Slashdot Mirror


Canonical's Troubles With the Free Software Community

puddingebola (2036796) writes "Bruce Byfield looks back at the soured relationships between Canonical and the free software community. Partly analysis, partly a review of past conflicts, the writer touches on Mir and Wayland, and what he sees as Canonical's attempts to take over projects. From the article, 'However, despite these other concerns, probably the most important single reason for the reservations about Ubuntu is its frequent attempts to assume the leadership of free software — a position that no one has ever filled, and that no one particularly wants to see filled. In its first few years, Ubuntu's influence was mostly by example. However, by 2008, Shuttleworth was promoting the idea that major projects should coordinate their release schedules. That idea was received without enthusiasm. However, it is worth noting that some of those who opposed it, like Aaron Seigo, have re-emerged as critics of Mir — another indication that personal differences are as important as the issues under discussion.'"

10 of 155 comments (clear)

  1. Infighting: Linux's biggest weakness by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The second any one party becomes big enough, or popular enough, to start making meaningful changes in the way Linux is implemented in their distributions, the knives come out.

    1. Re:Infighting: Linux's biggest weakness by Mr_Silver · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Not that being Apple has done that much good for their computing platform. They are still the same marginal also-ran that they have been since before Linux ever started.

      Last year, the Mac took 45% of all profits in the PC market and earnt an average 19% operating margin on its Mac sales.

      In comparison, it was 4% for Dell and less than that for HP, Lenovo, and Acer.

      Pretty good for a "marginal also-ran" if you ask me.

      source

      --
      Avantslash - View Slashdot cleanly on your mobile phone.
    2. Re:Infighting: Linux's biggest weakness by Lumpy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yet more people use apple for desktop computing than all linux combined. Stop with the hater bullshit. Linux has a long way to go for even OSX level of adoption on the desktop. I LOVE linux, but I cant use it because 90% of the apps I need are not on it nor have any real viable replacements.

      Example: video editing suites. NOTHING useable on linux compared to Final Cut X, AVID, or Sony Vegas. NOTHING on linux even close to After Effects.
      Nothing in linux even close to Lightroom.

      I want them to exist, but they dont.

      Hell even for business, NOTHING on linux even close to a real business accounting package. etc...

      every year I try to use linux in one way or another, and every year I have to go back to Windows or OSX because it just is not there yet.

      I WANT to use linux, sadly all the linux people are busy screwing around with bullshit like Desktop UI changes and doing nothing to make the platform useable for the masses.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    3. Re:Infighting: Linux's biggest weakness by lgw · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The Linux kernel was nothing special. Seriously. There were many such hobby projects at the time, and it wasn't a particularly great one. The success of Linux was the success of Linus as "the guy in charge" of an open source project. It grew and flourished because of leadership, not (early) technological advantage.

      The open source community certainly needs more such strong leaders. What it doesn't need is CEO-style wankers. Any sort of "business leader" needs to find a new space. What's lacking are engineering leaders, who have a strong and consistent vision of what say, the desktop, should be that resonates with contributors, and who has the political savvy to lead. You can't boss around an open source project based on any granted authority, but you can lead and inspire people to follow. That means you have to appeal to the people who'd likely do the work, not follow some business plan to grow the customer base.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    4. Re:Infighting: Linux's biggest weakness by AxeTheMax · · Score: 4, Insightful

      can you remember how bad the linux desktop was before ubuntu? it was atrocious....what about before x.org?

      I'm afraid some of us think the ubuntu desktop was and is atrocious.

    5. Re:Infighting: Linux's biggest weakness by Burz · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The apps don't materialize because serious app developers (instead of the system tinkerers in FOSS who like to imagine themselves as good apps developers) with passion and committment to their ideas try out "Linux" and experience the following:

      1. Scant control of hardware features (even getting the screen to turn off can be a challenge) and the controls that exist suck, because the proper level of vertical integration isn't there.

      2. Myriad desktop environments and administration applets that make the thought of guiding users through tech support a nightmare. This is the most obvious reason why "Linux" is not a desktop platform, because most non-techie users of said distros wouldn't even be able to recognize most other distros (or the same distro with a different DE).

      3. Myriad combinations of support libraries; even the common ones are bundled together with versions of each other that create a unique and unsupportable platform 'landscape' for each distro.

      4. Distro culture itself: 'Thou art a creepy skank if you sell apps and/or offer direct downloads of a product.' Invoking Yum and Apt are almost like genuflecting before entering a pew. Only its a cult, not a religion, because strong dynamic relationships with people outside the repository are frowned upon.

  2. Open Source Is About Decentralization by Bob9113 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    '... probably the most important single reason for the reservations about Ubuntu is its frequent attempts to assume the leadership of free software ... [S]ome of those who opposed it, like Aaron Seigo, have re-emerged as critics of Mir â" another indication that personal differences are as important as the issues under discussion.'

    Seeing the same critics reappear does not necessarily mean it is a personal difference. It really only indicates that the underlying disagreement remains. Mark Shuttleworth believes in centralization of authority, Open Source is implicitly about decentralization of authority. That is a difference with Mark Shuttleworth's world view; as long as he holds it, and particularly when he tries to be the central authority, he will not fit in the Open Source world. That is not personal in the sense of holding a grudge, but it won't change unless Mark genuinely embraces the decentralized nature of this method of software development.

  3. Re:Sadly for Canonical... by NaiveBayes · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Canonical have been making a major loss for years and yet still put more and more money into Ubuntu and open source software development. You may still want to see them as greedy, but is it greedy to not want to make losses year on year?

  4. Re:Sadly for Canonical... by ThePhilips · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ... they and Shuttleworth disappeared up their own backsides in a blinding flash of self importance and inability to listen to users (Unity - the OSS version of Windows 8 Metro, need I say more). I'm afraid their We Know Best doesn't tend to adhere them to many people and

    The same load of BS is repeated over and over again. That doesn't make it true.

    Unlike Metro:

    1. Unity actually provides some benefits. Like for example full screen zoom on smaller laptop screens.

    2. It breaks much less of UI conventions.

    3. You can actually replace Unity with something else within minutes. (Or you can even install the Ubuntu edition without it.)

    First two are also applicable to GNOME3 v. Unity comparison.

    I suspect they've now peaked in terms of their importance in the free software world and will slowly fade away as the years go by.

    Yeah. Ubuntu is going to be replaced by Mint. Oh wait, Mint *is* an Ubuntu-based distro.

    --
    All hope abandon ye who enter here.
  5. Weasel words by peppepz · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Just some days ago we were already told that the Free Software Community hates Canonical. Then again, who is this Free Software Community? I've been using free software since before it was fashionable to call it thus, so I think that I use lots of software coming from the Free Software Community. Today I happen to use some pieces of free software from Canonical. Of the works by some of the persons spotted in TFA as speakers for the "Free Software Community", I use nothing, so I see more contribution to the Free Software Community from Canonical than from them.

    Don't like software form Canonical? Don't use it. They're a commercial company, so they have to break even ultimately. I understand if, after listening to everyone, they make their own decision. Their Mir project is all about Ubuntu phones: should that platform be successful, they'll take the merit, should they fail, the Free Software Community will still have Android as their reference platform. Even if Google is a commercial company, too, and compared to them Canonical is Candy Candy.