PDA

View Full Version : Software Centre promoting paid applications



monkman71
October 15th, 2011, 08:50 AM
I have been using Linux for years now and I have tried many different Linux distros but I always found myself going back to Ubuntu. It had a perfect balance between user-friendliness and low-level customization. I could take Gnome and do beautiful things with it for the crowd who likes flashy set-ups. For the CLI gurus, I often found myself digging through /etc or playing with any sort of config file I could just for fun, sometimes only succumbing to sleep because the sun had risen and I had class or work in three hours.

However, Ubuntu 11.10 might just be the last straw that drives me away from Ubuntu in general. Yes, the "default" Unity issues arise. It seems over-simplified and feels like it is trying to land on a touch-based platform like an iPad or Android tablet, even though Android and iOS are more than adequately covering that field. Even the new Gnome hides all the little configurations that I loved to play with behind it's "pretty", new interface. But as a command line junkie, I can always find ways around this, and it is no deal breaker.

No, my problem is that Ubuntu is trying desperately to be like the operating systems that drove me to Linux in the first place. It is hard to find an Ubuntu newbie without the mac-like dock somewhere on his/her desktop, praising Unity because it is so similar to their smart phone, or breaking Gnome in order to make it look more like Windows. What's worse, for the people who do not want these things, you can either choose to spend hours forcing these new, useless gadgets to do your bidding, or switch to a different desktop environment completely and deal with all the compatibility issues it brings.

Finally, the most disturbing step Ubuntu has taken, I came across while trying to reinstall Gnome after my "upgrade". The software center is pushing paid software worse than the Android market! The section dedicated for new programs is clogged with price tags whereas once, it held programs created by open-source enthusiasts that, otherwise, might go unnoticed. Now, the next great open-source application might never get off the ground because it must live in the shadow of programs that are being vomited out of big corporations daily.

I liked it better when you had to TRY to find programs you'd actually have to pay for. One of the main reasons I started using Linux over Windows is that everything is free and nothing is restricted but with every new update, I feel like I am being dragged closer and closer to the corporate beasts that are only trying to bleed my wallet dry. Ubuntu is drifting away from it's FOSS roots. I almost feel like soon we will have to pay for the OS itself.

I know that the market for people who want big, flashy buttons is much larger than the one containing people like me. I'm sure what I have to say is likely going to be ignored for the most part and maybe that is because I am seeing things from the wrong perspective. I wrote all this for what Ubuntu used to be and for the time I gladly spent with it, but what I have seen has likely scared me away from Ubuntu for good.

3rdalbum
October 15th, 2011, 10:20 AM
1. I don't get what is "oversimplified" about Unity. So, the icons are 48 pixels wide and have rounded edges. Does this make the user interface "similar to a smartphone"? No. It really doesn't.

Unity lets you do basically the same things that Gnome 2 let you do. You can launch the same programs as before, switch between windows, open a file browser and do all your file management the same as before, you get notifications and a "system tray"... really, Unity only adds to the table with search and drag 'n' drop, rather than taking anything real away from it.

2. Canonical is a business. Fact. It would like to push paid programs which it gets a commission on. If you'd prefer to see open-source software instead, then scroll down 90 pixels and you'll see a selection. Or, use Synaptic. I think you'll also find that there's few, if any, "big corporations" with software in the Software Center.

There's demand for commercial software, especially commercial-quality games, on Ubuntu. Feeding that demand makes good financial sense.

Thewhistlingwind
October 15th, 2011, 10:36 AM
2. Canonical is a business. Fact. It would like to push paid programs which it gets a commission on. If you'd prefer to see open-source software instead, then scroll down 90 pixels and you'll see a selection. Or, use Synaptic. I think you'll also find that there's few, if any, "big corporations" with software in the Software Center.

There's demand for commercial software, especially commercial-quality games, on Ubuntu. Feeding that demand makes good financial sense.

+1

In addition, I would like to add my personal outlook on proprietary software on Linux:

If a monetary incentive is required for a product I want or need to exist, I'd rather pay than not have it.

That's it, nothing more nothing less. If I am SELLING a product, I would love to support a venture like canonical in the process. I would love to have a place to showcase my product, like the android and iOS markets.

That Canonical wishes to do this, and is doing it before Microsoft and Apple. (Though theirs are on the way soon.) is only a sign that Canonical is willing to stay in the game for a good run.

BigSilly
October 15th, 2011, 01:08 PM
+1

In addition, I would like to add my personal outlook on proprietary software on Linux:

If a monetary incentive is required for a product I want or need to exist, I'd rather pay than not have it.

That's it, nothing more nothing less. If I am SELLING a product, I would love to support a venture like canonical in the process. I would love to have a place to showcase my product, like the android and iOS markets.

That Canonical wishes to do this, and is doing it before Microsoft and Apple. (Though theirs are on the way soon.) is only a sign that Canonical is willing to stay in the game for a good run.

Good post. The fact is, many Linux companies make their money in different ways. Red Hat, SuSe, Mandriva, even distros like PCLinuxOS and Mint have some way of making money for their work, be they business contracts and enterprise, or just passionate donators. Now Canonical aims squarely at the home desktop user imho (as well as business). This is a difficult market to target as both Windows and Apple dominate. What we see with the latest Ubuntu and Unity, is a clear aim for the desktop user. Ubuntu will never charge the end user for the OS, but there are other ways of making money, not least of all through a software store. Apple and Android will tell you, this works.

I don't blame Ubuntu for trying to compete and they are offering a fantastic system completely for free to the end user. You don't have to buy anything (it's still FOSS at the end of the day and not a proprietary OS, and never will be), but there should, and must be, options to purchase quality software that isn't OSS. I'm a massive champion for stuff like Photoshop showing up in the store. Maybe one day. But no-one said Ubuntu should not be making anything out of it. A living has to be made.

mörgæs
October 15th, 2011, 02:03 PM
Changed the title to a less dramatic one.

KiwiNZ
October 15th, 2011, 06:33 PM
I have been using Linux for years now and I have tried many different Linux distros but I always found myself going back to Ubuntu. It had a perfect balance between user-friendliness and low-level customization. I could take Gnome and do beautiful things with it for the crowd who likes flashy set-ups. For the CLI gurus, I often found myself digging through /etc or playing with any sort of config file I could just for fun, sometimes only succumbing to sleep because the sun had risen and I had class or work in three hours.

However, Ubuntu 11.10 might just be the last straw that drives me away from Ubuntu in general. Yes, the "default" Unity issues arise. It seems over-simplified and feels like it is trying to land on a touch-based platform like an iPad or Android tablet, even though Android and iOS are more than adequately covering that field. Even the new Gnome hides all the little configurations that I loved to play with behind it's "pretty", new interface. But as a command line junkie, I can always find ways around this, and it is no deal breaker.

No, my problem is that Ubuntu is trying desperately to be like the operating systems that drove me to Linux in the first place. It is hard to find an Ubuntu newbie without the mac-like dock somewhere on his/her desktop, praising Unity because it is so similar to their smart phone, or breaking Gnome in order to make it look more like Windows. What's worse, for the people who do not want these things, you can either choose to spend hours forcing these new, useless gadgets to do your bidding, or switch to a different desktop environment completely and deal with all the compatibility issues it brings.

Finally, the most disturbing step Ubuntu has taken, I came across while trying to reinstall Gnome after my "upgrade". The software center is pushing paid software worse than the Android market! The section dedicated for new programs is clogged with price tags whereas once, it held programs created by open-source enthusiasts that, otherwise, might go unnoticed. Now, the next great open-source application might never get off the ground because it must live in the shadow of programs that are being vomited out of big corporations daily.

I liked it better when you had to TRY to find programs you'd actually have to pay for. One of the main reasons I started using Linux over Windows is that everything is free and nothing is restricted but with every new update, I feel like I am being dragged closer and closer to the corporate beasts that are only trying to bleed my wallet dry. Ubuntu is drifting away from it's FOSS roots. I almost feel like soon we will have to pay for the OS itself.

I know that the market for people who want big, flashy buttons is much larger than the one containing people like me. I'm sure what I have to say is likely going to be ignored for the most part and maybe that is because I am seeing things from the wrong perspective. I wrote all this for what Ubuntu used to be and for the time I gladly spent with it, but what I have seen has likely scared me away from Ubuntu for good.


I posted this in another thread, it is relevant here...

"How do you think the Servers are paid for ,including the Forum Servers?
How is CD/DVD distribution paid for?
How is the non corporate support paid for?
How are the on staff professional developers and techs paid for?
How is the rent on Offices paid for?
How is ubuntu paid for?

You may get it free but it costs to develop,distribute and support. Making a profit means long term viability and sustainability. Profit is not bad it is very vital for any enterprise."

1roxtar
October 15th, 2011, 10:52 PM
1. Unity is "over simplified"???? It's TOO easy to use? It's not complicated enough for you? Do you also eat your peas with chopsticks because using a spoon is too easy for you?

2. Since when is making a buck so damn evil? No wonder the mainstream writers and bloggers tend to refer to Linux users as "freetards". I have bought apps on my Android phones and paid for commercial Windows programs whenever I wanted or needed something that a free application couldn't give me. Sometimes I bought them just to get rid of ads. Nonetheless, I don't see companies as the enemies just because the want to promote paid versions alongside free stuff. In the end I choose for myself what I ultimately want to install on my phone or computer.

Isaacgallegos
October 16th, 2011, 02:55 PM
Software Centre promoting paid applications

Good! I hope ubuntu makes ten billion dollars from it.

sixthwheel
October 16th, 2011, 04:51 PM
Do you also eat your peas with chopsticks because using a spoon is too easy for you?
I suck it through a straw. Fun stuff.

d4m1r
October 16th, 2011, 09:14 PM
If a monetary incentive is required for a product I want or need to exist, I'd rather pay than not have it.

Couldn't have said it better myself...The more money generated from Ubuntu the better! It's what guarantees future updates, patches, and new versions.

I've only been using it for a week but I already feel guilty for only donating the default amount ($30)...For such a great OS that you get for FREE, you might as well pay a little for applications or games you might want.

Linuxratty
October 16th, 2011, 11:10 PM
Good! I hope ubuntu makes ten billion dollars from it.

How times have changed.
Remember Linspire? They offered software for $$$ and Ubuntu and other Linux users pitched a hussy fit.

Isaacgallegos
October 17th, 2011, 04:36 AM
There should be a "quick donate" button for each app in the software center.

Maybe Humble Bundle's model could be implemented in the software center.

c-1000
October 17th, 2011, 05:06 AM
If you are using Canonical software, and you aren't paying for it, then you are NOT the customer...you are the product being sold.

Tamlynmac
October 17th, 2011, 06:03 AM
c-1000
If you are using Canonical software, and you aren't paying for it, then you are NOT the customer...you are the product being sold.

Excellent response.

Hopefully, these words might inspire others to consider a different point of view. My only question is: Do you believe that applies to all of Linux & FOSS or only Canonical software that's being used for free?

mastablasta
October 17th, 2011, 08:34 AM
There should be a "quick donate" button for each app in the software center.

Maybe Humble Bundle's model could be implemented in the software center.

I second that. put the idea on launchpad!!!

Even if we pay for applicaitons the important thing is that the source is open and free. hmm does it make sense? well yes. if you pay you should get some good support. if you don't you're on your own.

I understand they need money to maintain servers and development. money and profit are not a bad thing as long as they are used for a good cause not hoarded by few individuals like in Steve's case.

dave0109
October 17th, 2011, 12:36 PM
I don't mind the paid applications being shown in the Software Centre. My problem is the size of the banner: on a netbook it takes up half the dialog. Oh, and that it seems to be even slower than before to load up.

mörgæs
October 17th, 2011, 01:05 PM
The thread was slowly winding its way to the cafe. I gave it the last lift.

BigSilly
October 17th, 2011, 06:38 PM
How times have changed.
Remember Linspire? They offered software for $$$ and Ubuntu and other Linux users pitched a hussy fit.

I remember Freespire! CNR (Click-N-Run)! Remember that? I thought that was a great OS, but you're right it got hammered by Linux users. To be fair though, it looks like Ubuntu is having to suffer a similar fate to our late Lin/Freespire friends. :D

FWIW, I don't have a problem with certain things like games being paid for and available to buy in any Linux software store on any distro. I don't think it's a terrible thing or oppressing Free Software.

Is it?

Legendary_Bibo
October 17th, 2011, 06:53 PM
I just bought Braid off of the Software Center even though I already owned a copy through Steam and the Humble Bundle (yes, I know you can play it on Linux)

U MAD BRO?

In all seriousness, shouldn't people be happy that Linux is now getting commercial software and people actually see it as a viable platform?

KiwiNZ
October 17th, 2011, 07:10 PM
I just bought Braid off of the Software Center even though I already owned a copy through Steam and the Humble Bundle (yes, I know you can play it on Linux)

U MAD BRO?

In all seriousness, shouldn't people be happy that Linux is now getting commercial software and people actually see it as a viable platform?

Linux/ubuntu users embracing change? remember the button out rage? and that other change what was it? that's right Unity.

jerenept
October 17th, 2011, 07:27 PM
OH MY GOD CANONICAL TRYING TO MAKE MONEY THE WORLD WILL END.

Seriously, how long did you all expect to sponge off the work of Canonical, without having to pay at all? There's no such thing as a free lunch, and, considering that Canonical is bleeding money, I expected measures like this A LOT sooner.

snip3r8
October 17th, 2011, 07:31 PM
remember the button out rage? please explain

Spice Weasel
October 17th, 2011, 07:32 PM
Are they pointing a gun to your head forcing you to buy software?

Exactly.

KiwiNZ
October 17th, 2011, 07:35 PM
please explain

Canonical moved the Close/maximize/minimize from the right hand side to the left hand side and the Sky fell in. The were pages and pages of hate threads. :rolleyes:

Linuxratty
October 18th, 2011, 01:06 AM
I remember Freespire! CNR (Click-N-Run)! Remember that?

Yes I do. It was my first distro and I loved it! Three days after running it live,I installed it.


I thought that was a great OS, but you're right it got hammered by Linux users. To be fair though, it looks like Ubuntu is having to suffer a similar fate to our late Lin/Freespire friends. :D

I thought it was a little slice of perfection .
Oh yes! It was beat to a fine powder by angry Linux users. And yes,I paid for the OS,but I only used free CNR apps.Not that much was for $$$ in their app center.
It also worries me that Shuttleworth may have stepped on one too many toes and Ubuntu may face the same fate...I hope not, but time will tell.


FWIW, I don't have a problem with certain things like games being paid for and available to buy in any Linux software store on any distro. I don't think it's a terrible thing or oppressing Free Software.

Is it?

I agree. I think a mix of free and paid works best and I don't have a problem with it. In fact, I used Linspire/Freespire till they signed up with Microsoft,then I wandered off to Klikit..BIG boo boo,but that's another story. :D


Canonical moved the Close/maximize/minimize from the right hand side to the left hand side and the Sky fell in. The were pages and pages of hate threads.


I'm a lefty. I really like the buttons on the left. I've held off on getting new versions of Fire Fox because there is no longer close window and close tab under edit. How lame is that?

Dr. C
October 18th, 2011, 01:24 AM
I just bought Braid off of the Software Center even though I already owned a copy through Steam and the Humble Bundle (yes, I know you can play it on Linux)

U MAD BRO?

In all seriousness, shouldn't people be happy that Linux is now getting commercial software and people actually see it as a viable platform?

Any DRM in the version of Braid from the Software Center?

earthpigg
October 18th, 2011, 01:36 AM
@OP: I'm not sure the level of hostility is justified. It was never a secret that Ubuntu was a commercial project.

You could have stuck with community distributions from day one, but you chose to embrace a commercial distribution. And now, when a commercial distribution acts like a commercial distribution you condemn it?

If condemnation is warranted, it isn't Ubuntu that should be the target...

Toafan
October 18th, 2011, 01:56 AM
In response to several posts on the first page: I have no problem paying for software that does what I want. That's why I support Humble Indy Bundle. However, I take issue with proprietary software in the software center, ESPECIALLY if I have to pay for it. (I wouldn't really notice if I didn't have to pay for it, unless I was looking out for that.)


I second that. put the idea on launchpad!!!

Even if we pay for applicaitons the important thing is that the source is open and free. hmm does it make sense? well yes. if you pay you should get some good support. if you don't you're on your own.

I understand they need money to maintain servers and development. money and profit are not a bad thing as long as they are used for a good cause not hoarded by few individuals like in Steve's case.


I want to do that, but I need to hash the idea out a little more... Anyone want to help me figure out what it should look like? :)

Here's my thinking:



The software center should be clearer about if the source code for a program is available. (As stated above, I don't tend to care if I get the app for free. But this is especially important for paid software. I'll pay to support open-source/free software. I don't want to use any more closed-source software than I have to.)
The software center should have a donate button on //all// software, like Firefox addons. If some software has a required minimum donation, I guess that's ok - as long as there's not to much.

At the moment, I have no Idea how to re-phrase this for Brainstorm, and no time to do so myself. If someone puts it up, please post a link back to this thread so I can follow it :)

earthpigg
October 18th, 2011, 02:35 AM
The software center should be clearer about if the source code for a program is available. (As stated above, I don't tend to care if I get the app for free. But this is especially important for paid software. I'll pay to support open-source/free software. I don't want to use any more closed-source software than I have to.)
The software center should have a donate button on //all// software, like Firefox addons. If some software has a required minimum donation, I guess that's ok - as long as there's not to much.



1: I'm still using 10.10, but when I look at the software in the "for purchase" section, I see "License: Proprietary" for the random one I picked. That is pretty cut and dry. To me, at least. In the current iteration, is no license listed prior to you entering credit card info?

2: Tens of thousands of packages included in Ubuntu. All handle copyright differently, some with central ownership by the "project", some (Linux itself, iirc?) allowing each of the thousands of contributors to retain ownership of their individual code contributions. Financial ties imply legal ties. Thousands of people own the code to our kernel itself. Very messy. Again in 10.10's software center, but I seem to see a website link for the last 5 or 6 random packages I clicked on after going to "more info" to read the package description. That is about the most that is realistic, I think: If you want to contribute money to Linux (kernel), you do your own homework and decide which of the thousands of owners you wish to donate to. That isn't for Canonical or Ubuntu to decide.

c-1000
October 18th, 2011, 03:29 AM
The thread was slowly winding its way to the cafe. I gave it the last lift.
I'd like to get to 50 posts, and get my avatar back.
Doesn't help when the forum staff keeps moving the goalposts on me...:confused:

thatguruguy
October 18th, 2011, 03:38 AM
I'd like to get to 50 posts, and get my avatar back.
Doesn't help when the forum staff keeps moving the goalposts on me...:confused:

You could always, I dunno, actually help someone with a problem or something.

thatguruguy
October 18th, 2011, 03:41 AM
1: I'm still using 10.10, but when I look at the software in the "for purchase" section, I see "License: Proprietary" for the random one I picked. That is pretty cut and dry. To me, at least. In the current iteration, is no license listed prior to you entering credit card info?

Oddly enough, I noticed the exact same thing when I've bought stuff through the Software Center.

Maybe any purchase needs to be interrupted long enough for Mark Shuttleworth to call each purchaser personally and warn them they are about to buy proprietary software.

Legendary_Bibo
October 18th, 2011, 03:42 AM
Any DRM in the version of Braid from the Software Center?

Like I give a flying *ahem*

No, it's just like the Humble Bundle one, and if you make an Ubuntu One account it's the same freaking convenience as Steam.

Quadunit404
October 18th, 2011, 03:44 AM
Any DRM in the version of Braid from the Software Center?

No DRM in the Steam version (http://store.steampowered.com/app/26800/) so that's a negative. You ever heard of research? It could come in handy you know.

c-1000
October 18th, 2011, 03:48 AM
You could always, I dunno, actually help someone with a problem or something.

Wow...you read every single one of my posts awfully fast.

Linuxratty
October 18th, 2011, 03:51 AM
I'd like to get to 50 posts, and get my avatar back.
Doesn't help when the forum staff keeps moving the goalposts on me...:confused:

You need fifty posts to get your avatar back?
Why?

thatguruguy
October 18th, 2011, 03:53 AM
Wow...you read every single one of my posts awfully fast.

OK, I did just now. There aren't many of them (28 at the time of my reading), so it wasn't difficult.

And I stand my earlier statement.

LMP900
October 18th, 2011, 03:58 AM
I'd love to start buying software from the Software Center, but I'm not really interested in games or magazines. Musictube is really the only interesting one for me, but I'll have to research the terms of the store carefully. I'd like it to be on all of my Ubuntu computers and be able to download it every reinstall without repurchasing.

thatguruguy
October 18th, 2011, 04:04 AM
I'd love to start buying software from the Software Center, but I'm not really interested in games or magazines. Musictube is really the only interesting one for me, but I'll have to research the terms of the store carefully. I'd like it to be on all of my Ubuntu computers and be able to download it every reinstall without repurchasing.

You can do that. Seriously.

c-1000
October 18th, 2011, 04:04 AM
OK, I did just now. There aren't many of them (28 at the time of my reading), so it wasn't difficult.

And I stand my earlier statement. Right... like I said, I'm trying to get to 50 posts, so there's going to be, you know, less than 50 of them.
And you know, a lot of them WERE in the spirit of trying to help my fellow users. Maybe I'm not a guru like you, maybe my ability to help others pales in comparison to yours, but I try to do whatever I can. I work in an unrelated field, and my knowledge of Linux is somewhat limited.
Point is, I was given something that was later taken away. I am trying to earn that back. Unfortunately, the criteria for what constitutes a "legitimate" post is somewhat ephemeral, and at the whim of the forum staff...

So, why all the vitriol, thatguruguy? I'm just trying to work my way into the community...I don't even know you. Why are you singling me out? What do you have against me? It's not like you're a member of the "forum staff", so, frankly....who pulled your chain?

Mikeb85
October 18th, 2011, 04:13 AM
You can do that. Seriously.

True, I've downloaded Oil Rush a few times and only paid for it once.

thatguruguy
October 18th, 2011, 04:16 AM
Right... like I said, I'm trying to get to 50 posts, so there's going to be, you know, less than 50 of them.
And you know, a lot of them WERE in the spirit of trying to help my fellow users. Maybe I'm not a guru like you, maybe my ability to help others pales in comparison to yours, but I try to do whatever I can. I work in an unrelated field, and my knowledge of Linux is somewhat limited.
Point is, I was given something that was later taken away. I am trying to earn that back. Unfortunately, the criteria for what constitutes a "legitimate" post is somewhat ephemeral, and at the whim of the forum staff...

So, why all the vitriol, thatguruguy? I'm just trying to work my way into the community...I don't even know you. Why are you singling me out? What do you have against me? It's not like you're a member of the "forum staff", so, frankly....who pulled your chain?

Relax, just funnin'. And I, too, work in an unrelated field. We're practically brothers.

Also, posts in the Community Cafe don't count towards the 50 posts you need. That was actually the point I was making, and it's a legitimate one, but I was having a bit of fun at your expense when making the point. Don't be upset, we're all friends here.

LMP900
October 18th, 2011, 04:24 AM
You can do that. Seriously.

This is what I assumed, but I wanted it in writing. So I guess it's the same as the Mac App Store. Buy once, install on all computers (with your account), and re-download as many times as you need.

Here's why I wanted to be sure since it can be confusing at times: I just found out a few days ago that, unlike books, my Kindle periodicals are tied to a specific Kindle instead of my account. It means that if my Kindle broke and I'm sent a replacement by Amazon, I lose all of my previous magazines and newspapers.

c-1000
October 18th, 2011, 04:25 AM
Also, posts in the Community Cafe don't count towards the 50 posts you needExactly.
On more than one occasion I've made what I felt was a SOLID contribution to a thread, only to have that thread moved to 'community'.
Negating not only my post, but my contribution.

So, of the 28 posts you read of mine...only 12 "count".


Relax, just funnin'. And I, too, work in an unrelated field. We're practically brothers.

I was having a bit of fun at your expense when making the point. Don't be upset, we're all friends here. If you ever reply to me on a thread again I will report you for abuse.

Good day.

thatguruguy
October 18th, 2011, 04:28 AM
exactly.
On more than one occasion i've made what i felt was a solid contribution to a thread, only to have that thread moved to 'community'.
Negating not only my post, but my contribution.

So, of the 28 posts you read of mine...only 12 "count".

If you ever reply to me on a thread again i will report you for abuse.

Good day.

o.k.

jerenept
October 18th, 2011, 04:32 AM
Exactly.
On more than one occasion I've made what I felt was a SOLID contribution to a thread, only to have that thread moved to 'community'.
Negating not only my post, but my contribution.

So, of the 28 posts you read of mine...only 12 "count".

If you ever reply to me on a thread again I will report you for abuse.

Good day.

Your behaviour here in this thread makes me believe that the mods were correct in their decision. You attacked a fellow poster at the slightest aggravation, despite the fact that you can, in fact increase your postcount by going to the support boards, and actually helping people, you know, the purpose of Ubuntu Forums.

KiwiNZ
October 18th, 2011, 04:32 AM
Exactly.
On more than one occasion I've made what I felt was a SOLID contribution to a thread, only to have that thread moved to 'community'.
Negating not only my post, but my contribution.

So, of the 28 posts you read of mine...only 12 "count".

If you ever reply to me on a thread again I will report you for abuse.

Good day.

Calm down please. Also you cannot stops other replying in threads you are active in, this is an open Forum. If you do not wish to see posts from a particular member place them on your ignore list.

c-1000
October 18th, 2011, 04:34 AM
okiedokie

Legendary_Bibo
October 18th, 2011, 04:36 AM
Right... like I said, I'm trying to get to 50 posts, so there's going to be, you know, less than 50 of them.
And you know, a lot of them WERE in the spirit of trying to help my fellow users. Maybe I'm not a guru like you, maybe my ability to help others pales in comparison to yours, but I try to do whatever I can. I work in an unrelated field, and my knowledge of Linux is somewhat limited.
Point is, I was given something that was later taken away. I am trying to earn that back. Unfortunately, the criteria for what constitutes a "legitimate" post is somewhat ephemeral, and at the whim of the forum staff...

So, why all the vitriol, thatguruguy? I'm just trying to work my way into the community...I don't even know you. Why are you singling me out? What do you have against me? It's not like you're a member of the "forum staff", so, frankly....who pulled your chain?

Having an avatar isn't a big deal. I wish the UF staff would let me have an animated avatar though :(

c-1000
October 18th, 2011, 04:47 AM
actually helping people[/I], you know, the purpose of Ubuntu Forums.

No sense in piling on, comrade. Like I said, I do my best to help whoever I can.
I won't argue that I'm not much help. I dont know much about Linux, or Ubuntu, relatively speaking.
But I look through the new posts every day. Diligently.
Hoping someone has a problem simple enough that I am able to help with.

My greivance is not unique to me. I merely alluded to inequities that are explored ad nauseum on numerous other threads.

Funny, and quite illuminating, to see the shills and organ-grinders come out FULL-FORCE on a thread that threatens to hit Canonical right in the wallet.

DANCE, MONKEYS, DANCE!!:popcorn:

TheNosh
October 18th, 2011, 04:47 AM
If you ever reply to me on a thread again I will report you for abuse.

Good day.

Internet is serious business. http://ubuntuforums.org/images/icons/icon6.gif

You can't report someone for responding to you unless they're actually breaking some rule in their response. You follow the forum rules, the forum doesn't follow yours.

Also, help in threads --> Higher post count.

Crazy!

juancarlospaco
October 18th, 2011, 04:48 AM
1) GPL apps are Commercial apps too
2) software-center --disable-buy

Atamisk
October 18th, 2011, 04:49 AM
I think the best way for Canonical to avoid bad press here is to offer a button in SC that hides the for-purchase apps. It'd also help if the SC didn't look like the bloody Mac App Store.

That said, i'm off to see if i can get world of goo from the SC :P.

Legendary_Bibo
October 18th, 2011, 04:59 AM
Your behaviour here in this thread makes me believe that the mods were correct in their decision. You attacked a fellow poster at the slightest aggravation, despite the fact that you can, in fact increase your postcount by going to the support boards, and actually helping people, you know, the purpose of Ubuntu Forums.

No sense in piling on, comrade. Like I said, I do my best to help whoever I can.
I won't argue that I'm not much help. I dont know much about Linux, or Ubuntu, relatively speaking.
But I look through the new posts every day. Diligently.
Hoping someone has a problem simple enough that I am able to help with.

My greivance is not unique to me. I merely alluded to inequities that are explored ad nauseum on numerous other threads.

Funny, and quite illuminating, to see the shills and organ-grinders come out FULL-FORCE on a thread that threatens to hit Canonical right in the wallet.

DANCE, MONKEYS, DANCE!!:popcorn:


How do you miss the "Quote" button??

Anyways, knowledge is power, but a little knowledge is destructive. If you don't have that much knowledge of what you're doing helping someone new with advice you don't fully understand yourself could lead them on the wrong path and to frustrations.

Atamisk
October 18th, 2011, 05:01 AM
Wow, this thread went to hell quick.

oh well. I regards to the DANCE MONKEYS comment, uh,yeah. If Canonical goes Belly Up, so does Ubuntu. Therefore, i have a vested interest in seeing Canonical do well. If that means being 'burdened' with buying software i already wanted in the first place from a source i trust, i think i'll survive.

Also, --disable buy CLI option is okay, but a menu button would be better. knowing that there's already capabilities in the meat of the program, implementing a toggle button wouldn't be hard.

<<---EDIT--->>

Probably gonna get an infraction for this but here goes...

That cracks me up. Not really in the spirit of the forums, but funny nonetheless.

krapp
October 18th, 2011, 05:11 AM
Wow, this thread went to hell quick.

Well, the A-team came in. You can count on them.

Returning to the topic, I too think a big button that says pay what you wish would work as well. It's kept the Met. Museum afloat in NY. That and big financial backing (which Ubuntu has).

Atamisk
October 18th, 2011, 05:14 AM
Even better would be a donate-after-download option for programs you find indispensible long after downloading, and then decide donating would be something to do.

Then again, linking each donation button back to the account for EVERY project would be a nightmare.

Legendary_Bibo
October 18th, 2011, 05:15 AM
Even better would be a donate-after-download option for programs you find indispensible long after downloading, and then decide donating would be something to do.

Then again, linking each donation button back to the account for EVERY project would be a nightmare.

Yeah and adding it for PPAs would add a bit of a challenge.

Atamisk
October 18th, 2011, 05:25 AM
Added Wrinkle: Software developed by a third party which Ubuntu Devs niggled with (-#ubuntu# packages). Who would get that money?

juancarlospaco
October 18th, 2011, 05:44 AM
Also, --disable buy CLI option is okay, but a menu button would be better. knowing that there's already capabilities in the meat of the program, implementing a toggle button wouldn't be hard.


View------->All Software------>Canonical Maintaineds

earthpigg
October 18th, 2011, 06:30 AM
It'd also help if the SC didn't look like the bloody Mac App Store.

Why would that help?

Some (not all, not most) die-hard Mac fans looooove throwing money away in exchange for mediocre product. They've been preconditioned, and are vulnerable for exploitation.

The kind of customers anyone should want.

Captain Smiley Pants
October 18th, 2011, 06:33 AM
Synaptic Package Manager is awesome, just throwing that out there.

TheNosh
October 18th, 2011, 06:43 AM
Software you could pay for always existed, the Software centre is just making it easier to get, install, and update. Perhaps I'm missing something, why is making something easier bad?

It's not forcing you to buy it. If you only want to use free programmes, go for it. I mostly do, because I'm cheap. I'm not offended when a vendor offers to sell me things, though.

How dare they offer a wider variety of choices! The nerve!

Jay Car
October 18th, 2011, 09:08 AM
It's interesting, yet puzzling, to see someone unhappy at finding for-pay apps in the Software Center, or that the SC is being more visibly promoted.

If I want to just install/uninstall a lot of software at once, I use Synaptic. But that doesn't mean I don't like to do an occasional bit of shopping too. I buy a lot of games to keep on my computers for when my grand kids visit (I think Oil Rush will be my next game purchase).

I keep reading that the big problem keeping more proprietary software companies from supporting Linux is the idea that there's no money to be made.

The truth is that we'll not only pay for things that we want, we are (sometimes) willing to spend a bit more in order to encourage more Linux support.

We get so much basic (and truly beautiful) software for free that it's mind-boggling, but there are lot's of more specialised programs that many of us wish we could use without having to install another OS or fuss with Wine.

One of these days those hesitant-to-support-Linux companies might learn that there really is a potentially large and growing market here.

None of that can happen if, when non-free software DOES become available, we have no easy way to buy it, or we just complain about it being available. It's a chicken/egg thing.

I dunno...it's late and I'm pretty tired, so maybe this rambling post isn't as eloquent as I'd wish, but I think a nice, clean app store, with a good variety of free and non-free choices, is a really excellent idea.

sffvba[e0rt
October 18th, 2011, 09:22 AM
So I open the Software center... and the first pile of software is found under "What's new." The fact that all the newest applications are paid for is nobodies fault and IMO a healthy sign that people are developing for Linux and new things are streaming in :)

Next up was "Top rated". Not one paid for app in sight.

I do not see how the SC is "promoting" one above the other. Keep in mind that Canonical is making some money from this (I am pretty sure) but the actual winners in this is the developers of software that can get paid for their work.

Then again my 2c worth is just adding to all that has been said already...

@the a-team... didn't see Mad Dog Murdock here yet?


404

beew
October 18th, 2011, 10:26 AM
I have no problem with SC making paid software available per se, but there should be a separate category for "software for purchased" like in the previous version of the SC. Most Linux users expect their apps from the repo to be free and it is not good to click on something and then be presented with a price tag for $9.99.

Perfect Storm
October 18th, 2011, 10:39 AM
I liked it better when you had to TRY to find programs you'd actually have to pay for. One of the main reasons I started using Linux over Windows is that everything is free and nothing is restricted but with every new update, I feel like I am being dragged closer and closer to the corporate beasts that are only trying to bleed my wallet dry. Ubuntu is drifting away from it's FOSS roots.

/facepalm

You know you actually have your own free will to decide to buy the stuff i USC? No one is twisting your arms.
All the free stuff is still free, but for those who wants to buy a specific piece of software is able to do so.

ninjaaron
October 18th, 2011, 12:09 PM
At present, Canonical is not a profitable company. For them to continue to be involved in Ubuntu (and all the other FOSS projects to which they donate financially), they must eventually become profitable. If that means acting as software outlet, what's the big deal?

thatguruguy
October 18th, 2011, 01:05 PM
I have no problem with SC making paid software available per se, but there should be a separate category for "software for purchased" like in the previous version of the SC. Most Linux users expect their apps from the repo to be free and it is not good to click on something and then be presented with a price tag for $9.99.

You mean like this?

Mikeb85
October 18th, 2011, 03:32 PM
Finally, the most disturbing step Ubuntu has taken, I came across while trying to reinstall Gnome after my "upgrade". The software center is pushing paid software worse than the Android market! The section dedicated for new programs is clogged with price tags whereas once, it held programs created by open-source enthusiasts that, otherwise, might go unnoticed. Now, the next great open-source application might never get off the ground because it must live in the shadow of programs that are being vomited out of big corporations daily.

God forbid, someone who creates programs for a living might actually want to get paid? Not everyone can afford to do it as a hobby, and distro makers have ways to make money that aren't available to smaller programmers. Red Hat, Novell, Canonical - all need to make money, but they make it from services as opposed to the software itself.

IMO this helps out indie programmers at least as much, now they not only have an outlet for distribution, but people will actually see their programs and be able to easily purchase them.



I liked it better when you had to TRY to find programs you'd actually have to pay for. One of the main reasons I started using Linux over Windows is that everything is free and nothing is restricted but with every new update, I feel like I am being dragged closer and closer to the corporate beasts that are only trying to bleed my wallet dry. Ubuntu is drifting away from it's FOSS roots. I almost feel like soon we will have to pay for the OS itself.

FOSS isn't about not having to pay for anything. It's about collaboration on a large scale, and about freedom. It's not about communism or entitlement...

DangerOnTheRanger
October 18th, 2011, 03:41 PM
2. Since when is making a buck so damn evil? No wonder the mainstream writers and bloggers tend to refer to Linux users as "freetards". I have bought apps on my Android phones and paid for commercial Windows programs whenever I wanted or needed something that a free application couldn't give me. Sometimes I bought them just to get rid of ads. Nonetheless, I don't see companies as the enemies just because the want to promote paid versions alongside free stuff. In the end I choose for myself what I ultimately want to install on my phone or computer.

For me, it's not that the applications cost money; it's that they're proprietary. If Ubuntu's friendliness to proprietary applications continues, we may soon find ourselves locked down in a way similar to Windows or Mac OSX, in which case I'll move to Mint or elsewhere.

FOSS != $0. I'm willing to pay for FOSS programs, and possibly use a freeware proprietary program, but I'm not paying for a program that takes my Linux system one step closer to Windows.



1) GPL apps are Commercial apps too


+1




FOSS isn't about not having to pay for anything. It's about collaboration on a large scale, and about freedom. It's not about communism or entitlement...

+1

Atamisk
October 18th, 2011, 03:46 PM
God forbid, someone who creates programs for a living might actually want to get paid? Not everyone can afford to do it as a hobby, and distro makers have ways to make money that aren't available to smaller programmers. Red Hat, Novell, Canonical - all need to make money, but they make it from services as opposed to the software itself.

IMO this helps out indie programmers at least as much, now they not only have an outlet for distribution, but people will actually see their programs and be able to easily purchase them.



FOSS isn't about not having to pay for anything. It's about collaboration on a large scale, and about freedom. It's not about communism or entitlement...

+154390427

I also like your interpretation of FOSS. Free as in freedom, but not necessarily lunch. makes sense to an extent!

Paqman
October 18th, 2011, 04:02 PM
What a ridiculous criticism. What's wrong with people making money from Linux? I'm constantly amazed at how keen a lot of open source zealots are to keep Linux sidelined as a "hobbyist" system.

IMO Ubuntu, as the distro with by far the biggest audience, has great real opportunity (if not a responsibility!) to promote paid-for Linux software. Getting people paid for developing for Linux will make more people develop for Linux. Simple.

zekopeko
October 18th, 2011, 05:10 PM
Some (not all, not most) die-hard Mac fans looooove throwing money away in exchange for mediocre product. They've been preconditioned, and are vulnerable for exploitation.

The kind of customers anyone should want.

If you are referring to software in my experience OSX has higher quality software amongst all desktop platforms. OSX apps > Windows apps > Linux apps.

krapp
October 18th, 2011, 05:33 PM
IMO Ubuntu, as the distro with by far the biggest audience, has great real opportunity (if not a responsibility!) to promote paid-for Linux software. Getting people paid for developing for Linux will make more people develop for Linux. Simple.

This is an interesting take, and a lot more persuasive than the reactionary arguments that invariably devolve into "why do you hate money, you commie, etc."

sffvba[e0rt
October 18th, 2011, 05:38 PM
If Ubuntu's friendliness to proprietary applications continues, we may soon find ourselves locked down in a way similar to Windows or Mac OSX, in which case I'll move to Mint or elsewhere.

You are aware that the applications in the SC are Linux applications and not Ubuntu applications right?

Oh and on a side note, the main version of Mint is still based on Ubuntu...


404

gsmanners
October 18th, 2011, 06:11 PM
For me, it's not that the applications cost money; it's that they're proprietary. If Ubuntu's friendliness to proprietary applications continues, we may soon find ourselves locked down in a way similar to Windows or Mac OSX, in which case I'll move to Mint or elsewhere.

I doubt the possibility of being locked down is really looming, and even if it was I would personally figure out a way to unlock it (and probably keep it to myself just because this is what a "nice" guy I am).

No, more likely what will happen is that you'll see games that have serious issues not being dealt with on the USC doing millions of dollars in business and the community going nuts over the lack of support. The Fallout from that will likely be lots of fun.

That said. ahem (http://www.nero.com/enu/linux4.html)

Spice Weasel
October 18th, 2011, 07:46 PM
For me, it's not that the applications cost money; it's that they're proprietary. If Ubuntu's friendliness to proprietary applications continues, we may soon find ourselves locked down in a way similar to Windows or Mac OSX, in which case I'll move to Mint or elsewhere.

FOSS != $0. I'm willing to pay for FOSS programs, and possibly use a freeware proprietary program, but I'm not paying for a program that takes my Linux system one step closer to Windows.

Er, isn't the whole purpose of Mint to include proprietary software that Ubuntu won't include?

3Miro
October 18th, 2011, 07:54 PM
Er, isn't the whole purpose of Mint to include proprietary software that Ubuntu won't include?

Not necessarily. Mint mostly includes free software that potentially violated software patents. Canonical doesn't do that.

For example, I can make a mp3 encoding library and license that under GPL, however, potentially I can sill get sued as well as everyone who uses the library as the mp3 format is proprietary. My library would be included in Mint, but not Ubuntu.

Having said that, Mint does indeed come with some proprietary software, like the Nvidia drivers.

ekaspar
October 18th, 2011, 10:04 PM
Unlike most of the rather bombastic posters on this forum, I agree with the original post.
With the advent of
a) Unity, with its uncustomizable interface
b) Ubuntu One, the Canonical-owned data storage service
c) The Ubuntu Software Center, with its paid-app promotions and aping of the Mac App Store,

it seems as though Ubuntu is trying to become a second Mac OS, a task at which I predict it will fail miserably. Frankly, I would posit that Canonical doesn't have the engineering and promoting talent, not to say mindshare, that Apple has. And I like it this way.
Linux is all about END-user control and corporate laissez-faire, about not having all your eggs in one basket, about having multiple options for software and utilities. Ubuntu seems to be trying to centralize everything more and more, which seems contrary to the very goals of Linux.
Now let me also say, before I get accused of portraying Canonical as a new Big Brother, that no freedoms have yet been restricted. You can still disable Unity, you can use whatever online storage you want, and you can still download and install any program you want from Softpedia or some backwater hacker site. I am simply stating my discomfort with the direction Canonical is taking with the system. It's a philosophy issue, not a nuts and bolts problem, at this point.
The beauty of Linux is, however, that should Canonical go full force with a Mac OS experience emulation, I can easily switch to a different OS. For me, I'd go back to straight Debian.

Legendary_Bibo
October 18th, 2011, 10:23 PM
Unlike most of the rather bombastic posters on this forum, I agree with the original post.
With the advent of
a) Unity, with its uncustomizable interface
b) Ubuntu One, the Canonical-owned data storage service
c) The Ubuntu Software Center, with its paid-app promotions and aping of the Mac App Store,

it seems as though Ubuntu is trying to become a second Mac OS, a task at which I predict it will fail miserably. Frankly, I would posit that Canonical doesn't have the engineering and promoting talent, not to say mindshare, that Apple has. And I like it this way.
Linux is all about END-user control and corporate laissez-faire, about not having all your eggs in one basket, about having multiple options for software and utilities. Ubuntu seems to be trying to centralize everything more and more, which seems contrary to the very goals of Linux.
Now let me also say, before I get accused of portraying Canonical as a new Big Brother, that no freedoms have yet been restricted. You can still disable Unity, you can use whatever online storage you want, and you can still download and install any program you want from Softpedia or some backwater hacker site. I am simply stating my discomfort with the direction Canonical is taking with the system. It's a philosophy issue, not a nuts and bolts problem, at this point.
The beauty of Linux is, however, that should Canonical go full force with a Mac OS experience emulation, I can easily switch to a different OS. For me, I'd go back to straight Debian.

Not being able to change the UI is not a violation of your freedom
Canonical (A company/corporation) putting pay-for applications in THEIR SOFTWARE CENTER on THEIR DISTRO is not a violation of your freedom
In case if you haven't noticed in the past 5-6 years there's been a lot of people who decided that they wanted to make Linux easier for the average user and turn it into a viable desktop option rather than a server only operating system

This is what they're doing.

If Canonical is doing something you don't like, use a different distro, if you don't like Unity, install Gnome Shell (which is what I did), but remember you're getting this for free, so if you really want change, code something and submit it, if it gets rejected, make your own distro that implements your software.

Quit confusing the open source/software freedom philosophy with the entitlement attitude where you believe they should be always doing something you want.

MonolithImmortal
October 18th, 2011, 11:32 PM
Quit confusing the open source/software freedom philosophy with the entitlement attitude where you believe they should be always doing something you want.
This.

kaldor
October 18th, 2011, 11:54 PM
Free beer vs free speech. Money doesn't infringe on your freedom.

kostkon
October 19th, 2011, 01:08 AM
Quit confusing the open source/software freedom philosophy with the entitlement attitude where you believe they should be always doing something you want.
Nice.

+1

Bachstelze
October 19th, 2011, 01:23 AM
Free beer vs free speech. Money doesn't infringe on your freedom.

Some of the methods used to make money do, however.

jerenept
October 19th, 2011, 05:42 AM
Some of the methods used to make money do, however.

Please explain to me how Canonical is doing this?

Mr. Picklesworth
October 19th, 2011, 06:02 AM
Finally, the most disturbing step Ubuntu has taken, I came across while trying to reinstall Gnome after my "upgrade". The software center is pushing paid software worse than the Android market! The section dedicated for new programs is clogged with price tags whereas once, it held programs created by open-source enthusiasts that, otherwise, might go unnoticed. Now, the next great open-source application might never get off the ground because it must live in the shadow of programs that are being vomited out of big corporations daily.

I agreed with the first bit of your post on some level. I kind of frowned when I noticed that everything under “what's new” was commercial. Partly, it was “oh no, someone is going to make an unhappy forum thread about this” (and boy was I right!), but, mostly, I'm a little concerned about something else. I think the main drive of the problem is that the extra app submission thing is really just getting off the ground (which I don't blame it for), so the stuff that was already in that category will end up being on the What's New section — and, from Natty, that stuff is (almost) all commercial. I think it would have worked out better if there was a well balanced selection to begin with; if developer.ubuntu.com took off a little earlier, maybe with some real incentive for people who already have free apps. Like the ability to release feature upgrades at any time. (And maybe that Donate button).
I guess time will tell how this works out. I know I'm planning to release a small (free / open source) app there in the next couple months, and I'm sure I'm not the only one. I bet in six months this will look completely different, and that dynamism is something we haven't had before.

Now, I totally take issue with you referring to stuff like Oil Rush, Steel Storm, SpaceChem, and Braid as having been “vomited out of big corporations daily.” Every commercial game that is in there has been written by a small team of independent developers (sometimes only one), usually over the course of years. Most of these people make games because they love to do it, and they charge for them because they want to keep doing it, and to do it well. I think it's unfair to assume Jonathan Blow is a soulless corporate goon because he has a product that costs money. Or that he wants to make money from you directly instead of hoping you'll buy books.

Why does free / open source need to be the only ethical way to make software? Isn't the world big enough for a few?

gsmanners
October 19th, 2011, 08:17 AM
Why does free / open source need to be the only ethical way to make software? Isn't the world big enough for a few?

I agree. This world is filled with strangers. Not everyone should be like family. Only software that's special to me is endearing to me like family. But we shouldn't pretend that strange, potentially hostile software isn't out there.

The better question is: Who exactly is in charge of managing the exposure of applications?

ekaspar
October 19th, 2011, 02:00 PM
Not being able to change the UI is not a violation of your freedom.

I'm not sure how you can make this statement with a straight face. To not be able to change a the UI of a system is the ultimate slap in the face of an end user who values his freedom. The UI is the most personal part of any system or software.
Thankfully, Ubuntu has not become restricted to the point that Unity is the only option.


In case if you haven't noticed in the past 5-6 years there's been a lot of people who decided that they wanted to make Linux easier for the average user and turn it into a viable desktop option rather than a server only operating system

Server-only OS? I'll gloss over that interesting remark for brevity's sake.
Making a UI easier to use for the non-computer cognoscenti is an admirable move; but carrying it to the point where the user is dumbed down to requiring 2" square icons to direct him to his youTube cat videos, online Angry Birds, and plethora of mind-bogglingly imbecilic social networks. What if we (gasp) challenge the end user to become a little more proficient, to gain knowledge?

Far from an entitlement philosophy, I would rather Canonical WOULD NOT make me a Unity desktop, WOULD NOT try to centralize (and charge for) all their software for me, WOULD NOT try to get me to give them my data in online storage, and WOULD NOT assume I'm a half-blind imbecile.

All told, though, many thanks to the dev teams behind Ubuntu for creating what still is a very good system!

CharlesA
October 19th, 2011, 02:07 PM
Canonical moved the Close/maximize/minimize from the right hand side to the left hand side and the Sky fell in. The were pages and pages of hate threads. :rolleyes:
I remember that. It got nearly as much uproar as Unity didn't it?

Paqman
October 19th, 2011, 02:30 PM
Thankfully, Ubuntu has not become restricted to the point that Unity is the only option.


Nor will it ever be. Ubuntu is based on Debian, as long as there are other DEs in the Debian repos, they'll be in Ubuntu.


Server-only OS? I'll gloss over that interesting remark for brevity's sake.

Essentially Linux is a server and embedded systems OS. That's what the vast majority of Linux installs are, and what the massive engineering effort and expense all goes into, and it's where all the money is. Desktop Linux is a sideshow, really.

Bear in mind that Unity is new, better customisation options are most likely on the roadmap, but quite sensibly aren't a priority for early releases.

zekopeko
October 19th, 2011, 03:05 PM
I agreed with the first bit of your post on some level. I kind of frowned when I noticed that everything under “what's new” was commercial. Partly, it was “oh no, someone is going to make an unhappy forum thread about this” (and boy was I right!), but, mostly, I'm a little concerned about something else. I think the main drive of the problem is that the extra app submission thing is really just getting off the ground (which I don't blame it for), so the stuff that was already in that category will end up being on the What's New section — and, from Natty, that stuff is (almost) all commercial. I think it would have worked out better if there was a well balanced selection to begin with; if developer.ubuntu.com took off a little earlier, maybe with some real incentive for people who already have free apps. Like the ability to release feature upgrades at any time. (And maybe that Donate button).

I thought it was pretty obvious all the paid applications in the What's New queue are there because they simply piled there during Ocelot's development. So once 11.10 came out they simply became exposed to end users which they weren't during development.

I think that Ubuntu needs to seriously push for something like Glick2 so we can finally have application bundles and consequently apps that aren't frozen in time for the next 1.5-3 years. Every other desktop platform out there supports this except desktop Linux.

Merk42
October 19th, 2011, 04:48 PM
You mean like this?Also shown in that image, the price of the app BEFORE you click on it.

For me, it's not that the applications cost money; it's that they're proprietary. If Ubuntu's friendliness to proprietary applications continues, we may soon find ourselves locked down in a way similar to Windows or Mac OSX, in which case I'll move to Mint or elsewhere.
False dichotomy.
Just because the proprietary software is available doesn't mean the FOSS will disappear.

KiwiNZ
October 19th, 2011, 07:15 PM
Canonical moved the Close/maximize/minimize from the right hand side to the left hand side and the Sky fell in. The were pages and pages of hate threads. :rolleyes:


I remember that. It got nearly as much uproar as Unity didn't it?

Yep, people even wanted to storm Canonical's HQ. The threatened mass exodus did not occur and most of the folks threatened to leave are still using and still posting here.

But the uproar was first fun then dammed annoying as nearly every new thread was hit/hijacked by those pushing their own hate agenda and stopping the enjoyment of those who liked what they had and just wanted to get on with.

CharlesA
October 19th, 2011, 07:16 PM
Yep, people even wanted to storm Canonical's HQ. The threatened mass exodus did not occur and most of the folks threatened to leave are still using and still posting here.

But the uproar was first fun then dammed annoying as nearly every new thread was hit/hijacked by those pushing their own hate agenda and stopping the enjoyment of those who liked what they had and just wanted to get on with.
Thought so. Sounds kinda familiar now that I think about it.

sffvba[e0rt
October 19th, 2011, 07:29 PM
thought so. Sounds kinda familiar now that i think about it.

qft!


404

Perfect Storm
October 19th, 2011, 07:31 PM
Yep, people even wanted to storm Canonical's HQ. The threatened mass exodus did not occur and most of the folks threatened to leave are still using and still posting here.

But the uproar was first fun then dammed annoying as nearly every new thread was hit/hijacked by those pushing their own hate agenda and stopping the enjoyment of those who liked what they had and just wanted to get on with.

:lolflag:

Legendary_Bibo
October 19th, 2011, 08:04 PM
I'm not sure how you can make this statement with a straight face. To not be able to change a the UI of a system is the ultimate slap in the face of an end user who values his freedom. The UI is the most personal part of any system or software.
Thankfully, Ubuntu has not become restricted to the point that Unity is the only option.

You..you can't be serious right? What freedom is being violated? Seriously, go ahead and tell me. Speech? Religion? Press? Go right ahead. In case you haven't noticed, this was software written by some paid professionals, and some volunteers (who are also professionals). You're using software written by someone else, just because you can't change the location of icons, or the theme that it uses. There's something called the Developer-User relationship, if you're using something that another developer made, you are at the whim of the developer, you have no right to tell them what features they should add in and demand it unless you're the guy signing his paycheck. That is self entitlement. You can suggest ideas if you'd like.

If Ubuntu tied Unity to itself and restricted you from changing anything, or installing anything outside of the store, or using a different DE you'd have a point.

Man, the "freedom" word seems to be thrown around a lot in Linux communities, but I'm starting to doubt people actually know what that entails in terms of software freedoms.



Server-only OS? I'll gloss over that interesting remark for brevity's sake.
Making a UI easier to use for the non-computer cognoscenti is an admirable move; but carrying it to the point where the user is dumbed down to requiring 2" square icons to direct him to his youTube cat videos, online Angry Birds, and plethora of mind-bogglingly imbecilic social networks. What if we (gasp) challenge the end user to become a little more proficient, to gain knowledge?

Silly me, using statistical evidence to make my basis such as looking at the server market shares, and the desktop market shares.

Fun Fact: Most people aren't interested in being the most proficient at using a computer. They want e-mail, Angry Birds, Facebook, Skype/IM, something they can do their essays/work on. They want a UI that's quick to understand and navigate. This doesn't make them imbeciles or stupid. There's a world outside the computer and a lot more to that world that people have skills in.



Far from an entitlement philosophy, I would rather Canonical WOULD NOT make me a Unity desktop, WOULD NOT try to centralize (and charge for) all their software for me, WOULD NOT try to get me to give them my data in online storage, and WOULD NOT assume I'm a half-blind imbecile.

All told, though, many thanks to the dev teams behind Ubuntu for creating what still is a very good system!

You don't have to use any of that stuff, what makes you look like an imbecile is that you keep thinking they're forcing this stuff on you. In fact, they're not even forcing you to use their distro! Isn't that great?!

Unless you take Mark Shuttleworth's place and start paying the devs' paychecks Ubuntu will obviously continue to develop Unity, Ubuntu One, and push the Ubuntu Software Center as a viable platform for commercial Linux software.

Primefalcon
October 19th, 2011, 08:12 PM
frankly I all for paid programs in the software center, if we can hoenstly get some of the bigger more popular proprietary software that's out there to support Linux such as games, Dreamweaver and so on.... That will seriously lower the barrier to adoption...

Legendary_Bibo
October 19th, 2011, 08:15 PM
If you're looking for something like Steam for Linux, Desura has a Linux beta. I signed up for it and two days later I was in it.

I tried two games, one installed correctly, and one gave me some error about a missing lib file. Although it bypasses Linux's security stuff (sudo/su) when installing games.

Perfect Storm
October 19th, 2011, 08:19 PM
If you're looking for something like Steam for Linux, Desura has a Linux beta. I signed up for it and two days later I was in it.

I tried two games, one installed correctly, and one gave me some error about a missing lib file. Although it bypasses Linux's security stuff (sudo/su) when installing games.

Just install Desura locally :KS

nothingspecial
October 19th, 2011, 08:31 PM
Watch this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GT5fUcMUfYg

ekaspar
October 19th, 2011, 09:43 PM
@Legendary_Bibo- Easy, easy. There's no need to get upset over what I have repeatedly stated is NOT an issue at this point, but is moving in (in my opinion) the wrong direction. Everything will be ok. :)

Allow me to attempt to defuse your anger by quoting myself- "Now let me also say, before I get accused of portraying Canonical as a new Big Brother, that no freedoms have yet been restricted." - "I am simply stating my discomfort with the direction Canonical is taking with the system. It's a philosophy issue, not a nuts and bolts problem, at this point."

So with these words, I will respectfully decline from engaging in any further argument with you. Have a great day!

KiwiNZ
October 20th, 2011, 01:35 AM
@Legendary_Bibo- Easy, easy. There's no need to get upset over what I have repeatedly stated is NOT an issue at this point, but is moving in (in my opinion) the wrong direction. Everything will be ok. :)

Allow me to attempt to defuse your anger by quoting myself- "Now let me also say, before I get accused of portraying Canonical as a new Big Brother, that no freedoms have yet been restricted." - "I am simply stating my discomfort with the direction Canonical is taking with the system. It's a philosophy issue, not a nuts and bolts problem, at this point."

So with these words, I will respectfully decline from engaging in any further argument with you. Have a great day!

You may not feel comfortable with the direction the ubuntu community is taking this Distro that is your right, to hint that freedoms have or may be taken away is nonsense, you are and will always be free to use a different Distro if this one does not suit your needs. There is no lock in.

Primefalcon
October 20th, 2011, 01:46 AM
I just want to say it outright, I really really like the direction Canonical is going with the Software center, awesome job guys.... now all you need to do is roll in an user friendly updater function and you can get rid o the current update program and do it ALL THROUGH THE SOFTWARE CENTER! (frankly I hope we see this in 12.04)

TheNosh
October 20th, 2011, 01:48 AM
To not be able to change a the UI of a system is the ultimate slap in the face of an end user who values his freedom.


Seriously? You're not required to use the system. What about interfaces within each application? Many of them have very little available customisation in the interface, but if you don't like it, you change to an application with an interface you do like, you don't say the developers aren't supporting your freedoms.

I like Banshee. I like the way it has iTunes like an column browser on top, and I like that it shows album art in the album column instead of just names. You know what I don't do? I don't think the developers of media programs that can't be customised to do that are disrespecting my freedom.

Operating systems are no different. The people that make them say what goes in them. If you want to decide, then make your own.

thatguruguy
October 20th, 2011, 01:55 AM
If you're looking for something like Steam for Linux, Desura has a Linux beta. I signed up for it and two days later I was in it.

Me, too. It's nifty.


I tried two games, one installed correctly, and one gave me some error about a missing lib file.

Was it SpaceChem by any chance? You can get it working by editing the launcher file (spacechem-launcher.sh) from

#!/bin/sh
./mono SpaceChem.exe
to

#!/bin/sh
mono SpaceChem.exe

Although it bypasses Linux's security stuff (sudo/su) when installing games.
I think that's because it is installing the games locally rather than system-wide. Nothing is being written to the system directories.

IWantFroyo
October 20th, 2011, 01:57 AM
I use Xubuntu and apt-get, so none of your problems affect me. I would consider trying the same thing.

I miss Gnome 2 sometimes, as well. XFCE is probably the next best thing, however.

DangerOnTheRanger
October 20th, 2011, 05:28 AM
You are aware that the applications in the SC are Linux applications and not Ubuntu applications right?

Oh and on a side note, the main version of Mint is still based on Ubuntu...


404

I also explicitly stated "or elsewhere", "elsewhere" possibly being Debian or Fedora. And Linux Mint is steadily deviating from its Ubuntu origins, and it's starting to really look like a good alternative to Ubuntu.




False dichotomy.
Just because the proprietary software is available doesn't mean the FOSS will disappear.

I never said FOSS would disappear, I merely stated that Ubuntu is by far the most proprietary software-friendly distro out there, and that is something I frankly cannot tolerate - software freedom is very important to me. I understand there are other distros, but I would hate to say goodbye to Ubuntu. I also understand that I am not being forced to use proprietary applications offered in the USC, but I predict one day Canonical will write and bundle proprietary programs with Ubuntu, and I don't want to be around when that happens.

gsmanners
October 20th, 2011, 05:54 AM
... I merely stated that Ubuntu is by far the most proprietary software-friendly distro out there...

LOL :lolflag:

Oh, are you serious?

Legendary_Bibo
October 20th, 2011, 06:52 AM
Me, too. It's nifty.



Was it SpaceChem by any chance? You can get it working by editing the launcher file (spacechem-launcher.sh) from

#!/bin/sh
./mono SpaceChem.exe
to

#!/bin/sh
mono SpaceChem.exe

I think that's because it is installing the games locally rather than system-wide. Nothing is being written to the system directories.

It was some old west shooter, but some reviews said you needed Quake installed first though.

Paqman
October 20th, 2011, 07:30 AM
Ubuntu is by far the most proprietary software-friendly distro out there, and that is something I frankly cannot tolerate



I would hate to say goodbye to Ubuntu.

Ok, but you realise that your problem is entirely created by clinging to these two contradictory opinions? My advice: switch to Debian or Fedora and be happy.

Tibuda
October 20th, 2011, 10:32 AM
I never said FOSS would disappear, I merely stated that Ubuntu is by far the most proprietary software-friendly distro out there, and that is something I frankly cannot tolerate - software freedom is very important to me.
Intolerance and freedom are words that do not go well together. If you really care for freedom, then you can tolerate proprietary software. If you don't want any proprietary software, just don't install it, but don't impose your opinion on others.


I understand there are other distros, but I would hate to say goodbye to Ubuntu. I also understand that I am not being forced to use proprietary applications offered in the USC, but I predict one day Canonical will write and bundle proprietary programs with Ubuntu, and I don't want to be around when that happens.
Canonical already bundle proprietary firmware blobs in Ubuntu since day 1. That's why Ubuntu is in RMS blacklist (http://www.gnu.org/distros/common-distros.html) (alongside all popular distros like Fedora).

Primefalcon
October 20th, 2011, 10:49 AM
actually there are a lot of binary blobss in the kernal...... there is a de-blobbed kernal you can use out there though..... wouldn't count on it's hardware support though

though if you want to go there just use gnewsense http://www.groklaw.net/articlebasic.php?story=20061102083226821

frankly I'll stick to ubuntu though myself

Legendary_Bibo
October 20th, 2011, 10:57 AM
actually there are a lot of binary blobss in the kernal...... there is a de-blobbed kernal you can use out there though..... wouldn't count on it's hardware support though

though if you want to go there just use gnewsense http://www.groklaw.net/articlebasic.php?story=20061102083226821

frankly I'll stick to ubuntu though myself

Yep same here, if I'm going to use Linux, I'm not going to use the crippled version of the kernel.

Paqman
October 20th, 2011, 11:06 AM
That's why Ubuntu is in RMS blacklist (http://www.gnu.org/distros/common-distros.html) (alongside all popular distros like Fedora).

That's the most pointless list I've ever seen. Even Debian isn't good enough for them. What planet do they live on?

Grenage
October 20th, 2011, 11:11 AM
Do I like swapped window buttons? Not really, but it doesn't make a big difference. Do I like Unity? No, I prefer GS, and have moved to Fedora 15. Moaning about a direction you don't like is usually fruitless.

Do I have a problem with paid software being pimped on a Linux desktop? Hell no!

The lack of commercial viability is, in my opinion, one of the issues crippling Linux uptake. A simple interface for purchasing quality software should be welcomed with open arms; it could easily attract more developers who code to eat, not just for fun.

Paqman
October 20th, 2011, 11:29 AM
The lack of commercial viability is, in my opinion, one of the issues crippling Linux uptake. A simple interface for purchasing quality software should be welcomed with open arms; it could easily attract more developers who code to eat, not just for fun.

This.

The trouble with the Linux desktop is that the market has traditionally been very fractured. If I was running a small software business I'd be asking questions like:

How do I get my software to your users?
How will they find/install/update it?
How will they pay for it?


Previously those questions have either had no answer, or a different one for every distro. Providing a proper portal to put software in front of the majority of Linux users lowers the risk of developing for Linux, and should ultimately give us all a better choice of software.

moldaviax
October 20th, 2011, 12:23 PM
I've not really got a problem with this, it could be nice to have an easy donate option to the free software too.

M.

sffvba[e0rt
October 20th, 2011, 12:34 PM
I've not really got a problem with this, it could be nice to have an easy donate option to the free software too.

M.

Interesting idea (I think the biggest issue with this would be that Canonical/Ubuntu may be criticized for handling the transaction... but still a link to pay directly to the developers would be sweet)...


404

ekaspar
October 20th, 2011, 02:09 PM
You may not feel comfortable with the direction the ubuntu community is taking this Distro that is your right, to hint that freedoms have or may be taken away is nonsense, you are and will always be free to use a different Distro if this one does not suit your needs. There is no lock in.

"To hint that freedoms have or may be taken away is nonsense". You fail to qualify this rather grand statement with "my opinion is". Thank you, however, for acknowledging my right to dissent with popular opinion occasionally. If Ubuntu does keep going the same direction I may very well switch to a different distro.

In the meantime, many things about this distro are quite good. I am happy with the system as it is, more or less. Woe betide anyone who dare speak of it except in terms of highest adulation, however. Moderators and legendary hobbits leap to its bulwarks in stout defense. :)

thatguruguy
October 20th, 2011, 02:14 PM
Moderators and legendary hobbits leap to its bulwarks in stout defense. :)

Or, people simply disagree with you on this particular issue.

kaldor
October 20th, 2011, 02:18 PM
"To hint that freedoms have or may be taken away is nonsense". You fail to qualify this rather grand statement with "my opinion is". Thank you, however, for acknowledging my right to dissent with popular opinion occasionally. If Ubuntu does keep going the same direction I may very well switch to a different distro.

In the meantime, many things about this distro are quite good. I am happy with the system as it is, more or less. Woe betide anyone who dare speak of it except in terms of highest adulation, however. Moderators and legendary hobbits leap to its bulwarks in stout defense. :)

I'm not usually one to state absolutes, but I do think this is a matter of 'Fact' versus opinion.

Nobody is taking anyone's freedom away. Nobody is forcing you to use Ubuntu. Offering commercial applications is not denying freedom, and arguably offers even more freedom.

It really is nonsense. You're using a free (as in cost) product and you're not being locked into anything.

People have every right to ask for money in return for their work. I don't get what's dishonourable about simply offering more choice in software or asking for a fee. As others in this thread have said, the sense of entitlement that a lot of users seem to have is just immature.

Edit regarding UI stuff:

Lack of UI customization is NOT restricting freedom. This comes back to the "entitlement" comments. Canonical owns Ubuntu and pays its employees to work on it. They have the full rights to include their own (open source even) desktop environment in their product. If you don't like it, install GNOME Shell or KDE.

Anyone who is arguing about the "Ubuntu takes away my freedom" crap should read up on what software freedom is. Also, read the GPL/BSD/Whatever licenses. It'll clear up these 'freedom' issues.

Edit regarding corporations:

People who complain about corporations being involved with Linux should read up on some of Linux's history. You'll find that most everything you use on a regular basis was influenced in some way by a company or by people paid by companies to work on a product. Google, Red Hat, Novell, IBM, Apple (yes, really), Microsoft (yes, really) and many, many more companies have contributed to Linux and common projects. Who do you think funds the GNOME project, for example?

dniMretsaM
October 20th, 2011, 06:22 PM
Ok, kind of coming in late on this thread, but I think I'll give my opinion on this anyway.

The first thing I wanted to say is that promoting paid applications has nothing to do with freedom. Freedom necessitates "free speech" not "free beer." Free software can require you to pay for it. Also, why the attitude of entitlement? Despite popular opinion, the world doesn't revolve around you and you don't deserve to have everything given to you free of charge. And you have absolutely no obligations to use Ubuntu. You are free to choose any other distro you like (i.e Debian, Fedora, Linux Mint, OpenSUSE, etc.).


Moderators and legendary hobbits leap to its bulwarks in stout defense. :)

Where are you getting "hobbits" from?

Legendary_Bibo
October 20th, 2011, 07:04 PM
Where are you getting "hobbits" from?

My username is Legendary Bibo

Bibo is close to Bilbo

Bilbo Baggins was a hobbit on The Lord of the Rings.

It's some lame trolling method.

Legendary_Bibo
October 20th, 2011, 07:21 PM
"To hint that freedoms have or may be taken away is nonsense". You fail to qualify this rather grand statement with "my opinion is".

Actually, the statement you made qualifies as you trying to state a fact, but mislabeling as an opinion. If I said "In my opinion whacking a stranger upside the head is practicing my freedom of speech" I just mislabeled my false fact as an opinion.



Thank you, however, for acknowledging my right to dissent with popular opinion occasionally. If Ubuntu does keep going the same direction I may very well switch to a different distro.

Not to be rude or anything, but in all honesty, no one really cares when someone else switches distros. People will care to help them switch and get some things setup if they need it, but people don't care if you switch. Goodbye Ubuntu threads are interesting in that regard.



In the meantime, many things about this distro are quite good. I am happy with the system as it is, more or less. Woe betide anyone who dare speak of it except in terms of highest adulation, however. Moderators and legendary hobbits leap to its bulwarks in stout defense. :)

You'll find that I'm one of the people who attack Linux more than praise it, I just don't think someone should be spewing ill informed lies about Linux or Canonical.

Oh and nice reference to me, you're so original you're like the billionth person who thought that Bilbo was a clever name replacement. :popcorn::lolflag::guitar:=D>

Primefalcon
October 20th, 2011, 07:30 PM
I really don't like these kind of topics, they don't really help the Linux world as a whole...

fact is, if you are completely against the concept of paid software, while Ubuntu may not be fore yo8u, maybe gNewSense would be..... Dishing one distro that is not for you really doesn't help... just choose one that does suit you....

That's the thing with Linux, there is choice, use it and don't complain!

MonolithImmortal
October 20th, 2011, 07:39 PM
Moderators and legendary hobbits leap to its bulwarks in stout defense. :)
I'm just gonna say this once, Bibo is kind of the opposite of an Ubuntu youth.

sffvba[e0rt
October 20th, 2011, 07:50 PM
I'm just gonna say this once, Bibo is kind of the opposite of an Ubuntu youth.

http://www.legendarytv.com/the_a-team/images/General_Stockwell_Robert_Vaughn_1.jpg

I think we have had enough bickering and arguing about who killed who... this thread has a topic... let us discuss it and not each other etc...



404

nothingspecial
October 20th, 2011, 07:50 PM
And so endeth the thread.

KiwiNZ
October 20th, 2011, 07:52 PM
"To hint that freedoms have or may be taken away is nonsense". You fail to qualify this rather grand statement with "my opinion is". Thank you, however, for acknowledging my right to dissent with popular opinion occasionally. If Ubuntu does keep going the same direction I may very well switch to a different distro.

In the meantime, many things about this distro are quite good. I am happy with the system as it is, more or less. Woe betide anyone who dare speak of it except in terms of highest adulation, however. Moderators and legendary hobbits leap to its bulwarks in stout defense. :)

I "failed to qualify" hmmmmm, OK, as it was clear that it was I that was making the post then the need to qualify was superfluous.

nothingspecial
October 20th, 2011, 08:06 PM
Closed