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 441096
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
felipec
Member since:
2007-09-25

"Imagine Canonical was evil and selfish. What would be their objective? They would want their product to be successful (as is the only way to survive), so they need users, and the way to do that is with a good user experience.

A company is by definition selfish.
"
But a company that collaborates (RedHat) is less selfish than a company that doesn't (Canonical). The point here is that RedHat could be more evil by not collaborating, Canonical doesn't really have any steps up in evilness.

"That is fine, but Fedora goes for the home run; a public, completely open source driver that has no license issues and can be used by all the distributions.

Which, last I heard, is still worse than the binary blob and at least on my card doesn't offer 3D acceleration.
"
That's NVIDIA's fault, not RedHat's. Fedora is trying to help their users in a collaborative/free way, while giving the users the option to use NVIDIA by using a 3rd party repository. Ubuntu is hardly helping the situation at all. IOW Fedora is part of the solution, Ubuntu is not.

At some point the open driver would work just fine, in part thanks to Fedora, and then Ubuntu will jump the bandwagon claiming that they are giving their users the best experience... but in reality they hardly did anything.

"Same with many other distributions which you have obviously not tried; e.g Fedora, OpenSUSE.

Yes, because things like LVM make so much sense to the home user!
"
So do partitions. The user don't have to ever see them. Just say "automatic" and Fedora will pick a sensible default that would not affect your experience at all if you don't know what a partition or a volume is.

"Clearly you haven't tried PackageKit, which was developed by Fedora, for all distributions and all package managers, and eventually Ubuntu would also use it.

Yet Software Center is the easiest front-end. People like big buttons and fluffy clouds.
"
Ubuntu is going to move to PackageKit, that's a fact you can see in their notes. If they don't like the UI they can change it, or they can make "Software Center" use PackageKit's backed. You see, it was designed to fit the needs of everyone.

Ubuntu could repay the favor by improving PackageKit's UI; i.e. contributing, but I guess that would be too much to ask.

"Canonical doesn't need to fix anything, they just need to make their code distribution agnostic, and perhaps push things in a truly open source way. See how Fedora made PackageKit available to everyone for example. But they simply don't care.

Why doesn't pacman work in Ubuntu? There, I suppose Arch is a selfish and evil distribution!
"
You are punching yourself; pacman does work in Ubuntu, just like in any other distribution, I've used it in Fedora; it doesn't conflict with the system's package manager. But you chose a very bad example anyway, because by definition the package management system is the single most important thing that defines a distribution; you wouldn't want to change that unless you are creating your own distro.

Reply Parent Score: 1

dragossh Member since:
2008-12-16

But a company that collaborates (RedHat) is less selfish than a company that doesn't (Canonical). The point here is that RedHat could be more evil by not collaborating, Canonical doesn't really have any steps up in evilness.

"Evil is generally accepted to be defined as the intention of causing harm or destruction while threatening or deliberately violating morality."

Did Canonical burn your computer or something? Killed your cat?

That's NVIDIA's fault, not RedHat's. Fedora is trying to help their users in a collaborative/free way, while giving the users the option to use NVIDIA by using a 3rd party repository. Ubuntu is hardly helping the situation at all. IOW Fedora is part of the solution, Ubuntu is not.

What I'm saying is, Ubuntu is providing a driver that WORKS. Users don't care about experimental, half-working drivers, trust me.

At some point the open driver would work just fine, in part thanks to Fedora, and then Ubuntu will jump the bandwagon claiming that they are giving their users the best experience... but in reality they hardly did anything.

They will be giving their users the best experience. How's that not true?

It's like saying Windows doesn't give people the best experience because Microsoft didn't work on the nVIDIA/ATI drivers.

So do partitions. The user don't have to ever see them. Just say "automatic" and Fedora will pick a sensible default that would not affect your experience at all if you don't know what a partition or a volume is.

I am tempted to try this, but I don't have a 2nd hard drive to spare. I'm farily confident Fedora's installer is a bit more cryptic than Ubuntu's.

Ubuntu is going to move to PackageKit, that's a fact you can see in their notes. If they don't like the UI they can change it, or they can make "Software Center" use PackageKit's backed. You see, it was designed to fit the needs of everyone.

Good. That means they are using the most sensible solution and not jumping on the ITLLWORKLATER projects that pop up every year or so.

Ubuntu could repay the favor by improving PackageKit's UI; i.e. contributing, but I guess that would be too much to ask.

Why aren't you trying to improve the frontends? Oh, wait, it's easier to call out Canonical.

Again, it's GPL. They can take it, modify it, and even sell it. All without being required to contribute back.

You are punching yourself; pacman does work in Ubuntu, just like in any other distribution, I've used it in Fedora; it doesn't conflict with the system's package manager.

Oh, it doesn't? Hey, let's use my distro's package manager to remo-- darn it.

Reply Parent Score: 1

felipec Member since:
2007-09-25

"But a company that collaborates (RedHat) is less selfish than a company that doesn't (Canonical). The point here is that RedHat could be more evil by not collaborating, Canonical doesn't really have any steps up in evilness.

"Evil is generally accepted to be defined as the intention of causing harm or destruction while threatening or deliberately violating morality."

Did Canonical burn your computer or something? Killed your cat?
"
That's one definition, but if you want to stick to it, then fine, let's use the original qualifier; how can Canonical step up in their selfishness? There aren't any more steps. They are pretty much as selfish as distributions go.

"That's NVIDIA's fault, not RedHat's. Fedora is trying to help their users in a collaborative/free way, while giving the users the option to use NVIDIA by using a 3rd party repository. Ubuntu is hardly helping the situation at all. IOW Fedora is part of the solution, Ubuntu is not.

What I'm saying is, Ubuntu is providing a driver that WORKS. Users don't care about experimental, half-working drivers, trust me.
"
Yes, but that doesn't benefit the linux community only users from Ubuntu, and that doesn't require Canonical to lift a finger! You see they are not doing anything! Just including one package by default.

And of course, what happens when NVIDIA decides to stop supporting certain cards, what are those users to do? How is Ubuntu addressing that problem that will happen eventually. They aren't doing anything at all, they rely utterly and completely on the linux community to solve that problem.

"At some point the open driver would work just fine, in part thanks to Fedora, and then Ubuntu will jump the bandwagon claiming that they are giving their users the best experience... but in reality they hardly did anything.

They will be giving their users the best experience. How's that not true?

It's like saying Windows doesn't give people the best experience because Microsoft didn't work on the nVIDIA/ATI drivers.
"
It would be strictly true, but deceiving. The true linux community did it; Fedora, Debian, Archlinux... not Ubuntu. Ubuntu only takes, never gives. A leecher.

"So do partitions. The user don't have to ever see them. Just say "automatic" and Fedora will pick a sensible default that would not affect your experience at all if you don't know what a partition or a volume is.

I am tempted to try this, but I don't have a 2nd hard drive to spare. I'm farily confident Fedora's installer is a bit more cryptic than Ubuntu's.
"
Based on what? Did you dream it? How about you try to form your opinions on facts?

"Ubuntu is going to move to PackageKit, that's a fact you can see in their notes. If they don't like the UI they can change it, or they can make "Software Center" use PackageKit's backed. You see, it was designed to fit the needs of everyone.

Good. That means they are using the most sensible solution and not jumping on the ITLLWORKLATER projects that pop up every year or so.
"
When Fedora introduced it in a release it worked perfectly fine, otherwise they wouldn't have included it. Fedora is fertile ground for innovation and stays stable. Of course you wouldn't know that because Ubuntu tells you that if they are not doing it, it must be wrong, and you believe it.

"Ubuntu could repay the favor by improving PackageKit's UI; i.e. contributing, but I guess that would be too much to ask.

Why aren't you trying to improve the frontends? Oh, wait, it's easier to call out Canonical.
"
Are you insane? Nobody is relying on Canonical, that's precisely the point; Canonical doesn't contribute.

The fontend is improving without the help from Canonical. Nobody is relying on Fedora, nor Archlinux, nor Debian. This is the commons; everyone contributes and we all benefit.

Again, it's GPL. They can take it, modify it, and even sell it. All without being required to contribute back.

Why are you repeating the same? Yes, they can decide to not collaborate, and they are doing so, we are merely pointing the fact that they are doing it.

"You are punching yourself; pacman does work in Ubuntu, just like in any other distribution, I've used it in Fedora; it doesn't conflict with the system's package manager.

Oh, it doesn't? Hey, let's use my distro's package manager to remo-- darn it.
"
What are you even talking about? The point is that they contribute.

Reply Parent Score: 1