Do careers exist promoting Ubuntu/FOSS?

[summersab]

Community,

I'm graduating from the University of Arkansas in May with a Master's in Management Information Systems. I have a BS in Computer Science and an Assc. in Engineering. I've been applying for jobs regarding networking and server maintenance lately, but I've started to realize that my interest is actually elsewhere.

As a user of Linux since Dapper Drake, I've come to have an interest in FOSS as well as Linux maintenance in general. I've started to wonder - is there a career in marketing Linux/Ubuntu/FOSS to businesses, consulting to install such software, or working to sway software manufacturers to port their software to Linux? Honestly, these would be dream jobs for me, but I don't know if they even exist. I thought about emailing CodeWeavers with regards to the later interest of mine, but they mentioned on their website that they don't hire frequently. Does anyone have some thoughts on potential employers in this field? Additionally, I really like the Northwest Arkansas area (Bentonville, Fayetteville - the area where Walmart, Tyson, and JB Hunt are located). While I'm willing to move for sure, I'd love to stay here.

While this should probably be first in my post, to summarize my interests, I enjoy Linux networking and maintenance as well as process efficiency, front-end user experience, business process reengineering (BPR), and mechanical systems. I have an interest in leadership, and due to my cross-discipline experience, I have developed good communication skills across a wide range of people.

I have attached a copy of my resume, and my LinkedIn profile is at the following location:

http://www.linkedin.com/in/andrewbsummers

Many thanks,

Andrew "Arthur" Summers
MIS Degree Candidate 2011
University of Arkansas

[jerenept]

canonical.com (http://canonical.com)

[GeneralZod]

Just a heads-up: your resume has the word "wibsites" in it ;)

[Simian Man]

Ubuntu doesn't actually develop very much, I'd look for a job at Red Hat if I were you.

[NightwishFan]

Ubuntu doesn't actually develop very much, I'd look for a job at Red Hat if I were you.

Have a Canonical vendetta?

[summersab]

@GeneralZod, thanks - just edited some stuff and overlooked that. Fixed!

I'm really not looking at software development and coding - I'll be honest that I'm novice to intermediate there. Rather, I'd like to either help promote FOSS and/or assist in the implementation of FOSS systems. I wouldn't mind finding clients, selling them on the idea, and then working with them to transition their systems efficiently. I don't know if Canonical or Red Hat do any of that, really.

[linuxforartists]

Ubuntu doesn't actually develop very much, I'd look for a job at Red Hat if I were you.

On a related note, I'd say to get certified in Red Hat Enterprise Linux. Then you'd be qualified to work for any company who uses Red Hat systems, not just Red Hat themselves.

As for promoting Linux, I'd say Jono Bacon (http://www.jonobacon.org/about/) has your dream job. He's the Ubuntu Community Manager at Canonical.

You could also try writing articles for Linux magazines. I'd say to to do this on the side while you have a day job like as a systems administrator. Then maybe you could become a full-time Linux writer.

Good luck!

[samalex]

Jobs in FOSS do exist, but they're hard to come by in many areas, like mine. The best way to get involved with FOSS IMO is to get with a company or IT shop that's at least open minded then bring in Open Source concepts to integrate into their infrastructure. Most Open Source applications have no marketing or advocates, so if you are that advocate in your organization and you don't push it too hard you can bring FOSS on board in most shops.

Something else unrelated it seems I see mentions of Katy, Texas all the time whether I run into someone talking about it, see it mentioned in the news, on an article, or even just in casual conversation. Some friends were talking about going to Houston not long ago and the hick in our department mentioned Bass Pro Shops in Katy being a 'Must Stop'. So seeing it in your resume as well was just way weird. I live in Waco, Tx and used to live not far from Houston so I've been through Katy many times but it's been years. Anyway, just some weirdness...

[wirepuller134]

We are about 15 minutes from you...Bethel Heights. JB Hunt uses almost exclusively Red Hat. The processing plants in the area use a mixture of BSD and Windows in the production areas of the plants. I know we have installed several systems locally that run either Linux or BSD depending on what we are doing for them. Although we just finished developing a system based on Windows CE for a local OEM. The money was right, we had a tight schedule with a 6 day turn around, for full documentation and a working system.
You might find it worth your while to contact Pac-mac in Fayetteville, their funnel bagger presently uses a touch screen and backbone based on DOS 8.0. They wanted us to help them develop a system, but due to many factors we did not do the job.
Cargill, Tyson, Georges, Simmons, Cobb, list goes on.....Would all be a good place to get started. These plants are having trouble getting people to work in the plants in these jobs. More and more the production managers are wanting information about the process to determine the plants yeild. All of the information collected by smaller systems, is dumped by shift to servers in the data centers. This tells the plant how efficiently they are running. It's easy for them to fill the office jobs, but not the plant end of this. Read...your gonna get wet and dirty here, we do. But the jobs do exist and are sitting open in the area. The hot spots for these plants equipment is here and Georgia.
Pm me if you would like more information on the area.

[unknownPoster]

Have a Canonical vendetta?

It's a known fact that Canonical/Ubuntu contributes very little to upstream.

So no, it's not a Canonical vendetta, it's a simple statement of the fact if the desire is to contribute to Linux, there are better options than Canonical.

I submit the following as examples of proof:

http://blogs.gnome.org/bolsh/2010/07/28/gnome-census/

Red Hat is at ~16% while Canonical just barely breaks 1%.


From the blog of a keynote speaker at a Linux conference:
http://www.kroah.com/log/linux/lpc_2008_keynote.html
(A bit old, but the point is still valid.)

In the past 3 years, from the 2.6.15 kernel to 2.6.27-rc6, Canonical has had 100 patches in the Linux kernel...From the 2.6.15 kernel release to the present, there have been 99324 patches made to the Linux kernel...So, to place Canonical's contribution into perspective, that means they did 00.10068% of all of the kernel development for the past 3 years.

[alaukikyo]

@GeneralZod, thanks - just edited some stuff and overlooked that. Fixed!

I'm really not looking at software development and coding - I'll be honest that I'm novice to intermediate there. Rather, I'd like to either help promote FOSS and/or assist in the implementation of FOSS systems. I wouldn't mind finding clients, selling them on the idea, and then working with them to transition their systems efficiently. I don't know if Canonical or Red Hat do any of that, really.

canonical do provide support to home and business users so you can try your luck there.

[XubuRoxMySox]

It's a known fact that Canonical/Ubuntu contributes very little to upstream.

So no, it's not a Canonical vendetta, it's a simple statement of the fact if the desire is to contribute to Linux, there are better options than Canonical.

I submit the following as examples of proof:

http://blogs.gnome.org/bolsh/2010/07/28/gnome-census/

Red Hat is at ~16% while Canonical just barely breaks 1%.


From the blog of a keynote speaker at a Linux conference:
http://www.kroah.com/log/linux/lpc_2008_keynote.html
(A bit old, but the point is still valid.)

Upstream from Canonical is Debian, and Debian is known to simply turn their nose up at contributions from outside. Their "If we didn't come up with it, it's rubbish" attitude is the primary reason for the low numbers. There are alot of folks in the Debian community that are trying to get that haughty attitude changed. But it ain't Canonical's fault.

Red Hat doesn't contribute to Debian that much either (because it's an rpm distro and because of Debian's arrogance). Canonical supports a lot of other upstream projects and contributes everything from money to code. But Debian is like "75% Debian" or more, and since Debian is "too good" to accept improvements from it's Number One derivative, how is that Canonical's fault?

-Robin

[samstreet101]

It's a known fact that Canonical/Ubuntu contributes very little to upstream.

So no, it's not a Canonical vendetta, it's a simple statement of the fact if the desire is to contribute to Linux, there are better options than Canonical.

I submit the following as examples of proof:

http://blogs.gnome.org/bolsh/2010/07/28/gnome-census/

Red Hat is at ~16% while Canonical just barely breaks 1%.


From the blog of a keynote speaker at a Linux conference:
http://www.kroah.com/log/linux/lpc_2008_keynote.html
(A bit old, but the point is still valid.)

I would agree entirely, like you say its not opinion its simple statement of facts that Canonical contribute very little to Linux upstream. However, I think it is a little unfair as it does sort of imply (thought not by definition) that they simply use Linux's resources and don't give anything back at all.

There are more ways to contribute to the Linux ecosystem than just upstream (though I know that's not what you were saying). They are probably responsible for the vast majority of the recent growth in Linux users in recent years and if nothing else have helped Linux's image to non linux users tremendously. In my opinion anyway

[gnomeuser]

It's a known fact that Canonical/Ubuntu contributes very little to upstream.

It is also kinda false, Ubuntu has been contributing a lot upstream and in many cases (especially those where upstream refused to properly debate their contributions) they are upstream.

Yeah Red Hat has them beat by hefty margin but they had several years of burning through dot com money building their business and finding what is today a successful business model (and trust me they went through quite a lot of money wasting and projects that went nowhere).

I think it is unfair to compare the two and expect Canonical to deliver on the same scale as Red Hat does today despite being in the same stage of business development where Red Hat lost money left and right (under different circumstances in terms of the ecosystem as well).

[fuduntu]

Upstream from Canonical is Debian, and Debian is known to simply turn their nose up at contributions from outside. Their "If we didn't come up with it, it's rubbish" attitude is the primary reason for the low numbers. There are alot of folks in the Debian community that are trying to get that haughty attitude changed. But it ain't Canonical's fault.

You have no evidence of this. Most of the original Ubuntu team was made up of Debian developers (including Mark). Canonical / Ubuntu is starting to contribute a lot more upstream but historically the statistics speak for themselves.



Red Hat doesn't contribute to Debian that much either (because it's an rpm distro and because of Debian's arrogance). Canonical supports a lot of other upstream projects and contributes everything from money to code. But Debian is like "75% Debian" or more, and since Debian is "too good" to accept improvements from it's Number One derivative, how is that Canonical's fault?

-Robin

RedHat contributes to the sources that Debian and all other distributions benefit from. They have significant resources contributing to GNOME, they participate in a significant amount of kernel development, and they are active contributors to many other top level projects.

Don't discount RedHat's contributions because without them Ubuntu wouldn't be the same platform it is today.

[fuduntu]

It is also kinda false, Ubuntu has been contributing a lot upstream and in many cases (especially those where upstream refused to properly debate their contributions) they are upstream.


Not really, historically this is true. It is changing, but they don't contribute a lot. They can claim to be upstream for software developed by them which would be true, but if no one uses it, isn't it a wasted argument?



Yeah Red Hat has them beat by hefty margin but they had several years of burning through dot com money building their business and finding what is today a successful business model (and trust me they went through quite a lot of money wasting and projects that went nowhere).

RedHat was contributing long before their IPO. They are smart, and understand the key to success is directly related to their contributions to the community. Canonical (Ubuntu) is just now learning this lesson.



I think it is unfair to compare the two and expect Canonical to deliver on the same scale as Red Hat does today despite being in the same stage of business development where Red Hat lost money left and right (under different circumstances in terms of the ecosystem as well).

It's perfectly fair, no one expects Canonical (Ubuntu) to contribute on the same scale, but more than 1% is expected based on their community size.

[unknownPoster]

Upstream from Canonical is Debian, and Debian is known to simply turn their nose up at contributions from outside. Their "If we didn't come up with it, it's rubbish" attitude is the primary reason for the low numbers. There are alot of folks in the Debian community that are trying to get that haughty attitude changed. But it ain't Canonical's fault.

Red Hat doesn't contribute to Debian that much either (because it's an rpm distro and because of Debian's arrogance). Canonical supports a lot of other upstream projects and contributes everything from money to code. But Debian is like "75% Debian" or more, and since Debian is "too good" to accept improvements from it's Number One derivative, how is that Canonical's fault?

-Robin

Debian is NOT upstream and I fail to see how Debian's refusal changes anything. I'm referring to the source of the software itself, such as kernel patches and contributions to Gnome. If Debian won't take the contributions, nothing is stopping Ubuntu/Canonical from contributing directly to Upstream.

To be honest, I'm surprised so many people are denying documented, factual evidence without providing proof of their own.

[summersab]

@linuxforartists - yes, he does sound like he has an incredible job. I'm rather jealous. Perhaps I should shoot him an email? ;)

@samalex - Yeah, I grew up in Ohio and Illinois, so Katy is a little different to me. It's mainly a huge, ugly urban sprawl that is just a bedroom neighborhood for the workers of Houston. There are reasons I want to stay in Northwest Arkansas if possible and not go back to Katy.

@wirepuller134 - I'll PM you shortly. Thanks!

If anyone else has suggestions, I'm subscribed to this post, so feel free to put something up. Even if it doesn't fit me, there are plenty of people looking for jobs, and it could be a help to someone.

[Simian Man]

Have a Canonical vendetta?

No, and I didn't mean to spark a debate (I also picked up an infraction for this for some reason). I just mean that Red Hat does more development for open source than Canonical (a known fact), has many more emplyees, and is therefore a more likely place to land a job working on open source.

Even IBM (http://www-03.ibm.com/linux/ltc/career.html) probably pays more people to work on Linux.

[fuduntu]

(I also picked up an infraction for this for some reason).

WTF? I didn't see anything in your post that would justify an infraction.

/opinion

[NightwishFan]

WTF? I didn't see anything in your post that would justify an infraction.

/opinion

I agree. Seems a bit harsh.

I am sure it is quite true they do not develop as much as Red Hat but they do develop. As far as I know they are now the upstream maintainer of Apparmor and managed to get it in the kernel now.

[XubuRoxMySox]

I'm referring to the source of the software itself, such as kernel patches and contributions to Gnome. To be honest, I'm surprised so many people are denying documented, factual evidence without providing proof of their own.

So are kernel patches and code the only contributions that matter? What about marketing? Interface design? Documentation? Getting Linux into the "mainstream?" Canonical has done more to contribute in those areas than anyone else, including Red Hat.

That is my point. And I'm not alone. Even the managing editor of Linux Today - not an Ubuntu/Canonical fan at all - shares my opinion and has some facts to back it up (see here (http://www.linuxtoday.com/infrastructure/2010073002835OSCYUB)).

-Robin

[fuduntu]

So are kernel patches and code the only contributions that matter? What about marketing? Interface design? Documentation? Getting Linux into the "mainstream?" Canonical has done more to contribute in those areas than anyone else, including Red Hat.


I seem to remember Sun and RedHat writing the first versions of the GNOME HIG, not Canonical.

Sorry.

RedHat's marketing must suck, I mean they are only approaching $1B.

;)

[Simian Man]

So are kernel patches and code the only contributions that matter? What about marketing? Interface design? Documentation? Getting Linux into the "mainstream?" Canonical has done more to contribute in those areas than anyone else, including Red Hat.

Even if that's true (BTW the only Linux commercial I've ever seen was by IBM), the OP has degrees in Computer Science and Information Systems. I'd assume they want to use them and not get a marketing or documentation job which they would be way overqualified for.

[unknownPoster]

So are kernel patches and code the only contributions that matter? What about marketing? Interface design? Documentation? Getting Linux into the "mainstream?" Canonical has done more to contribute in those areas than anyone else, including Red Hat.

-Robin

Almost 1 billion in revenue says otherwise. Red Hat dominates the server market and the Linux market in general.

Your point about the UI fails as previously shown in my other post. How can Canonical lead in Interface design when it only contributed 1% to Gnome compared to Red Hat's 16%.

I'd find it hard to believe that Ubuntu has better documentation than the commercial powerhouse that is Red Hat.

[Icehuck]

So are kernel patches and code the only contributions that matter? What about marketing? Interface design? Documentation? Getting Linux into the "mainstream?" Canonical has done more to contribute in those areas than anyone else, including Red Hat.

That is my point. And I'm not alone. Even the managing editor of Linux Today - not an Ubuntu/Canonical fan at all - shares my opinion and has some facts to back it up (see here (http://www.linuxtoday.com/infrastructure/2010073002835OSCYUB)).

-Robin

Canonical didn't write gnome or kde last i checked. So not sure how they did more interface design than any one else...

[fuduntu]

Even if that's true (BTW the only Linux commercial I've ever seen was by IBM), the OP has degrees in Computer Science and Information Systems. I'd assume they want to use them and not get a marketing or documentation job which they would be way overqualified for.

+1

I also remember IBM's Peace Love & Linux campaign. Though, that kind of backfired on them. lol

[wirepuller134]

PM sent to OP.

[KiwiNZ]

This thread has drifted way off topic.

Thread closed