Shuttleworth on Ubuntu's Direction and Intent 242
cj2003 writes "Mark Shuttleworth has released a FAQ about Ubuntu's Direction and Intent. It comments on the discussions of funding, of being a Debian-fork or not, of the strange names, and many other 'hot topics' relating to Ubuntu. In his own words: 'This document exists to give the community some insight into my thinking, and to a certain extent that of the Community Council, Technical Board and other governance structures - on some of the issues and decisions that have been controversial.'"
Professional Addition (Score:3, Funny)
If you don't make a commercial "Ubuntu Professional Edition", how can Ubuntu be sustainable?
I am puzzled, don't Home Editions make money?
Re:Professional Addition (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Professional Addition (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Professional Addition (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Professional Addition (Score:3, Funny)
I am sure he will get nailed to a tree in the end :)
Re:Professional Addition (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Professional Addition (Score:3, Informative)
In fact, the original meaning of "computer" was a person who did math calculations for a living.
ObIndy (Score:5, Funny)
Snakes. Why did it have to be snakes?
Re:Professional Addition (Score:4, Insightful)
The easy answer
I disagree. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:I disagree. (Score:5, Informative)
Come on now, XP Pro has, what, Active Directory/Windows Domain/whatever-else-Microsoft-tried-to-replace-LD AP-with support? A nice GUI for managing NTFS ACLs which you can manipulated in XP Home with cacls? As far as I know, Pro is only really useful if you're managing a large gaggle of Windows boxes. For instance, at home I run all my network services under Linux. I've a few boxes dual-booting with XP Home, and one with XP Pro. Pro sees no benefits whatsoever in this environment; it's no more stable, functional or secure.
Re:I disagree. (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:I disagree. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:I disagree. (Score:4, Informative)
compmgmt.msc
I'm not positive, but I don't think either of those extremely useful utilities are in XP Home. (Can anyone confirm?)
Re:I disagree. (Score:3, Informative)
Re:I disagree. (Score:4, Funny)
Re:I disagree. (Score:3, Interesting)
better performing, platform-independant hardware RAID?
It's common wisdom that hardware RAID is better than software RAID, but I'm not so sure. Performance may or may not be better, depending on workload, but I think the "platform independence" of hardware RAID is highly overrated. Hardware RAID solutions are platform-independent in the sense that you can theoretically access the data with any other operating system, but they're extremely dependent on the hardware platform. If your hardware RAID contro
Re:I disagree. (Score:5, Informative)
When XP came out, the logic was that anyone on 98/ME could move to XP Home, while XP Pro was for those who needed 'that weird esoteric enterprise stuff' that was only in windows 2000 professional.
So when all these users got their new laptops and desktops with xp home preinstalled it was a pretty rude awakening that MS had actually removed the webserver and disabled the ability to connect to a domain entirely.
It wasn't simply that Home was a watered down version of XP Pro (people were pretty much expecting that)...in some significant respects it was a waterned down version of 98!!! "Upgrading" from 98 to Home actually removed 2 pretty major features.
A lot of hobbyists, tele-communters, home-based web developers, power users, savvy gamers, and so forth got burnt by Home Edition. It was aggravated by the price difference, and the fact that many system builders didn't offer XP as an option in their more home-consumer targeted products... yet many "home consumers" needed XP Pro, but had no reason to pay 60% more for an 'enterprise workstation model of pc/laptop'
Additionally the watered down security model, the lack of support for encryption (what?! Home users don't need privacy??) and limiting users to the "Microsoft Way" of setting up shared folders etc (hiding all the details where users literally could not meaningfully get to them -- yet all the details were there for misbehaving software to bungle up) was a real disservice to consumers.
Finally the loss of remote desktop, has saved the day for countless thousands as more clued friends family are able to solve their problems. (Sure home comes with remote assistance which is much much much clumsier and more of a pain to setup, especially when all parties are behind NAT boxes. Getting RD up and running is a few checkboxes and an easy nat/firewall tweak...)
Home solidly deserves its reputation for being crippled.
Re:I disagree. (Score:2)
1. Remote Desktop
2. IIS (yeah some people have installed IIS on XP Home but it sure didn't work for me)
Re:I disagree. (Score:2)
It is more secure. The Pro version supports Encrypted File System, which is quite useful because it's not a cooperative security measure like NTFS permissions. If I use NTFS permissions to secure a folder, then browse the folder under Linux, I can read everything. This doesn't work if you encrypt the file with EFS, unless you take the time to crack it somehow. EFS has it's faults, but IMHO it's a useful featur
Re:I disagree. (Score:2, Insightful)
Although I don't quite agree with you considering "Home Edition" crippled, I must say that it would make sense to "cripple" a home version of Windows (or a user-friendlier version of Linux) to aid in helping newbies learn the ropes. It may seem a little drastic, but you'd be surprised just how many people honestly don't read the plethora of popup dialog boxes and system tray bubbles that appear.
And - funny as it may sound - you'd be surprised just how intimidated newbies are whenever the Start menu automa
Re:I disagree. (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Professional Addition (Score:2)
2.6 cams? Wow, I didn't realize they come in fractional values.
Re:Professional Addition (Score:2)
Re:Professional Addition (Score:3, Funny)
Whoa — or, "Ubuntu Starter Edition"!
I think we're on to something here!
Re:Professional Addition (Score:5, Funny)
Good idea. (Score:2)
Linspire.
I want a server edition. (Score:2)
Re:I want a server edition. (Score:3, Insightful)
Insightful indeed... (Score:5, Interesting)
(As an aside, Ubuntu "Live" was great for testing out that OS X x86 release that was going around, so in that regards, kudos to Ubuntu for being straight-forward to provide the means to get OSx86 up and running.)
Re:Insightful indeed... (Score:2)
I won't mod you down, but I probably would have if you had said "digg".
Re:Insightful indeed... (Score:2)
The biggest problem I've had is with environment vars.... I just want to put a system wide set-when-you-boot-env-var and call a command reliably at boot time.
Re:Insightful indeed... (Score:2)
Pam, being responsible for the initialization of all login sessions is in hte perfect position to do this.
Re:Insightful indeed... (Score:3, Informative)
Jambo Ubuntu (Score:5, Interesting)
use rdesktop for windows (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Jambo Ubuntu (Score:2)
Re:Jambo Ubuntu (Score:2)
evolution --version says "Gnome evolution-2.2 2.2.1.1"
Should I file a bug report on that
Re:Jambo Ubuntu (Score:2)
$ evolution --version
Gnome evolution-2.4 2.4.1
Re:Jambo Ubuntu (Score:2)
So I click Reload, and get 7 packages to install: 5 GTK packages, openoffice.org-debian-files, and update-notifier (maybe it will automatically "Reload" on startup...).
After I tell "Software Updates" to "Install" those 7 updates (and even reboot, just to see whether that's necessary for all those GTK updates), evolution --version still says "Gnome evolution-2.2 2.2.1.1"
Re:Jambo Ubuntu (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Jambo Ubuntu (Score:3, Informative)
They state quite rigiorusly that the development branch/unstable is just that. however, you may have luck with changing
Propietary Software Industry (Score:5, Interesting)
I agree that some tactics of the proprietary software industry are less than desirable, but how many of us would be able to earn a living without them?
I also agree that many businesses (Google for example) are offering a free interface while keeping their proprietary software on the back end. However, the majority of companies AREN'T going in that direction (Adobe for example). That they're "dying out rapidly" is a ridiculous statement.
Re:Propietary Software Industry (Score:5, Insightful)
From available evidence, the outstanding majority. In fact, a majority (approx. 90% by some counts) of all programmers already do earn a living working directly for companies that use the software, rather than for those companies which sell software for others to use. Beyond that, of course, I'm sure companies existing and new will learn to adapt as the market changes. Once, all computer companies sold their own, incompatible, proprietary machines; now most sell open, compatible, semi-generic systems. And yet, the industry is hardly any poorer for that.
Re:Propietary Software Industry (Score:3, Informative)
but a tiny, miniscule amount of that software ends up packaged on store shelf.
Re:Propietary Software Industry (Score:2)
And, in fact, about 7 or 8% of the other 10 are niche products in very niche markets (think computational chemistry, IC design, fixed-income securities analysis, etc.) where the programmer encapsulates fairly complex domain knowledge. These apps are also not going away.
As for the rest - well,
Re:Propietary Software Industry (Score:5, Informative)
Don't forget the third option: I work for a company that produces software that is licensed to hardware manufacturers who then ship actual devices. Mobile phones, in my case. The software is never sold directly to the primary users of the software.
I suspect there's a hell of lot of this going on, too.
Re:Propietary Software Industry (Score:2)
Open source software notwithstanding, what percent of corporations give out their internally-developed business code for free?
Re:Propietary Software Industry (Score:2)
The central point remains: free/libre/open-source software is no threat, and has potentially great benefit, to nearly all programmers.
Re:Propietary Software Industry (Score:2)
The answer to that is simple. Free Software allows the small custom developer and the in-house developer to deliver large and complex custom applications (based on Free Software frameworks) with more functionality and a lower cost than proprietary software. Parts of these applications will probably always remain "secret" to the company, but it is almost always advantageous to share improvements to the framework and core application. As someone who has tried to maintain their own parallell version of a po
Re:Propietary Software Industry (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Propietary Software Industry (Score:3, Informative)
See here [slashdot.org].
Trend: Products (before) -> Services (after)
Re:Propietary Software Industry (Score:2, Insightful)
Pretty much all of you. This may come as a shock, but the majority of people in the world manage to get by without ever writing a single line of code.
This may also come as a shock to you, but the world doesn't give a flying you know what about what you wish to be paid to do. In fact, it works the other way around, you either have to take care of yourself or be willing to do whatever other people are willing to pay you for.
I do not owe you a liv
Re:Propietary Software Industry (Score:2)
Indeed, in fact Shuttleworth is apparently blind to the contradiction he offers through two examples in adjacent paragraphs:
Re:Propietary Software Industry (Score:3, Insightful)
And? It sounds like what you are calling "the only difference" is what is actually the whole point - especially in the context of the cross distro collaboration efforts he talks about. The contradictions are entirely in the way you chose to interpret them.
Money Talks (Score:5, Insightful)
He's certainly made me believe he's sticking to Debian for the heavy lifting then Q/A and patching to make the packages perform the way he wants them.
I do wonder though if the Debian volunteers will really stick around and still take pride in working on the distro that makes Ubuntu so good.
Re:Money Talks (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Money Talks (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Money Talks (Score:2)
I'm inclined to believe that merging with Debian Unstable every six months will be the downfall of Ubuntu. That was cool when Debian had taken forever to get a new release out and unstable was more like testing is now, but unstable is now much more "broken". They'll be wasting a lot of effort rushing to a release before the Debian people (who are, in some sense, exper
Unstable: Perfect Storm (Score:4, Informative)
Once these are over, Debian Unstable will be its usual not-really-unstable self.
Re:Unstable: Perfect Storm (Score:2)
Yes, basically. The exception is GCC, as Gentoo is insanely slow about that. They are currently on 3.3 (not 4... not 3.4... 3.3!).
Re:Money Talks (Score:2)
And who knows
Re:Money Talks (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Money Talks (Score:4, Funny)
The should be... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Money Talks (Score:2)
I'm not really involved with Ubuntu, but I submitted a bug report for a package that was sent upstream to Gnome - not Debian. The
Grumpy Groundhog info (Score:5, Informative)
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/GrumpyGroundhog [ubuntu.com]
It's an ubuntu distribution for developers that has the daily builds of everything:
Funky Fairy! (Score:5, Funny)
Funky Fairy would be an AWESOME name for Ubuntu 6.10!
hmm (Score:2)
I wonder if we could get Clumsy Clawshrimp [penny-arcade.com] accepted?
Maybe now (Score:3, Insightful)
Why is Ubuntu not part of the DCC Alliance?
I don't believe the DCC will succeed, though its aims are lofty and laudable. It would be expensive to participate, and it would slow down our ability to add the features, polish and integration that we want in new releases. I'm not prepared to devote scarce resources to an initiative that I believe will ultimately fail.
Ouch. I thought the simple fact that DCC is based on Sarge, and Ubuntu on Sid was reason enough.
Also, this FAQ should put to rest the question of leeching and other dumb shit that Ubuntu has been accused of.
Re:Maybe now (Score:3, Funny)
Debian Cello Conservatory?
Desktop Cruft Collection?
Dramatically Capable Computers?
D C Cisnotanacronym?
Don't Clutch your Crotch?
Re:Maybe now (Score:3, Informative)
http://dccalliance.org/ [dccalliance.org]
I think it's an organization trying to promote cooperation amoungst the debian based distro's. Cooperation towards better coordination (eg. bug fixing) and some standardizaton to make things easier for the end-user. Somebody correct me if I'm wrong.
All the major debian derived distro's belong to it other than Ubuntu. Obviously this is a major ommision which, on it's own, is enough to kill it.
Re:Maybe now (Score:3, Interesting)
In the fine article, Mark makes the great point that the strength of FLOSS stuff is the source code, which can be compiled to whichever architecture it supports. It made me wonder if ABI compatibility in LSB is a silly x86-centric mistake.
Re:Maybe now (Score:2)
If DCC does fail he will have contributed to this by not supporting it in some manner (even if just giving it his moral support).
In my opinion, DCC is good for debian, and good for LInux.
What a nice guy (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:What a nice guy (Score:3, Informative)
Or... instead of using $20 million on an 8 day trip to space?
That said, I am very gratefull for his sponsorship of Ubuntu
The crux of the article... (Score:5, Informative)
Ubuntu Talk at Debconf 5 (Score:3, Insightful)
With all his wealth (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:With all his wealth (Score:3, Interesting)
Moving from RedHat/Fedora to Ubuntu? (Score:2, Interesting)
I use Fedora, with freshrpms, kderedhat, and some other public repositories. I like some of the Ubuntu concepts such as the warm fuzzy humanity thing feels really good to me. But I'm wondering if it's practically worth the effort switching? The hype is enticing, but what's it really like?
thanks
Re:Moving from RedHat/Fedora to Ubuntu? (Score:2)
Re:Moving from RedHat/Fedora to Ubuntu? (Score:2, Interesting)
I hold RHCE for 9 and Enterprise 3 and while I like certain aspects of Red Hat, I can't justify the cost when Ubuntu is perfectly suited.
The problem with Fedora/RHEL is that I have to pay to get easy updating. I know I can jump through hoops to make it work without paying, but it's not worth it to me, especially when Ubuntu's apt works wonderfully. I plan on asking my employer, in ex
Re:Moving from RedHat/Fedora to Ubuntu? (Score:2)
Re:Moving from RedHat/Fedora to Ubuntu? (Score:3, Interesting)
FC3 came on four CD's, I believe. I think sarge comes on 11, if I remember right (I only download the first CD and apt the other stuff I need, personally). All that extra software is part of the debian project and fits seamlessly into it. Everything is available from one place, which makes sear
DCC... (Score:3, Interesting)
Honestly, I agree with him. It has marginal chance of success over the attempt that was UnitedLinux, by not having the commercial interest muddying the waters. However, the crux of the problem is that it flies somewhat in the face of the whole point of different distributions. The theory may be that distros distinguish themselves at a higher level and by forcing common underpinnings doesn't impact the ability to differentiate, but if that were truly the case, there wouldn't be such variation today.
For example, let's assume a member of the DCC is a tad more enthusiastic about GNUstep than the others. Hypothetically, GCC 4.2 releases with ObjC++ support as a significant feature. That distro may want to break with the conservative members to provid the GCC that would allow easier porting of a wider range of OSX apps. What's perceived commonly as a 'boring underpinning' becomes a potential significant factor in differentiation for a distro, but requires breaking compatibility with the rest of DCC.
Just as UnitedLinux made it impossible for the members to meaningly be different, everything ending up essentially being SuSE with different artwork and corporate propoganda, the DCC just simply can't occur and preserve meaningfully unique identies of member distributions.
Debian has always been about open source, and by not even having the illusion of binary compatibility amongst them, it perhaps encourages practices of distributing description files, tarballs, and diffs rather than binary
Ubuntu to Supplant Debian? (Score:2, Interesting)
What to do about Debian? (Score:3, Insightful)
Even so, I suspect there's a problem here that's slowly appearing on the horizon and that's the future of Debian. It's beginning to resemble an old tramp steamer. Years of sterling, cargo-carrying service but now the crew are arguing on the bridge and some are even trying to force the captain's safe. The engineers (fewer than there were) are desperately trying to keep the ship's rather aged boilers from bursting. And a flotilla of other vessels, some flying the skull and crossbones, are circling, many darting in to nick some of the deck cargo and occasionally a few crew members to boot (although the chief purser has so far proved too weighty to carry off in a pirate lighter). If the old girl starts to founder then a whole lot of people are going to be in a serious pickle.
It may be that simply contributing patches back up to Debian isn't enough. Debian is a huge and amazing project, but for that reason is needs a lot of organization and talented manpower to keep it not merely going but a beacon of excellence. If it catches a cold, so does everyone else. With Debian being pulled in different directions, you have to wonder how long it can hold up for without beginning to suffer.
Ubuntu as distros go... (Score:3, Informative)
Re:The strange names... (Score:2)
Re:The strange names... (Score:3, Insightful)
And please learn the English language. "Dapper" doesn't mean gay, it means stylish!
Re:So which is it? (Score:2)
imagine you're rich and you want to have phpMyAdmin with a pink theme. the easiest way is to go to PMA's devs and tell them "modify it for me to be pink and I'll give you $xxx.
Re:So which is it? (Score:2, Interesting)
That's what I think anyway.
They're CODENAMES! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:They're CODENAMES! (Score:2)
Go to the official download page [ubuntu.com].
Now what do you find there?:
Download the latest Ubuntu!
Ubuntu 5.10 "The Breezy Badger" Preview Release
Ubuntu 5.04 "The Hoary Hedgehog"
MS never put their codenames on the boxes
My Gawd ... Shocking! (Score:2, Funny)
Re:They're CODENAMES! (Score:2)
Re:The strange names... (Score:4, Insightful)
Or until some people become less anal-retentive. Did you read the part about NASA being one of their customers? And is an interacial menage a trois somehow worse than a single race one?
Pffft (Score:5, Insightful)
Criticising Ubuntu's 'marketing' is ludicrous given that they have had outrageous success in accruing brand recognition very quickly.
I don't think the problem you see really lies with Ubuntu. With your references to "half naked and interracial menage-a-trois" and Dapper Drake being a "gay duck" I think it is you that has maturity problems, not Ubuntu.
Re:If only I didn't have to install stuff AFTER (Score:3, Informative)