Mark Shuttleworth, millionaire cosmonaut and self-funded Linux guru, has managed to make his Ubuntu project the Linux distribution of choice in just two years. But now the friendly brown OS with the cute drumming noises faces an awkward journey towards the commercial mainstream.
He is one of the most market savy guys I have read about. Think about it… he has a name which gives one a first hand idea about his famous qualification – being one of the few space tourists.
He gives out Ubuntu CDs free of cost – one of the main reason it is so popular.
He Uses other peoples work – took up Debian sid and converted it into something as userfriendly as Ubuntu – something the debian guys are shy of doing.
… I could go on and on.
Debian has always epitomized everything that’s best in the world of Free Software but Debian has also always intimidated a certain type of people who think that it’s money (and money only) that makes the world go round. It took a rich guy like Mark Shuttleworth to show the larger audience that Debian can really rock.
But shipping free CDs and employing full-time developers is not cheap. (Apparently it takes $10m a year.) It’ll be interesting to see if Shuttleworth can turn his version of Debian into a profitable business. But whatever happens, Ubuntu users will always have Debian proper to fall back on.
What many people fail to realize is that Ubuntu is basically a Debian system — built on top of regular snapshots of Debian sid, modified by Debian developers whom Shuttleworth has employed. And Shuttleworth himself used to be a Debian developer. In fact, the current Debian Project Leader Anthony Towns said in a recent interview that Shuttleworth has reactivated his developer account to be able to vote in the DPL elections. 🙂
http://www.linux.com/article.pl?sid=06/04/11/1818237
But whatever happens, Ubuntu users will always have Debian proper to fall back on.
I wouldn’t go taking them for granted like I did the early redhat community. Debian will only last as long as the debian community makes it and who knows, they could wake up and go gentoo any time….
Only on days that they woke up on the wrong side of the bed.
True…but won’t Red Hat only last as long as Red Hat is in business? Isn’t that the nature of software?
I thought one of the original points behind FOSS software was the lack of worrying about such things – as long as two people are working on it, isn’t that a community (perhaps not overly productive or viable, but a community nonetheless).
Linux will die when people stop using/developing.
Oh, and while I’ll admit my portage experience is limited, you can pull apt from my cold dead hands!
Not much of a interview. Not much of a read either. Debian is user friendly you just have to learn a little and what you get back in return is choice, options, and flexibility.
Debian already rocks and is slowly getting better really.
I don’t doubt that canonical will make some money from ubuntu. I don’t think he will ever recoup the money poured into it and turn a killer profit as least not for a very long time. I also feel like that ubuntu will be less community oriented the more business like it becomes. Wait a min, is ubuntu community oriented now?
the popularity of ubuntu is definitely partly due to the free shipping of CDs. however, there is no denying that it has impressed both home and corporate users with performance, convenience and hardware detection. but then there are those criticism saying that if not for the free shipping, ubuntu would not have gone to where its popularity lies now. maybe, nevertheless it still worked for many.
as for venturing into profit-making, there is nothing wrong trying to take back some of the 10M per year of budget.
will it cost the lost of interest to the community? it largely depends on how Mr. Shuttleworth would approach it, and it is too early to make some conclusions as of now.
the only thing that best matters now is: will ubuntu do the job most efficiently for users and corporations given its free shipping and their (the users) requirements and expectations? by experience many say yes. in the future: will ubuntu be the best choice should it cost users some bucks? there’s no telling for now, but it’s possible.
the truth is, that is the same bottomline for every distro, including Windows and Mac – and yes – including the FOSS and the costly closed source ones.
the popularity of ubuntu is definitely partly due to the free shipping of CDs. however, there is no denying that it has impressed both home and corporate users with performance, convenience and hardware detection. but then there are those criticism saying that if not for the free shipping, ubuntu would not have gone to where its popularity lies now. maybe, nevertheless it still worked for many.
Ok, I’ll bite, since you brought corporate users into it. How has it impressed corporate users with performance, convenience and hardware detection? How is that not deniable? Red Hat, Novell/Suse, Libranet, Linspire and Xandros, to name a few, have all targeted corporate users. What does *buntu do differently?
as for venturing into profit-making, there is nothing wrong trying to take back some of the 10M per year of budget.
will it cost the lost of interest to the community? it largely depends on how Mr. Shuttleworth would approach it, and it is too early to make some conclusions as of now.
Absolutely agree, but this is easier said than done, pre-mature conclusions aside. *buntu has always been a bastion of “free” (as in philosophy) software. Translating that into a commercial endeavour *without* alienating the community they rely on will be tricky. Plus Canonical’s pricing for support compared to Red Hat or Novell really isn’t that competitive, particularly considering support for Debian-based distros is generally non-existent for third-party commercial linux ISV’s (you’re lucky if you find Suse support, most assume linux == Red hat) so I can’t see where the draw is to attract paying corporate customers to *buntu versus the “established” enterprise leaders?
the only thing that best matters now is: will ubuntu do the job most efficiently for users and corporations given its free shipping and their (the users) requirements and expectations? by experience many say yes. in the future: will ubuntu be the best choice should it cost users some bucks? there’s no telling for now, but it’s possible.
You’re really placing an exaggerated emphasis on the free shipping. Don’t get me wrong, it sets *buntu apart among community distros, and I think it’s a great thing they’re doing. But it’s hardly going to convince “corporate” customers to switch from their established platform.
You do raise a good point though, is *buntu really *buntu if customers have to pay for it? That’s the same issue all linux distros struggle with. Some, like Linspire or Xandros, rely on proprietary hooks that tie their users to their service in order to assure revenue. Others like Novell or Red Hat assume certain customers will be willing to pay for the ability to receive an established and proven high-level support infrastructure, and that subsidizes the “free” users. *buntu is kind of in the middle. They can’t adopt any proprietary practices that would lock users to a revenue stream, and they have neither the infrastructure nor legacy to support Canonical’s fees. This doesn’t even touch the fact that *buntu lacks any sort of management infrastructure, which is really what the corporate customers are looking for, right next to applications.
the truth is, that is the same bottomline for every distro, including Windows and Mac – and yes – including the FOSS and the costly closed source ones.
I’m really not trying to nitpick, but what bottomline are you referring to? What’s the challenge? Windows is established because it works. In the consumer space, OS X can give Windows a challenge because it offers comparable return for the users. In the enterprise space, OS X has a significant handicap in that it forces customers into deeper lock-in, which is specifically what many are looking to avoid when evalutating alternatives. Business customers need a solution that offers better *value*, hence return, not necessarily the best price.
IMHO, the biggest challenge linux faces is the tendency for the community to assume or even interpose their values and requirements as being equivalent to everyone else. Right off the bat we need to seperate what works for consumers or the “average” user, and what businesses need. They’re completely different issues. Linux has a much better chance of gaining enterprise acceptance, since many of the weaknesses people often stress in linux (installation, configuration, multimedia etc.) are generally not pain-points for business users, they have priorities around manageability, compliance, stability vs. bleeding-edge etc. These are easier things to address, many of them already have been. Business customers care less about Xgl and mp3, more about effectiveness for their requirements. That’s what needs to be addressed.
*buntu is a fantastic distribution, and has done much to evangelize the linux desktop and bring new users into the fold. But to assume that based on that popularity it is ready to conquor the enterprise market with their vastly different requirements pretty much dooms it in that area.
IMHO, Shuttleworth would be better served by considering a split with a Canonical-optimized version of *buntu for businesses and the ever-popular community version that actually drives the development, almost a Red Hat/Fedora kind of deal. One thing I have become convinced of is that community and commercial objectives will simply never be completely aligned, and more often than not will point in completely seperate directions. Better to address that than pretend it’s not an issue.
Anyways, just my 2c…
…How has it impressed corporate users with performance, convenience and hardware detection? …What does *buntu do differently?
it has impressed corporate users because performs right out of the box. there may be cases of it not working upon installation here and there, but testimonials of it working well is all around. corporations use it. that alone means that they see ubuntu fit for the job.
what does ubuntu do differently? maybe none. but what does red hat, novel, linspire comparatively have? if it is your point that corporations may actually resort to the already paid for distros should ubuntu cost some, that may be true for now, or would it? but putting a price tag on it is still a future plan, and lots of features can still be added to make it buying-worthy.
considering support for Debian-based distros is generally non-existent for third-party commercial linux ISV’s (you’re lucky if you find Suse support, most assume linux == Red hat) so I can’t see where the draw is to attract paying corporate customers to *buntu versus the “established” enterprise leaders?
it’s not that Mr. Shuttleworth will put a price tag now. concluding that it will not work based on the current state of ubuntu without considering the yet to be added features and future market plans for ubuntu seems to be quite a stretch for now.
I’m really not trying to nitpick, but what bottomline are you referring to? … Business customers need a solution that offers better *value*, hence return, not necessarily the best price.
it’s actually the best value based on expected returns and available budget. the value is definite criteria, but the price sure sure earns consideration as well. for business use, linux has served quite a number for quite a time, and ubuntu has its share of success stories. for home use, i think linux has yet to overcome (1) user expectation of a windows-like feel where they have been accustomed for years – it will be hard to attract the attention of average users when they are to adjust from their already established windows know-how and (2) availability of the favorites softwares/games/etc…
But to assume that based on that popularity it is ready to conquor the enterprise market with their vastly different requirements pretty much dooms it in that area.
and i doubt that Mr. Shuttleworth thinks bases his decisions solely on the popularity of Ubuntu.
IMHO, Shuttleworth would be better served by considering a split with a Canonical-optimized version of *buntu for businesses and the ever-popular community version that actually drives the development, almost a Red Hat/Fedora kind of deal. One thing I have become convinced of is that community and commercial objectives will simply never be completely aligned, and more often than not will point in completely seperate directions. Better to address that than pretend it’s not an issue.
totally agree!
“What does *buntu do differently? “
Provides an easy to set up integrated LAMP stack in the Dapper server version. In the long run Ubuntu may produce an integrated server so simple to operate that even MCSE’s could run them.
“IMHO, Shuttleworth would be better served by considering a split with a Canonical-optimized version of *buntu for businesses and the ever-popular community version that actually drives the development, almost a Red Hat/Fedora kind of deal.”
By putting a 5 year support on Dapper LTS while pushing ahead with Edgy Eft he is effectively giving rise to the separation of a development version and a stable supported enterprise version.
IBM is already supporting DB2 on Ubuntu … I think Ubuntu has every chance success in the corporate server market. First establishing itself on the edge of the corporate datacentre (non mission critical intranets and internet websites) working its way into the datacentre as it becomes more accepted on the periphery.
Edited 2006-07-26 16:36
It looks look someone marked down my post. I guess I must have offended an MCSE with this statment:
” In the long run Ubuntu may produce an integrated server so simple to operate that even MCSE’s could run them.”
Well I am sorry if I offended all you MCSE’s out there it was intended part humorously but also with a serious intent. In previous threads on Linux servers there were a lot of microsoftie types compaining about lack of GUI tools to administer Linux servers etc. and how Linux server administration was too complicated.
Well my point is this; Ubuntu has gained a lot of desktop Linux users because it ia is to set up and administer. It just works. Well if they adopt this approach to the server version it will make it accesible to more sysadmins not just the *nix orientated ones. And I regard the integrated, it just works, LAMP stack in Dapper as an example of this.
Maybe as long as you don’t see Ubuntu shining boxes at Best Buy on the shelves, companies won’t trust it, or won’t consider it.
You know how people are… Also, when a product is free of charge, people don’t trust it, they think it’s bad quality. Also, the fact that Ubuntu is based on the Isle of Man doesn’t help in credibility. The USA would have been better for the customer.
Nobody cares where it is from. The BB comment may or may not be true, but Ubuntu’s issue isn’t where its developers are located. Look at Linux, Linux is based all over the world, and it seems to have caught on like wildfire in enterprise now, and they are typically the most steadfast/stubborn guys.
LOL USA? Incredible ignorant statement. USA stands for poor quality overall. And that does not only comply in terms of computers, but as in cars, machinery, steel, worker condtions, telemecanique. And even though USA provides some products of equal quality as some other nations, its very often ten to a hundred times more expensive, due to taxation and the workers salaries as well as expensive raw materials and the industrial machinery needed to produce the products.
“I would trust an american car when its designed, built and assembled by asians or europeans”
Roger Welsh
The cars made in the USA are fine…just don’t buy one made on Friday or Monday!!! 🙂
That’s not even worthy of a rebuttle. -1 for you, dirtbag.
Anyways, back on topic, Mark seems like a nice guy, and is quite smart, I just hope he figures out it’s the software that matters, the platform isn’t the big issue, and he gets some developers working on stabilizing APIs as much as possible, making nice frameworks, and creating killer-apps (something to replace logic pro, photoshop, etc..) would be nice! It all takes money though, we’ll see how it goes.
Regardless, he’s doing quite a good job so far, better than all the other distro makers now. Basically unlimited funding helps, but so does a good leader. Kudos Mark, and keep up the good work. Look forward to the improvements as you figure out how to work with OSS more and more!
I get the vibe that lots of people are doubtful of the idea that Shuttleworth is on Their Side. That is, the side that wants Linux to stay Free, and growing in healthy directions.
It is my opinion that, although I don’t think Shuttleworth is quite a valiant knight in shining armor, his actions will have a mostly positive effect on Linux long-term.
This is because he is (allegedy) spending $10M/yr on Linux while not worrying about turning a profit quite yet. The developers he employs are working on GPL code, they are trying to make it do What The Users Want, and there is specific attention paid to an open community. This is a Good Thing.
I don’t think it is reasonable to think he has some sort of Devious Plan for subverting Linux. The community involvement will make sure the User benefits and the GPL will make sure the code stays Free.
Of course (with the recent death of OpenDarwin in mind) let us look to what Apple has done with Open Source… I don’t think Shuttleworth’s approach is anything close to what what Apple has pulled off. However, all Apple has “given back” in all these years is a few clumps of uncompilable, undocumented code. If you want to vilify someone, go after them instead.
Well Ubuntu refuses to have ANY kind of proprietary software (free as in bear or not) installed. So I take it they’re quite trustworthy when it comes to Free (as in freedom) Software.
They do however allow you to install these things after the installation (except for libdvdcss2 and w32codecs, which are illegal in some countries), looking at the new commercial repos, I hope they will gain the trust of more commercial software developers, so that more proprietary software can be added legally.
nvidia?