Is Canonical Becoming The New Microsoft?

[bryonak]

As far as I know, Canonical has not yet loaded any of their products up with DRM, nor cut sneaky deals with computer manufacturers to push competitors out of business, nor engaged in embrace, extend, and extinguish campaigns, nor foisted pages-long doublespeaky legalese EULA's upon its users. So even if they were to switch to an entirely proprietary business model, they wouldn't be the new Microsoft. (Yet).

True, not comparable to Microsoft. Then again, keep in mind hyperbole is an often used tool to emphasise changes and grab attention.
And I daresay that there are fairly different moral standards for a FOSS company.

Canonical is indeed increasingly walking the less-free road, this becomes clearer every year. Them making money is a Good Thing, yet for example Red Hat seems to manage splendidly and doesn't experience such a "karma loss".
Canonical is of course still a FOSS company and will continue to be, but the changes, especially in mindset, point to the wrong direction IMO.

As an anecdote, this has lead to my personal enthusiasm for Ubuntu waning and my activity on these forums decreasing. Recently I've more than once entertained the thought of switching (my personal as well as the family/friends machines I maintain) to Sidux and Fedora, whose morals seem to be still untarnished. I'm sure giving Fedora 13 a try instead of Lucid.

[Kazade]

Only people who obsess about their ram usage would say that. I'm going to guess you aren't actually aware of how much easier java and .NET make developing and maintaining.

You guess wrong, I work with them daily but then I'm a C++ programmer at heart so I'm likely a little biased.

That's not the point of GNOME. Use something that's supposed to be lightweight like LXDE or Xfce.

True, but I like GNOME

[[h2o]]

In comparison, Mono uses more memory than a natively compiled app because it has to run a virtual machine. I've seen memory comparisons with Tomboy vs Gnote and Rhythmbox vs Banshee that show large differences (of course it's not a totally fair comparison as code quality has an effect).

Not sure what you want with your last statement. But to the rest: Yes they will obviously use more memory since a virtual machine has to be running. The question is if the amount of memory is relevant.
Just drawing theoretical figures from my behind:
If Tomboy use 3MB of memory and GNote only 1MB for the same amount of data then I am not worried.
If Banshee use 600MB while playing my music while Rhythmbox only uses 100MB for the same music library, then yes that could be annoying. If on the other hand Banshee uses 200 MB I would not really care.

It should also be noted that measuring memory usage is very, very hard.

No. Generally not compared to a compiled app that does the equivalent.

Benchmarks?

That is not as easy as you might think, especially if dependencies on Mono increase.

If I understood correctly very few bits have a possible patent-axe hanging over them, and they were not essential. If you have other information I am happy to review it.

FWIW I replace Tomboy with Gnote and remove F-spot on my default install which allows me to remove the otherwise unused mono runtime.

And I bet your previously slow computer really flies now, eh?

[m4tic]

i wouldn't mind if wmp or a trial of iLife was included in the default. every rhythmbox i've had always had problems

[Tristam Green]

You mean "was as wealthy". Because he's not in the same league.

Technically, it's "were as wealthy" in the subjunctive case.

grammar nazi awaaaaaaaaaay

[jwbrase]

Might be because the FSF and RMS has been acting in a way that quite a lot of people don't like.
I for one was a big supporter of the FSF and had no strong opinions about RMS. After recent events (childish Bad Vista campains, RMS being totally unempathic about sexist issues, etc) I see no reason why anyone should take them seriously.

I've never been a total supporter of the FSF or RMS and have always found them a bit extreme (for one thing, I have no problem with proprietary software if the business practices behind it are ethical), but I had no problem with the Bad Vista campaign, it just speaks out against the shenanigans that Microsoft is pulling and has pulled with Windows for years. I'm not familiar with these "sexist issues" that RMS has been "unempathetic" about, but just because he's a blithering idiot with regards to gender issues, or economics, or underwater basket weaving doesn't mean I can't take him seriously with regards to software politics (or, at least, as seriously as I ever took him in the first place).

[[h2o]]

I'm not familiar with these "sexist issues" that RMS has been "unempathetic" about, but just because he's a blithering idiot with regards to gender issues, or economics, or underwater basket weaving doesn't mean I can't take him seriously with regards to software politics (or, at least, as seriously as I ever took him in the first place).

I can grant you that. I do however not feel that he represent a very sane view on software politics either.

[jwbrase]

True, not comparable to Microsoft. Then again, keep in mind hyperbole is an often used tool to emphasise changes and grab attention.

Granted.

And I daresay that there are fairly different moral standards for a FOSS company.

Canonical is indeed increasingly walking the less-free road, this becomes clearer every year. Them making money is a Good Thing, yet for example Red Hat seems to manage splendidly and doesn't experience such a "karma loss".
Canonical is of course still a FOSS company and will continue to be, but the changes, especially in mindset, point to the wrong direction IMO.

I guess part of it is just that I don't hold companies to that high of a standard. FOSS is good because it avoids the abuses that many of your large proprietary vendors participate in, but it's not impossible to avoid those abuses in a proprietary project.

The only thing that Canonical is doing that has me really concerned is Ubuntu One, and even then, my objection isn't really an ethical one.

[Kenny_Strawn]

For the record: Ubuntu One is a Web application. You cannot have an open source Web application without having it being hosted by the user. In order for a Web application to be FOSS, you have to essentially host it on every computer it runs on, a killer of performance.

[jwbrase]

I can grant you that. I do however not feel that he represent a very sane view on software politics either.

Not really. But he's still saner than a Microsoft EULA.