Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 14th Sep 2010 22:42 UTC
Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Xubuntu If there's one consistent piece of criticism that gets lobbed in Canonical's and Mark Shuttleworth's direction, it's that they do not contribute enough code - or anything else for that matter - to the Free software world. Mark Shuttleworth has apparently had enough, and has written a very, very lengthy blog post detailing how he feels about this criticism.
Thread beginning with comment 440972
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
felipec
Member since:
2007-09-25

Sure, they don't have to collaborate. By why should anyone applaud Canonical for meeting their legal obligations regarding the GPL? They have to.

RedHat, SUSE, Mandriva, they all contribute back to the community; they go beyond their bare minimal legal obligations, and their selfish interest for their own distribution, and push the changes upstream, and the rest of the community benefits; that is to be applauded.

Canonical is spreading Linux, and making money in the process, which is entirely selfish, and that's fine, but all we are saying is "you are not part of the community", of course that's "bad PR" so they don't want to accept that, which is denying their nature.

Reply Parent Score: 3

ebasconp Member since:
2006-05-09

Why? Because Ubuntu made Linux visible and usable for a lot of people and end users.

That's a lot of contribution.

Reply Parent Score: 5

felipec Member since:
2007-09-25

Why? Because Ubuntu made Linux visible and usable for a lot of people and end users.

That's a lot of contribution.


"contribution" to what? The end-users perhaps (which is called distribution), not the linux community.

As an example I put PackageKit, developed by Fedora in a distribution-agnostic way. Then comes Archlinux, who provides a module for their package management system. That is collaboration of two members of the linux community in a common technology.

Ubuntu doesn't do anything like that.

So, how would an Evil Canonical behave? Isn't gathering end-users pretty much what any company tries to do? So how is Canonical not being a self-interested, non-collaborative leecher?

Reply Parent Score: 2

kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

Why? Because Ubuntu made Linux visible and usable for a lot of people and end users.

That's a lot of contribution.


Contribution to make Linux more usable? show me 6 contributions that have made Linux more usable. I can't think of a single thing that comes to mind right now of something that is home grown by them that actually helps when it comes to usability.

Reply Parent Score: 3

Fettarme H-Milch Member since:
2010-02-16

Why? Because Ubuntu made Linux visible and usable for a lot of people and end users.

That's a lot of contribution.

First fact:
Pretty much all usability work in GNOME ("the Linux GUI") was done by Sun.

Second fact:
Canonical does not make "Linux" visible. In fact they try very hard to avoid using that term at all on ubuntu.com.

Reply Parent Score: 5

collinm Member since:
2005-07-15

like mandriva, opensuse, xandros, linspire...

you remember corel linux?
it existed a lot of years before ubuntu and was very user friendly...

Reply Parent Score: 2

dragossh Member since:
2008-12-16

Go figure! A company being in business to make money! How selfish of them!

Reply Parent Score: 2

phreck Member since:
2009-08-13

That *is* selfish.

But what is not selfish in this world. I am e.g. selfish for going to work to earn some money, and in my hobby-time I am developing free software for my selfish desire getting high on code and having users.

Reply Parent Score: 1

felipec Member since:
2007-09-25

Go figure! A company being in business to make money! How selfish of them!


Hmm, so how does RedHat manages to contribute? They are a company after all, are they not?

Reply Parent Score: 1

apoclypse Member since:
2007-02-17

How can they not be part of the community when they ARE the community? People are going to have to get over the fact that Canonical doesn't want to spend money developing the latest shitty version of X and instead rather spend their money on making that latest shitty version look as nice as possible. Is there something wrong with that? I don't know. They are right, however, that Ubuntu's popularity (notoriety?) has a very active dev community. They just don't happen to care very much about anything but Ubuntu. Which is cool. What people don't say is that Ubuntu's community is probably a huge contributor to bug reports and have had a major hand in many projects, including compiz. The most vocal and more prevalent users were Ubuntu users. I don't know about you but just looking at where Fedora was in the early part of the decade and where it is now, I'd be very surprised if Ubuntu didn't have a hand in that, if not via code at least via its community influence. Not that Fedora still isn't a buggy bloated piece of shit, but so is Ubuntu sometimes.

Reply Parent Score: 3

felipec Member since:
2007-09-25

How can they not be part of the community when they ARE the community? People are going to have to get over the fact that Canonical doesn't want to spend money developing the latest shitty version of X and instead rather spend their money on making that latest shitty version look as nice as possible. Is there something wrong with that? I don't know. They are right, however, that Ubuntu's popularity (notoriety?) has a very active dev community. They just don't happen to care very much about anything but Ubuntu. Which is cool. What people don't say is that Ubuntu's community is probably a huge contributor to bug reports and have had a major hand in many projects, including compiz. The most vocal and more prevalent users were Ubuntu users. I don't know about you but just looking at where Fedora was in the early part of the decade and where it is now, I'd be very surprised if Ubuntu didn't have a hand in that, if not via code at least via its community influence. Not that Fedora still isn't a buggy bloated piece of shit, but so is Ubuntu sometimes.


Ubuntu community != linux community. They don't contribute to the linux community.

Reply Parent Score: 0

jabbotts Member since:
2007-09-06

This has been mentioned a few times so I gotta speak up; it's all selfish interest. With individuals, I can see a percentage being purely altruistic but the majority have an invested self interest. But a corporation? Novell, Mandriva, Red Hat; they don't do a single thing that is not about self interests. They are legally obligated to value the share holder above all else. The only reason the contribute so much code back is because they believe it will lead to greater profit. These are profit focused entities not well sponsored non-profit orgs. If they thought there was less profit in collaborating, they wouldn't do it.

It's worked so far. It's fantastic that such big organizations believe there is value in that collaboration. Mandriva was my distro of choice until Debian recently. They really deserve credit for being the first to focus on new users; it's still a better distro backed by a lesser marketing department than Canonical's. I'm just suggesting that we remember that these suggested altruistic corporations are legally obligated amoral entities that wouldn't lean left and pass gas if it didn't lead toward profit.

For the record, I do have grief for Canonical but it's with the distro assembly. In the greater market, Canonical has been highly successful at bringing more attention to the FOSS world.

Reply Parent Score: 2