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
Thread beginning with comment 435282
To view parent comment, click here.
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

JAlexoid Member since:
2009-05-19

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


Mint has as much negative connotation as Ubuntu. "Would you like a mint, dearie?"

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

Well you might have not been looking in the right places. And most corporate rollouts are not publicized. Though the problems with corporate Linux desktop adoption are more related to Microsoft's solutions being more integrated and complete, and have little or even nothing to do with names or color schemes. That is why Apple's good looking OS is a total failure in the corporate environments as well.

Reply Parent Score: 3

Flatland_Spider Member since:
2006-09-01

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


Remember the Luna theme on WinXP, or how about the Aero themes on Vista and Win7?

I've seen apps designed to create as much pain as possible made the standard for large corporations, so the UI is not the deciding factor when decisions are made.

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


I've seen one job posting in my area that called for experience with Ubuntu on the desktop, and looking around there are a couple more around. Not a lot, but some.
http://www.indeed.com/jobs?q=ubuntu+desktop&l=

As JAlexoid mentioned and I hinted at, MS has a lot of support technologies that add value to Windows desktops. Ubuntu really needs to create an answer for them (easy implementation by unskilled admins) to really step up as the corporate desktop Linux.

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.


Money can't buy taste.

Reply Parent Score: 1

vivainio Member since:
2008-12-26


Money can't buy taste.


Huh? So hotshot designers work for free these days?

Reply Parent Score: 2

Clinton Member since:
2005-07-05

Novell does make a circus OS...

Reply Parent Score: 2