As someone who has been an active contributor to desktop Linux in the past, and particularly very close to Ubuntu (I was sponsored to attend UDS-O), I have to say that I am happy Shuttleworth is finally taking this much needed stand.
I can absolutely understand the blowback to his sentiments, because really, the diversity of use and mindset in the Linux community is one of its defining characteristics. But frankly, he's right -- if Ubuntu isn't the platform you're looking for, either go find the one that is, or start it.
I don't see Shuttleworth's stance, or indeed the negative feedback from a vocally inflamed (though not majority) userbase, as a sign of Ubuntu's decline. I see it as Ubuntu finally having the balls to do what no other desktop Linux platform has done before -- move ahead with their grand vision on bringing free software to the masses, not just the ones that demand it the most.
I completely agree. This kind of pivot will slough off some Ubuntu enthusiasts and contributors, and upset some users, but I suspect that we'll all be looking back in 5 years and saying how obvious this move was.
Why am I so confident it'll actually work? Canonical has done a great job for many years on managing the sprawling world of integrating multiple upstream OSS projects that weren't under its control.
That's just a totally different thing from how you manage the development and integration of commercial software. What Canonical has done is much, much harder. And in my view, people who have done that can do anything -- beginning with the long-term technology planning, partnership building, and platform integration work that their vision requires.
That vision, by the way, is I think one that most of us want: 1) a 'smart device' OS, suitable for many hardware channels 2) a desktop OS tuned for content creation and collaboration 3) open cloud infrastructure to provide services to 1 and 2
For me, the single most important outcome of this vision is using Ubuntu to drive an educational revolution in the developing world. That requires Ubuntu to be in the hands of a wide and diverse community of developers, educators, scientists, engineers, artists, artisans, activists, policymakers, and hobbyists interested in such things, and who have total freedom to hack them.
That will not happen if "Linux" still means your dad's 90s desktop OS.
> I see it as Ubuntu finally having the balls to .. move ahead with their grand vision on bringing free software to the masses
Actually, I don't see that at all. Where's the marketing initiative? Where's the retail channel? Where's the Linux Genius Bar/Geek Squad? Who really desires/wants/needs Linux and why can't they obtain it?
This is all Open Source development politics where nerds project their prejudicial ideas of what "normal people" want in some sort of bizarre appeal to popularity. None of this is backed up by serious UI research. None of this is actually trying to solve a real market problem, even assuming they had the resources to do so.
Eventually, I hope that people will let Linux be Linux. It should be just an environment focused on the needs of Programmers and Free-Software lovers. It should stop trying to be a totally baseless appeal to the "the masses".
This is actually a response to some Ubuntu contributors very publicly leaving the project, and not to criticism from users. This is the blog post that started it off:
And here some the many responses in the past two days (remember, these are Ubuntu members, not random users), many of them agree that there's something wrong with the Ubuntu community of contributors:
That's basically saying the linux community and their mindset are antithetical to modern computing.
What a massively backhanded insult. Yet also a tragically true statement.
The world is flying towards Sim City always on DRM with open arms, and mark shuttleworth wants to lead the charge? Fine. Coddled computing for everyone.
For god sakes, A pox on the people who actually choose to use Amazon Linux.
The actions of Ubuntu affect people using other distributions. If Mir is completed and Nvidia, ATI and Intel decide that they will support it and no longer maintain their X11 drivers, that means that other distributions will suffer because of Ubuntu's actions.
It's like having microsoft control a standard, it's why the guys who develop mono are off their rocker. When you let someone at the wheel who completely hates what you are trying to achieve, he's going to steer things in bad directions. What's worse is that wayland was doing was simple. X11 was an old old standard and wayland was just moving in to replace a crufty piece of open source.
Some people were OK with it, some people weren't, then all of a sudden ubuntu goes and makes a THIRD standard, citing a laundry list of nonsense reasons to abandon all that work. We know the reason they did it, it's the same reason they made that ridiculous unity DE. They want control.
The problem is secrecy and authoritarianism run directly contrary to the spirit of open source software, and if we're going to go down that road then we need to stop calling it a community-driven Linux distribution.
Where will we be when Amazon et al start leaning more heavily on Canonical for more invasive features? What recourse will the existing user-base have other than being callously told to "fuck off if you don't like it, or buy some lube and start grabbing your ankles"?
Comments
As someone who has been an active contributor to desktop Linux in the past, and particularly very close to Ubuntu (I was sponsored to attend UDS-O), I have to say that I am happy Shuttleworth is finally taking this much needed stand.
I can absolutely understand the blowback to his sentiments, because really, the diversity of use and mindset in the Linux community is one of its defining characteristics. But frankly, he's right -- if Ubuntu isn't the platform you're looking for, either go find the one that is, or start it.
I don't see Shuttleworth's stance, or indeed the negative feedback from a vocally inflamed (though not majority) userbase, as a sign of Ubuntu's decline. I see it as Ubuntu finally having the balls to do what no other desktop Linux platform has done before -- move ahead with their grand vision on bringing free software to the masses, not just the ones that demand it the most.
I completely agree. This kind of pivot will slough off some Ubuntu enthusiasts and contributors, and upset some users, but I suspect that we'll all be looking back in 5 years and saying how obvious this move was.
Why am I so confident it'll actually work? Canonical has done a great job for many years on managing the sprawling world of integrating multiple upstream OSS projects that weren't under its control.
That's just a totally different thing from how you manage the development and integration of commercial software. What Canonical has done is much, much harder. And in my view, people who have done that can do anything -- beginning with the long-term technology planning, partnership building, and platform integration work that their vision requires.
That vision, by the way, is I think one that most of us want: 1) a 'smart device' OS, suitable for many hardware channels 2) a desktop OS tuned for content creation and collaboration 3) open cloud infrastructure to provide services to 1 and 2
For me, the single most important outcome of this vision is using Ubuntu to drive an educational revolution in the developing world. That requires Ubuntu to be in the hands of a wide and diverse community of developers, educators, scientists, engineers, artists, artisans, activists, policymakers, and hobbyists interested in such things, and who have total freedom to hack them.
That will not happen if "Linux" still means your dad's 90s desktop OS.
Go Shuttleworth!
> I see it as Ubuntu finally having the balls to .. move ahead with their grand vision on bringing free software to the masses
Actually, I don't see that at all. Where's the marketing initiative? Where's the retail channel? Where's the Linux Genius Bar/Geek Squad? Who really desires/wants/needs Linux and why can't they obtain it?
This is all Open Source development politics where nerds project their prejudicial ideas of what "normal people" want in some sort of bizarre appeal to popularity. None of this is backed up by serious UI research. None of this is actually trying to solve a real market problem, even assuming they had the resources to do so.
Eventually, I hope that people will let Linux be Linux. It should be just an environment focused on the needs of Programmers and Free-Software lovers. It should stop trying to be a totally baseless appeal to the "the masses".
This is actually a response to some Ubuntu contributors very publicly leaving the project, and not to criticism from users. This is the blog post that started it off:
http://doctormo.org/2013/03/06/ubuntu-membership-2/
And here some the many responses in the past two days (remember, these are Ubuntu members, not random users), many of them agree that there's something wrong with the Ubuntu community of contributors:
http://randall.executiv.es/ubuntu-stage-next
http://blog.pault.ag/post/44821301540/ubuntu-the-community
http://www.jonobacon.org/2013/03/08/thoughts-on-recent-commu...
http://www.markshuttleworth.com/archives/1235
http://apachelog.wordpress.com/2013/03/07/divisive-leadershi...
http://www.markshuttleworth.com/archives/1232
http://smartboyhw.tk/wordpress_smartboyhw/?p=28
http://linuxgrandma.blogspot.co.uk/2013/03/thoughts-and-worr...
http://philipballew.wordpress.com/2013/03/07/confessions-of-...
http://princessleia.com/journal/?p=7670
http://ftbeowulf.wordpress.com/2013/03/06/freedom-and-commun...
That's basically saying the linux community and their mindset are antithetical to modern computing.
What a massively backhanded insult. Yet also a tragically true statement.
The world is flying towards Sim City always on DRM with open arms, and mark shuttleworth wants to lead the charge? Fine. Coddled computing for everyone.
For god sakes, A pox on the people who actually choose to use Amazon Linux.
No one's forcing you to use Ubuntu. Don't like it? Move along.
The actions of Ubuntu affect people using other distributions. If Mir is completed and Nvidia, ATI and Intel decide that they will support it and no longer maintain their X11 drivers, that means that other distributions will suffer because of Ubuntu's actions.
That may be true, if and only if, Mir turns out worse than X11. If it turns out better, then it is a step in the right direction.
I really don't see how it could be worse than being stuck in X11-land though.
Sure, Wayland may(or may not) end up even better. But why should I care, as long as there is a great improvement to the current situation?
It's like having microsoft control a standard, it's why the guys who develop mono are off their rocker. When you let someone at the wheel who completely hates what you are trying to achieve, he's going to steer things in bad directions. What's worse is that wayland was doing was simple. X11 was an old old standard and wayland was just moving in to replace a crufty piece of open source.
Some people were OK with it, some people weren't, then all of a sudden ubuntu goes and makes a THIRD standard, citing a laundry list of nonsense reasons to abandon all that work. We know the reason they did it, it's the same reason they made that ridiculous unity DE. They want control.
That's exactly what most smart people have done. How does that help Canonical when that happens?
No one's forcing me to swim in a cesspool either.
That doesn't mean I can't complain about the stink.
The problem is secrecy and authoritarianism run directly contrary to the spirit of open source software, and if we're going to go down that road then we need to stop calling it a community-driven Linux distribution.
Where will we be when Amazon et al start leaning more heavily on Canonical for more invasive features? What recourse will the existing user-base have other than being callously told to "fuck off if you don't like it, or buy some lube and start grabbing your ankles"?
>Where will we be when Amazon et al start leaning more heavily on Canonical for more invasive features?
You'll be on a different Linux distro.
>if we're going to go down that road then we need to stop calling it a community-driven Linux distribution.
It's not like "community-driven Linux distribution" is such a badge of honor.