LCA2012: Bruce Perens Says Open Source Needs To Do More

Wearing a suit when the rest of the 500-strong lecture theatre were dressed in shorts, jandals, and old conference T Shirts, Bruce Perens introduced himself by announcing his clothes as a lesson: Linux needs to be more outward facing.

Perens is described as an open source luminary, the founder of a number of non-profits, groups and Open Source initiatives and projects including the well-renowned and globally used Busybox. A former Debian Project Leader, he represented Open Source at the United Nations World Summit on the Information Society in 2005. Perens is often quoted in the press, advocating for open source and the reform of national and international technology policy.

Maintaining control

Perens begins his talk by saying open source is a success, and also a failure. The aim of open source was to free computing for the world as users increasingly become slaves to their tools. He gives the iPhone as an example. Part of its function is to not do what you want when that action might reduce the profit of Apple, or a media company, or upset a cellular carrier or the government.

“We trust very few companies to decide what’s right for us to consume and what isn’t.”

But what is the harm? People enjoy iPhones, and on the whole they cater to what the average consumer is after. The danger lies in the lack of control. Perens argues you’re a slave to whoever controls that tool, and thus controls what you do with it, what you see on it, and what you use it for. Apple, Microsoft, Google, and a sprinkling of other multinational companies are simply intermediaries between content and our consumption.

And we trust very few companies to decide what’s right for us to consume and what isn’t.

The Open Source movement, Perens suggests, is the only credible producer of software (and recently hardware), and therefore not bound to a single interest, economically or politically. Open Source is important in a world controlled by big business, and it’s up to us to ensure it’s not squashed like a bug by the interests of these large companies.

Evolving goals

Perens suggests that the goals of open source need to evolve and become simply more than development of quality software. Open source needs to become relevant with the mainstream and needs to earn their sympathy. We face many challenges – a much covered and controversial story over the last few months has been the SOPA bill – hotly contested by the software and internet community. But progress against this bill has been slow and difficult.

Why is it so difficult for us to be heard?

Open source has not built a relationship with users, with common people, like Apple has manifested over the last decade. Open source has not earned consumer sympathy and when it comes to the crunch, we can’t bet on the rest of the world to rally beside us when it’s required to shut down harmful bills such as SOPA.

“Nothing’s more annoying than the complaining user who has never contributed anything.”

Perens calls for developers to start caring about users. He admits that it’s easy for developers to simply ignore users, and concedes that – as a developer himself – nothing’s more annoying than the complaining user who has never contributed anything. He understands that many developers of open source software wonder why they should care about users, and instead develop for themselves and other developers.

But when open source work only benefits ourselves and our community, it’s self limiting.

Some companies and organizations understand this, and Perens listed a “best of breed” which included Mozilla, Wikipedia, and yes, Ubuntu.

Beware of the ‘buntu

While Ubuntu demonstrates great self discipline, and has a very user-centric approach to open source software, however, it is in the position of becoming an intermediary – Perens warns that Ubuntu is owned by Canonical, a commercial company.

“We need to accept that our commercial partners will put the interest of their business before all else.”

Perens suggests that Canonical will put business before the community. The interest of their commercial partners (for example, OEMs) will constrain what they can do. All companies, open source or not, will put business first.

As commercial companies like Red Hat and Canonical took the foreground in open source over the last two decades, the community and volunteer contributors lost the moral high ground, and Perens says that today this makes Open Source just another competitor.

Perens warns that “working for free to make Mark Shuttleworth ricer just isn’t very smart” and advises Ubuntu developers to make sure their presence is known independently of Ubuntu.

“Working for free to make Mark Shuttleworth richer just isn’t very smart.”

He finishes by saying that simply making a better platform than the competition is an insufficient goal if the company behind it eventually turns into another Microsoft. It’s Windows, just from another company.

So Perens asks, is it going to be our destiny to live in a world of constraint?

Authors note: Unfortunately my camera card reader is playing up, so photos will be added to this article whenever I can get my hands on a new one.

Related posts:

  1. How Does One Monetize Open Source Software?
  2. Bruce Perens Announced As Linux.conf.au 2012 Keynote Speaker
  3. #LCA2011 How does one create a sustainable open source business?
Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • Philip Witte

    One day, every governmental, industrial, technical, and educational endeavor will be structured with an Open Source philosophy… and the world will have little need of personal or corporate profit. Monetary economics will die and a truly efficient resourced based economy will be built for the benefit of the entire global population.

    • http://twitter.com/zaghy2zy Ivan Lapis

      Am I reading a comment from a supporter of the Venus project? I rarely hear people say “resource based economy” unless it’s spoken in context as the Venus project… In fact, I can only attach those words to the Venus Project. 

      • Philip Witte

        Venus Project and Zeitgeist Movement! ;-)

        • Anonymous

          I find it hard to believe in the Venus project when I see that they’re selling most media related to the project for ridiculously high prices on their website… If you’re going to oppose the monetary system, don’t be hypocritical and *sell* all related media for money. Even if profits are used for supporting the Venus project…

          • Philip Witte

            I can’t speak much for the Venus Projects practices as I’m much more part of the Zeitgeist Movement. I do fully support it’s ideology and economic design from a technical standpoint.

            Even within TZM, many members are confused or divided about realistic transition methods to a RBE. My firm believe is that the world will naturally move that direction with the increasingly rapid growth of Open Source replacements to propitiatory technologies.

            Because OS is truly free, our constructs will eventually out-perform the alternatives in every imaginable way. Once the scale is tipped far enough, a RBE is the only applicable economic model.

          • StringEcho

            Even thou they advocate abolishment of monetary system they as we all are still living in monetary paradigm. So one need money to survive regardless what he think about it. That is one of the “beauties” of current system so they have no much of a choice do they?. But this is for much longer debate so i’ll leave it with that.

      • Danny Walton

        I think the term is used more in the Burning Man scene. 

    • StringEcho

      Amen to that :) 

  • Anonymous

    Free and open philosophy: A way to slowly alleviate the capitalist theory without lowering quality standards.

  • Samuel Orr

    “Perens warns that “working for free to make Mark Shuttleworth ricer just
    isn’t very smart” and advises Ubuntu developers to make sure their
    presence is known independently of Ubuntu.”

    This is partly the reason I stopped using Ubuntu. Though I have a lot of respect for Mark Shuttleworth, Ubuntu, and have a few acquaintances from Canonical I really felt like I was just advocating Ubuntu and helping Ubuntu instead of open source.

    I opted to use a more community oriented and controlled distribution with more upstream ties. Though the Ubuntu community seems to be doing very well at sending bug reports and etc to the original developers.

    • Anonymous

      this is why, despite the occasional hiccough, I’m convinced that Mint is heading in the right direction.  If they wind up going the same route as Ubuntu, which is possible, then I’ll move on again.  But when I contribute, financially or otherwise, I want it to be in a way that puts the software and the community first, not a business interest.

      • http://www.frothingthefrap.com/ Shannon Black

        Personally (and when I say personally I mean that this is my view and respect the differences in our statements) I feel there is nothing wrong in helping someone help everyone. Ubuntu is funded and can get linux to get recognized by OEM’s. When you find out and use Ubuntu, you become more open to the concept of linux in general. If we all decided that because they are a private company we shouldn’t support them then we’d lose the marketing that Canonical is getting for everyone. 

        Also note that without Ubuntu you wouldn’t have Linux Mint. Linux Mint isn’t trying to remove the need for Ubuntu, but rather fix their mistakes and provide something for what the community asks when Canonical can’t please everyone. They are probably mostly independant by now, but they still benefit from Ubuntu’s contributions. So here we see an example of when you help Ubuntu you help Linux Mint, but when you help Linux Mint you aren’t necessarily helping Ubuntu or Debian. 

        It’s wierd how people feel that contributions to Ubuntu end there. They also move upstream or downstream and are used in general. The more contributors Ubuntu has the more contributors the linux community has. Ubuntu is made up of many things, Network Manager, CD Burning, Audio Player, Movie Player, Browsers, File Managers etc etc. Obviously other distributions have those, but you can’t rule out the fact that the more flawless these run in Ubuntu (and Ubuntu would suck if they didn’t and Canonical would lose money) the more flawless they run everywhere. Also, I’m recognizing that Ubuntu users aren’t the only contributors here, but you can’t rule them out.

        Note that Ubuntu is not profiting at the moment, so Mark is paying out of his pocket, yet despite that Ubuntu is still the team player. 

        • Anonymous

          There’s just too much history of Ubuntu not contributing upstream.  Which makes sense, of course, from Canonical’s perspective — if everything they have is available upstream, how can they distinguish their own OS, or make any money out of it?

          Is the trade off worth it?  Development ultimately guided by the imperative to monetize a product, in return for a bit of oomph? Perhaps — I think it’s fair to say Ubuntu has had a broadly positive effect on the FOSS ecosystem, and brought many useful things to the table.

          For me, though, I got into FOSS computing because I believe in community-oriented computing, and Ubuntu is clearly headed in a different direction.  That’s cool, and I wish Canonical every success in turning Ubuntu into a profitable product.  But this is where I get off, that’s all.

      • Anonymous

        Helping Ubuntu you help Linux Mint. :)

        • Anonymous

          well I don’t use the Ubuntu-based versions of Linux Mint, naturally — that wouldn’t make any sense, given my reasons for doing so.

    • Anonymous

      I found Unity half baked in 11.04 and 11.10 and not ready yet. A also prefer qt to gtk and wanted kde, and a highly optimized system. So I too left Ubuntu. I installed Gentoo yesterday, I’ll see how it goes.

      • http://profiles.google.com/topchider1965 v m

        >also prefer qt to gtk and wanted kde, and a highly >optimized system. So I too left Ubuntu. 

        unlike many people (here and elsewhere) who feel personally insulted when someone rejects ‘their precious’, I realize that its part of Linux life. Heck, if you have even moderate computer skills, I would find it strange that someone hasnt at least tried another distro.
        How many people do you know have stayed with the same distro for over 4 years?
        Experiment, try different things, KDE, XCFE, E17, you are bound to find something to your liking. As long as you are using free software, its a win.

        But I have to ask: if you like Qt and KDE, why not Kubuntu, the red headed Buntu stepchild?
        Have you tried it?

        Ive detested Gnome with a passion (my wife told me she wanted Vista the day I put Ubuntu 8.04 on a laptop. she said it was depressing and sad looking!) for quite some time and tried Kubuntu over the years and even in a plain KDE distro, it was just awful.
        But I have to admit that the 10-11 series are very usable and competitive with the KDE’s I usually use. Im actually writing this from a relatives 10.04 LTS running laptop and run 11.04 on one of the kids computers.

        To be honest, most newbs look at distros using the same desktop and say :What choice? its the same thing!:

        But at the very least, give Kubuntu a try.
        I changed my mind about it and its not the crappy Kubuntu of old.

  • Celso Henriques

    “Perens warns that “working for free to make Mark Shuttleworth richer just
    isn’t very smart” and advises Ubuntu developers to make sure their
    presence is known independently of Ubuntu.”  Don’t worry because a good dev is well known in the software world. And i’m glad that they are working for free, not for mark getting richer but for me and all comunity to have a good open source and FREE OS! Thanks all comunity and devs!

    • Anonymous

      Heck yeah.

      • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_IK3GYJHISHUG7XCTGBTMOXTHWU Trigger

        lol

    • Ms. Polly

      Keep drinking the kool-aid – ignorance is bliss.

      • Anonymous

        Now, I’m all for cynicism, and I don’t trust companies (or people) blindly. But when does one stop being cynical and becomes just plain paranoid?

        I mean, all arguments against Canonical are about what evil things they *could* do if they decide to do so, and not what they have actually done.

        And people like Perens come and tell us to not support any company that makes money from open source (not literally, but it’s implied in his talk), again, just because they *might* turn evil.

        Oh, and he says that Linux isn’t user-focused! I’m sorry, Mr. Perens, but us “geeks” don’t care about “normal users” as much as companies that make money do, and there’s nothing you can do to change it

        • Ms. Polly

          Remember when Ubuntu came on the seen and it was all about customizability and community? I do love my Ubuntu, but it is starting to feel more like Canonical OS these days and the user is less empowered than in the past. Ubuntu is becoming more and more company and money focused. That is just how I feel.

          • Anonymous

            I’m curious, what could  you do in the past that you can’t do now?

          • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_IK3GYJHISHUG7XCTGBTMOXTHWU Trigger

            I think Ms Polly is referring to Plymouth . After my wife it is my first love..lol

          • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_IK3GYJHISHUG7XCTGBTMOXTHWU Trigger

            Yes I think 8.10 was the last one before Plymouth and it changed. When I first saw it, I did not like it. then netbook came along and I did not like it now unity is here and well its better that gnome 3 Evolution happens. I preferred messing with the bootstraps but I updated to Plymouth. 

          • http://twitter.com/Omega Omega

            What does it mean for a free software project to be money focused? Who does it affect? And how does it affect anyone?

            Another question: would you feel better if Canonical didn’t make money but that they were a “team” of hackers working on Ubuntu, with that I mean just a group that label themselves Canonical? If so, why? How would that be different from how it is now?

          • Michael Cobb

            so has canonical made Ubuntu so locked-down that you cant install Gnome-panel, xfce, lxde, Gnome-shell, KDE.

            just because Ubuntu have focused on Unity, it doesnt stop you from installing another DE

          • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_IK3GYJHISHUG7XCTGBTMOXTHWU Trigger

            Are you referring to Plymouth?

      • http://mark-y-a.myopenid.com/ Marky

        Nope. Ignorance made M$ billions and billions rich. =D  The kool-aid must taste great.

        • Ms. Polly

          Yes, making billions of dollars makes everything you do morally correct and peachy. I don’t think so.

      • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_IK3GYJHISHUG7XCTGBTMOXTHWU Trigger

        What kind of coolaide? Grape … Orange? How does Debian pay there server costs? Yeah coolaide.

        • Ms. Polly

          The users will know which flavor tastes the best.

          • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_IK3GYJHISHUG7XCTGBTMOXTHWU Trigger

            I like the orange… What flavor do you prefer?

    • Chad Germann

      once again better service to the community to contribute to the upstream

  • Anonymous

    He really does make a good point on making Ubuntu “owners” richer. I certainly wouldn’t code for Ubuntu for free :P

    • http://facebook.com/domcan2 1roxtar

      …but you get back everything they make from it for free AND with the source code.  You can then take that code and do whatever you want to do with it as well.  So they want to build a business around Ubuntu.  So am I.  I install Ubuntu on computers and then sell those computers at a discounted rate.  Am I a moocher for trying to put a little scratch in my wallet for using what other coders wrote for free?  “Evil” Canonical gives it to you for free and is building services around Ubuntu.  If you want a more community based Ubuntu, then use Linux Mint.  Oh, wait.  THEY are trying to make a little money too.  Greedy planet.  :p

      • http://www.frothingthefrap.com/ Shannon Black

        You can’t expect people to work for free. Time is money. Its different if you only put a few hours a day towards it, but most of these guys are or are planning to contribute full time. How can you contribute full time or even partially full time without getting money to eat?

        And the community can certainly benefit with dedicated developers

        • http://twitter.com/Azthma Azthma

          That’s because some people still do not understand how FOSS work. 

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_JF5QSZ7QF535IXQNCYCHWUIQ2I fatvinny

    And be like Microsoft!?That will be the day I move into the mountains and live in a cave!This Perens’ agenda is only for profit. No concern for the end user.As with politicians here in the U.S.,What ever they can make money from they take from the people.We(Linuxers) are here against of that very philosophy.Some of us support by helping develop and others support by purchasing merchandise.Makes me wonder to the degree of his association with that other O.S.

  • Anonymous

    How are the people working on Ubuntu making Shuttleworth richer when Ubuntu has yet to turn a profit? 

    • Anonymous

      well that’s a good question.
      And how does Mr Perens knows
      how much Canonical makes from Ubuntu?

    • http://twitter.com/humphreybc Benjamin Humphrey

      You should probably look into how Canonical makes money.

      • Anonymous

        From my understanding they make money by selling support services (and the highly debated but trivial income from mp3 sales), but seeing as how Shuttleworth keeps investing his own money to keep the company going and they have yet to turn a profit, I don’t see how anyone is making him rich or why people should be bitter about it. 

  • Anonymous

    “working for free to make Mark Shuttleworth ricer just isn’t very smart” I second that. Who knows he is not into rice and likes noodles more ? 
    Personally I cannot thank Mark Shuttleworth for whatever he has done with Ubuntu. It’s because of him that I started using a Linux based OS.

    • https://launchpad.net/~mpt mpt

      Clearly Bruce is referring to this kind of ricer: http://funroll-loops.info/

      • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_IK3GYJHISHUG7XCTGBTMOXTHWU Trigger

        That or it is a type O… lol

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_IK3GYJHISHUG7XCTGBTMOXTHWU Trigger

      Uhmm  Mark.. Can I have some Ramen please…. lol  no nI love my Ubuntu. I started on it and tried others ( Fedora, arch (which I found difficult to install, trigger suse, and mint). I am not strong in the coding department. I am glad that the Ubuntu community is so willing to help out.

  • http://facebook.com/domcan2 1roxtar

     ”Perens warns that “working for free to make Mark Shuttleworth ricer just isn’t very smart’”

    Opinions are like rectal orifices, everyone has one.  Just because he said this from a stage doesn’t mean he is right.  That was just plain stupid. 

    • Ms. Polly

      Yes everyone has an opinion and although I don’t agree with everything he said, he did make some valid points and is entitled to share them.

    • Chad Germann

      he is simply stating that all of these Ubuntu contributors could serve the community as a whole better by contributing to the upstream

      • http://twitter.com/Omega Omega

        Free software is about choice, and if you want to go your own way and deviate from upstream, go ahead. But also, nothing stops upstream from taking your patches and implementing them in upstream.

        “he is simply stating that all of these Ubuntu contributors *could* serve the community as a whole better by contributing to the upstream”
        Yes it could, or it could not, such broad statements like “upstreaming patches is always better” are unfounded. Sometimes upstream does not agree with the direction you want to go, should you just stop developing then?

        • Chad Germann

          Free Software has never been about Choice it has been about Freedom to study and use code.

          Lets use an example for the rest
          Let us say I find a Bug in nautilus  that causes corruption if you use it to access a ecomstation HPFS file system and I create a patch

          I could go two routes with this and the first is only  submit it to Ubuntu and it only shows up in ubuntu’s source tree
           
          or i could submit to the Gnome project and it shows up in every Distribution’s source tree at the same time.

          What one is more ethical?

          • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_IK3GYJHISHUG7XCTGBTMOXTHWU Trigger

            Why not reply to both?

          • Ms. Polly

            I think you’ve identified the problem.

          • http://twitter.com/Omega Omega

            If you choose to only send it to Ubuntu, they will tell you this should be in upstream and upstream it; that is what would happen. Ubuntu doesn’t like diverging from upstream, it only does it when it has to.

      • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_IK3GYJHISHUG7XCTGBTMOXTHWU Trigger

        Isnt the code out there for everyone to take and do with what they will?

  • Anonymous

    People like Perens see FOSS as a cultural movement; Developers see it as a way to make, share and use good software. Canonical sees it as a business strategy. Everyone else sees it as a way to get their computer to work as intended (with various influences from the previous categories).

    “Working for free to make Mark Shuttleworth richer just isn’t very smart.”

    I think he has a point especially when, as is currently the case, canonical becomes the gatekeeper of what patches and changes are accepted into the official distro. Essentially decisions are made for the long term viability of canonical’s sustainability over the requests of the community.

    I can’t be the only one who’s a little annoyed at the way Ubuntu TV was created in secrecy and without our input. It indicates how canonical sees its community and, i think, sets the tone for the future.

    • Anonymous

      Ubuntu TV is not yet created, they just put a primary design, and now the source is available for the community to add their input.  It is in pre alpha mode now, no where near the final product. (as far as I know).

    • http://twitter.com/Azthma Azthma

      The contribution from the community to Ubuntu is not that huge neither! I think things will be clarified soon. But I think Canonical sees FOSS as all what you mentioned (Cultural, better software, strategy). Personally, I cannot wake up the morning and start contributing while I am starving and have no black coffea. So does Canonical. You want Ubuntu to be the leader and smash up Microsoft, then let’s understand the commercial strategy! And for Ubuntu TV, for me it is such a spontaneous fact from Canonical. They initiate and the community follows. It always been like that. However, they also browse the aspirations of the community and respond to them as possibly as they can.

    • Anonymous

      “canonical becomes the gatekeeper of what patches and changes are accepted into the official distro”

      What?

      I’m sorry, but that’s just ignorance on your part about how Linux distributions in general (and Ubuntu in particular) work. Here’s a summary (overly simplified):

      Upstream developers develop their software, and they can add whatever patches and changes they want.

      Next, when upstream developers make a release, Debian developers take the release and package it in Sid (Debian unstable). They apply whatever extra patches and changes they need to make it work in Debian.

      Every 6 months, Ubuntu takes the software from Debian Sid and use it as a base for the next Ubuntu release. They apply their own patches and changes (for example, overlay scrollbars). Ubuntu policy also recommends merging these patches into Debian and upstream if possible (i.e. there is no disagreement about them).

      How on earth is Canonical the “gatekeeper” in this process? Are they going to actually remove patches that were applied upstream? They certainly “can”, but that doesn’t mean they actively do. Also, Debian developers are as much “gatekeepers” as Canonical in this regard. Why not question *their* motives too?

    • Anonymous

      We can’t get away from the fact that there’s an inherent conflict of interest here, whenever there’s a commercial interest involved.  I got involved with FOSS because I realized there was another way.  I used Ubuntu for many years, but now I’ve moved on because it’s diverging farther and farther from what initially attracted me.

  • Anonymous


     It’s Windows, just from another company.”

    Except that their source code is available and free to anyone that whats to modify or build a business around it. That’s the whole idea behind open source projects… free as it speech, not free as in beer. 

    As big as Ubuntu gets, you will still have the right to download it, change  what you don’t like and call it Linux Perens. That’s the difference between Microsoft and Conanical and why its ridiculous to imply there is anything wrong or evil about what Conanical is doing. 

    • Ms. Polly

      Yes, they are apples and oranges, but to imply that Canonical is perfect and wrong about nothing – well it is just naive.

      • Anonymous

        What are they wrong about as a company?

        • Ms. Polly

          not listening to the user base

          • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_IK3GYJHISHUG7XCTGBTMOXTHWU Trigger

            what company does? The developers do the work. You have the choice to use what ever window manager you want. Where yes Canonical does have alot of work done for us, so we dont have to do it,  There is always the choice to change it. Remove Plymouth or unity or whatever you dont like and inset the alternative you want.

          • Ms. Polly

            The developers alone do not do all the work – you’re forgetting about the community of contributers and users that support it. Without listening to the users, a distro can become less relevant and practical.

          • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_IK3GYJHISHUG7XCTGBTMOXTHWU Trigger

            Mr Polly  the community is part of the developers. On the Ubunut page it states that  
            “The success of the Ubuntu Project depends on a wide community of talented, passionate developers.Anyone with the right technical skills can contribute. If you’re new to the process, you can find a mentor within the development team to help you along.
            There are lots of tools to support your efforts. You can find information about how Ubuntu is built in the developer documentation , which is maintained on the Ubuntu wiki. It explains how the development team is structured, provides technical information about building Ubuntu, and indexes other useful resources for current and prospective Ubuntu contributors. ” So it is made by the developers.

      • Anonymous

        Strawman argument. No one has claimed or implied that Canonical is perfect. It’s just that it releases all the source code for client software (server software is a different issue altogether).

        Are you implying that open source is not good?

        • Ms. Polly

          “…why its ridiculous to imply there is anything wrong or evil about what Canonical is doing.”
          sounds pretty clear to me :)

          • Anonymous

            “what Canonical is doing”

            There is a HUGE difference between that and “what Canonical might do”.

            So, what evil is Canonical doing right now?  Ubuntu is still open source, and you can inspect/modify/fork every bit of it. Even Ubuntu One, the “evil proprietary service”,  has GPL client software.

          • Ms. Polly

            My point is, although they do many things great, there is always room for improvement and we should be open to hearing the opinions of others, even if we don’t agree with them. Ubuntu is not perfect – it is good. I love it, but I do happen to feel they are listening less to the wishes of the users, especially desktop users. The focus on community must remain or Ubuntu will become too corporatized. As an experienced user, I know how to tweak to get results, but it becomes more time consuming with every release. I think they need to get back to basics. I really like what eOS and Xubuntu are doing right now – they understand traditional desktop users. By the way, the machine I’m on now is Ubuntu + Shell + AWN at the bottom and I’m okay with it, but I do worry about Ubuntu’s further diversions. 

      • https://login.ubuntu.com/+id/R4szkb7 Jo-Erlend Schinstad

         Who did that? You have a bad habit in the way you keep twisting peoples words to say things they didn’t intend to.

        • Ms. Polly

          “…why its ridiculous to imply there is anything wrong or evil about what Canonical is doing.”
          sounds pretty clear to me :)

          • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_IK3GYJHISHUG7XCTGBTMOXTHWU Trigger

            So you use Ubuntu  (xubuntu),  Why do you feel that it is evil?

          • Ms. Polly

            I never said that. I was quoting someone else to point out that Ubuntu/Canonical is not perfect and that listening to diverse perspectives and user insights would be advantageous.

          • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_IK3GYJHISHUG7XCTGBTMOXTHWU Trigger

            ms polly you are right, you did not say that canonical is evil…. Bruce did. The way some people see it you are defending the guy who said that that the makers of Ubuntu are evil. This is a mean thing to say. Some people took offence to it.  He went on to say that if people who are not smart enough to code ( I am tring to learn python at the moment) and complain, then  they do not deserve to have there voice heard. He went on to say “He finishes by saying that simply making a better platform than the competition is an insufficient goal if the company behind it eventually turns into another Microsoft. It’s Windows, just from another company”  which to me means canonical = evil.

      • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_IK3GYJHISHUG7XCTGBTMOXTHWU Trigger

        I have read and read the article. I still am not sure what Bruce is talking about. Open Source is software freedom. I think that the code that comes out of  Ubuntu is just as free as what came out of Finix. How did the creator of linux  survive after collage? 
        If Linux is free how does Linus Torvalds earn his living? Red Hat and VA Linux, both leading developers of Linux-based software, presented Torvalds with stock options in gratitude for his creation. In 1999, both companies went public and Torvalds’ net worth shot up to roughly $20 million
        We need to stop bickering within the confines of Linux and work together. 

      • http://twitter.com/Omega Omega

        (you said this further down)

        “I love it, but I do happen to feel they are listening less to the wishes of the users, especially desktop users.”
        Red herring. This can be said of _any_ free software project. Oh they didn’t change the default wallpaper to a picture of my grandmother? “Ubuntu does not listen to desktop users”.

        Furthermore, Ubuntu does not owe anyone anything, it has no obligations to anyone. Ubuntu is a free software project started by a few people and they allow anyone to use it. How they run their project and what they choose to do with it is entirely up to them.
        “The focus on community must remain or Ubuntu will become too corporatized.”Do you propose Ubuntu stop accepting patches from developers that are employed?

    • http://profiles.google.com/nieknooijens niek nooijens

      and canonical doesn’t have a long criminal record like microsoft, canonical plays fair games!

      • http://www.fewt.com/ Fewt

        Fair – because taking revenue from upstream projects is fair.  Fair – because taking from upstream and adding 50,000 patches then claiming upstream is broken is fair. 

        I mean no disrespect to Ubuntu, but as far as Linux companies go they have the worst historical track record for contributions to the community as a whole.

        • Guest

          Ubuntu is free.   Canonical makes their money on consulting services.    Many Open Source companies survive that way.   Codes free/open but technical consulting services  cost.   Whats wrong with that?   If someone’s smart enough to be able to do everything themselves they don’t have to pay Canonical anything.

          • http://www.fewt.com/ Fewt

            Hi Mark.

    • Freddi

      The more we like Ubuntu, the more we become closed in by Ubuntu One [if we use it, sure you can opt out]. Ubuntu One is a great service, but it’s integrity into this system makes it the ONLY complete Ubuntu experience as it has been designed to be.

      Although Android/iPhone(not Bada/WebOS/Symbian?) apps are available, they all center around Ubuntu. Sure, you can do all that with Dropbox or anything else, but it would never have the connectivity and services that U1 has.

      If Canonical does not want U1 to become another MS Live or Google, then they should care about this, just for the sake of TRUSTWORTHINESS.

      It would be great if a user could still have this experience while choosing to store his files on his own cloud, own server, different cloud provider etc. (pluggable cloud). All services like the integration into music players should be able to sync with the cloud that you trust.

      This means not that I don’t trust Canonical, but that we can only keep trust if we still freedom and alternatives.

      • Freddi

        Mark said that the uniqueness of Ubuntu One is that we can upload and delete what we want and still own our data (not like others who don’t really delete or who index our emails). +1 !

        We also are free to write any service that makes use of syncing etc. without needing Canonical to approve it. +1 !

        But what makes Diaspora, Appleseed, Wikipedia truely free is that we could run our own instances of it.

      • Fatriff

        Off you go then, get coding! This is what it’s all about, if you don’t like something, change it.

    • Chad Germann

      It is only open because it has to be Unity and Ubuntu One both deeply integrate GPL 3 and GPL 4 software and code as a result both products have to use the GPL.

      The problem with Unity is it is treated like a proprietary project. and gives off an aura of “User feedback be damned we have a vision of design and we are sticking with it even at even at the expense of the needs of the individuals who ave used the open source desktop for two decades”

      But I fully suspect I will be moded down and ignored on these points because the Ubuntu User space has become full of fan users whom are as rabid as any out of the Microsoft or Apple camps.

      And yes i do use ubuntu as a base but with Openbox as my desktop.

      • Anonymous

        double post

      • Anonymous

        Yes its open under GPL but I don’t think that’s the only reason its open. Shuttleworth has always talked about the power of open source, and there is no reason to believe that they secretly want to develop closed source software. 

        I’m not a huge Unity fan, but realize that it doesn’t matter how much or little input conanical takes from users during its development. They are allowed to make whatever they like, just like you are allowed to download their source code and fix Unity to suit your needs. Then the masses can decide what approach they like better and go with that (this is what has happened with the success of Linux Mint for example). 

        But all that is very different from Apple or Microsoft. You can’t see the source code, you can’t change it, and you can’t make your own version of it. And in most cases you can’t even escape their proprietary software because every computer on the market is forced to be configured with their software. 

        I’m sure I sound like a fanboy, but I assure you I’m not. I have use Linux since Redhat 5.x. I just don’t think that someone trying to innovate and change things in the OS world is automatically evil because they make money or ignore the people on message boards with an opinion. They are playing by the rules of open source and are allow to do what they are doing. 

    • http://www.fewt.com/ Fewt

      I suggest opening your mind.  Bruce Perens is one of the most respected people in OSS, don’t discard his comments because of your own ignorance and bias for Ubuntu.

  • https://launchpad.net/~j-johan-edwards J Johan Edwards

    He says FOSS needs more user focus and discipline, and then goes on the condemn the only type of institution that has any record of achieving as inherently bad. As someone who’s contributed to Ubuntu (albeit in a small capacity), I find Perens’ comments offensive. Worse, they’re painfully naive.

    • Ms. Polly

      Debian?

      • https://launchpad.net/~j-johan-edwards J Johan Edwards

        Debian has many virtues,  but “user focus” isn’t necessarily one of them. ;)

        As for the ability of FOSS to succeed with community only… Debian does not exist in a vacuum . Go through the archive and try cutting out packages with substantial contributions from RedHat, Intel, etc. You’ll see that the operating system we currently enjoy would not exist in a usable form without their self-interested development.

        • Ms. Polly

          It is a matter of balance and degree of freedom. In my opinion, Debian has better values and philosophy. I think Ubuntu has alienated more people than Debian in some ways. Overall, I still love Ubuntu, but every release they move toward a more corporatized, ad-based OS, and further away from pure Gnome and the community. They are slipping in ratio with other distributions because of this.

          • Bart Willemsen

            Everyone is still able to help with development. And I have never seen any ad or something inside Ubuntu (Only for Ubuntu One, but it’s not that you get screens in your face every 5 minutes that you need to register an account..). And Ubuntu is still pure Gnome. Only with a different shell. The origional shell is easily installable if you want.

          • Ms. Polly

            for now and with less integration and components without extra tweaking

          • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_IK3GYJHISHUG7XCTGBTMOXTHWU Trigger

            Ms Polly this sounds like what desktop environment do you prefer. If not I am sorry and ignore this post. Yes I loved my beloved gnome. then gnome 3 came out and I could not run it on my laptop. It was to bloated. It would not even install. So I tried unity. I was omg how can they like lubuntu when it first came out. xfce rules, well its not bad now that I have used it . I hope you enjoy the environment that you chose. I am going to try.

  • Anonymous

    I think it’s a great opportunity to thank Mr.Mark Shuttle Worth, for what he has done the FOSS, its because of him I began to use linux as my primary os, and I am sure very many.  Perens seems to think only geeks should use linux.  People like me wants more Shuttle worths here.  Who cares if they make profits for their hard work.  Keep up the good work Canonical!

    • Jonathan Wong

      Uh why are you spelling Shuttleworth in separate words as shuttle worth? 

      • Anonymous

        maybe iPhone autocorrect…?

      • Anonymous

         my bad, corrected.

    • Ms. Polly

      You sound like an ad from Apple – think about it.

      • Anonymous

        What? Have you even *seen* an Apple ad?

        Here’s one: http://www.apple.com/macosx/whats-new/#video-lion

        They describe everything as “magical”, “profound”, “amazing”, and many other over-the-top adjectives. They have done marketing research, and found that these adjectives increase sales and “customer loyalty”.

        How does the above comment remotely compare?

        • http://www.frothingthefrap.com/ Shannon Black

          Also note that Shuttleworth is not at all similar to Steve Jobs. He has similar visions of taking over the world with Ubuntu, but he’s vision is at the benefit and use of the community. Without Ubuntu you wouldn’t have Linux Mint. If this was another Apple product Linux Mint would be sued and shut down for any innovation whatsoever.

          I’m not saying that Shuttleworth is the Christ of open source, I’m just saying you can’t compare monitairy leeches with him because he is not taking from the community without giving back. 

          Also, as an individual developer your contributions are recognized and can just as easily be included in your resume.

          • Chad Germann

            Canonical is only giving back because they /HAVE TO/  its in the GPL

          • http://twitter.com/Omega Omega

            Why would Shuttleworth have started the Ubuntu project if he didn’t /WANT TO/ give back? Surely if he was after cash he would have found something else to invest his money into with a higher return rate, no?

          • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_IK3GYJHISHUG7XCTGBTMOXTHWU Trigger

            same as red hat, suse, debian. they are a company. some companys are better and put out a better product, like ubuntu.

          • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_IK3GYJHISHUG7XCTGBTMOXTHWU Trigger

            same as red hat, suse, debian. they are a company. some companys are better and put out a better product, like ubuntu.

          • http://www.frothingthefrap.com/ Shannon Black

            Agree with Omega. I think you should research why Ubuntu was founded

          • Anonymous

            If they didn’t want to give back, they didn’t have to use GPLed code.

        • Ms. Polly

          Ubuntu is becoming more restricted, less in tune with users, and more dominated by the upper hierarchy and corporate elite, all the while using some of the same adjectives and becoming less community based. I see the connections – you may not agree. But one tires of the endless praise without analytic criticism of the vision and direction.

          • Bart Willemsen

            Still, Ubuntu supports and even encourages things like Linux Mint. I would notsay that is restricted. It’s true that Ubuntu is getting a bit restricted but that’s only because we need one design goal where everyone can work on. Not 25 idea’s (think about Unity fans and haters against each other, that wouldn’t work :P) that all work against each other.

          • Ms. Polly

            You’re right. Let’s get behind Gnome Shell and their extensions, since it is better integrated and has great extensions and community support. People can always install Unity if they want to.

          • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_IK3GYJHISHUG7XCTGBTMOXTHWU Trigger

            Ms Polly, Gnome 3 is a bloated piece of software. I had a year old dell inspiron 1545. It would not install. I did not have the power to do it. Unity runs like a champ. not everything about unity is good, but I have found that through ppas it works great for me. I know that Ubuntu is a great os. 

          • http://twitter.com/Omega Omega

            Calling yourself a free thinker doesn’t actually make you one.

            “Ubuntu is becoming more restricted”
            It is literally impossible for Ubuntu to become “more restricted” as Ubuntu is a free software project, anyone can revert any changes made “from above” and/or make their own changes. ”less in tune with users”Please provide evidence to support this claim. Just because you don’t like something doesn’t mean no one does. And even if no one liked it, it doesn’t even matter, anyone is free to do what they want.

            “and more dominated by the upper hierarchy and corporate elite”This is a valid concern, but not exactly a critique, the Ubuntu project is free to choose how they organize themselves.I’m not a fan of hierarchies myself (anarchist here) but they may choose how to spend their time and with whom to associate.

            “But one tires of the endless praise without analytic criticism of the vision and direction.”

            A healthy dose of criticism is always welcome, but criticism that is not well thought-out is a disservice.

          • Ms. Polly

            One only has to look to current articles about Ubuntu and popularity statistics to feel the pulse of the public’s perception. Many of these criticisms have been well thought-out and are available on the world wide web. If you really feel it is impossible for Ubuntu to become more restricted, then you really must have your head in the sand and not be a freethinker yourself.

          • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_IK3GYJHISHUG7XCTGBTMOXTHWU Trigger

            what would you like to change. Make a list. Find a alternative to it. install it.

          • Ms. Polly

            I do and I have stuck with Ubuntu or its derivatives on my computers, but I reserve the right to share my perspective and will continue to do so.  :)

          • http://twitter.com/Omega Omega

            (replying to a comment further down)

            “One only has to look to current articles about Ubuntu and popularity statistics to feel the pulse of the public’s perception.”

            I’m pretty sure Mark has said that: “We don’t know exactly how many people are using Ubuntu, but we have a pretty good estimate based on download numbers and watching browser user agent strings. I can tell you that Ubuntu 11.04, the first to offer Unity, was the fastest adopted version of Ubuntu to date.”[1] Furthermore articles are a rather poor way to tell what the public perception is. Remember the public are more than just those that visit OMG!Ubuntu.

            “Many of these criticisms have been well thought-out and are available on the world wide web.” 

            It’s clear that they were not, otherwise defending them would have been easy instead of resorting to “there’s well thought out criticism on the internet, go find it”. How is this different than saying “God exists, evidence is available on the world wide web”? If you make a claim, it is your responsibility to provide the evidence, I shouldn’t have to do your homework for you and go looking for it.

            “If you really feel it is impossible for Ubuntu to become more restricted, then you really must have your head in the sand and not be a freethinker yourself.”

            Again you did not address the points I raised and instead just telling me “no you’re wrong because I said so”.

            [1]: http://techcrunch.com/2011/10/31/ubuntu-developer-summit-kicks-off-mark-shuttleworth-shares-plans-for-ubuntu-12-04-and-beyond/

        • Chad Germann

          Have you ever used lion compared to windows those actives are rather spot on.

      • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_IK3GYJHISHUG7XCTGBTMOXTHWU Trigger

        what Mac ad are you referring to? 

    • Chad Germann

      Why not it it is Geek’s software

      Who Wrote the compiler that made it all possible? A geek

      Who wrote the kernel ? A Geek

      Who perfected it? Many many geeks adding functionality they wanted for themselves.

      We the Geeks of the world say “it’s our software and you are free to use it but keep your fingers off of what makes it useful for Us geeks”

      • Anonymous

        …and ubuntu is made for Human Beings… Yah!  I see a fare reason you to be get angry.  What can I say, sorry…., but it is what it is :)

        • Chad Germann

          “Linux for human beings” is just a tag line GNU and Linux have allys had human fredoms at the centre of it purpose but it has centered around talented ones.  the direction of Unity than Canonical’s Ignoring of feedback in the issue (IE vanishing menus) tends to annoy technical users so thre is a tendancy to dislike it amongst that population.

          lately “linux for rabid fanbois” seems to be a better fit

          • Anonymous

            It’s very sad people who calls themselves ‘we are for freedom’, turns and disrespectful to other people’s choices and preferences. Your way of thinking is ‘I don’t like it, so you should also be’. There are plenty of other distros if you don’t like one. If, I don’t like a linux distro at all, I will not use it. Still I will value their work and respect them for what they are doing for some other people.

            I may not like every bit of unity. But I have enough reason to stick with ubuntu, so I stays. That’s it.

      • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_IK3GYJHISHUG7XCTGBTMOXTHWU Trigger

        Who works at Canonical? Who works at red aht, who works at Finnux? Geeks? Nerds? Jocks.. ok not as many jocks.. What are you trying to say?

        • Ms. Polly

          that we need to listen to the users.

          • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_IK3GYJHISHUG7XCTGBTMOXTHWU Trigger

            I agree, I was just on another page having a discussion that we were wishing that unity, would make a “skin” to simulate gnome 2. whatever. We thought it would make alot of people happy.

  • Van Long Pham Cong

    “Working for free to make Mark Shuttleworth richer just isn’t very smart.”

    this is all about trust. I believe the bone between devs and Mark has not been broken yet. Let’s wait and see.

  • Anonymous

    if everything goes to what perens said, i think the open source project would no go mainstream. to take windows without resource from commercial company, its just a dream. how many time has passed and linux still mere 1%. 

    • https://login.ubuntu.com/+id/R4szkb7 Jo-Erlend Schinstad

      Linux has a huge market share. Nobody knows the market share Ubuntu has, but it is likely that it is more popular in countries where internet access isn’t as widely available, and in countries that uses different sites. It’s extremely difficult to measure. It also doesn’t matter at all. What matters is that Ubuntu is _good_. It would be very nice if a lot of people started using it, because that would attract more developers to Ubuntu, Debian and Free Software in general, but other than that… who cares?

      • Anonymous

        “..but it is likely that it is more popular in countries where internet access isn’t as widely available..”

        Sorry, but since ALL linux distributions rely on  some kind of package manager in order to install/update/upgrade/ software and therefore require good internet access, I find your assumption strange and not in correlation with the reality.

        • https://login.ubuntu.com/+id/R4szkb7 Jo-Erlend Schinstad

          That is simply not true. Anyone can setup their own repositories and mirrors. All you need is a PC. If your claim is that you can’t use Ubuntu without Internet access, you’re quite simply wrong.  There is something called local networks.

  • Brian Oswald

    I have deep respect for Bruce, especially after watching Revolution OS. He’s a very wise, level-headed OSS developer that seems very down-to-earth, but not afraid to address “dangerous” topics (like some other so-called advocates). 

    I must admit that as much as I applaud Canonical with their efforts toward making OSS something everyone can use, I can’t help but agree when I hear “Ubuntu is advertising for Ubuntu, not Linux”. From the half-baked Unity experiment (11.04) to the lack of customization (Unity, removal of Synaptic) and their cold-shoulder approach to feedback, I’m worried that Mark is trying to make Canonical into the next Apple.

    I hope Mark still has his priorities in place and doesn’t forget his target audience. Linux for business is great, and we all could use more freedom. However, we should let Linux work for us and not us for it.

    • http://nilux.myopenid.com/ Nilux

      They do contribute upstream, and thus their work will still be available to Linux users even if they become a walled garden. The popularity of Ubuntu may make hardware manufacturers more interested in Linux, and that will be to the benefit of us all! If you want to make a user-friendly enviroment, you have to make a nice integrated experience and not just use all the fragmented pieces of software found on github. The FOSS world has lots of software alterantives, but one of a type will allways become the most popular, and I see nothing wrong in it. Even better if someone can make money of it :-).

      • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_IK3GYJHISHUG7XCTGBTMOXTHWU Trigger

        thank you

  • Satchit Bhogle

    Those who demand that Linux be “community-driven” are hipsters, longing for those dark basement days. Linux has changed enormously, and just this week, OMGU quoted that some 70% of contributions to Linux are from paid developers. In other words, the quality you see in Linux, the hardware compatibility you see which improves exponentially with each kernel release, would be compromised if not for those who look to make profits from Linux.

    Mark Shuttleworth has made a large investment, and, speaking as an Ubuntu fan, I’d say it was a pretty optimistic investment. Canonical has not turned a profit in the roughly eight years it has been in operation, and yet Mr. Shuttleworth persists. Quite frankly, I’d be glad if he makes money from Ubuntu because we trust him, and know that it will encourage him to continue his investment in Ubuntu which makes things better for us all. Certain developers choose to break away, believing that Ubuntu is no longer “of the people”, but they must remember that they are standing on the shoulders of giants, and that the beauty of Linux is that they can!

    Mr. Perens is entitled to his opinion, but I don’t think he’ll find too many subscribers.

    • Anonymous

      I’m a paid contributor to open source, but I still do it from my dark basement ;-)

  • Michael Faille

    ” Switching from Google Maps to OpenStreetMap without
    helping the OSM project in any way is evil freeriding. . Remember the
    Give part of the Give and Take axiom.

    CLARIFICATION my rant is aimed at companies switching from Google Maps to OSM to save money and up their margins. Not at individual, private users.”
    Jan Wildeboer – Red Hat

    • https://login.ubuntu.com/+id/R4szkb7 Jo-Erlend Schinstad

      That’s stupid, imho. You want as many people as possible to benefit from Free Software and data. Some people contribute out of the goodness of their hearts, but it really works best when people contribute because they have their own itch to scratch – whether that’s earning money or improving the software because they use it.

      I really don’t subscribe to the idea that users and companies have a duty to do community work. However, I do believe it to be an efficient way of getting attention and good will. For instance, as someone suggested on h-online.com, I think, Amazon could launch something like “Amazon Summer of Documentation”.

  • http://twitter.com/Azthma Azthma

    By the way, I forgot to say that I do approve Canonical’s strategy and I understand their commercial behavior around Ubuntu.
    For me, Canonical made a life-time pact which is “Ubuntu will always be FOSS”. This is enough for me to adopt and contribute to Ubuntu. And by contributing to Ubuntu and supporting it, I indirectly contribute to Linux and FOSS in general. I don’t blame Bruce Perens for his thoughts though! Being too meticulous and carefull for the sake of FOSS can lead one to make mistakes and lose the spirit of abstraction. If there is an OS that can push Microsoft off and make it weep its blood, then it is Ubuntu. 
    Canonical understood that sometimes, you need to fight Fire with Fire. These days we need innovation and Canonical is innovating. That is what I perceived these last 4 years.

  • Anonymous

    He finishes by saying that simply making a better platform than the
    competition is an insufficient goal if the company behind it eventually
    turns into another Microsoft. It’s Windows, just from another company.

  • http://jewelfox.dreamwidth.org/ Taryn Fox

    Ubuntu is winning for the same reason Apple is winning: It put the people who would be using it, and the quality of the product, above everything else.

    The “open source” world doesn’t care about emotional / cultural / intellectual accessibility to anyone not like it, which is why there are fewer women in open source than in proprietary software development.

    • Joaquin Padilla Rivero

      Could it be that software development is a male-oriented career period?

  • Valery Levchenko

    RMS already said it years ago – it’s not enough just open the code. The freedom of the software and it’s users – isn’t a technical issue.

  • http://johannpopper.myopenid.com/ Johann popper

    lol, FOSS isn’t the key to some communist utopian future. They way some people talk… Marxism is nothing more than sheer fantasy. FOSS is just about Free and Open Source Software. Some people have such imaginations and anger and envy of people who just have more money or power than them. 

    There is no necessary conflict of interest between making a profit and the desires of the user community.

    “Resource-based economy”? You mean dictatorship of one group of luminaries or another over the rest of us? Honestly, a machine-based economy is science fantasy and will always be mere fantasy. After all, people will always have to maintain the machines. That’s a job, and nobody is going to work for nothing forever. Besides, our natural equilibrium has taught us that nature knows better than geniuses, by which I mean, controlling all resources requires that you control and regulate all of humanity. That’s not a future I’d like to live in, no matter how comfortable it may be for the people allowed to live for a time by “quality-of-life engineers”. We have enough people who want to be gods, and thankfully, they have thus far failed to get as much power as some of these “futurists” want to give them, and probably because nature outsmarts them. “Sustainability?” You mean, totalitarianism? Telling people what and how much they can eat, how many kids they can have, where they can live, what they can do? The fact is, nature sorts out human life better than a few ambitious wannabe dictators. 

    Apparently, Marxist fantasies have convinced a huge amount of otherwise smart people that life or society is a machine that can be fully understood and controlled, or that there is one magic economy determining every human life. That’s just perverse and wrong, and all people should be left alone as much as possible, come what may. 

    Personally, I think a lack of religious faith in the destiny of the universe (nihilism) has led an entire generation of people into a kind of psychosis of godhood, whereby they are terrified of what they perceive to be an uncaring reality, and become totally convinced that only they can save the world by means of brilliant schemes.

  • https://login.ubuntu.com/+id/R4szkb7 Jo-Erlend Schinstad

    It is incomprehensible to me – procovative even – that a man like Bruce Perens would suggest that Canonical could ever legally become another Microsoft. While I do agree with much of what he says, that point is just obviously false. Yes, Canonical could make at least Unity closed source, but that would only affect future versions. But why on earth would they? It’s not their business model. They cannot retract software that already has been released as GPL software. Neither can Debian, as Perens knows very well. It is not possible for some large company to simply buy out Debian and make it another Microsoft. Neither is it possible to do so with the Ubuntu community. If Canonical some time in the future should decide that future versions of Unity or whatever it might be, should be closed source, then there are always lots of alternatives. For instance, it’s quite easy to switch to Gnome Shell in Ubuntu. It would obviously also be legal to fork it.

    We already have several spinoffs from Ubuntu that Canonical has no power to control in any way. That’s not just because Canonical is a bunch of nice guys or that Mark Shuttleworth has a past as a Debian Developer – it’s because that’s how Free Software works. 

    While it is true that Canonical owns the Ubuntu name and branding, it is not really true that they own Ubuntu. Also, Canonical is a rather small company with only a few hundred employees. To even compare them to Apple or Microsoft, is quite simply ludicrous. The idea that Canonical owns Ubuntu is just as false as the idea that Canonical is solely responsible for fixing bugs or developing features. That misconception is far more dangerous than whether or not developers wear a jacket and tie. What we need, is for users to report bugs instead of shouting angrily in blog comments. And we need to actively crunch the rumors and misconceptions that are rapidly polluting our community. We need to keep on teaching newbies how to contribute – not because they somehow owe it to the community, but because that’s how you get your problems fixed.

    The idea that it is stupid to develop Free Software because someone might benefit from it … Is everything ok at home, Bruce? I mean, it’s gotta be something.

  • http://profiles.google.com/iljajj Ilja Nieuwland

    As a recent Ubuntu convert, I would say that Perens has got it exactly the wrong way around. The Linux community’s laid-back, geeky image is one of its strong points – the LAST thing it needs to do is to ‘suit up’. What it does need to do IMO – if it wishes to attract more users – is to become far less fragmented: about ideals and methods, but mostly about software. Even using Ubuntu can be a bewildering experience if you’re used to the polished experiences of Apple Macs or even Windows boxes.

  • http://nilux.myopenid.com/ Nilux

    Shouldn’t we, as a community, have some kind of combined approach to comanies like AMD(ATI), Nvidia, Broadcom, Buffalo and other hardware producers? How could I as a single voice in the world of 6B people make any impact? This applies to Software houses too. Adobe, EA, AutoDesk, !Microsoft…
    We can always continue doing “nothing”, but should we? What do you think?

    • https://launchpad.net/~esteinma Erik

      As a free software community we have organizations like the FSF to support. Yes I know many people here find them way too radical. Think that Richard Stallman is an idealistic bearded fool etcetera. However I more and more get the feeling that it is time to get radical. We, as people who like to have control over our general purpose computing devices, have the zeitgeist against us. The proprietary boys are (getting) radical too with stuff like SOPA and PIPA.

  • Hein Hanssen

    I disagree with Bruce on his negative comments about Ubuntu. Let’s face it: Canonical assures that there is actual money available (not just shoulder padding) for developing Ubuntu into a distribution fit for computer users. And Ubuntu is the most successful distribution out there and that’s for a reason: strong backing and commercial focus.
    It’s also the right ‘vehicle’ to bring Ubuntu to hardware vendors and act as an intermediary between the community and the industry. Without Canonical we would not have seen Ubuntu TV: we would have perhaps 10 different solutions in the community, some of them perhaps great, but not taken serious by hardware vendors.

    Should developers now wear ties? No please! It’s as silly as the Blue Suit at IBM. We want to be different, otherwise we are just another Windows or OSX. Windows is for stupid users who don’t realize they have a choice, OSX is for those willing to pay a premium for design and take for granted that they are completely vendor locked and Linux is for those who like choice and freedom. Canonical wants to give us a complete package e.g. with Ubuntu One. The difference with Apple is though, that we can still choose to use a different cloud computing platform: freedom of choice or install other software, or even install another Linux distro or create an Ubuntu fork.

  • Omer Akram

    and Omer Akram says the same, there should be an article feature me as well :p

  • http://twitter.com/raulvalino Raúl Valiño

    I wonder how many people in the community can start from Debian 3 and end up in Ubuntu 11.10 (with whatever changes you may think necessary), and how many time would they need, doing it for free in their spare time. I’m part of the community and installing an OS is more than enough for me.

  • http://twitter.com/gwelr Gregoire Welraeds

    Does someone remember UserLinux?
    This http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UserLinux page is enlightening to understand Mr Perens rants about Cannonical. He probably is a bit frustrated.

    • http://twitter.com/gwelr Gregoire Welraeds

       – crossposted on g+ –In 2005, Brock A. Frazier, one of the UserLinux
      contributor, wrote an article to Linux Weekly News where he tries to
      analyze the Points of failure for UserLinux. By the end of the article,
      he concludes with: [quote][...] provided Ubuntu remains a
      streamlined distribution, remains free, includes a notable ISV support
      network, and provides a reasonable certification program.Ubuntu will
      largely deliver onthe UserLinux Mission Statement:Provide businesses
       with freely available, high quality Linux operatingsystems accompanied
      by certifications, service, and support optionsdesigned to encourage
      productivity and security while reducing overallcosts.Time will tell if
      Canonical will have commercial success with Ubuntu. Theyalready have
      made successful inroads into the early adopter market.[/quote]Remember that UserLinux was Perens’ babay. Read the full article here: http://lwn.net/Articles/151642/

    • http://twitter.com/Azthma Azthma

      I thought so! We’re not that sure but, that probability is strong!

  • http://twitter.com/gwelr Gregoire Welraeds

    – crossposted on g+ –In 2005, Brock A. Frazier, one of the UserLinux
    contributor, wrote an article to Linux Weekly News where he tries to
    analyze the Points of failure for UserLinux. By the end of the article,
    he concludes with: [quote][...] provided Ubuntu remains a
    streamlined distribution, remains free, includes a notable ISV support
    network, and provides a reasonable certification program.Ubuntu will
    largely deliver onthe UserLinux Mission Statement:Provide businesses
    with freely available, high quality Linux operatingsystems accompanied
    by certifications, service, and support optionsdesigned to encourage
    productivity and security while reducing overallcosts.Time will tell if
    Canonical will have commercial success with Ubuntu. Theyalready have
    made successful inroads into the early adopter market.[/quote]Remember that UserLinux was Perens’ babay. Read the full article here: http://lwn.net/Articles/151642/

  • https://launchpad.net/~esteinma Erik

    It sounds a bit insulting to be honest, the Ubuntu part. Whilst I agree with the rest of Bruce Perens’ talk. So far Mark Shuttleworth doesn’t seem to make much money from Ubuntu (he has invested quite some in it I assume), and so what if he does? This infers that making money from an open source OS equals Microsoft practices or will indefinitely lead to that path. If Shuttleworth was funding the Ubuntu project for quick profit he would have abandoned it years ago.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_IK3GYJHISHUG7XCTGBTMOXTHWU Trigger

      In 2005 he founded the Ubuntu Foundation and made an initial investment of 10 million dollars

      • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_IK3GYJHISHUG7XCTGBTMOXTHWU Trigger

        A quote from Mark Shuttleworth : 
        Will Ubuntu ever demand licence fees or royalties?
        No. Never. I have no interest in taking Ubuntu to join the proprietary software industry, it’s a horrible business that is boring and difficult, and dying out rapidly anyway. My motivation and goal is to find a way to create a global desktop OS that is *free*, in every sense, as well as sustainable and of a quality comparable to anything you could pay for. 

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_FD5M7R6NP7VXXFS4FHYYAGCHPM James

    Ms. Polly – Your thinly veiled hatred of Unity is quite obvious.  I think all your remarks in these comments lead back to that.  Change your diaper already and stop crying about it.  

  • Jean-Christophe Pagès

    penguins tie => NEED!!!

  • http://profiles.google.com/topchider1965 v m

    I like Perens speeches, he doesnt speak corporate BS and says things people dont want to hear. And most of his speeches are done in plain english, not tech PR spin.

    As for the author;s clothes obsession, this isnt a marketing or sales conf, its mainly a technical one. Secondly, before the rainfall it was bloody hot in Australia (and will be again this week) because its summer in australia.
    I sweated through my underwears twice already.
    One ozzie who writes for a popular blog called his one of his pieces: “The smart and the sweaty”. You know why? ITS HOT!!!

    Another started with “…there’s a definite air of sweat around the place.”
    You know why? See above for clue.
    First paragraph sets the tone for an article. Instead a throwaway sentence becomes the focus.

    Wearing a suit? Yeah, I think you havent come to many of these things.

    Would I want our VP to go meet investors dressed like our developers do?
    No. Just like I wouldnt want them to come dressed like that at my wedding.
    Proper place and time for everything.

    Just like throwaway sentences.

  • Anonymous

    Unfortunately my camera card reader is playing up? Ever heard of a USB cable?