributions become *buntu based, at least I know that I have a good alternative.
Let the people decide what they want, nobody will force anything, you can’t do that in the Open Source world.
Let’s hope not. I don’t have anything against Ubuntu. I simply don’t like it therefore I don’t use it. But this “Any Linux you want, as long as it’s ubuntu” movement is leaving a really bad taste in my mouth.
I agree, and I like and use Ubuntu. But I don’t want a mono-culture.
I agree, and I like and use Ubuntu. But I don’t want a mono-culture.
There will never be a monoculture as long as there’s free software. If people are allowed to choose and create freely, you won’t find two people with the exact same preferences. Many of us scorn at the diversity in the GNU/Linux world all the time, but that’s what keeps free software healthy.
Absolutely agreed.
My worry is what happens to Debian? I know a lot of the new fancy Ubuntu users don’t give a shit about Debian, but what we’re starting to see now is what I predicted 2 or so years ago when Ubuntu first surfaced:
1. It’s a deliberate ploy to kill off Debian and supplant itself
2. There’s more to Ubuntu behind the scenes than what we know. I would not be surprised to see a Microsoft connection here to be honest.
3. Ubuntu was meant to remain free. If CNR costs money to subscribe to, it’s not free. Sure, the initial distro might be free, but it’s useless if you can’t update it. If Ubuntu moves totally to a CNR repository that costs money, and drops their free repositories that use apt-get/dpkg, and Debian is killed off, it won’t leave much room for a ‘free’ distro will it?
The sad thing is, all these new age wannabe Linux users that are attracted to Ubuntu and its ilk are (imho) bad for open source software, and especially the FSF movement. These people don’t care one iota about the ideals of the FSF, or the GPL, they just want a ‘free’ alternative to Microsoft Windows. And they’ll bitch and complain about things being too hard, instead of getting off their lazy asses and learning how to use the system and do research. I’m sick of open source software being screwed because of these types of users, imho we’re better off without them.
There, I’ve got that off my chest. Here endeth the rant.
Dave
2. There’s more to Ubuntu behind the scenes than what we know. I would not be surprised to see a Microsoft connection here to be honest.
OMG, get a life you paranoic troll.
How you got to +5 I don’t know, so since you wanted to trade insults, I’ll use my moderation ability to remove a point.
Just maybe I’m right. Just maybe. I hope I’m wrong, but in this very weird day and age, anything is possible. I think Microsoft realises that Open source software is here to stay, as is Linux, so it’ll probably try and do a swifty to move it’s current monopoly to a Linux monopoly.
Dave
I think you’re absolutely correct on most accounts. There are some other issues with this too. Anybody ever wonder just why Linspire at one time ran as root, and even now uses sudo with no password which is effectively running as root? It’s because CNR won’t work if run under a proper Linux environment. How many security run-arounds are Canonical willing to employ to “enhance the user experience”. While this may be fine for Linspire and their ~100 users, what happens when you have many thousands of deliberately insecure Linux installations out there? Again I haven’t got anything against Ubuntu personally, but they might want to consider some of the reasons why Linspire is number 43 on Distrowatch before hopping into bed with these guys.
How come this moron get moded up to +5?
Honestly, OSNEWS is going down the drain and now is owned but a bunch of extremist members of the Stallman cult.
RIP OSNEWS.
I think nothing can save it at this point.
No, I don’t think this could happen. Ubuntu needs Debian…I think what will happen is that Debian will remain as a free distro, mostly used on servers (for which it already enjoys an excellent reputation), while Ubuntu will continue to grow on the desktop.
My, who would have thought Suttleworth/Canonical being so devious? I see none of the things you’ve mentioned. Do you know for a fact that CNR will be a subscription only service? KANOTIX and Mepis both plan to use Ubuntu’s repos. Do you think they, too will charge? You are seeing conspiracies in the cupboard.
“KANOTIX and Mepis both plan to use Ubuntu’s repos.”
Not quite right. Kano has a very open mind, but he is leaning more towards Debian Etch than Ubuntu.
The really major change within Kanotix has been moving away from Sid.
Maybe, maybe not. Tell me, who’ll run Debian development if they end up with such low numbers of developers that they simply cannot proceed? Developers are leaving Debian in droves, for a variety of reasons. They’re too busy doing their day job, or they’re moving to other distributions (like Ubuntu), they’re not happy with the Debian ‘politics’, or they’re simply not happy with the turn around time for Debian releases. Sure, not all of these are issues directly related to Ubuntu, but let’s do the maths here. If developers leave Debian, who develops it? Sure, it’s nice to have Ubuntu backporting packages to Debian proper, but if there’s no one to take care of these backported packages, how useful are they?
I haven’t trusted Ubuntu from the very first moment it hit the shelves. My spider sense is tingling badly and it’s usually right I might add.
Dave
> Maybe, maybe not. Tell me, who’ll run Debian development if they end
> up with such low numbers of developers that they simply cannot
> proceed? Developers are leaving Debian in droves, for a variety of
> reasons. They’re too busy doing their day job, or they’re moving to
> other distributions (like Ubuntu), they’re not happy with the Debian
> ‘politics’, or they’re simply not happy with the turn around time for
> Debian releases. Sure, not all of these are issues directly related to
> Ubuntu, but let’s do the maths here. If developers leave Debian, who
> develops it? Sure, it’s nice to have Ubuntu backporting packages to
> Debian proper, but if there’s no one to take care of these backported
> packages, how useful are they?
You did your math, and right, Debian is lost without its developers. Still I fail to see how this is related to Ubuntu. If Ubuntu didn’t exist, would the Debian developers then be more happy with the Debian ‘politics’, or with the turnaround time, or would they have more time besides their job?
My worry is what happens to Debian? I know a lot of the new fancy Ubuntu users don’t give a shit about Debian, but what we’re starting to see now is what I predicted 2 or so years ago when Ubuntu first surfaced:
1. It’s a deliberate ploy to kill off Debian and supplant itself
While I don’t think it is deliberate, I too from the start worried about Ubuntu supplanting Debian. If Debian has been struggling lately and having problems defining itself, I think that a small part of that at least is due to developers jumping ship to Ubuntu.
If Debian were to die and Ubuntu were to take its place, that wouldn’t be bad in and of itself. However, although Ubuntu diverges more each release, Universe is still basically Debian. Without Debian would Ubuntu be able to maintain all those by itself? I have my doubts about Ubuntu being able to take over maintaining the 18,000 packages that make up Debian.
Now, I rather doubt Debian will go anywhere, as it is used on more than just desktops. Of course, Ubuntu’s move to offer a version for servers does give one pause..
Debian I also feel isn’t doing as bad as some might think. It’s doing just fine on my desktop right now. But perceptions of struggles are almost as bad as actual struggles sometimes. If people see Debian as diminishing in the face of Ubuntu it acts as a self fulfilling prophecy.
I hope Debian doesn’t go anywhere. If it does, I hope Ubuntu can handle making a distro with all the packages of and for all the architectures served by Debian.
I don’t think Debian is going anywhere soon. Debian serves as a great Server Platform and application repository. All the development Ubuntu brings to the Debian world are pushed back up to Debian and all this talk of Ubuntu surplanting Debian is nothing more than Paraniod BS.
Canonical has done a hell of a lot to put Debian based Distro’s on the map in the face of Redhat based Distros and personally I have always prefered Deb over RPM for package management with only Pacman being a viable alternative to Apt as a package manager. If Canonical was to start locking down Ubuntu you would see everyone leaving faster than rats from a sinking ship. To have though, a unified structure to the Linux platform that is utilised across the board of distros is a good thing as it opens up Linux to the wider community.
This deos not mean that there will not be diversity in Linux distros but app developers will be able to more easily target the broad Linux community easier than has been the case previously. This is what is needed to move Linux forward. Words of doom and gloom by the paranoid just show how backward thinking they are.
At the end of the day it is about interoperability, open standards, quality and respecting the GPL.
The users will not leave that quickly.
The users will not leave that quickly.
If (and that is a big if) Ubuntu turns out to be the evil twin of Microsoft, the users will jump ship. Most of them did it once before, from Windows to Ubuntu, so it’s not like they can’t.
If Ubuntu goes the “proprietary” route, how much community involvement do you think Canonical will retain?
Yes, but the problem is most people won’t run Debian these days. They’ll immediately think ‘Ubuntu’. This is bad for Linux, it’s a monopolisation of the market if you think about it.
From a business point of view, Ubuntu killing off 90% of the rest of the Linux distributions is a very good thing, and it will probably help stabilise Linux in the many areas that it’s currently weak in, so that it becomes more mainstream. The problem with this is that I see many fine distributions going the way of dust. My favourite Linux distribution, Libranet died as a direct result of Ubuntu imho, and many core loyal Libranet users would agree with my statement.
Dave
My worry is what happens to Debian? I know a lot of the new fancy Ubuntu users don’t give a shit about Debian, but what we’re starting to see now is what I predicted 2 or so years ago when Ubuntu first surfaced:
Why do you expect new users to? They have better things to worry about than learning the lineage of Ubuntu, such as getting used to the ins and outs of a new OS.
1. It’s a deliberate ploy to kill off Debian and supplant itself.
No one is trying to kill Debian. (except maybe the Debian developers themselves sometimes) However, at the time Ubuntu showed up Sarge was ridiculously behind schedule and Debian was quite unfriendly to the green windows user. In addition the Debian community itself was home to some of the worst linux elitists around, good luck trying to get help from them. If you ask me, Debian was in need of a little supplanting.
Ubuntu is slowly replacing Debian for the average users desktop, which is a good thing. Debian’s developement model isn’t suited for them, nor should it have to be.
2. There’s more to Ubuntu behind the scenes than what we know. I would not be surprised to see a Microsoft connection here to be honest.
I think it’s time you took of that tinfoil hat, it’s starting to rust a bit. Ubuntu is an open-source project, which don’t exactly lend themselves very well to back room conspiracies. I have a feeling Ubuntu is exactly what it appears to be, a linux distro with the common user in mind.
3. Ubuntu was meant to remain free. If CNR costs money to subscribe to, it’s not free. Sure, the initial distro might be free, but it’s useless if you can’t update it. If Ubuntu moves totally to a CNR repository that costs money, and drops their free repositories that use apt-get/dpkg, and Debian is killed off, it won’t leave much room for a ‘free’ distro will it?
Ubuntu is not moving to a total CNR distro, nor are they getting rid of apt-get or even dpackage. Their package mangement isn’t changing one bit. What they are going to allow is the ability for users to easily leverage CNR is they choose to do so. You know choice, that virtue that all of us linux users proclaim so highly and then seem to decry at every turn.
The sad thing is, all these new age wannabe Linux users that are attracted to Ubuntu and its ilk are (imho) bad for open source software, and especially the FSF movement. These people don’t care one iota about the ideals of the FSF, or the GPL, they just want a ‘free’ alternative to Microsoft Windows. And they’ll bitch and complain about things being too hard, instead of getting off their lazy asses and learning how to use the system and do research. I’m sick of open source software being screwed because of these types of users, imho we’re better off without them.
Not everyone has the time or the will to learn very much about computers, nor should they have to. Yet there are many people with little computer knowledge who aren’t satisfied with their experience on Windows. Why shouldn’t we welcome these users? They have every right to chose to use Linux as we do and have every right ask for a little help or voice what would make their experience better.
If you want to know why Debian is being supplanted then just re-read your last paragraph. Debian is where it is because they got the idea in their heads that they were too good for some users. That everyone needed to be a starry eyed idealist if they wanted to play in their sandbox. You know what I say to that? Screw you and the horse you rode in on. The free software movement is about one thing, freedom, and that freedom should be available to everyone. Furthermore, that freedom should be allowed to mean whatever each individual wants it to, be it freedom from proprietary software, poor security, or even monetary concerns. This freedom should have only one requirement, the choice to be free.
It’s time to open your eyes and realize that the free software and open-source movements are far bigger than the FSF or the GPL. If not, here’s a ball. I don’t care where you play. In my honest opinion, we are far better off with anyone than without them.
Edited 2007-02-10 02:05
I understand completely where you’re coming from. I might have said the same thing a couple years ago when my views on the Linux ecosystem were less mature.
1. It’s a deliberate ploy to kill off Debian and supplant itself
No, Ubuntu is an attempt to address (what were seen as) shortcomings in Debian’s project and release management procedures. Shuttleworth voiced his concerns to the Debian community before founding the Ubuntu project, but the Debian community was unreceptive to his ideas. Debian maintains (and will continue to maintain) a vital role in the Linux community. The strength of Debian is the ultimate flexibility of its massive package repositories, comprehensive architecture support, and the most thoroughly vetted stable branch available from any community distribution. The unstable and testing branches were always just a means to these ends. Ubuntu goal was to make the Debian unstable branch truly accessible to the public for the first time.
2. There’s more to Ubuntu behind the scenes than what we know. I would not be surprised to see a Microsoft connection here to be honest.
Ubuntu is no angel. They have made and continue to make mistakes in their relationship with the Linux community at large. I think they’re testing the waters to validate potential business models outside of the services sector. Check out my post from yesterday’s article on this topic for a discussion concerning how Launchpad is a misguided attempt to drive revenue that will ultimately fail. Once they realize their growth markets and cut the crap, they’ll settle into their role as a benevolent citizen of Linux community. I agree with the other poster than your baseless allegation of ties to Microsoft is trollish.
3. Ubuntu was meant to remain free. If CNR costs money to subscribe to, it’s not free. Sure, the initial distro might be free, but it’s useless if you can’t update it. If Ubuntu moves totally to a CNR repository that costs money, and drops their free repositories that use apt-get/dpkg, and Debian is killed off, it won’t leave much room for a ‘free’ distro will it?
There’s some confusion here. The new open CNR service doesn’t require a paid subscription. It serves as a glorified web frontend for Ubuntu’s existing package manager and official repositories. The CNR server is proprietary, but there’s no tie-in. If the rug gets pulled out from under us, we’ll still have our native package management frontends. CNR allows users to easily discover and purchase proprietary software available for Linux, which is a fundamentally new concept. CNR doesn’t really bring much else to the table, just a marginally slicker interface with more newbie-friendly category labels.
The sad thing is, all these new age wannabe Linux users that are attracted to Ubuntu and its ilk are (imho) bad for open source software, and especially the FSF movement. These people don’t care one iota about the ideals of the FSF, or the GPL, they just want a ‘free’ alternative to Microsoft Windows. And they’ll bitch and complain about things being too hard, instead of getting off their lazy asses and learning how to use the system and do research. I’m sick of open source software being screwed because of these types of users, imho we’re better off without them.
There is certainly some truth to this. End users suck the life out of smaller community projects. They take significant community resources to support and bring nothing to the table. But we want them to be using Linux if it can meet their individual needs. More users means the economics of the software industry shift in our favor, putting pressure on hardware and software vendors to provide support from their target market, which increasingly may be using non-Microsoft platforms.
What we need to do is shed the free as in beer image and sell compelling Linux desktop products with innovative and cost-effective support options. Vendors need to look past phone or even email support models and provide interactive web support, e.g. via a web-based messaging interface. They should reach out to their enthusiast communities, filled with users that know the system intimately despite being non-programmers. Provide perks to these users (tokens such as special forum identifiers) in exchange for passing a certification quiz and volunteering time to help users via the support channel. I believe that interactive web support from certified gurus and professionals can be offered for $25-40USD per year, which is a bargain any user can appreciate.
But here’s my own baseless speculation concerning the Ubuntu/Linspire deal: Mark Shuttleworth and Kevin Carmony are type-A personalities that I call “sharks.” Sharks are characterized as ambitious, pragmatic, and charismatic. They are passionate about their pet causes and aren’t afraid to push. There’s a fine line between a benevolent dictator like Linus and a shark like these two. Linus has the first three qualities, but he doesn’t play with emotion and he doesn’t cut against the grain. He never backs down to a vocal minority, but he won’t push against a majority opinion.
Sharks have the potential to do great things for the Linux community. They’re all about getting things done, which can’t be said for all of us in the community. But if they run into resistance, their instinct is to push harder. Sharks don’t give up. If their opposition proves too steadfast, they find a way around it. Like a real shark, if they stop moving, they suffocate. Their razor-sharp teeth are their blogs and other media pulpits on which they boldly make waves.
In the ocean of the Linux community, we must beware of sharks. They respect our sea-ciety of meritocratic populism only so long as we heed their message of personal empowerment. For many, sugar-coated features come second to the sovereignty of the harmonious reef we call free software. Sharks giveth, and they taketh away. They offer compromise. I believe that some compromise is necessary, not only to for us to grow our community in size, but also to grow it in strength. At the end of the day (or decade, as it were), a strong community is what will protect free software from our true enemies–not the sharks, but the robber barons who enslave us with lock-in to which no silly web-based frontend can be compared.
Let’s keep our eye on them and do our best to keep them honest. But the compromise they offer is one that I believe is in our best interest as beneficiaries of the free software community and as ordinary Linux users.
I honestly hope you’re right, I really do.
Dave
Slackware is the only cure for the Ubuntu virus!!! 🙂
Slackware is pure–100% without artificial sweetners and fillers. No harmful additives or byproducts; just good, wholesome unix in a can.
Get some now at your local grocer!!
Thanks for the good laugh, it was much needed!
Dave
The sad thing is, all these new age wannabe Linux users that are attracted to Ubuntu and its ilk are (imho) bad for open source software, and especially the FSF movement. These people don’t care one iota about the ideals of the FSF, or the GPL, they just want a ‘free’ alternative to Microsoft Windows. And they’ll bitch and complain about things being too hard, instead of getting off their lazy asses and learning how to use the system and do research. I’m sick of open source software being screwed because of these types of users, imho we’re better off without them.
QFT! They don’t give a shit, they are just plain greedy.
You sir are a condescending twat. With attitudes like that you would ensure that there is no healthy landscape for FSF or the GPL to grow in. Just have it restricted to the “leet” computer users who don’t give a flying toss about anything.
I think that that attitude is no better than full adoption and compromise of FSF and open GPL. Why not get off the high horse you sit and help educate the new comers as to what it is that they are moving into and show them the reasons why it is best to hold onto the ideals you spout about Linux?
Me thinks you are too lazy and prefer to just continue with the computing status quo with a monopoly dictating the flow of information globally? No?
Crawl back under your rock and f-off!
QFT??? I have no idea what that acronym means.
Dave
Sorry, but to me that sounds like you just don’t like “all these new age wannabe Linux users”. A wannabe Linux user? I guess they aren’t REAL Linux users unless they use Debian and are paranoid that Ubuntu is a conspiracy to steal software freedoms.
“Wouldn’t be surprised to see a Microsoft connection”?!?
You have to be joking.
2. There’s more to Ubuntu behind the scenes than what we know. I would not be surprised to see a Microsoft connection here to be honest.
Mkay…?
I’ll just go get my tinfoil hat
1. It’s a deliberate ploy to kill off Debian and supplant itself
What evidence do you have to back this statement? Ubuntu wants to succeed, sure. But killing off Debian is not in its best interests, Shuttleworth is more than aware of this. I would agree that Ubuntu is riding on and utilizing the hard work of the Debian maintainers. This is a symbiotic relationship however, not a predatory one.
2. There’s more to Ubuntu behind the scenes than what we know. I would not be surprised to see a Microsoft connection here to be honest.
What evidence do you have to back this statement? Anything?? Anything at all?? Holy cow, where is that one coming from? So anyone who is not 100% free and tries to actually profit off of Linux is in league with MS? Better tell IBM, I guess they missed that memo.
3. Ubuntu was meant to remain free. If CNR costs money to subscribe to, it’s not free. Sure, the initial distro might be free, but it’s useless if you can’t update it. If Ubuntu moves totally to a CNR repository that costs money, and drops their free repositories that use apt-get/dpkg, and Debian is killed off, it won’t leave much room for a ‘free’ distro will it?
What evidence do you have to back this statement? You sir live in a dark and suspicious world.
First, do you actually believe that ANY linux community would take a shift from open, mirrored, repositories to a pay service only closed repository? A fork would happen overnight. Sure Ubuntu could try it, if they were run by complete and utter morons. Look at the backlash at Novells pact with MS, which is not nearly as extreme as the idiotic tripe you are suggesting, and tell me a business man would do that?
Second, hello? CNR is not a pay only service and it is a (poor imho) option if you do not like the other apt based solutions that constitute the core of all Debian based distributions. It provides an option to purchase, if you so choose, applications and have them supported by a central repository. I personally do not have much need for this, but I feel that the option to be able to buy commercial software for Linux is important in the long run. The gaming industry as an example tends to be commercial, as are many specialty applications. If you have moral objections to buying software no one is forcing you to, but that does not preclude making the option available to others.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but when you start accusing others of ulterior motives and evil intent the least you can do is back it up with some form of facts rather than just throwing out accusations because you can.
I did not mod you down since your post is not directly inflammatory or abusive, merely unsupported and polarized to the negative. I was tempted to though I must confess.
Of course I don’t have any solid proof. If I did, I’d sure as hell be shouting about it as much as possible.
Let’s think about a few things though – Mepis is now based on Ubuntu (rather than Debian), Linspire is also now going to be based on Ubuntu. Both of these have sizeable and respectable market share. Add that to Ubuntu itself, and you’ll find very few Debian based distributions these days actually based on Debian. Doesn’t that sound in the least worrying to you?
I’ve had a play with various Ubuntu releases, and imho, none of them have really impressed me one iota (but then again, Gnome is not a desktop environment that I like). Several friends have tried Ubuntu 6.10 and have come to the same conclusion. Very overrated. Many of the sheep now using Ubuntu are Linux newbies, direct from Microsoft Windows land. They see that so many people rave about Ubuntu, so they download it because they believe it must be good. Since they have no other experience with other Linux distributions, they think it is good.
We see the Ubuntuites as what they really are, a plague of locusts that destroy everything in their path. Ubuntu is so popular, that you can’t dare post anything that questions Ubuntu’s motives, or is anti Ubuntu, because you’ll end up with a hundred or more Ubuntuites incorrectly modding down your post simply because they disagree with it, and for no other reason. At least you had the common sense to actually follow the moderation rules, and for that I thank you.
Maybe CNR will be a subscription model for those that are willing to pay, rather than being pushed across the board. If so, this is good. My worry is Ubuntu moving to CNR and dropping its own repositories, leaving vast numbers of Linux newbies either subscribing to CNR to keep their systems up to date (and thus making a nice profit for Canonical and Linspire), or risk editing their /etc/apt/sources.list files to sync back to Debian proper and risk ruining their systems due to compatibility issues between the old Ubuntu repositories, and the Debian ones. I think a great deal of people would probably agree to pay for CNR if it isn’t too expensive, and is cheaper than the alternatives (Windows/OS X). Maybe Canonical will gamble of this.
Dave
I had to quickly reply to this … and I am not sure if some has expressed the same thought , but this is a bit short sighted don’t you think? People , Distros are “choosing” Ubuntu over others , that’s what Open Source is about, having the choice and the options available.
In what way can this gradual migration be bad ?
There is no lock in on the “ubuntu” platform, so it can not force its “dominance” apart from being the most popular choice at the moment. I think this is good , because it shows some form of consolidation in the linux landscape. and the nice thing is that , alternative distros , approachs will not go away , you will always find something that works fine for you !
So stop complaining 🙂 and see the good in this. .. i see it , and i can’t see why you cant … heh
So the real question is: when will be the year of Desktop Ubuntu?
That depends on what “the year of” means…I think last year was the year Ubuntu captured a large enough part of the Linux mindshare. For all its faults as a distro (and there aren’t that many), it’s an excellent brand. It’s the best branding thing to happen to Linux since Tux, in many ways.
If you mean the year it is ready for general usage (internet, multimedia, office work, PIM, casual gaming) on the vast majority of hardware, then I’d say this year.
If you mean the year that Ubuntu becomes the only Linux distro, or when it will have a near-monopoly market share, then that’ll probably never happen (and that’s a good thing – monopolies suck).
As for increasing the overall desktop share of (at the expense of Windows, presumably), well, only time will tell, but it’s going to take more than one year.
That depends on what “the year of” means…
It was actually just meant as a joke, in tribute to all the “Year of Linux Desktop” discussions throughout the years.
There’s great potential in this. This could be the tipping point for Linux. Being honest, as a fairly new *NIX user I can tell you guys that most people don’t want to be bothered with the console or, in the case of BSD, with ports. And although Synaptic is a fairly good option, nothing beats double clicking on an icon to install software.
Standardization IS the way to go. This could very well be a historical announcement. I’m stoked.
People don’t want to be bothered with the console because they are coming from a windows world where everything is about buttons. They never learned to use the console and so never know how much easier many tasks are when you use it.
Coming from a number of years of using many package management tool I’d say there is nothing worse than ‘double clicking an icon to install software’. It’s a huge effort to install software like that.
1. Go to website and find program installer
2. Download program installer
3. Find downloaded program installer and double click
4. Go through many configuration windows
5. repeat for each program you wish to install.
apt-get, emerge, yum etc. are so much easier and less effort.
general users like the GUI interface better though. The command line is too archaic. And yes, it can be easier for a lot of things, but that is once you finally learn it. Your average user does not want to put in the effort to learn the intricacies of bash when they can just point and click a few times. windows originally captured market share because it was so simple (still is really)
BSDrama: There’s great potential in this. This could be the tipping point for Linux. Being honest, as a fairly new *NIX user I can tell you guys that most people don’t want to be bothered with the console or, in the case of BSD, with ports.
You, certainly, know that Linspire was already very casual-user friendly before this announcement. AFAIK, they were the first to include a searchable help manual that showed you movies to explain how to do stuff. You certainly don’t need to use a terminal if you don’t want to.
And although Synaptic is a fairly good option, nothing beats double clicking on an icon to install software.
Unless, of course, you want to install a whole load of apps, do this without user-interaction, remotely or on several machines at the same time. But agreed, for the casual home desktop user this probably is not too bad.
Standardization IS the way to go. This could very well be a historical announcement. I’m stoked.
I fear, you lost me here. How is moving from being based on Debian to being based on Ubuntu — which itself is based on Debian — a step up on the standardization ladder?
I think that CNR is gonna be good for the adoption of Linux as a who;e. CNR Will make Ubuntu even more attractive then it is now to the average user.
>>CNR Will make Ubuntu even more attractive then it is now to the average user.
From my personal experiences of introducing Linux to new users, Ubuntu is anything but attractive to the “average user.”
From my personal experiences of introducing Linux to new users, Ubuntu is anything but attractive to the “average user.”
I disagree. Of all the distros that have come and gone, Ubuntu is on of the most newbie-friendly ones to garner enough interest to thrive.
Slap Beryl on an Ubuntu install, and the Newbie Attraction Factor instantly goes to 11.
> From my personal experiences of introducing Linux to new users,
> Ubuntu is anything but attractive to the “average user.”
It depends. The average user wants things to “just work”. If you take average users who are satisfied with Windows as an example, then you’ll have a hard time convincing them of Linux. Things don’t “just work” there: There are hardware issues, software that doesn’t run on it, etc. Linux doesn’t offer anything to users who are entirely satisfied, and hence even Ubuntu isn’t attractive to them.
On the other hand, if you take users who are unsatisfied with Windows, and enough so to justify an effort to improve their situation, then Ubuntu may serve their purpose. As said, Ubuntu has its problems, but for users that have bigger problems on Windows, it’s a reasonable choice.
A certain danger to Linux lies in the Mac, as Apple does a lot of things right too, especially concerning the average user. I know that many people in the F/OSS crowd don’t like this, but Apple *does* make good decisions, and it would help the F/OSS people much better if they accept that fact and follow their example (and that does NOT mean giving up their ideals). The Ubuntu/Linspire deal may be a crucial step in that direction.
I love Debian, like anyone else, but it’s starting to become a bit….outdated? in some places. It’s a great distro; the most stable and with better security mainteinance of the non-licensed linux world, perfect for servers; but people is starting to base their desktop distros in Ubuntu because doing it in debian is becoming more and more hard. It’d be nice to see debian focused a bit more in the “desktop experience”, desktop users matter and right now debian as desktop is a bit painful except for a minority.
Etch is definitely not outdated and, even if not officially released yet, it is quite stable.
The desktop experience is great too, IMO. Certainly a lot better than it used to be at the time of Woody…
True, you need to manually install Nvidia and ATI drivers plus proprietary plug-ins (if you want). But all that could be explained in a very simple how to.
> desktop users matter and right now debian as desktop is
> a bit painful except for a minority.
No, they don’t.
You obviously would _like_ Debian to become a more desktop oriented distro, but this is not what the developers want, the people who actually _work_ on Debian.
Desktop users are not important for them, as they are not important for Solaris, for example.
> because doing it in debian is becoming more and more
> hard.
No, its just becomming easier and easier on Ubuntu, because people get paid to work on Ubuntu. Debian is improving slowly, or not improving at all in the area you would want, because simply nothing is interested to work on that.
You obviously would _like_ Debian to become a more desktop oriented distro, but this is not what the developers want, the people who actually _work_ on Debian […] Desktop users are not important for them, as they are not important for Solaris, for example.
Please take a look at the debian social contract:
4. Our priorities are our users and free software.
We will be guided by the needs of our users and the free software community. We will place their interests first in our priorities. We will support the needs of our users for operation in many different kinds of computing environments […]
Software that does not care about users fails sooner or later. And debian users have been asking for a better desktop distro for a long time.
Edited 2007-02-10 00:19
Software that does not care about users fails sooner or later. And debian users have been asking for a better desktop distro for a long time.
Would you explain what you mean by “a better desktop” in Debian? Here I am, typing this on KDE in Debian Etch. It’s fast, it’s stable, it comes with all the candy and I don’t feel deprived in any way. Let’s have some examples, please, before we join Warren Woodford in sentencing Debian to death by hardcore purism.
Wait – are you *seriously* asking why debian is not as good as Ubuntu or Fedora or Opensuse for desktops?
Wait – are you *seriously* asking why debian is not as good as Ubuntu or Fedora or Opensuse for desktops?
There’s no hurry
I’m asking for some examples of “a better desktop” for Debian (or examples of a lack of one) since you have cited this issue as symptomatic of Debian’s alleged lack of care for its users.
As someone with a mighty moderated score of 3.28 you’re surely a man who knows what he’s talking about, so bring it on.
installer, package manager (initially installed, not what is available) – mostly just getting the system setup. Its a lot easier to put in the ubuntu cd and just go than sitting at a command line for a while. ubuntu just added a layer of usability that wasn’t there before without some effort, thats why they’re doing so well.
Ubuntu’s changes are propagated upstream to Debian, so there’s no reason an “Debian Stable”-buntu couldn’t be done. The key difference between Ubuntu and “Debian Stable”-buntu would simply be that “Debian Stable”-buntu would be updated only when Debian Stable is updated.
So it would lag behind a bit. But that’s okay since if you’re responsible for installing 1000 desktops, the last thing you’d want is to upgrade your software often.
The key problem is, most companies and admins who use Debian are more interested in the server aspects than the desktop aspects and desktop users tend to use Debian unstable (which isn’t exactly user friendly since it breaks every once and a while by definition). So there isn’t much pent up demand for a “Debian Stable”-buntu and the demand that exists is fulled mostly by CentOS or Ubuntu LTS (assuming you’re willing to risk that Ubuntu LTS+1 will exist and that the Ubuntu LTS to Ubuntu LTS+1 migration will be smooth).
You’re just historically wrong. Debian Sarge 3.0 has been the easiest Debian ever to install and there was about a 2 1/2 year lag time bt versions 2.0 and 3.0.
First, it is not a rant!
Why would any Debian based distro change its tested package management system and Synaptic for something that is not totally free now? I know CNR client is free but it does not means CNR is free.
I have no experience with Debian, for the matter, but one thing I like on FOSS is when the community has total control over the general tools, what is not the case by now. Nothing against proprietary software, far from it, but for such essential service would make more sense to use free tools, I think.
To me looks like Ubuntu will start to offer a “premium service” or something like that and they need a package management that can’t be GPL to stuff their supply chain. Again, nothing against paid software, just wondering on what can be the outcome of this.
Why would any Debian based distro change its tested package management system and Synaptic for something that is not totally free now? I know CNR client is free but it does not means CNR is free.
It is not changing its package management system at all. Ubuntu will continue to use the Ubuntu repositories, and you’ll still be able to use unofficial repositories as well. However, you’ll also have the option to install software via CNR. CNR is deb-based, just like Synaptic.
Let’s say I want to install Celestia – cool app, check it out – on my Kubuntu system (which is the really the same as a Ubuntu system, and uses the same packages/repositories). With the Linspire deal, I’ll now be able to install the program in four ways. From the less newbie-friendly to the most:
– Download the .deb from the Celetia website and install it (with dpkg, or by double-clicking on it to open kpackage); note that this will not solve dependency issues
– Install the package by clicking on it in Synaptic/Adept
– Install Software with the new “Add/Remove Software” applications
– Go on the CNR website and install it from there
You’ll also be able uninstall the app using any of these methods, independent of how you installed (though again using dpkg directly will not automatically resolve dependencies)
This is really great news. Its the final nail in the coffin of those who claim that installing software in Linux is hard. We’ll just have to see the app selection, but the advantage is that you’ll get ratings and user reviews.
I don’t think Ubuntu will offer a premium service, however you will be able to buy fully-licensed programs, so that those in the U.S. can watch DVDs on Linux without breaking the law.
I for one am excited to see so many distributions switching to Ubuntu as their base. Not only has Ubuntu itself spun off a slew of popular distributions (i.e., Edubuntu, Xubuntu, Kubuntu, nUbuntu, etc.) but some popular and well established distributions have changed their basis to Ubuntu (i.e., Mepis, Linspire.) What’s happening is what all we Linux enthusiasts hoped would happen: have many distributions to choose from with the hope that a clear winner would emerge. That winner appears to be Ubuntu and Canonical. Love it or hate it, Ubuntu is doing something right. It’s been on the top of Distrowatch for the past two years and it’s beginning to become synonymous with Debian and even Linux itself for that matter. I’ve tried literally dozens of distributions over the past four years in search of one I could call home. For me, it’s Ubuntu. With so many distros switching to Ubuntu as their base, perhaps the hardware and software vendors will sit up and take notice. My hope is to finally have mainstream support for all new hardware and commercial software. This is a good thing for Linux!
What’s happening is what all we Linux enthusiasts hoped would happen: have many distributions to choose from with the hope that a clear winner would emerge.
1. Speak for yourself, I certainly do not hope that happens.
2. It would be a terrible thing if it did. Think of all the developers around the world coming up with new and improved ideas for how to do things. Nowadays, they get a shot at being heard. If everyone used one distro it would be a serious bottleneck in innovation. Everyone can’t contribute to one project. A dev would be as successful in getting Ubuntu (or whoever the ‘winner’ is) to incorporate their ideas as I am now in getting MS to incorporate mine. And as great as Ubuntu is (I use it), there are still things that they can learn from other distros. That learning won’t happen if other distros aren’t popular as well.
And if anyone out there argues with me, I’ll start my own distro just to piss you off. I mean it! I’ll roll my own this weekend, and you’ll see it in Distrowatch on monday. It’ll be called “lasagnix”, and will come with art, recipes and bookmarks about lasagna.:)
And if anyone out there argues with me, I’ll start my own distro just to piss you off. I mean it! I’ll roll my own this weekend, and you’ll see it in Distrowatch on monday. It’ll be called “lasagnix”, and will come with art, recipes and bookmarks about lasagna.:)
Hadta hand over a mod point to that after quite literally LMAO. I fully support your right to build Lasagna Linux!
Surely you cannot believe that it’s good for Linux to have 1000’s of different distributions that only differ from each other in small ways. I think you also might have misunderstood what I said. By arriving at a Linux standards base (i.e., Ubuntu based distros) I don’t mean to imply that this is meant to stifle innovation. Linux is still free; it’s still open. With say >50% of Linux users using the same distribution, however, it will give hardware and software vendors confidence and an impetus to produce their wares for Linux users.
But according to your posts it’s okay to have 1000’s of distros as long as they’re all based on Ubuntu?
Some words from Warren Woodford in the article seem to sum things up nicely:
“More and more the Debian community is becoming the Ubuntu community. New people coming in are allowed to have diverse opinions about open source software. The hardcore purists are sticking with Debian, but five years from now, they may be about as plentiful as 1970s MIT hackers.”
With every new iteration, Ubuntu and Debian diverge just that little bit further. And there’s a sense, too, that with every new iteration Ubuntu tries to engage a little more with its users, whereas Debian seems to be struggling a little, at least over communicating what it has to offer.
What Debian has to offer, imho, is superior to either Ubuntu or Mepis and has nothing to do with “hardcore purists” even if it isn’t for everyone. But that’s just my 2 cents. OTOH, without Debian certain distros would be nothing, so talking as if you’ll soon be dancing on Debian’s grave may strike some folks as just maybe a little tasteless.
Mark Shuttleworth has done great things and all kudos to him, but if his empire continues to expand then eventually the question about how much open source power should be in one set of hands is going to become too big to ignore. No matter how well-meaning an individual may be, F/OSS is not capitalism under another name.
Edited to correct infelicitous language.
Edited 2007-02-10 00:37
Three good things:
1. Linspire being based on Ubuntu
2. CNR, which supports both deb and rpm, to be supported on Ubuntu, Debian, SuSE, and Fedora/RedHat
3. More distros to be based on Ubuntu
What does this all mean?
ISVs and HD vendors can standardize around three main Linux platforms – Ubuntu, Fedora/RH, and SuSE.
CNR becomes the de-facto standard for ISVs to package their proprietary software to Linux. This means stuff like TurboTax, Adobe Photoshop, and heck, even top games can much more easily port to Linux.
It also means that it is easier and less controversial for end users to get the proprietary codecs, plug-ins, and drivers to get the full wireless and multimedia and browsing experience on Linux.
This all means accelerated software choice, accelerated hardware support, and ultimately, accelerated desktop adoption for Linux.
Then we have other nice things happening – Sun GPL’ing Java, for instance – which means more Java on Linux, and more adoption of both technologies.
And then there is the forthcoming Windows installer for Ubuntu (installs on Windows as a file, to run as a loopback with ext3 in the file, and put in as a selection in the Windows bootloader).
I keep getting flashbacks about some saying that regards history repeating itself. It was only a couple years back that I remember nearly any and all third party software was packaged for RedHat and nobody else. RedHat was the standard and RedHat was Linux as far as anyone was concerned. People found this unnaceptable then, so how is it that it’s the best thing ever if it happens again with ubuntu?
Edited 2007-02-10 03:13
I don’t think Adobe is going to port Photoshop for Linux anytime soon, even if there’s CNR. Linux users are using Linux because they don’t have to pay hell of money for software… well I think it might actually happen in future, but it will take more than 6-7 years in my opinion. You’d better checkout Pixel for now, it’s in CNR already as well : http://www.kanzelsberger.com
I wonder why Ubuntu wants to offer CNR to their users. Ubuntu already has CNR !
To try it just pop in an Ubuntu Live-CD (not Kubuntu), go to their packages page (link below) and search for “abiword” for the version you’re using (edgy, dapper,…). Then select your architecture and click on a mirror link. Firefox will ask you if you want to open it with Gdebi (default). Accept. Gdebi (a graphical installer like MSI) will pop up and install it for you pulling dependencies. It can’t get much easier.
Ok, the website is not designed as a CNR warehouse, but then they only need a good website with selected apps, nice icons to click and user ratings and comments. Someone from the community could do this website easily.
http://packages.ubuntu.com/
By the way, Debian also has this Gdebi and a website with their packages.
this is good for linux and my Ubuntu
CNR becomes the de-facto standard for ISVs to package their proprietary software to Linux. This means stuff like TurboTax, Adobe Photoshop, and heck, even top games can much more easily port to Linux.
I don’t think CNR helps with this problem — if a single package won’t work on all distros (because of RPM vs. DEB or library versions), then CNR doesn’t magically fix that. CNR packages still have to be separately built for each distro. The only thing that CNR makes easier is finding software.
Personally I find Debian a slightly better desktop distro than Ubuntu, at least for my modest needs. I much prefer the constant stream of daily updates in Debian “testing” to Ubuntu’s stagnated software versions between releases. End users don’t necessarily need distro releases — my own experience running Debian “testing” on the desktop has clearly proven that daily updates don’t need to break your system.
However, things are different for smaller distros that base their releases on the releases of some bigger distros. I can see how Ubuntu’s strategy can attract such derivate distros. Quite understandably it’s way easier to build your own derivative distro when the mother distro provides frequent releases and the package pools don’t change between releases. Of course, also Debian makes releases but Debian’s release cycle is more appropriate for servers than for desktop use.
It’s a bit sad to see that Debian’s place in this ecosystem is to become a “supermarket of packages,” like someone has described the current situation. Debian’s release cycle fails to serve the needs of desktop-oriented derivative distros. Debian is still important but its place is now in the kitchen, away from the spotlights. Ubuntu gets the media attention and the credit from Debian’s work. In time Ubuntu may also get Debian’s community.
But Ubuntu is not Debian. Ubuntu is an instrument in Canonical’s business plan. While Debian strives to become an Universal Operating System, Ubuntu strives to become a profitable business.
IMO, Debian should follow Ubuntu’s example and prepare some kind of “alpha” releases, targeting especially desktop users, about twice a year. These could be just snapshots of Debian “testing” with a little added polish and some extra bug-fixing. But they wouldn’t need to be as high quality as the stable Debian releases. Ubuntu, and many other desktop distros, make hasty and buggy releases and that doesn’t seem to affect their popularity. This kind of “alpha” releases could improve the quality of the actual stable Debian releases and they would certainly serve the needs of derivative distros better.
This Ubuntu as base movement will end just as the RedHat as base trend did. I like Ubuntu and I gave up 9 years of FreeBSD for it. However I don’t want it to take over the world anymore than I want MS to.
The year of desktop……NOT….. The year that marks the slide of ubuntu from the popular kid down to another rotten distro that pushes proprietary….
Would the wolf please remove the last vestiges of the sheep disguise please.
Ubuntu Philosophy page
http://www.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/philosophy
needs a MAJOR FREAKIN overhaul might go for this
http://www.linspire.com/lindows_products_OSEULA.php
or even this
http://www.linspire.com/linspire_trademarks.php
Yes I think Ubuntu’s Philosophy page says it all, and I see no indication they are about to change it.
CNR will just be another tool where’s the problem?
This Ubuntu = Microsoft is just trollish, Ubuntu is just trying to appeal to non geeks, which can only be a good thing. I have no doubt that Hardcore distros will always exist and Ubuntu is doing nothing to harm them. Ubuntu’s Philosophy says nothing about world domination or destroying Slackware etc if Ubuntu makes Free software more popular or mainstream, thats good, where’s the problem?
es I think Ubuntu’s Philosophy page says it all, and I see no indication they are about to change it.
CNR will just be another tool where’s the problem?
proclaiming your belief in free software
http://www.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/philosophy
while providing access to tons of proprietary at least seems a bit contrary to me….
Edited 2007-02-10 06:44
No Ubuntu is giving users the choice to use non-free software if they wish. Automatix does that now with thing like video drivers etc. The OS will still be free as in speech or beer, at the same time many more users will be exposed to the benefits of free software. I don’t see any GPL violation or Novel like deal here.
I suppose I don’t see this as a War between Free software and closed source. We may see the competitive exclusion principal coming into play but I’m confident in Free Software can compete and survive, but their will be niches for commercial software.
This in its self is a testment as to why Linux is not doing better then it is. We will sit here and bicker and fight to the very end over ideals when the very nature of Linux (or Gnu/Linux) is to give us options. Ubuntu is helping to bring more people into the fold more people in the fold = more hardware support from the big companies, thus our hard ware works better. This is good for the end users. There will always be other distro’s and the F/oss movment will keep going on but lets face some facts people we need the hardware thus we need the users to bring the companies on board.
Perhaps in time they will go Open source many software compines are going that way. But now more then ever is the time for us to be doing everything we can to add to the community cause right now MS is as weak as we have ever seen it.
It will be the year of the linux desktop for me when i will have:
-decent cad software (i use autocad on windows)
-decent drivers for my audigy card (i don’t want to spen lots of money on the card and on the 5.1 logitech sound system and have much inferior sound quality on linux than on windows)
-nvidia drivers that will offer me the same functionality that they offer on windows xp
The good thing in all this is that my list was way more longer some time ago, so things are really improving. Actually, these 3 complains are all that stands between me an everyday linux computer.
If i am wrong or there is a sollution for my problems that i don’t know about, please let me know.
nothing on your list really depend of the linux commmunity
there are already many linux cad software
http://www.tech-edv.co.at/lunix/CADlinks.html
VariCAD it’s very nice
for the audigy card, creative problem
same thing for the nvidia driver
If Patrick “The Man” Volkerding switches to Ubuntu in future Slackware releases, I will sell all my computers and move to an area with no Internet connections. This is a promise.
This is not Ubuntu hate. In fact, I regularly recommend it to new users of GNU/Linux. The distribution landscape definitely needs weeding out, too. Who needs all those hundreds of different and mostly incompatible distributions? But you will not touch my Slackware.
If it does happen, please send an envelope to:
http://osnews.com
80, 67.18.254.190
The Internet
with news,
Thanks.
it is true there are many distro but if you stop and step back you will see a large number have one of the following bases slackware, debian, mandrivia, or fedora how far they stray is arguable but a good number of the modern distros are only a few steps away from their parent
Maybe it’s just me, but despite of how I like or dislike Ubuntu and/or Linspire, it doesn’t make me feel good to see announcements about commercial and/or commercial-goal Linux distros/companies joining forces and saying others coming to enlist. But as always, there are more sides to the story. For one, Linux’s status would be strengthened if commercially driven and supported solid distro would emerge from this. Still, I fear large enough commercial backing of a few selected ones could diminish the other – not less solid – free distros in the long term. Yes, you could list Suse and Redhat as counter examples, still, non of them has seen such a fast and huge popularization as Ubuntu has.
Thing is, putting company and commercialization behind your distro will inherently mean drop in independent free development in the long term, and people will begin working on new distros. Don’t underestimate what free hand in development can mean to a dev.
And, as an extra, how would some new commercial linux megacorp would help FOSS advance ? That’s right, we don’t know, if even, if ever. We can hope, and some of you maybe can believe that trust is not misplaced. But you know, no trust put in a commercial entity has ever turned out to be well placed.
…in my opinion. Living in the USA, I’ve long wanted an easy, convenient and legal way to add the features that I want to my Linux distro-of-choice. Multimedia, the abilityto play commercial DVDs, that kind of thing. Ubuntu, with the addition of CNR from Linspire, will give me that choice – without taking away my freedom to not do so, if I so choose.
In an earlier post, someone made a comment to the effect of “Users suck the life out of smaller, community distributions.” If not for us life-sucking users, where are you? If you make, or support, a distro that doesn’t cater to main-stream users, that’s fine. But, please, don’t denigrate the main-stream user – we’re the ones that provide the “critical mass” for any given initiative.
This is great for people with the Microsoft mind-set. I hope Gentoo don’t follow suit.
This is great for people with the Microsoft mind-set. I hope Gentoo don’t follow suit.
What does Gentoo have to do with Ubuntu/Freespire/Linspire? Totally different userbase.
/* What does Gentoo have to do with Ubuntu/Freespire/Linspire? Totally different userbase.*/
that is good, the distro i use will not be in that userbase, i would be embarrassed to be using an OS that follows the Microsoft mind-set,like, Ubuntu/Freespire/Linspire and others soon to follow.
Sounds crazy, but it could be done.
It could have Firefox, The Gimp, OpenOffice, etc. It could be a simple way to introduce Windows users to Free software.
There is the open cd project. Not a web based install I grant, but a great way to introduce people to open source software.
http://www.theopencd.org/
Ubuntu Member Carthik Sharma (https://launchpad.net/~carthik ) has expressed his initial thoughts about the Ubuntu-Linspire deal.
http://ubuntu.wordpress.com/2007/02/10/ubuntu-linspire-so-who-else-…
Some points he makes:
1. Sharma thinks that Linspire’s primary motivation is not to make Desktop Linux popular but, instead, to make a profit.
I think that’s also one of Ubuntu’s main motivations. It costs a lot of money to pay the Ubuntu & Launchpad developers and to ship no-cost CDs around the world. Canonical needs to start making profit if Ubuntu is to continue.
2. Sharma also thinks that Ubuntu becoming the mother distro for many derivative distros adds difficult and time-consuming bugtracking work for Ubuntu devs. Sharma would rather let Debian sort out the bugs that these distros report.
3. Sharma thinks that there’s not much benefit for Ubuntu in the Linspire-Ubuntu deal.
But I suspect that Canonical gets a fair share of the CNR revenue that comes from selling proprietary codecs and commercial applications. Otherwise I don’t see much point in Canonical being so visible in announcing this “technology partnership.” As I said, Ubuntu needs to be made profitable if it is to continue in the long run.
4. Sharma points out that the CNR system is not quite as open as Mark Shuttleworth makes it appear.
5. Sharma doesn’t think that he will personally benefit much from using the cnr.com service. He’s happy with Ubuntu’s current offerings.
6. Sharma has searched the current cnr website without finding the “legal” codecs (w32codecs, libdvdcss2 etc.) that you are supposed to be able to purchase via the CNR service. Maybe they are sold under some different name?
7. Sharma points out that after CNR is officially supported in Ubuntu, developers now have to accept bug reports against packages that are not made by Ubuntu devs. Sharma expects that this situation will create problems.
Sharma concludes that Ubuntu is now becoming the “New Debian.”
Well, I would like to remind people that the “Old Debian” isn’t going away anytime soon. Debian doesn’t need to produce profit in order to be able to continue and many users and derivative distros will continue to appreciate this reliability.
Can we all at the very least agree that the work of all the Linux community in breaking the MS monopoly is good for the world as a whole?
To me every person that Picks Linux, BSD, Solaris or Even OSX is a step in the right direction for OS community as a whole.
Is arresting one crack dealer a good thing?
Is getting one user off crack(Windows) a good thing? 😛
Is getting one user off crack(Windows) a good thing? 😛
getting off of win-crack and getting on spire-crack – no not a good thing….
~~crack kills~~
I guess it depends what your end goal is. My main goal is to see a Monopoly broken. Granted there are a great deal of Idealist in the F/OSS community but we may as well except that we lose if this is our only target market.
Also if we remove the distro’s attempting to make money in someway then there isn’t that much left to chose from.
Also what rule in the GPL is it that Ununtu is breaking? causes thats the only gage I use it decide if its anti FSF.
Edited 2007-02-11 23:15
Break one, create one – still have one….
No, arresting one crack dealer doesn’t do much, but you’re seeing it backwards.
Getting one person to realize they don’t need crack…..er MS…can begat many others who don’t either.
One convert at a time. One result can equal many. We must not be so myopic that only our version is the way to go, the use of any alternate OS is good, if for no other reason that it doesn’t let MS get too comfortable. Don’t forget even Billyboy watches the goings on in Linux very carefully, even if it is such a tiny percentage of the OS marketplace.
I see a lot of heated argument over this deal between Mark Shuttleworth’s company and Linspire, and like many people I may have been cynical at first when the news broke, but ultimately in the long run at least it gives new users an easier – alternative – method of installing software – (yes I know there are other numerous methods) -however more choice cant be a bad thing.
I have been using Ubuntu for a few weeks and I think it is a good OS. I haven’t ditched windows completely because of various reasons (hardware) but I have not touched WindowsXp in a while, and only do so because of a printer which doesn’t work under Linux – So I blame Olivetti for this, although my printer does work for Mac?
The only reason that industry will not adopt Linux or desktop Linux in the mainstream has to do with Hardware manufacturers. I’m sure when vista rolled off the production line it was sweet music to the hardware companies. Microsoft knows it will screw the end user who has to upgrade (or have an OS pushed on to them), and the hardware guys know that all their new products that will work for it (vista) love it because they can keep on making products you don’t actually need, and use more resources. MS owns because of this, and Linux will never come close, so long as drivers are involved with hardware – and Hardware companies are not willing to write drivers that will work on all distros.
I think this announcement is good for newbies who want an easy and convenient way to set up their computer with all of the legal codecs and such. But Ubuntu and its derivatives are made to be used “as is” with little or no configuration or tweaking.
As one’s appreciation for the Linux operating system grows one wants to take more control of their system and “graduates” to the higher-end distros like Slackware, Arch or Gentoo. More configuration needed but there is also more power at your disposable–and the joy of configuring and customizing.
To say that Ubuntu is not necessary is like saying elementary school isn’t necessary. But as your knowledge grows, so should your distro.
I know both beginners and power users use and enjoy Ubuntu so exceptions do exist. But if you try to tweak Ubuntu too much it will break.
Edited 2007-02-11 03:49
As usual, there seems to be much speculation fueling debate here. Not that there’s anything wrong with that, it certainly keeps things interesting.
Here’s a few thoughts that come to mind from reading through these posts:
— If Debian becomes marginalized because users, distros and ISV’s are flocking to Ubuntu, is the problem with the users, distros and ISV’s, or is it possibly an issue that Debian needs to address? I mean, hell, even the FSF chose Ubuntu as the base for their new flagship freedom distro
— Groklaw-crowd aside, does anyone rationally believe that Shuttleworth is out to supplant Debian for ulterior commercial purposes? At the end of the day, he expects Canonical to realize a profit at some point from his investment in Ubuntu. It would be somewhat counterproductive to take on the investment and resources required to supplant the army of volunteers Debian has working on coding and packaging? Seriously, if anyone is claiming some sort of Microsoft-esque takeover of Debian by Shuttleworth, at least put forth a rational motive that applies business logic behind it.
— With the possible exception of Linspire, the only distribution with paid resources at their disposal, none of the Ubuntu-derivatives are contributing anything significant back to Ubuntu in terms of co-development so where’s the ultimate gain for Ubuntu to try and subvert Debian, since they’d only be subsidizing the fracture of their own potential userbase?
— It’s very possible, even likely, that Canonical will be getting some sort of a revenue sharing kickback from CNR purchases, it would make sense, but is there anything wrong with that, particularly if it leads to further investment in Ubuntu?
— Why exactly will distros moving from standardizing on Debian to standardizing on Ubuntu magically change the state of desktop linux from an ISV point of view? It’s simply share-shift, not a paradigm shift. Changes nothing.
— To add to the above point, we already have an established standard for linux, it’s appropriately called the Linux Standards Base and it exists to ensure that people still have choice in distributions while maintaining compatibility with third-party software. Sadly, it doesn’t change the fact that 99% of the ISV’s target only RHEL for support, since Red Hat is the only company that can actually provide metrics for a paying customer base.
— Has anybody professing preference for .deb over .rpm actually used an rpm package manager in the last decade? Or are we still holding onto the old “dependency-hell” stereotype from when rpm’s were installed individually without the concept of package repositories?
Just some things I’m wondering after reading through these many varied threads.
If Debian becomes marginalized because users, distros and ISV’s are flocking to Ubuntu, is the problem with the users, distros and ISV’s, or is it possibly an issue that Debian needs to address? I mean, hell, even the FSF chose Ubuntu as the base for their new flagship freedom distro
“Marginalizing” is a strong word if you realize how dependent Ubuntu is on Debian. Ubuntu is smaller and quicker in its turns than Debian, plus they have a team of paid full-time developers and a smart release cycle that allows them to take credit of the work that has actually been done in Debian. But if you look behind the recent bad press and the unfortunate delay with the Etch release, you’ll see that Debian is a damn good distro and it’s also currently in a pretty good shape. Those of us who currently run Debian “testing” know this already and the rest of the world will learn it when Etch is finally released.
As for the FSF recommendations, their preferred distros (gNewSense, Ututo, Blag, Dynebolic, GNUStep, Musix) seem to enjoy only marginal popularity when compared to Debian. And I’ve heard that in practice FSF uses Debian on its servers.
http://www.libervis.com/of_hypocrisy_and_the_fsf
Many people seem to think that Debian’s goals are identical with the FSF ideals. But this is not entirely true because Debian has its own Social Contract and its own Free Software Guidelines, which help to understand why Debian often chooses to follow its own path.
http://www.debian.org/social_contract
Ubuntu dapper is the first linux distribution that makes me seriously consider a Mac. Considering that I’ve been running linux since ’96 (slack, redhat, suse, gentoo, mandriva, fedora and now ubuntu dapper since its inception), that’s is some level of achievement. Just browse the forums for people with unbootable systems after upgrade, upgrades that don’t work, hal seems working sometimes, openoffice produces an error message when saving documents. Please reconsider basing anything on ubuntu. Adding to this rant that one out of three times I get a skype call my system hangs hard (though this is not ubuntu specific), the Mac looks better and better. I can’t make myself to run Windows however.
I know for me I dont have any issues everything runs clean and I have no issues at all. I know this isn’t your case but Ubuntu must be doing something right