Canonical's Troubles With the Free Software Community 155
puddingebola (2036796) writes "Bruce Byfield looks back at the soured relationships between Canonical and the free software community. Partly analysis, partly a review of past conflicts, the writer touches on Mir and Wayland, and what he sees as Canonical's attempts to take over projects. From the article, 'However, despite these other concerns, probably the most important single reason for the reservations about Ubuntu is its frequent attempts to assume the leadership of free software — a position that no one has ever filled, and that no one particularly wants to see filled. In its first few years, Ubuntu's influence was mostly by example. However, by 2008, Shuttleworth was promoting the idea that major projects should coordinate their release schedules. That idea was received without enthusiasm. However, it is worth noting that some of those who opposed it, like Aaron Seigo, have re-emerged as critics of Mir — another indication that personal differences are as important as the issues under discussion.'"
Re:Sadly for Canonical... (Score:3, Interesting)
That and once they decided to monetize our search results and share it with Amazon ... well, I'll never have an Ubuntu installation again.
My perception of Canonical is now "greedy assholes who don't care about user's privacy"
Re:They may not officially coordinate (Score:2, Interesting)
Ubuntu is switching to systemd:
http://www.markshuttleworth.com/archives/1316
Lets hope they'll eventually switch to Wayland, too.
Unfortunately it also remains true that Ubuntu is the most usable Linux distro out there for the "I'm not afraid of computers, but also don't have the time to learn Linux, I just need a working environment and the ability to quickly google stuff" crowd.
As a KDE user... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Infighting: Linux's biggest weakness (Score:1, Interesting)
which is fine when you're a cat, but when you're a group of supposed computer experts who think the world should be a better place and want to improve upon the old, it's not fine, it's a complete waste of energy and the top #1 reason why linux only makes steps forward when somebody steps forward to take that charge, e.g. Linus, Google (with android), Nvidia, ATI, the wayland team
can you remember how bad the linux desktop was before ubuntu? it was atrocious....what about before x.org?
the list is probably endless if you ask somebody for other examples, but I think I've made my point
Re:Infighting: Linux's biggest weakness (Score:4, Interesting)
Are you forgetting that Linus created Linux? He didn't step forward to take charge. You can't even include him in that list.
When I started using Linux (0.99a Kernel, Slackware on a million floppy disks), the X interface (and OS) was several years ahead of anything Microsoft produced. And I still consider fvwm to be one of my favorite desktop environments of all time, because it was lean, and worked quite well.
I finished university using that machine, and having learned UNIX and C on it, it got me my first job.
You know what I think are terrible desktops? The new stuff which looks like a dumbed down Windows from 10 years ago.
Well, you've made a point. I don't find it nearly as compelling as you do.
Is open source fragmented and beset with infighting? Sure it is. Has it created really cool stuff despite that? Yup. Has it needed someone to be in charge of it (especially when that someone is a for-profit entity)? Nope. Is this likely to change? Doubtful.
Re:Sadly for Canonical... (Score:5, Interesting)
Yup. I suspect Canonical is going to continue down a path towards irrelevancy. They've got a solid userbase and a pretty good lead for now, which means it's not going to happen soon, but I can't see anything but a decline in the future for them.
I'm seeing a lot of parallels with Cyanogen Inc, the company that was formed by some of the CyanogenMod leads. They're delusionally self-important and consistently speaking things in direct conflict with their actions ("Everything you see now will remain open-source" at the same time they're trying to force a contributor to dual-license a major GPL work so they could have commercial rights to it. Fortunately their CLA wasn't as powerful as Canonical's). I suspect they're going to wind up going down the same road as Canonical.
Cyngn is doing EVERYTHING in nearly the exact same way Canonical has - and seems oblivious to the fact that Canonical has been doing a good job of alienating all of their potential partners and many of their contributors. Canonical should serve as a shining example of how NOT to monetize open source software in a sustainable fashion (especially by coopting existing projects), yet certain people feel that Canonical's example is the best one to follow.
Re:As the Sun sets (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Sadly for Canonical... (Score:5, Interesting)