Canonical should acquire Resara.

[tymiles]

I am thinking that Canonical should acquire Resara.

Rasara was a company that used Samba 4 to make a small to medium business server on top of Ubuntu that was compatible with Windows (Looked to Windows like AD) Macs and Linux.

This company is winding down and open sourced everything. I think Ubuntu would do good to have something like this to get further into the small business market. Esp now that MS got rid of its home server and its dedicated small business server.

I am in the IT business and a lot of times I want to offer Ubuntu or the likes for small business file sharing but I can't because its not easy enough to manage, directory services are not there etc.

Resara has all this and it works well on top of Ubuntu as their base. With Ubuntu putting in the R and D and then selling it on Dell or HP hardware etc, I think it would be a hit.

Let me know what you think?

http://www.resara.org

[Nixarter]

Have they expressed interest in the company?

[KiwiNZ]

it's insolvent so no they should not.

[lykwydchykyn]

I think they'd be better off acquiring Zentyal, assuming they wanted to offer that kind of product at all.

[alexan]

Shuttleworth sa id che had moneny only TO keep Ubuntu form only another 5 years. it was said a year ago.
So, no. Currently Canonical need only a more reliable way to sustain itself; and users to support it. (buy from software center)

[mips]

I am thinking that Canonical should acquire Resara.

Rasara was a company that used Samba 4 to make a small to medium business server on top of Ubuntu that was compatible with Windows (Looked to Windows like AD) Macs and Linux.

This company is winding down and open sourced everything.

So why buy them when you can just use the source code in your own products?

[effenberg0x0]

Not if I buy it first :)
Take that Mark!!

[KiwiNZ]

Not if I buy it first :)
Take that Mark!!

You must have a spare $1.50

[s.fox]

Shuttleworth sa id che had moneny only TO keep Ubuntu form only another 5 years. it was said a year ago.

Do you have a source for that? :)

[AllRadioisDead]

Shuttleworth sa id che had moneny only TO keep Ubuntu form only another 5 years. it was said a year ago.
So, no. Currently Canonical need only a more reliable way to sustain itself; and users to support it. (buy from software center)

Mr. Shuttleworth said no such thing.

[Nixarter]

Perhaps a misinterpretation of this presentation? (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4QlcQNjzPHA)

[Grenage]

I assume that the 5 year support was referring to LTS server support. ^^

[Irihapeti]

Do you have a source for that? :)

Don't need one. Saw it somewhere on the internet, so it must be true. :)

[alexan]

In the 2008 Canonical wasn't cash positive and Mark Shuttleworth said: "I have no objection to funding the business for another three to five years," (link (http://news.cnet.com/8301-1001_3-10075890-92.html). Today we're in the 4th of those 3~5 years and I don't remember any news/announcement that claim Canonical finally cash positive.

[Elfy]

Shuttleworth sa id che had moneny only TO keep Ubuntu form only another 5 years. it was said a year ago...


In the 2008 Canonical wasn't cash positive and Mark Shuttleworth said: [I]"I have no objection to funding the business for another three to five years...

A year ago was 2011 ...

But regardless of that I doubt that Mark Shuttleworth worries too much about what was said 4 years ago, have you seen anything that says recently that he'll stop funding in 2013 ?

[desktorp]

from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ubuntu_Foundation ..

Mark Shuttleworth describes it as an "emergency fund" in the event that Canonical's involvement in the Ubuntu project ends.

I think this is where the idea of Ubuntu shuttering (justifiably) originates. I'm not saying I think it's going anywhere, anytime soon- but the writing is on the wall. Ubuntu will either become profitable enough to sustain itself, or it will not. If it does not and the foundation runs out of cash, people can't be paid.

[rg4w]

from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ubuntu_Foundation ..

Mark Shuttleworth describes it as an "emergency fund" in the event that Canonical's involvement in the Ubuntu project ends.

I think this is where the idea of Ubuntu shuttering (justifiably) originates. I'm not saying I think it's going anywhere, anytime soon- but the writing is on the wall.
My understanding is that the Foundation was established to give even greater confidence to OEMs, who need to plan product cycles across a longer term than most.

By creating the Foundation, Canonical has assured the OEMs (along with everyone else) that even if Mark's hundreds of millions run out and Canonical still isn't profitable enough to continue on its own, there's enough cash in the Foundation to keep the project moving forward for several years while other funding sources are put together.

[forrestcupp]

In the 2008 Canonical wasn't cash positive and Mark Shuttleworth said: "I have no objection to funding the business for another three to five years," (link (http://news.cnet.com/8301-1001_3-10075890-92.html). Today we're in the 4th of those 3~5 years and I don't remember any news/announcement that claim Canonical finally cash positive.His point in that quote wasn't that he is going to stop supporting Ubuntu in 3-5 years. His whole point was that he's a patient man, and he's not just going to quit immediately because it's not profitable. He also said, "If we needed to, we probably could be profitable in two years." They haven't gotten to the point that they need to yet.


My understanding is that the Foundation was established to give even greater confidence to OEMs, who need to plan product cycles across a longer term than most.

By creating the Foundation, Canonical has assured the OEMs (along with everyone else) that even if Mark's hundreds of millions run out and Canonical still isn't profitable enough to continue on its own, there's enough cash in the Foundation to keep the project moving forward for several years while other funding sources are put together.
That's exactly what it's for. The Foundation is not a sign that Shuttleworth is backing out, but a sign that it could continue to thrive if he ever has to.

[KiwiNZ]

His point in that quote wasn't that he is going to stop supporting Ubuntu in 3-5 years. His whole point was that he's a patient man, and he's not just going to quit immediately because it's not profitable. He also said, "If we needed to, we probably could be profitable in two years." They haven't gotten to the point that they need to yet.


That's exactly what it's for. The Foundation is not a sign that Shuttleworth is backing out, but a sign that it could continue to thrive if he ever has to.

No No No, the Foundation is to provide holiday funding for UF Staff

[forrestcupp]

No No No, the Foundation is to provide holiday funding for UF Staff

Lol. I heard they're paying $100 to anyone who likes them on Facebook. (https://www.facebook.com/ubuntulinux)

[zombifier25]

He can always sell his jet.

[StygianAgenda]

Umm... I think this thread has wandered away from the original subject....

Anyways: Resara... Nice technology. I used it on a test project a while back, and today... I'm finding myself re-implementing it... because to date... I've found nothing better in the way of competing directly against Active Directory (while maintaining things as purely OSS).

While I don't advise Canonical to purchase Resara (the company's intellectual properties), I do advise that Canonical should investigate the possibility of absorbing the Resara source code into Ubuntu, or at the least, assist in refining Resara's source code for the benefit of the entire Linux community. Really, the right people to get behind that idea would be the Samba Team. If the Samba Team made the Resara source code part of the base Samba4 distribution, it would ease deployment all the way around on every platform that uses Samba, and that would carry the greatest benefit of all.

[iamkuriouspurpleoranj]

^Do you have a source for him not saying that?