Linked by David Adams on Tue 3rd Aug 2010 16:05 UTC, submitted by sjvn
Linux As we mentioned in a previous article, Red Hat advocate Greg DeKoenigsberg claimed that due to the much larger amount of code it's contributed, Red Hat is a better open source citizen than Canonical, adding, "Canonical is a marketing organization masquerading as an engineering organization." A Computerworld blog retorts that that's no insult; and that marketing Linux could be just as important to the cause as contributing code. Updated
Permalink for comment 435282
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
nt_jerkface
Member since:
2009-08-26

Ubuntu has tons of corporate appeal. The engineering, the name, the color of the icons doesn't matter; only the ability to buy a support contract does.


So if Novell made a distro called ClownTimeOS that used a circus theme that wouldn't matter as long as they offered support contracts?


Linux Mint has zero marketability in the corporate world due to it being a community project.


Linux Mint isn't being marketed to the corporate world but the name and color scheme would be an easier sell.


Ubuntu has been good for corporate Linux. It's really pushed the idea that Linux has a place outside of the server room.


I'm not seeing major corporate rollouts of Ubuntu. I think it has been a waste of time for Linux overall.


I do agree with you about Mint being better then Ubuntu.


It's funny as to how many people prefer Mint when Shuttleworth has a team of designers and Mint is mostly the work of 1 person.

Reply Parent Score: 1