How profitable is Ubuntu really?

[Madspyman]

Canonical is a corporation that's investing in the potential profitability of the Linux desktop. However it would seem most of their profit based services have to do with net based strategies (Ubuntu One/music store, Canonicals own web store.) that are based on existing business models that can work regardless of what OS you use.

What advantage does Ubuntu provide Canonical, that they couldn't gain by just making their services available to already existing Linux distro's, or even Windows or OS X (although with Dropbox, Amazon mp3 and iTunes I doubt Win/Mac users would have a need).

Currently Ubuntu is the most popular Linux distro out there, so I understand name recognition is probably key, but I've never had to pay anything for Ubuntu to work as well as it does. So I wonder how profitable Ubuntu is alone, or if Canonical's business model might slowly changing towards mostly net based services.

I'm just curious as I was actually excited about a few of the services, Ubuntu One music store in particular, but ended up having to go elsewhere (back to Amazon mp3) due to the fact that 7digital didn't have a lot of the newer stuff from some of the artists I listen to. Honestly I haven't used any of the paid services Ubuntu offers as it's easy to find a better (sometimes free) alternatives. I wonder how Ubuntu desktop offerings benefit Canonical, other than just name recognition.

Note: I'm speaking strictly about the consumer/desktop realm, not the corporate/OEM or server realm, as I can imagine Canonical makes some dough in support fees. Although the Ubuntu forums provides more than enough tech support info if you ask me.

[cariboo]

If a customer has a problem, it gets fixed asap, without them having to check out the forums. If a customer requests a feature, it gets implemented a lot quicker that the usual process takes. Basically we do free testing for Canonical's paid support customers.

[Madspyman]

I suppose I see your point, the people paying for support get better support, companies recommend Ubuntu to other companies, and Canonical gets more coin in support fees.

Companies prefer to have tech support from company reps anyway (instead of having fix problems themselves after checking the forums.) and Canonical tech reps can check the forums to see if the answer already exists, saving the time of having to figure it out themselves.

Still I wonder about the profitability of their web service endeavorers, and would much rather see some more innovation instead of new Ubuntu branded alternatives to existing services, Dropbox, Amazon and iTunes already exist.

Regardless though, I'm a big fan and am looking forward to Maverick.

[NightwishFan]

Red Hat has a similar business model and it became a fortune 500 company. :)

[Austin25]

It could be, but it's beauty is in it isn't.

[Madspyman]

It could be, but it's beauty is in it isn't.

Free is good, but I'm not against paying for software, I won't if I don't have to though. Thats why I think Ubuntu isn't very profitable, everything I need from Ubuntu is free. Also the things (web services) Ubuntu offers I could pay for, have better alternatives.

So no complaints here, just confusion.

[KiwiNZ]

It would be nice to see more start to use some of the paid products to give back to keep Ubuntu feed.

[Austin25]

Free is good, but I'm not against paying for software, I won't if I don't have to though. Thats why I think Ubuntu isn't very profitable, everything I need from Ubuntu is free. Also the things (web services) Ubuntu offers I could pay for, have better alternatives.

So no complaints here, just confusion.
Yeah, It's kind of like the lantern guy in Zelda: Twilight Princess; he gave away lanterns to sell oil, but you could buy oil elsewhere, but that doesn't mean I don't want the lantern anyway,


It would be nice to see more start to use some of the paid products to give back to keep Ubuntu feed.

Oh good, when ever I see your avatar, I always wonder if the thread is closed.

[NightwishFan]

When Kiwi closes a thread, he has the good grace and manner to do it with style. *hats off*

[alexan]

If you've some "problem" with linux, Canonical service can support you from very simple setting like configure email&co... to patching the kernel (big companies) for specific needs.

If a company work on (for example) OSX or Windows, Canonical service end where Apple or Microsoft want Canonical stop.

They are not working for use a peculiar business.. but contribute to a more wide open one (where everyone play with only their only abilities). Create the democratic business

[Madspyman]

It would be nice to see more start to use some of the paid products to give back to keep Ubuntu feed.

I agree with you, I just haven't found a need for any of them yet. Next time I buy music and if Ubuntu One Music Store has the album I'm looking for I'll get it there.

Canonical should offer a digital video store/rentals Netflix, Amazon, iTunes style, that'd get popular fast.

[Paqman]

everything I need from Ubuntu is free.

If you're just a regular Joe using a desktop at home, you're not really who they're trying to squeeze money out of (with the possible exception of Ubuntu One).

The real money is in corporate contracts. Besides the obvious support for enterprise servers (and to a lesser degree desktops) Canonical also contract out engineering support to companies like Google, which is probably quite lucrative.

Mark Shuttleworth has gone on record stating he doesn't agree with the accepted wisdom that there's no money to be made in desktop Linux, but i'd be surprised if the desktop currently made up any more than a tiny sliver of Canonical's income. Maybe one day if they start shipping large numbers of preinstalls that will change, but after the bashing we took on netbooks I can't see any big companies jumping into that any time soon.

[keithpeter]

Hello All


It would be nice to see more start to use some of the paid products to give back to keep Ubuntu feed.

I'd love to use Ubuntu One instead of Dropbox when I need more than 2Gb of cloudy storage and need to pay. For me to be able to use UO in my current circumstances, there has to be a windows client, see below from Ubuntu One site...


"There is not an Ubuntu One client for Windows. Some work has been done to port the Ubuntu One Syncdaemon to Windows. If you or someone you know is interested in helping us port to Windows, please contact Lucio dot Torre at Canonical.com."

...enough of those £10 per month subscriptions could help the income stream.

[Johnsie]

I wonder how many people actually use those paid services.

We have a number of Ubuntu machines at work and the whole reason I installed them is so that we wouldnt have to pay anything for the OS, software or maintenance. Ubuntu is reliable and hard to break. The help forums and irc channel are pretty decent for getting help. So for our business of around 30 people there is not really any point in paying Canonical for support.

[Madspyman]

Mark Shuttleworth has gone on record stating he doesn't agree with the accepted wisdom that there's no money to be made in desktop Linux, but i'd be surprised if the desktop currently made up any more than a tiny sliver of Canonical's income. Maybe one day if they start shipping large numbers of preinstalls that will change, but after the bashing we took on netbooks I can't see any big companies jumping into that any time soon.

Ubuntu is targeting the wrong market netbooks are the future of the mobile phone not the PC, and Google and Android/Chrome OS are whats it now for the mobile market. The desktop is far from dead, but even Ubuntu desktop edition is starting to feel like a netbook edition.

IMO media creation is the future of the desktop, cloud based services offer little (other than clever ways of storage) in the way of graphic design music and video editing. This is why Windows and Mac are still pertinent. If people could run all of Adobe's software in Ubuntu there'd probably be less of a need for Mac/Windows.

I don't feel Canonical has faith in Ubuntu for graphic design and media, and could end up fighting a losing battle with Google for netbook supremacy. Linux already owns the internet and Canonical is trying to profit off reinventing the wrong wheel.

I really think Ubuntu Studio needs more love. Major vfx houses such as Weta Digital use Ubuntu not just for there servers and render farms, but as their main desktop OS as well. Of course they use $4000 dollar (a piece not for a whole bundle) Linux compatible software such as Nuke, Shake, and Houdini.

Point is Ubuntu is capable it just doesn't have user friendly consumer/prosumer level offerings (Gimp, Blender and Openshot are getting close), or decent Wine support for existing Windows offerings.

If a Linux desktop could boast a competitive media production OS at the consumer/prosumer level it'd kill, especially with OEM's.

[KiwiNZ]

Ubuntu is targeting the wrong market netbooks are the future of the mobile phone not the PC, and Google and Android/Chrome OS are whats it now for the mobile market. The desktop is far from dead, but even Ubuntu desktop edition is starting to feel like a netbook edition.

IMO media creation is the future of the desktop, cloud based services offer little (other than clever ways of storage) in the way of graphic design music and video editing. This is why Windows and Mac are still pertinent. If people could run all of Adobe's software in Ubuntu there'd probably be less of a need for Mac/Windows.

I don't feel Canonical has faith in Ubuntu for graphic design and media, and could end up fighting a losing battle with Google for netbook supremacy. Linux already owns the internet and Canonical is trying to profit off reinventing the wrong wheel.

I really think Ubuntu Studio needs more love. Major vfx houses such as Weta Digital use Ubuntu not just for there servers and render farms, but as their main desktop OS as well. Of course they use $4000 dollar (a piece not for a whole bundle) Linux compatible software such as Nuke, Shake, and Houdini.

Point is Ubuntu is capable it just doesn't have user friendly consumer/prosumer level offerings (Gimp, Blender and Openshot are getting close), or decent Wine support for existing Windows offerings.

If a Linux desktop could boast a competitive media production OS at the consumer/prosumer level it'd kill, especially with OEM's.

Agreed.

Netbooks however their days are numbered in my humble opinion. The new generation tablets are going to super cede the Netbook. Be it a Ipad, HP WebOS Tablet , an Andriod .

But I agree with the points you make above.

[Paqman]

Ubuntu is targeting the wrong market netbooks are the future of the mobile phone not the PC

Breaking Linux back into the netbook market would be a seriously tough sell. Dell has been doing an alright sideline selling Ubuntu, but it's never really gained traction in the mainstream. This is really Dell's fault, there's little Canonical can do to make an OEM market a product properly if they don't want to.


I don't feel Canonical has faith in Ubuntu for graphic design and media

I'm sure they'd love to see it make inroads in professional design, they'd make a lot of money selling support. But is it Canonical's job to provide the apps, or just the platform? Remember that Canonical doesn't actually make any of the productivity apps in the Ubuntu repos. They aren't Adobe. And until Adobe decides to support Ubuntu/Linux (ie: never) then it'll stay that way. Besides, I don't know how you'd overcome the brand loyalty people have for Macs in design, even if Ubuntu was running the same apps.

[NCLI]

Agreed.

Netbooks however their days are numbered in my humble opinion. The new generation tablets are going to super cede the Netbook. Be it a Ipad, HP WebOS Tablet , an Andriod .

But I agree with the points you make above.

Well, since Canonical is currently focusing most of its energy on developing Unity, which is intended both for netbooks and for tablets, I'd say that you agree. ;)

I don't though. I think netbooks will continue to play an important role as small, easily portable productivity devices, at least until they find a way to make virtual keyboards much less virtual, or improve speech recognition tremendously.

[JohnElway]

Breaking Linux back into the netbook market would be a seriously tough sell. Dell has been doing an alright sideline selling Ubuntu, but it's never really gained traction in the mainstream. This is really Dell's fault, there's little Canonical can do to make an OEM market a product properly if they don't want to.



I'm sure they'd love to see it make inroads in professional design, they'd make a lot of money selling support. But is it Canonical's job to provide the apps, or just the platform? Remember that Canonical doesn't actually make any of the productivity apps in the Ubuntu repos. They aren't Adobe. And until Adobe decides to support Ubuntu/Linux (ie: never) then it'll stay that way. Besides, I don't know how you'd overcome the brand loyalty people have for Macs in design, even if Ubuntu was running the same apps.

Agreed. It's up to Adobe, not Canonical. In reality, I think it'll be up to GNU or some like-minded project to bring real media creation to Linux.

[stmiller]

The name is everything in the corporate world, unfortunately.

I'm the biggest Ubuntu fan boy you will meet, but telling the non-tech CEOs:

"Yeah we need to run UBUNTU for our servers!"

...gets laughs, simply from the name.


Where as:

"We should use Redhat ENTERPRISE Linux for our servers"

gets a deal signed.

I think Canonical should perhaps focus on the name like 'Canonical Server' or something like that to really break out into the corporate world.

[koenn]

...
I think Canonical should perhaps focus on the name like 'Canonical Server' or something like that to really break out into the corporate world.

Enterprises happily use software named 'Apache', 'Acrobat', 'Java', ...
In marketing, a name is what you make it.

[koenn]

It would be nice to see more start to use some of the paid products to give back to keep Ubuntu feed.

depends.

A viable business model would hinge more on people wanting/needing the products and services Canonical offers, than on a guilt-tripped "let's throw them a bone" purchase.

The way I understand it, Canonical is an experiment in bringing Free Software to the market. That means that they're now in the process of trying to come up with products and services that they think exists a marker for, or that they can create a market for, and with suitable delivery channels and release cycles, production methods, ...

That will either work, or not. Starting to use their paid services to keep them alive, or out of sympathy or guilt, would actually ruin the experiment. They'll have to earn their profits.

[Groucho Marxist]

Oh good, when ever I see your avatar, I always wonder if the thread is closed.

"I find your lack of faith disturbing." :D

[Madspyman]

Until Adobe decides to support Ubuntu/Linux (ie: never) then it'll stay that way. Besides, I don't know how you'd overcome the brand loyalty people have for Macs in design, even if Ubuntu was running the same apps.

Adobe holds some pretty powerful cards, it's hard to imagine they might hold the key to the Linux desktop revolution, especially when their Linux Flash developers can't figure out how to implement x264 gpu acceleration in Flash (http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=ODQ5OA) when there are open source alternatives that are already doing this (http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=NzU1MA).

PC users would switch cause Ubuntu is a cheaper alternative to buying a Mac. Also current Mac users might consider a Ubuntu PC for graphic design if upgrading to it was cheaper than buying a new Mac, and ran all their Adobe software, also still not having to run Windows would be a key selling point.

[KiwiNZ]

Canonical and Ubuntu has a window of opportunity to develop niche markets in the Tablet and the higher end Desktop Workstation markets. Those opportunities will close soon though especially the Tablet.

I feel Apples niche with the Mac Pro is ripe for the picking ( no pun intended) and other players are dropping out eg Sun etc.

As for the Tablet Apple is the only real player there right now, the Dell thing is a joke and that current Andriod one which I cant remember is an abomination but HP will soon bring its WIN 7 versions to enterprise markets and WebOS versions to domestic. Samsung, Lenovo, Google will bring them.
Canonical could team with an OEM to bring a nice Tablet at a good price.

[Zorgoth]

depends.

A viable business model would hinge more on people wanting/needing the products and services Canonical offers, than on a guilt-tripped "let's throw them a bone" purchase.

The way I understand it, Canonical is an experiment in bringing Free Software to the market. That means that they're now in the process of trying to come up with products and services that they think exists a marker for, or that they can create a market for, and with suitable delivery channels and release cycles, production methods, ...

That will either work, or not. Starting to use their paid services to keep them alive, or out of sympathy or guilt, would actually ruin the experiment. They'll have to earn their profits.

Strictly speaking, if Canonical is that kind of experiment, it is kind of redundant. Ever heard of Red Hat?

[KiwiNZ]

depends.

A viable business model would hinge more on people wanting/needing the products and services Canonical offers, than on a guilt-tripped "let's throw them a bone" purchase.

The way I understand it, Canonical is an experiment in bringing Free Software to the market. That means that they're now in the process of trying to come up with products and services that they think exists a marker for, or that they can create a market for, and with suitable delivery channels and release cycles, production methods, ...

That will either work, or not. Starting to use their paid services to keep them alive, or out of sympathy or guilt, would actually ruin the experiment. They'll have to earn their profits.

All business are about finding finding products or services the customer wants to buy.

[Madspyman]

Canonical and Ubuntu has a window of opportunity to develop niche markets in the Tablet and the higher end Desktop Workstation markets. Those opportunities will close soon though especially the Tablet.

Only if OEM's gave Ubuntu more of the time of day, for Ubuntu to succeed in the tablet world Canonical would need to create a tablet.


I feel Apples niche with the Mac Pro is ripe for the picking ( no pun intended) and other players are dropping out eg Sun etc.

Again the Adobe issue is huge, people don't want alternatives they want Adobe. Even if Gimp was an exact clone of Photoshop, sharing the name with the sexual deviant from "Pulp Fiction" would probably kill it's marketing appeal.


As for the Tablet Apple is the only real player there right now, the Dell thing is a joke and that current Andriod one which I cant remember is an abomination but HP will soon bring its WIN 7 versions to enterprise markets and WebOS versions to domestic. Samsung, Lenovo, Google will bring them.
Canonical could team with an OEM to bring a nice Tablet at a good price.

Don't count Android out just yet, it's not hard to release a better tablet than the iPad, add expandible memory, a usb port, camera, and Flash support, then boom! iPad killer.

[koenn]

Strictly speaking, if Canonical is that kind of experiment, it is kind of redundant. Ever heard of Red Hat?

The main difference is Redhat abandoned the consumer desktop market a couple of years ago, to focus on the enterorise market. They still do desktop, but more from a "client to our server products" angle. With Ubuntu, canonical is targetting the consumer desktop market.

Canonical may also look into markets that an enterprise-oriented Redhat isn't interested in.

Lastly, Redhat is indeed a succesful example of 1 specific way of running a business where the product is "open source" (although Redhat's angle is 'linux' rather than 'Free Software'). Maybe M.Shuttleworth thinks he can come up with some other ways.

[KiwiNZ]

Only if OEM's gave Ubuntu more of the time of day, for Ubuntu to succeed in the tablet world Canonical would need to create a tablet.



Again the Adobe issue is huge, people don't want alternatives they want Adobe. Even if Gimp was an exact clone of Photoshop, sharing the name with the sexual deviant from "Pulp Fiction" would probably kill it's marketing appeal.



Don't count Android out just yet, it's not hard to release a better tablet than the iPad, add expandible memory, a usb port, camera, and Flash support, then boom! iPad killer.

You are probably right about Android, but it has not had a good start. I think it has suffered from some "rushed jobs" ruining its image.

I would really like to see a very good competitor to the Ipad then we have a Win/Win for the consumer. Witha bit of vision that competitor could be Ubuntu and Canonical.

[koenn]

All business are about finding finding products or services the customer wants to buy.

but not all businesses are build around products you might also find for free, and are freely redistributable once a customer acquired them.

So finding a viable business model here might be a bit more of a challenge.

[Zorgoth]

Canonical and Ubuntu has a window of opportunity to develop niche markets in the Tablet and the higher end Desktop Workstation markets. Those opportunities will close soon though especially the Tablet.

I feel Apples niche with the Mac Pro is ripe for the picking ( no pun intended) and other players are dropping out eg Sun etc.

As for the Tablet Apple is the only real player there right now, the Dell thing is a joke and that current Andriod one which I cant remember is an abomination but HP will soon bring its WIN 7 versions to enterprise markets and WebOS versions to domestic. Samsung, Lenovo, Google will bring them.
Canonical could team with an OEM to bring a nice Tablet at a good price.

I would tend to agree about tablets; I think that is a market where Apple is too expensive and Windows is far too bloated. Also, I just don't think Microsoft has designed a very good multitouch interface.

I think Ubuntu has a lot more potential there, as Canonical is developing multitouch technology and Linux is a fundamentally more customizable environment. My guess is that in the long run the real competition to Ubuntu in the tablet market won't be iOS (which is not really a full OS but a fancy toy imo (a pretty cool toy, but so locked down that even a normal user is going to feel it to some degree)) but Android - and I bet that many or most Android tablets will run Ubuntu. Either way, FOSS wins. Also I bet it is a lot easier to convince someone to change a tablet OS they've been using for one year to a more mature netbook/desktop quality OS than it is to convince them to change desktop OSes when they've been on Windows for 15 years.

The HP and Dell touchscreen computers, from what I've seen of them, are basically a joke, and I can't imagine a Windows tablet being anything but worse. A base iPad is a $500 device with 256 MB of RAM and a 1024x768 resolution...

The only thing about the Mac Pro is that, well... People who buy 4,000 dollar computers:

a) usually are putting at least 1,000 dollars of software on that isn't available for Linux, or more.

b) usually are worth enough money that their company will happily buy their Mac Pros even if they think it is a 10% productivity difference. Ubuntu doesn't just have to be "almost as good" to compete in that market. It has to be seen as *better*, and in that sector, that basically means better professional multimedia applications. Ubuntu is a long way from that.

[Thomas Garman]

delete

[KiwiNZ]

If you look at Windows 7 as a desktop it was developed by hundreds if not thousands of full time professionals and in the end you can go out an buy an OEM disk for $100... so I can't really see how Ubuntu, which will never be on more than a few million desktops, is ever going to make any money at all. They would have to advertise it massively and then they would have to deliver a product that was superior to Windows 7... not likely.

For one thing: Ubuntu is ugly and so long as they confine themselves to 700 MB releases it will always be extremely minimal and ugly and therefore not appealing to the vast majority of users.

For another thing: digital media. If you had an actual business trying to make money off Ubuntu in America then they would have to clamp down massively on how the OS works with Digital Media... FOR EXAMPLE: are you really going to try to make money selling a Desktop that all but encourages its users to rip DVDs?

And... the free distribution aspect of Ubuntu: are you really going to produce a product that can be sold for a profit and then just let people copy it freely? So why would anyone ever pay for it if they could get it free?

IN OTHER WORDS... a lot of what makes WINDOWS and OS X work the way they do is DIGITAL PROPERTY RIGHTS and Ubuntu/Cannonical just doesn't have the money to play at that level even if Mark Shuttleworth gave them all the money he's got. Google, OS X, Windows: these players are not going to give up a significant share of the desktop market without an extremely expensive fight.

Ubuntu is largely a hobby project. Fun but somewhat Quixotic.

So you are saying because it is hard we should give up? No thanks. Not how we do things.

Also where does Ubuntu encourage users to Rip DVD's?

[Thomas Garman]

delete

[koenn]

And... the free distribution aspect of Ubuntu: are you really going to produce a product that can be sold for a profit and then just let people copy it freely? So why would anyone ever pay for it if they could get it free?

Well, that's the point I was making earlier : for the past couple of decades, the software business was about selling bits and finding ways (technical, legal, ...) to prevent users from copying them and passing them on.
Canonical is about finding ways to not impose such restrictions, and still make a business out of software.
As pointed out earlier : RedHat, for one, seems to have already found a way.

[NCLI]

I am not saying it encourages people to rip DVD's its just an example of how Ubuntu has a very lax DRM policy that basically just ignores digital rights entirely and if they tried to make money of it in the United States they would not last long financially. If you did get Ubuntu on to 100 million American desktops then you would have to see significant changes in the way the OS interacts with Digital Media and those changes would make it virtually indistinguishable from Windows or OS X and there the entire point of a Linux based OS would be lost.
It doesn't. You have to install these things yourself, and you're responsible for using them for legal purposes. Breaking DRM in order to access your content is not illegal, at least not where I live.

[Madspyman]

Ubuntu doesn't just have to be "almost as good" to compete in that market. It has to be seen as *better*, and in that sector, that basically means better professional multimedia applications. Ubuntu is a long way from that.

True, but Ubuntu isn't the problem, companies provide Linux compatible equals to Adobe just not affordable ones. Compared to the prices of some of the Linux software the uber pro's in the VFX industry industry are using Adobe looks like consumer grade software, and is should probably be considered closer to prosumer in terms of price.

That $1000 is for an entire creative suite people in the VFX industry pay upwards of over $4000 for just one piece of software. Dropping win/mac licencing and support fees by using Linux free up funds to buy expensive VFX software for the uber pros. It's not the pros tools Ubuntu needs per say, it's prosumer/consumer level ones which are not really all that pricey, when you consider what the guys over at Weta spend to make movies. Adobe software is so popular for getting started in the industry cause it's cheap.

Point is if price is no concern than Ubuntu's there. What Ubuntu needs is affordable consumer/prosumer level media production software. Until Adobe starts playing ball I doubt that'll ever happen.

[Zorgoth]

If you look at Windows 7 as a desktop it was developed by hundreds if not thousands of full time professionals and in the end you can go out an buy an OEM disk for $100... so I can't really see how Ubuntu, which will never be on more than a few million desktops, is ever going to make any money at all. They would have to advertise it massively and then they would have to deliver a product that was superior to Windows 7... not likely.

For one thing: Ubuntu is ugly and so long as they confine themselves to 700 MB releases it will always be extremely minimal and ugly and therefore not appealing to the vast majority of users.

For another thing: digital media. If you had an actual business trying to make money off Ubuntu in America then they would have to clamp down massively on how the OS works with Digital Media... FOR EXAMPLE: are you really going to try to make money selling a Desktop that all but encourages its users to rip DVDs?

And... the free distribution aspect of Ubuntu: are you really going to produce a product that can be sold for a profit and then just let people copy it freely? So why would anyone ever pay for it if they could get it free?

IN OTHER WORDS... a lot of what makes WINDOWS and OS X work the way they do is DIGITAL PROPERTY RIGHTS and Ubuntu/Cannonical just doesn't have the money to play at that level even if Mark Shuttleworth gave them all the money he's got. Google, OS X, Windows: these players are not going to give up a significant share of the desktop market without an extremely expensive fight.

Ubuntu is largely a hobby project. Fun but somewhat Quixotic.

Ubuntu is ugly... Ubuntu is so customizable that that statement is meaningless. Ubuntu can look just like OS X. Does that make OS X "ugly"?

Ubuntu being "minimal" is also a silly complaint when you can add all the software you need in literally one click each (well, as # of programs -> ∞ # of clicks -> 1) from the repository.

As for not incorporating DRM into the OS, bravo (not that its very surprising lol)! An OS should not be responsible for DRM - that is the "responsibility" of the distributor of the product. I don't really want every product I own to be produced in order to restrict every other product! My OS is *mine*, thank you very much. I've never ripped a DVD with it either :lolflag:

And you fundamentally fail to grasp the concept of open source. Canonical does not develop most of the software used in Ubuntu, only a tiny portion in fact. Their revenue is only 30 million dollars after all. But to become a dominant OS, an open source OS need not have much more than that, because the technologies behind Ubuntu are constantly being developed by players like Google, IBM, Red Hat, Novell, the US government, and many others, as well as of course many community-based products and code contributions. All of these companies and individuals contribute because what any of them develops, all of them can use for free, and the licensing on the software means that no one can steal the code - if they modify it, they have to release those modifications back to the community if they wish to distribute any product based on that.

Red Hat is a company that makes over 750 million dollars a year exclusively selling and supporting open source. And you claim that is is impossible to profit from it?

And if you must have DRM on your system, buy Fluendo codecs :D - (that is what Dell does with its preinstalled Ubuntu machines I believe)

[Thomas Garman]

delete

[Zorgoth]

I am not saying it encourages people to rip DVD's its just an example of how Ubuntu has a very lax DRM policy that basically just ignores digital rights entirely and if they tried to make money of it in the United States they would not last long financially. If you did get Ubuntu on to 100 million American desktops then you would have to see significant changes in the way the OS interacts with Digital Media and those changes would make it virtually indistinguishable from Windows or OS X and there the entire point of a Linux based OS would be lost.

On a preinstalled Ubuntu system you might well have some DRM software like Fluendo codecs for patented formats/DVDs/etc, at least in the US (in most countries the law recognizes that it is absurd to restrict the platforms properly-purchased media can be played on just because one platform is open source and therefore part of a business model that cannot pay the licensing fees or distribute the software themselves).

However things like automatically deleting files the OS suspects to be faulty are not going to happen because fundamentally Ubuntu is too open of a platform for it not to be trivial to kill whatever services are doing that, so all you would be generating was bad PR. Killing whatever services hardware vendors placed on the system would probably end up meaning downloading a .deb or a script hosted in the EU (where software patents are illegal) to kill all the nasty services and replace whatever was damaged. Note that downloading potentially patent-violating software is in fact unquestionably legal - only distributing it is illegal in the US, so as long as the rest of the world keeps the monstrosity called software patents out of their laws, it will be easy and legal to get around patents on any open platform.

Also note patents != copyright. Comparing playing legally-owned media through unendorsed methods to pirating media is ridiculous.

And if you were remotely technical you could of course do a clean install.

[NCLI]

@NCLI

I agree that you have to download and install all of the software yourself but here is my point specifically:

if you got Ubuntu onto 100 million desktops, for example, and you would find your desktop in legal gray areas and that is where all the other players would eat your lunch. The margins on your product would diminish to zero. I don't think Cannonical has the resources to really produce a profitiable product that can play in the big time when every single major player is already fighting tooth and nail to keep their share...

and it is at the level of Digital Rights Management that the legal battles are waged... and Ubuntu would ultimately have to restrict the way you can use it to interact with digital content.

Dell simply buys the Fluendo codecs for all the computers it sells with Ubuntu pre-installed to get around this issue in the US. Other OEMS could do the same thing.

IF YOU ARE NOT CONCERNED WITH SELLING PRODUCT IN THE AMERICAN MARKET THEN NONE OF THIS WOULD BE AN ISSUE but then at the same time you are not going to make any money selling software outside of America.

In short: the costs are too high in America for Cannonical to make any money of Ubuntu and there is no money to be made outside of america on an OS.
...either you are very uninformed, very nationalist, or very stupid. The EU (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_%28nominal%29) is currently the "state" with the most buying power in the world, surpassing the US quite handily. Both Japan and China are also close behind them, not to mention that North America isn't exactly top-of-the list of countries with the most buying power pro capita. So why, exactly, can't you make money by selling software outside of North America?

[Zorgoth]

there is no money to be made outside of america on an OS.

You live in a small world, don't you? People buy OSes in Europe too (although in some places in Europe and in much of the developing world there is a lot of piracy, which is not even an issue for Ubuntu). America is 20% of the world economy and 5% of the population. That is a lot, but it leaves 80% of the economy and 95% of the population unaccounted for...

[Austin25]

Well, I know for a fact that if I snuck into school early and booted up an Ubuntu Live Environment on the computers in the computer lab, there would definitely be some controversy.

[Thomas Garman]

delete

[Zorgoth]

Yeah, it takes a while to be able to customize the OS without it blowing up in your face, I kind of forget that after a while :). At this point I basically know exactly what I want to do and so apart from when I try to compile alpha software from source or something my system is quite stable (and I don't need alpha software, I just want to take a look at the new features coming - when compiz 0.9 has the bugs worked out it should be *awesome*).

But certainly a hardware vendor could make Ubuntu look however they liked without real stability problems for the end user. In my opinion some of the themes that ship by default with 10.04 are pretty good. I personally like them more than the Windows 7 look. I would prefer a Mac UI to a default Ubuntu UI, but fortunately I can customize my computer however I like, and my custom compiz + cairo-dock + gnome-do + terminator (the terminal emulator) in my desktop background suits my very well and is far better for me what I could get from Microsoft or Apple.

[Zorgoth]

Well, I know for a fact that if I snuck into school early and booted up an Ubuntu Live Environment on the computers in the computer lab, there would definitely be some controversy.

I've always wanted to do that to someone.

[Thomas Garman]

delete

[koenn]

With Linux all you get is somebody in Denmark playing Halo as they are just finishing up a bong who may or may not be putting parentheses in the right spot to get a driver coded to work properly and in any case nobody is really getting paid or providing a warranty for anything so what difference does it make...

And that is fundamentally why you are never going to make money of this desktop in my opinion.

and this is where you showed you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.

[NCLI]

@Zorgoth... I have been wanting to try to get the whole cairo-dock to work and you have inspired me to give it a try this weekend... one thing that held me back a few months ago was the announcement that Ubuntu is dropping Compiz in favor of the Gnome Shell for 10.04 or was it 10.10 I can't remember. And that didn't happen.
That has never been announced. Gnome has announced that Compiz won't be compatible with Gnome Shell, which is ture. However, Ubuntu has never announced that there will be a switch to Gnome Shell.


As for the commercial viabilityof Ubuntu. I have already mentioned the problems with customizing the look but then I was sitting here thinking "what is really the problem with this OS?" Here is an example that just fundamentally seals the deal...

I have a Pinnacle PCTV USB tv tuner. With Windows 7 all I have to do is plug this tv tuner into my laptop and Windows Media Center detects it, scans for channels and within a minute I am watching TV.

On the other hand, with Ubuntu I have never been able to get it to work at all. I can at best get a choppy/pixelated image with Me-TV and the DVB drivers installed.

I had the exact same problem with my Kodak printer: it simply does not work with Ubuntu but it works fine with Windows.

Etc etc etc

The reason you pay for Windows is that they already paid someone a decent wage to make sure that your computer is going to work with almost any hardware you throw at it. The reason you pay for OS X is that they already paid someone to design specific propriety software to work with it.
The problems you mention have nothing to do with Ubuntu. They simply have to do with the fact that many hardware manufacturers don't write Linux drivers. Microsoft doesn't pay anyone to write drivers, the hardware manufacturers do that themselves.

Apple is almost the same. They choose a small set of hardware, then make it a term in the contract with the hardware manufacturer that they must write and maintain drivers for Macintosh for the hardware they're buying for X years.

Neither Apple or Microsoft pays anyone to write the drivers(Apart from a few very basic generic fallback drivers).


With Linux all you get is somebody in Denmark playing Halo as they are just finishing up a bong who may or may not be putting parentheses in the right spot to get a driver coded to work properly and in any case nobody is really getting paid or providing a warranty for anything so what difference does it make... and we all spend days and days searching forums for the simplest fixes.

And that is fundamentally why you are never going to make money of this desktop in my opinion.
1. Marijuana is illegal in Denmark.
2. You've just pissed off a lot of very smart people.
3. Who the hell do you think you are?

The people who make drivers for Linux, whether they're hired to do so or not(Many of them are), are generally very smart, talented people. Also, all drivers which go into the Linux kernel are first checked and verified to be functioning by the kernel team. There is actually a lot of quality control going on. Why? Because they care that Linux works properly, because they use it themselves.

Sure, not all hardware is supported in Linux, but the vast majority is. A lot of people work very hard to ensure that, and a lot of big corporations depend on their work. You, on the other hand, just insult them. How great you are.

I have much more to say to you, but unfortunately it would get me banned for breaking the Code of Conduct.

[Thomas Garman]

deleted

[NCLI]

@ Zorgoth...

America may only be 5% of the population of the earth but... I wish you the best of luck selling operating systems in Lithuania and all those other countries in Europe where the population is about the size of a small US city and where they absolutely couldn't care less about piracy and... If you are content with making a few million dollars worth of sales then I am sure you will have a great time pitching operating systems in Uganda and I am sure the West Africa market is going to explode in PC sales real soon!

America is the market for desktops.

You, sir, are an ignorant moron. I'll probably get an infraction for that, but it had to be said.

I've already pointed out to you that the EU is the largest economy in the world, not the US. Lithuania and Uganda are both pretty much 3rd-world countries, sure, but how about France, Spain, Germany, Great Britain, Switzerland, Denmark, Sweden, Korea, Norway, Finland, China, South Africa, Japan, etc, etc, etc!?

None of the above are US states, and combined, I daresay they easily spend more money on IT than the US.

[koenn]

You, sir, are an ignorant moron. I'll probably get an infraction for that, but it had to be said.

I've already pointed out to you that the EU is the largest economy in the world, not the US. Lithuania and Uganda are both pretty much 3rd-world countries, sure, but how about France, Spain, Germany, Great Britain, Switzerland, Denmark, Sweden, Korea, Norway, Finland, China, South Africa, Japan, etc, etc, etc!?

None of the above are US states, and combined, I daresay they easily spend more money on IT than the US.

QFT
+ some numbers : http://www.etforecasts.com/products/ES_pcww1203.htm#1.1
The PC market in W-Europe alone is larger than the one in the USA

[Thomas Garman]

deleted

[KiwiNZ]

@ Zorgoth...

America may only be 5% of the population of the earth but... I wish you the best of luck selling operating systems in Lithuania and all those other countries in Europe where the population is about the size of a small US city and where they absolutely couldn't care less about piracy and... If you are content with making a few million dollars worth of sales then I am sure you will have a great time pitching operating systems in Uganda and I am sure the West Africa market is going to explode in PC sales real soon!

America is the market for desktops.

That is some what arrogant and rude.
Ever looked at London, Paris , Berlin to name a few ?

Just may surprise you when you look on an Atlas USA is not the Center of the World and the rest of the World is mostly out of recession, even New Zealand and our neighbors Australia didn't even have one and ours was short lived and very small the US has just re entered recession.

[NCLI]

QFT
+ some numbers : http://www.etforecasts.com/products/ES_pcww1203.htm#1.1
The PC market in W-Europe alone is larger than the one in the USA

Thanks for that link. I've looked for it, but couldn't find it.

[Thomas Garman]

deleted

[NCLI]

@NCLI...

I just pissed off a lot of very smart people?

You don't even use your real name when you post so I think I probably just posted on a forum read almost exclusively by a few nerds who probably ought to go outside and talk a long walk in the sun. Seriously, you make me laugh.

Ubuntu is basically a vanity project that will be superceded by Mint if it hasn't already been. The only thing ubuntu has going for it is that it is easier than Debian.

I have no doubt that Google's Chrome/Chromium OS, when it finally ships, will all but shut this party down. The best days of Ubuntu are long behind it: all it has to offer now is a series of new plymouth screens masquerading as 10.10, 11.04, 11.10... yawn... and GWIBBER... Genius. Social from the start, indeed.

Dear sir,

1. This forum currently (http://www.yourdictionary.com/currently) has over 10.000 active users online.
2. I do actually (http://www.yourdictionary.com/actually) use my real name, just an abbreviation (http://www.yourdictionary.com/abbreviation). I also have a photo (http://www.yourdictionary.com/abbreviation) of myself in my profile, so I'm hardly anonymous (http://www.yourdictionary.com/anonymous).
3. I apologize if you don't understand what smart (http://www.yourdictionary.com/smart) means. >To help you, I've linked difficult words in this post to an online dictionary (http://www.yourdictionary.com/dictionary).
4. Last year, I walked over 100 kilometers of la camino de Santiago (www.santiago-compostela.net) in three days. I'm hardly in bad shape, and I can assure (http://www.yourdictionary.com/assure) you that I go outside quite often.
5. Mint is based (http://www.yourdictionary.com/based) on Ubuntu like Ubuntu is based on Debian. Without Ubuntu, there will be no Mint.
6. Chrome OS is aiming for a completely different audience (http://www.yourdictionary.com/audience).
7. You are so full of yourself and your stereotypes (http://www.yourdictionary.com/stereotype)that you're probably beyond saving. Please leave the US on your next vacation.

KOENN and others:

The population of Europe is in decline and the long term baby prospects show that your economies/populatons are shrinking. Sure, you are still living off the glory and richesse of several centuries of colonial enslavement of the planet but you are not the future of computing.
Europe's decline is hardly dramatic, nothing that can't be offset by higher immigration rates, and advances in robotics. However, if you take your, for once, logical argument but flawed to its logical conclusion, China is the future of computing, not the US.

It's also interesting to note that the more scientifically advanced, rich, and equal a country becomes, the lower the birthrate.

[koenn]

KOENN and others:

The population of Europe is in decline and the long term baby prospects show that your economies/populatons are shrinking. Sure, you are still living off the glory and richesse of several centuries of colonial enslavement of the planet but you are not the future of computing.

I never claimed to be the future of anything.
I just proved you wrong about the seize of PC markets today and in the forseeable future, is all.

You really live in a small world, and trying to make you see beyound your own little world is probably a wasted effort.

[NightwishFan]

I would just ignore him. After his description of the people on this forums and folk from Denmark I became uninterested in his opinion.

[NCLI]

Let's start a clean slate now, and let the discussion flourish as it did before it was interrupted :)