Linked by Hadrien Grasland on Tue 1st Mar 2011 18:32 UTC, submitted by sjvn
Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Xubuntu "The conflict between Banshee and Canonical over what should be done with Banshee's Amazon Store revenue stream, while it was finally resolved, was not Ubuntu's most shining moment. At the matter's conclusion, Banshee developers were not happy with the results. This is not how open-source communities should work together and no one knows that better than Mark Shuttleworth, Canonical, Ubuntu's parent company, who wrote, "We made some mistakes in our handling of the discussion around revenue share with the Banshee team.""
Thread beginning with comment 464571
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: What is Fedora, then?
by perlid on Wed 2nd Mar 2011 23:36 UTC in reply to "What is Fedora, then? "
Member since:

I have no idea what the "commercial Linux Desktop" means. What is Fedora? Is it Commercial or not? It doesn't charge any money and the software is free to use. Many developers are paid by RedHat, and its used as a basis for an OS that requires a support contract to use and receive updates for ( RHEL).

By "commercial Linux desktop" I'm sure he is primarily referring to SuSE Linux Enterprise Desktop and Redhat Enterprise Linux Desktop, which unlike Ubuntu Desktop Edition are not available free of charge.

Redhat's commercial desktop offering is quite different from Fedora from a test/quality/stability/maintenance point of view. Sure, their commercial releases are initially based on subset of Fedora, but what you pay for is the extra level of testing and the long term maintenance, which Fedora users don't receive. In the case of Ubuntu you will, free of change, get the exact same bits and maintenance updates as the commercial Ubuntu customers get. That's what sets Ubuntu apart and I'd think that is the point Shuttleworth is trying to make.

You can't talk about what you've given, without recognizing what you've received. Unless you want to sound like an a**hole.

Very true, which is why I find it hypocritical when people release their code under a F/OSS license and then come crying about how "unethical" someone is because they are enjoying (e.g. making money from) their work. What these people tend to forget is that they are themselves enjoying tons of software (e.g. a Linux distribution) other people wrote and gave away without asking them for anything in return.

In other words, people tend to overestimate their own contributions and underestimating other's.

Reply Parent Score: 1

Bill Shooter of Bul Member since:

You are defining it in one of two ways which I can't tell form your post.

Definition #1 : A commercial Linux desktop is one that can be paid for.

So to become a commercial Linux desktop just like Ubuntu, Someone just needs to sell fedora?


Definition #2: A commercial Linux desktop is one that has had an "extra level of testing".

So if Fedora is not a commercial Linux desktop ( because the lack of testing), then it has more bugs than Ubuntu? That could be quantitatively measured. I don't think you would find a statistically significant difference.

I still maintain that its a silly, ill defined statement that he made to try and earn good will in listeners.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: What is Fedora, then?
by perlid on Thu 3rd Mar 2011 00:49 in reply to "RE[2]: What is Fedora, then? "
perlid Member since:

Neither selling nor testing the bits is the main point, it's the commercial support offering (which usually implies selling/testing/etc).

I think you might be a bit too hung up on the specific phrase "commercial Linux desktop" used by Shuttleworth, which admittedly is vague and ambiguous. However, in context of his blog post is seems fairly obvious to me that he is referring to Redhat and Novell. Which, together with Canonical, are the only relevant vendors which provide commercial support services for their desktop distributions.

Shuttleworth's choice of phrase might not have been perfect here, but I can't say that it made me think his intentions was to mislead or earn goodwill.

Reply Parent Score: 1