PDA

View Full Version : Canonical needs to expand



Primefalcon
August 23rd, 2010, 11:15 AM
I know Canonical was set up to back Ubuntu but..... I've been thinking Canonical need to make name for themselves for them and Ubuntu to become a big player and not just for Linux, it needs to offer services for everyone,

Start online ad-powered services, look at what Google, Microsoft and such are doing and try and do it better....

Start a lot of services, keep the ones that are the most popular, kill the ones that aren't.

If they get a big enough name, popularity for Ubuntu would follow.

I just feel offering all of their services to well us Linuxites only is limiting their success, and then forth the success of Ubuntu, Google have proven that given a big name, Linux can be a success Look at Android a Linux OS, its the now passed Blackberry to be the most popular phone OS. AND THATS A LINUX OS!

What does everyone else think?

Bachstelze
August 23rd, 2010, 11:18 AM
Start a lot of services, keep the ones that are the most popular, kill the ones that aren't.

If they get a big enough name, popularity for Ubuntu would follow.


If Ubuntu doesn't get killed because other services are more popular...

Paqman
August 23rd, 2010, 01:23 PM
You think Canonical needs more cash, but you're pimping a competing product in your sig?

JDShu
August 23rd, 2010, 01:33 PM
Diversification is always an option, but I doubt Canonical is big enough to want to take such a risk. They're already doing that to some extent anyway.

sataris
August 23rd, 2010, 02:44 PM
So much wrong here. Let me respond to this.

I know Canonical was set up to back Ubuntu but..... I've been thinking Canonical need to make name for themselves for them and Ubuntu to become a big player and not just for Linux, it needs to offer services for everyone,

Start online ad-powered services, look at what Google, Microsoft and such are doing and try and do it better....

Start a lot of services, keep the ones that are the most popular, kill the ones that aren't.


Why? They would be utterly destroyed. It makes no sense to go up to the companies who are the kings of the hill in their respective area and say all ur base are belong to us.



If they get a big enough name, popularity for Ubuntu would follow.

I just feel offering all of their services to well us Linuxites only is limiting their success, and then forth the success of Ubuntu, Google have proven that given a big name, Linux can be a success Look at Android a Linux OS, its the now passed Blackberry to be the most popular phone OS. AND THATS A LINUX OS!

What does everyone else think?

Google is popular, but do you really think their ChromeOS will put even a dent in Apple or Microsoft's market share? And their name alone carries a ton of power.

I either need to drink coffee before reading some posts or something.

If canon decides to focus on either the desktop or servers, then focuses on making EVERYTHING about that stable and usable with the priority being Usability and Polished, then moves on to a marketing blitz it may be able to make a small dent.

Red Hat has had fedora out for forever, and its market share is arguably the second highest in desktop linux. Fedora's total desktop usage is probably at .15-.2% worldwide.

Just saying.

KiwiNZ
August 23rd, 2010, 08:59 PM
To play in the big boys back yard you need ....

You need a good product base
You need a good plan of action
You need excellent R&D and infrastructure
You need a huge line of credit
You need an immense pool of capital.

Remember...

Beta Max
Commodore
Lindows
Coral OS
Gateways big international expansion and blow out
DeLorean

To name a few off my head that tried with out the above when the competition started to bite or the road got hard.

koenn
August 23rd, 2010, 09:08 PM
To play in the big boys back yard you need ....

You need a good product base
You need a good plan of action
You need excellent R&D and infrastructure
You need a huge line of credit
You need an immense pool of capital.

which one(s) of those do you think Canonical does not have ?

murderslastcrow
August 23rd, 2010, 09:51 PM
Ubuntu One is being spread to Windows and mobiles, and the music store may make it to Windows through Banshee's new Windows version. So yeah, I think they're doing a fairly good job offering what services they do have to other people, and they're carrying along nicely. They're also making deals with partners while keeping their users happy.

I really think they're already doing quite a bit.

LowSky
August 23rd, 2010, 10:18 PM
Ubuntu One is being spread to Windows and mobiles, and the music store may make it to Windows through Banshee's new Windows version. So yeah, I think they're doing a fairly good job offering what services they do have to other people, and they're carrying along nicely. They're also making deals with partners while keeping their users happy.

I really think they're already doing quite a bit.

Banshee uses Amazon's music store. Ubuntu's store is available but not on the newest PPA release.

Madspyman
August 23rd, 2010, 11:21 PM
Ubuntu One is being spread to Windows and mobiles, and the music store may make it to Windows through Banshee's new Windows version. So yeah, I think they're doing a fairly good job offering what services they do have to other people, and they're carrying along nicely. They're also making deals with partners while keeping their users happy.

I really think they're already doing quite a bit.

Problem is the music store is already on Windows, it's called the 7digital website. Also for DRM free music Amazon MP3 is the best option. The Banshee guys figured this out and made Ubuntu One music store pointless as a Banshee option. Canonical would be doing their users more of a favor adding a Amazon MP3 store plugin to Rhythmbox.

As for Ubuntuone storage, theres a ton of better alternatives. Currently the only reason anyone has to used any of the pay options Canonical offers is if they are just making an effort to support Canonical. That works for Ubuntu users who want to give back, but Windows users would have a hard time feeling the need to replace services like iTunes or Dropbox.

The best thing I think Canonical can do is concentrate on making Linux a viable desktop option for all case use scenario's instead just the netbook. Any Linux based distro can be tuned by any OEM to offer the same net based experience Canonical can provide with Ubuntu. Also with a name like Google offering Linux flavors with more name recognition, it'll be hard for OEM's to consider Ubuntu a serious player in the market of netbook/tablets.

IMO, Canonical needs to either offer new and more innovative cross platform web services, instead of Ubuntu branded alternatives. Or serious work on developing a Ubuntu based desktop experience, that rivals that off Window 7/Os X. That means concentrating more on multimedia capability.

Ubuntu already owns for using the internet, it's time for Canonical to move on to make Ubuntu an accepted consumer alternative for other things as well.

KiwiNZ
August 23rd, 2010, 11:37 PM
which one(s) of those do you think Canonical does not have ?

Due to my position here I am not going to answer that

DeadSuperHero
August 24th, 2010, 02:30 AM
Here are my own insane thoughts. You can respectfully disagree, of course.

-Hey, Canonical Design team, Ayatana devs, and GTK hackers! Consult these people (http://www.tat.se/) about beating Apple in aesthetic design and usability features. Don't use their toolkit, but get sound advice from them, and find ways to recreate their ideas you get from them in Clutter, Compiz, and so on. Figure out how to make Ayatana not only slick, but brilliant and functional as well.

-We all know it's a running joke, but what about Bug #1 (https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bug/1)? The problem is that there are too many Windows machines, and not enough OEM's supporting Ubuntu. We have drivers, codecs, but no outstanding hardware support in the form of mainstream OEM's. You have smaller OEM's, and you have people like Dell, who halfheartedly support the OS at any given time. So what should you do? BUY SYSTEM 76. Re-brand their offerings as Canonical, Inc, and make them into your hardware division. Sell the computers directly through the Ubuntu.com site, and then start setting foot into actual computer stores. Make some real commercials while you're at it.

-Start trading in disgruntled employees from the big guns. Apple, IBM, Oracle/Sun, Google, Microsoft. Get their input on the fields they're most proficient in, and put them to work. Get the big guns going, I implore you.

-Break away from "Upstream", and keep a stake in your project's own identity. This is Ubuntu-Gnome, not Gnome-with-an-Ubuntu-theme.

-Disassociate yourselves with the fringe lunatics that are in the GNU project. Give them a respectful nod of course, they did contribute a lot at one point in time, but stick to "Open Source" more than just "Free Software".


And although this is a planned future feature, I cannot stress this enough:

-Open up Ubuntu Software Center to third-party app and game developers, and give the commercial Linux app community the very boost it needs to sustain itself.

Paqman
August 24th, 2010, 05:48 AM
Or serious work on developing a Ubuntu based desktop experience, that rivals that off Window 7/Os X.

Er, they're not doing this already? Are you using a different Ubuntu? Just because they're developing Unity doesn't mean they've stopped developing the Gnome desktop. It's not an either/or situation. Unity complements the regular desktop Ubuntu, it doesn't replace it.

murderslastcrow
August 24th, 2010, 08:59 AM
I don't see how people still believe that Linux doesn't provide an easier or prettier desktop experience than 7/OS X.

Maybe it's because no one else here knows what KDE 4 is? Even still, it only takes a minute to get a nice theme and customize things just enough to have a more excellent dock than is available anywhere else, if that's the kind of eye candy you want. And well, there's compiz and Kwin, against which there is little to compare in Windows and OS X.

But really, I don't see where we fall short in functionality except for software vendors not always supporting us, so we have to make our own programs and support their formats through reverse-engineering.

I think we're doing an amazing job as it is. I just don't think many people like the idea of leaving their software behind for something new, even if it's better, or perfectly adequate. Wine only makes it harder for them to try new things.

But in a world like this one, why would anyone switch away from something they already bought unless they were learning to explore, and be creative? Most people just deal with what they have, even if it's crap.

One bird in hand is more than two in the bush, as they say. But then you dual boot. XD

To summarize, it's pretty obvious that Linux is on par with OS X and Windows today, as there's little to boast above Linux in either of those two outside of software availability and advertising, and there is plenty to boast of in Linux that you can't find anywhere else. It really is that high quality. It's not for everyone, of course, and some people can't move to it completely, but that doesn't degrade it's quality and excellence, and it doesn't mean you can't dual boot, either.

Madspyman
August 24th, 2010, 06:46 PM
Er, they're not doing this already? Are you using a different Ubuntu? Just because they're developing Unity doesn't mean they've stopped developing the Gnome desktop. It's not an either/or situation. Unity complements the regular desktop Ubuntu, it doesn't replace it.

I think you missed the point of my post, I mentioned concentrating on multimedia production/playback. Try playing Netflix in your Ubuntu install it doesn't work, maybe you'd like to edit uncompressed HD video without having to open Blender. I don't use Netflix and love Blender for video editing, but for the average user?

How about gpu accelerated h264 Flash playback? How about compatibility with older proprietary gpu drivers, so my now unsupported Radeon 200m laptop could work with the drivers from 8.04 which it was supported in. Or open source drivers that don't f-up hibernation?

Don't get me wrong I hate windows, and don't even have any Windows computers anymore, but in windows 7 you can install the older XP drivers for hardware that is no longer supported and doesn't have ones for Win 7.

Also many of these problems aren't Canonization fault, but I feel Canonical concentrates to hard on using their funds to repeat ad nauseam the things they've already mastered instead of looking into what it might take to be a complete Windows/OSX replacement, for all purpose use.

sataris
August 24th, 2010, 09:06 PM
which one(s) of those do you think Canonical does not have ?
good product base
good plan of action
excellent R&D and infrastructure
immense pool of capital

No this isnt to bash canon. Explanations as follows:

Linux is fractured...Getting better, but too many choices of things that dont work 90% of the time. Many programs dont work 50% of the time...and this is in the official repos.

Plan of action...everything so far has been focused on how it looks vs. how everything works. If this is the linux for humans, simple things should happen. 1x audio, increased wifi support, stable default programs, Increased ease of getting flash, codecs, dvd playback, and things people use routinely.

R&D and infrastructure...Market research is lacking. Severely. Taking the color schemes of purple and black, slapping that on gnome, and focusing on Ayatana is counterintuitive. Yes there are FOSS zealots saying keep it pure, but once again, Ubuntu's motto is linux for human beings. Mint is closer to that. Also .conf files need to die in fire for basic tasks. X, Video Drivers, and things of that nature should not be something the average user, think your great grandma, sees. Also, get paid graphical designers onto the team. Mac has them, Windows has them, Linux just has Devs (who prefer bash over gui's most days out of the week) and people who fancy themselves as internet artist superstars. (think deviantart)

Canonical does not make monies. They have a limited income. It's increasing, but its also based on their server support. Therefore, since that is based on server support, a lot of that money has to be redirected into their infrastructure to ensure they can keep making that money from supporting the servers. See the logical loop there?

I figured i'd answer since I didnt see too much else in rational terms.

I think paid apps in the software center is a step in the right direction. However, people have to be willing to pay (and a lot of people like free as in beer) in order for that service to begin increasing the revenue opportunities of Ubuntu/Canonical.

JDShu
August 25th, 2010, 05:46 PM
BUY SYSTEM 76. Re-brand their offerings as Canonical, Inc, and make them into your hardware division. Sell the computers directly through the Ubuntu.com site, and then start setting foot into actual computer stores. Make some real commercials while you're at it.


I really wish Canonical would consider doing this. They have a following, so they should tap it.

Sporkman
August 25th, 2010, 06:06 PM
I really wish Canonical would consider doing this. They have a following, so they should tap it.

They could become an open source Apple.

JDShu
August 25th, 2010, 06:17 PM
They could become an open source Apple.

Basically. It would be awesome to see.

Sporkman
August 25th, 2010, 06:19 PM
Basically. It would be awesome to see.

I think they're aiming to be more like Red Hat though, at least in terms of growing revenue.

Zorgoth
August 25th, 2010, 07:11 PM
I also think it would be good for Ubuntu in System76 was part of Canonical (and added an international warranty...), because then Canonical would be able to make money advertising and selling a brand of computer, and those advertisements would naturally focus a lot on Ubuntu.

And of course it would be a fully integrated system then because bugs in a System76/Canonical laptop would be fixed by Canonical itself. If there were lighter weight laptops from S76 with decent graphics card I would have bought one a month ago. If Canonical owned System76 though (and had an international warranty), I think I probably would have gotten myself a Pangolin Performance anyway (not because I couldn't afford a Serval Professional but because I don't believe in laptops over 6 lbs.).

Eddie Wilson
August 25th, 2010, 07:36 PM
There are several misconceptions here. One is the problem with Netflix. The reason that Netflix does not support Linux is because of the DRM used. In case you didn't know it was developed by MS. Most of you people are talking about OEM installs when you compare with MS and Apple. Codecs? not even an issue on OEM installs and easily installed on a user system whether it's legal or not. Most of the general computer users do not worry about config files, drivers, graphics settings and such. Most of the items mentioned are just nonsense and complaining. You cry "we want drivers" and you act like you have no ideal where closed source drivers come from. From what I've read here it seems that most people wants Canonical to turn Ubuntu into a proprietary paid for operating system. What would be the benefit of that?

"Linux is fractured...Getting better, but too many choices of things that dont work 90% of the time. Many programs dont work 50% of the time...and this is in the official repos."

What kind of nonsense is a statement like this. Totally untrue and pure FUD and no I don't have to prove that it's untrue. Things that don't work 90% of the time? 50% of programs that don't work in the official repos? Those statements in themselves sound ridiculous. If that was the case no one would be using this os. I own a copy of MS Windows 7 and use it mostly as a game machine. That's the only benefit I see in it. I've been installing software since the MS-DOS days and using Linux for years so I know what's going on. Desktop operating systems are not going to rule the roost in the future.

"Google is popular, but do you really think their ChromeOS will put even a dent in Apple or Microsoft's market share? And their name alone carries a ton of power."

Google is not worried about the desktop os market share. Microsoft and Apple will have some catching up to do. More so MS than Apple. People need to look into the future just a little bit and by that you will see that Canoncial is not that far off base. Before long everything will be cross platform, Flash will be no more, and Internet standards with mobile computing will rule. It's not far from that now. I may not want it that way but I will be overruled by the younger crowd and maybe that's the way it should be.

Paqman
August 25th, 2010, 08:47 PM
Try playing Netflix in your Ubuntu install it doesn't work

I'm not that familiar with Netflix, but I understand they're a video streaming site yes? If a site chooses to stream their content in a form that's not compatible with Linux, there's not much Canonical can do about that. Except ask nicely maybe?


How about gpu accelerated h264 Flash playback?

Again, not something Canonical has any control over.


How about compatibility with older proprietary gpu drivers

See above. Canonical do not maintain the drivers.


Or open source drivers that don't f-up hibernation?

Canonical could sponsor development of these I suppose. Maybe they do already, I don't know.

Canonical are a small company who produce a product that's almost entirely assembled from components provided by other people. Like most distros, they're systems integrators, not manufacturers. QA is an important part of them pushing Ubuntu out the door, but holding them responsible for every little bug or feature ignores the community nature of Linux development.

After all, as the recent Gnome survey pointed out, if you're unhappy with Gnome in Ubuntu, you should be pointing the finger more at Red Hat than Canonical ;)

JDShu
August 25th, 2010, 08:51 PM
I think they're aiming to be more like Red Hat though, at least in terms of growing revenue.

Obviously what I wish they did is different from what they are actually doing. (I don't think its a good strategy :P)

Madspyman
August 25th, 2010, 10:15 PM
I'm not that familiar with Netflix, but I understand they're a video streaming site yes? If a site chooses to stream their content in a form that's not compatible with Linux, there's not much Canonical can do about that. Except ask nicely maybe?



Again, not something Canonical has any control over.



See above. Canonical do not maintain the drivers.



Canonical could sponsor development of these I suppose. Maybe they do already, I don't know.

Canonical are a small company who produce a product that's almost entirely assembled from components provided by other people. Like most distros, they're systems integrators, not manufacturers. QA is an important part of them pushing Ubuntu out the door, but holding them responsible for every little bug or feature ignores the community nature of Linux development.

After all, as the recent Gnome survey pointed out, if you're unhappy with Gnome in Ubuntu, you should be pointing the finger more at Red Hat than Canonical ;)

The point I was trying to make is Ubuntu isn't there yet in terms of 100% Win/Mac replacement. The user I was responding to seemed to be saying it was.

Netflix issue is with hated/dreaded/pointless DRM, Moonlight could get it to work but it's goal is to remain DRM free, but defeats it's purpose, because it seems companies who use Silverlight do so for DRM. Microsoft blames Linux, Linux blames Microsoft. Netflix can't drop DRM because content providers are worried about piracy. To be considered a complete Windows/OS X replacement Ubuntu would need Netflix.

As for AMD not supporting my 200m drivers in the latest Fglrx anymore that's their fault, but there are Fglrx drivers that do support 200m, my point is they should be made capable of installing with the latest version of Ubuntu, without having to downgrade X.org. XP drivers work in Windows 7, we need that Linux needs that kind of backwards compatibly for users who would rather use the drivers for their hardware created by the same company that created the hardware, even if they are older drivers.

Or the Open Source divers need to mature (as they have been) to the point where in cases where things such as hibernation don't work you don't need to install proprietary drivers to get them to, as that's not always an option.

Lately Canonicals goal has been internet services that are Ubuntu branded alternatives to existing services, that already offered Linux compatibility, and have better options. If the goal is profit they need a better strategy.

Zorgoth
August 25th, 2010, 10:26 PM
The point I was trying to make is Ubuntu isn't there yet in terms of 100% Win/Mac replacement. The user I was responding to seemed to be saying it was.

Mac isn't 100% Windows replacement. Windows isn't 100% Mac replacemane. Neither Windows nor Mac are 100% Linux replacements. Linux doesn't have to incorporate all of the features of Mac or Windows - in fact that would a be a very bad thing as that would result in a huge amount of bloat.



As for AMD not supporting my 200m drivers in the latest Fglrx anymore that's their fault, but there are Fglrx drivers that do support 200m, my point is they should be made capable of installing with the latest version of Ubuntu, without having to downgrade X.org. XP drivers work in Windows 7, we need that Linux needs that kind of backwards compatibly for users who would rather use the drivers for their hardware created by the same company that created the hardware, even if they are older drivers.


That's AMD's job, not Canonical's. Canonical cannot be responsible for maintaining compatibility with outdated hardware with proprietary drivers. That would slow the pace of progress and development immensely.

And when the proprietary drivers are like old ATI drivers, why would you want them anyway? They were garbage!

The problem is, how would Canonical make it so you didn't have to downgrade X.org? By not upgrading X.org... I, for one, do not want that.

Paqman
August 25th, 2010, 10:30 PM
To be considered a complete Windows/OS X replacement Ubuntu would need Netflix.

That's one website, which is available in one country. The majority of the world really couldn't give a hoot. It might be important to YOU, but it's not really that important to the big picture.



Lately Canonicals goal has been internet services that are Ubuntu branded alternatives to existing services, that already offered Linux compatibility, and have better options. If the goal is profit they need a better strategy.

I guess they consider that they have a good platform to promote their services. Dropbox would have loved to have their software preinstalled on 8 million systems. Ubuntu One is still under heavy development and will be reaching feature parity with it soon. Once it does, watch out Dropbox.

Zorgoth
August 25th, 2010, 10:46 PM
There are several misconceptions here. One is the problem with Netflix. The reason that Netflix does not support Linux is because of the DRM used. In case you didn't know it was developed by MS. Most of you people are talking about OEM installs when you compare with MS and Apple. Codecs? not even an issue on OEM installs and easily installed on a user system whether it's legal or not. Most of the general computer users do not worry about config files, drivers, graphics settings and such. Most of the items mentioned are just nonsense and complaining. You cry "we want drivers" and you act like you have no ideal where closed source drivers come from. From what I've read here it seems that most people wants Canonical to turn Ubuntu into a proprietary paid for operating system. What would be the benefit of that?


So the fact that I have proprietary graphics drivers means my entire system is closed source? :o

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

An OEM install at least at first would have to include a lot of proprietary components. If it didn't, it couldn't support people transferring their data easily, and it would get sued if they tried to use something like libdvdcss2 (and a lot of users I bet would take it back to the store rather than Google playing DVDs on Linux - not because it's hard, but because they are probably being very wary anyway), so Fluendo codecs are a must. Unless Nouveau and the ATI open source divers get better, proprietary graphics drivers are too.

And you know what? I don't care. It will help the Linux community even if there are a few proprietary programs installed. And I bet that if Linux became widespread enough probably codecs/formats would end up being open source. Graphics drivers, maybe not, but I don't have a problem with that. My proprietary ATI drivers work very well, and I'm fine with them. If there was a better open source option, I'd take it, but there isn't and probably won't be (now that ATI is making decent drivers for newer cards).

Madspyman
August 25th, 2010, 11:45 PM
That's one website, which is available in one country. The majority of the world really couldn't give a hoot. It might be important to YOU, but it's not really that important to the big picture.



I guess they consider that they have a good platform to promote their services. Dropbox would have loved to have their software preinstalled on 8 million systems. Ubuntu One is still under heavy development and will be reaching feature parity with it soon. Once it does, watch out Dropbox.

To quote myself.


I don't use Netflix.

DVDs are a dollar to rent, and I get movies on demand from Cablevision. I have friends that use Netflix though, and it keeps them Windows/Mac users.

Just because something is preinstalled doesn't mean people are using it. I wonder how many of those 8 million systems are actually using the paid version of Ubuntu One?

Paqman
August 26th, 2010, 12:14 AM
Just because something is preinstalled doesn't mean people are using it. I wonder how many of those 8 million systems are actually using the paid version of Ubuntu One?

How many Dropbox users use the paid version? That kind of service is always going to be a horde of freeloaders supported by a tiny minority of paying users.

Madspyman
August 26th, 2010, 12:18 AM
How many Dropbox users use the paid version? That kind of service is always going to be a horde of freeloaders supported by a tiny minority of paying users.

Which is exactly why if it's about profitability, Canonical needs to consider new strategies.

Paqman
August 26th, 2010, 12:26 AM
Which is exactly why if it's about profitability, Canonical needs to consider new strategies.

Not really, it's a ubiquitous and well-proven business model for web services.

jonathonblake
August 26th, 2010, 01:00 AM
The reason that Netflix does not support Linux is because of the DRM used.

Er no. Netflix point blank won't support Linux.

It is not a DRM issue. It is Netflix pure and simple. Netflix refuses to either provide, or even point to the currently distributed software that is properly licensed for the DRM that Netflix uses.(It is a commercial product. It is closed source. It is not listed in Ubuntu One.)


Things that don't work 90% of the time? 50% of programs that don't work in the official repos?

One of these days I may take the time to try to install everything in the repos, and make a list of things that will not be installed, because the required components are not available/installed.

I come across the "blah_blah won't be installed because it requires bleh, which is not available", nearly every time I look for something in the repos that might be a solution to something I'm looking at.

jonathon