I don't get what they gain by this?
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| smallboxadmin Mar 28, 2012 11:46 AM EDT |
So what does Canonical/Ubuntu gain by doing this? Try to separate themselves from the possibly "Linux is too difficult" newbies? Then again, maybe they don't want to seem dependent on things like the Linux kernel and Debian, which without they wouldn't exist. A perceived, on their part, weakness? It seems they are competing (or trying to) with RedHat, Debian, etc. but want to be identified similarly to "Windows" and "OS X". It's like they bought a car and changed the badges, gave it a new paint job and maybe a new interior and called it an Canonical Ubuntu car. |
| JaseP Mar 28, 2012 12:22 PM EDT |
Am I shocked they're doing this? No. Do I expect a reversal? No. Is this just an announcement, and are they keeping the deb package name the same? I don't know. Is this a hysterical reaction? Yes. |
| tbuitenh Mar 28, 2012 12:35 PM EDT |
Those who would prefer that someones first impression of Linux isn't Ubuntu have been saying "Ubuntu is not (all of) Linux" for a long time. Now Canonical also says "Ubuntu is not Linux". They may be right that this will bring them more users. So it looks like a win-win situation to me. |
| jdixon Mar 28, 2012 12:58 PM EDT |
> Now Canonical also says "Ubuntu is not Linux". And they appear to be more and more correct with each passing day. |
| Khamul Mar 28, 2012 1:06 PM EDT |
This is great news. Ubuntu is a stain upon the Linux "brand", with its horrible Unity UI, so anything which separates the two will be good for Linux at this point. As I've said before, it isn't helping the cause of adoption of Linux if newbies download Ubuntu, try it out, and run away screaming in horror because of Unity and vow never to try Linux again. As for the kernel name, that's really irrelevant because most users never see that. Get an android device, log in to its console, and type 'uname': it says "Linux". 99.999% of Android phone users never see that. |
| kennethh Mar 28, 2012 4:18 PM EDT |
It's one thing to rag on Unity when Unity sucked.. but who cares if they rename something? I don't. |
| kingttx Mar 28, 2012 4:25 PM EDT |
Who says Marketing is all about honesty? Bleh! |
| Khamul Mar 28, 2012 6:00 PM EDT |
"Marketing" is a synonym for "lying". |
| jdixon Mar 28, 2012 9:01 PM EDT |
> "Marketing" is a synonym for "lying". Not entirely true. The best marketers only exaggerate. |
| DrDubious Mar 29, 2012 2:24 AM EDT |
They do their best to completely disown "Linux" on their website, too. Ungrateful buttnuggets. |
| r_a_trip Mar 29, 2012 6:10 AM EDT |
Just one more drop in the bucket on the way to the "Apple-ification" of Canonical. I wonder when they are going to make significant changes to the Linux Kernel itself and not bother to upstream it. Maybe the day they develop their own Ubuntu Stable Driver ABI... I've suspected the sepearation of Ubuntu from Linux proper would happen one day, ever since the teeth of Canonical started shining throug the Ubuntu Community mumbo-jumbo. Well, the sooner Canonical forks their repositories into ever more incompatible versions, the better. Then we can safely lump them in with Microsoft and Apple as the other systems and not dwell on them anymore. |
| mbaehrlxer Mar 29, 2012 6:22 AM EDT |
Quoting:Who says Marketing is all about honesty?being a human being is all about honesty. truthfulness is the foundation of all human virtues. not everything people do is acceptable. lying is generally not acceptable. calling it marketing doesn't make it any more acceptable. if marketing is not about honesty then marketing should be stopped. there is simply no excuse for dishonesty. greetings, eMBee. |
| JaseP Mar 29, 2012 9:05 AM EDT |
@ r_a_trip, They couldn't make kernel changes without releasing them. They'd be violating the GPL 2.0 license. |
| ComputerBob Mar 29, 2012 10:14 AM EDT |
If Canonical ever made changes to the kernel, I'm not sure I would want them to release them upstream, because I suspect that their "changes" would mostly involve removing functionality that users have come to count on. |
| smallboxadmin Mar 29, 2012 11:23 AM EDT |
@r_a_trip
Quoting:Just one more drop in the bucket on the way to the "Apple-ification" of Canonical. So, the next logical step would be to switch to a BSD based kernel/license. If becoming Apple was their plan, which I doubt, they should have done that in the first place. Of course they wouldn't have gotten the jump start or community that Linux gave them. |
| kingttx Mar 29, 2012 12:17 PM EDT |
@mbaehrlxer:
Erm, I think we're both in agreement, the lecture perhaps unnecessary. Let's try it this way: FLOSS is a meritocracy, correct? The most technically sound ideas are promoted and those people behind that idea are esteemed. In order to keep that foundation alive, the end product should still be openly attributed to the group or individuals that are responsible for the excellence. My comment about marketing was meant to be a slight, a cynical observation. Marketing means put the bottom line ahead of EVERYTHING, including the people responsible for the success. The ends justifies the means. Nothing is sacred. So, in my cloud of cynicism about their apparent separation from GNU/Linux - the very foundation upon which their product is built - I've labeled them marketers instead of FLOSS citizens. Perhaps I'm being too altruistic about it but I can't help it. They're hiding Linux because they are convinced anything labeled with Linux will turn away $$$. I like their older stuff before Unity, I use Kubuntu now (I know, there are better KDE options out there but I enjoy the resources/repositories behind it), and I recently began appreciating the work the community put into Ubuntu Studio. The marketing comment was meant as an insult; I believe anyone in FLOSS would appreciate that irony. :) |
| JaseP Mar 29, 2012 12:55 PM EDT |
@ smallboxadmin, They mostly couldn't Apple-ify either, because, while Unity is their creation it's built on Gnome, which is, if I am correct, released under the GPL and LGPL licenses. So, while it may be possible to create programs that link into Gnome, there will always be some components that don't allow for that. Apple released it's respin of BSD with an entire proprietary graphical shell on top of it. The BSD license is a "free-er" license, in the respect that it allows someone to build on it and make changes without open sourcing them (more free for the developer, less so for the community). If it weren't for certain legal/license issues associated with the BSD license at the time the Linux kernel began to make strides towards use as a drop in kernel for the GNU project, we'd likely all be using GNU software on top of a BSD kernel, instead of Linux. But because BSD was embroiled in controversy, and Linux was getting useable, the developers flocked around Linux, instead. Nowadays, developers focus on Linux to the exclusion of BSD because of the groundswell momentum that helped Linux pull ahead. But if Linux ever got shut down (unlikely that the big players would ever let it get that far),people would switch back to BSD,... most likely. And then there's always HURD,... although HURD is light years behind in functionality. |
| lcafiero Mar 29, 2012 1:05 PM EDT |
Late to the party (but not for lack of talking about this topic elsewhere) . . . . I think Joe Brockmeier is right on the money in this personal blog item, for some of the following reasons --smallboxadmin brings up the point about community: Someone somewhere made this comparison between Android and Ubuntu which I thought spoke past that particular issue, but it bears mentioning: One company has tried to build a reputation as being all about "community" -- down to their logo of stylized people giving a huge "kumbaya" -- and giving credit to upstreams, even though arguably they don't practice what they preach. The other company is Google. -- What's wrong with the following statement? "Debian is part of the Ubuntu 'ecosystem.' " Anyone? If you said, "That's backwards, it should be the other way around," you'd go on to the bonus round. But that's Mark Shuttleworth's view of the relationship between Debian and Ubuntu. This is only one of many examples of the boundless hubris that Mark Shuttleworth displays, whether it's handing down from "on high" the next release name to forcing his "innovation" in the desktop environment with an arguably substandard offering in Unity. -- Some might thing this is a tempest in a teapot. I think they're wrong. The systematic shelving of any reference to Linux on the Ubuntu site coupled with their marketing of "Ubuntu OS" (has anyone else seen the ads on facebook, or maybe even not that far: I know LXer has Ubuntu ads now) shows they're no longer "team players" in the FOSS realm. True, it's never been "Ubuntu Linux," but it's never been "Fedora Linux," yet they have Linux right there in black and white on their Web page. Same with OpenSUSE. Neither of them has had a problem calling themselves "Linux," but that hasn't been the case with Canonical/Ubuntu. -- Many of you know that the words "Ubuntu critic" have never been far from my name, and you might think that an "I told you so" would bring me to the edge of tittering glee. But on the whole, this is tragic. I would have preferred to have been wrong about all this, eating endless crow about how I didn't get this right. For those of you who stayed awake this long, thanks for reading. |
| ComputerBob Mar 29, 2012 1:35 PM EDT |
You're welcome. |
| mbaehrlxer Mar 29, 2012 11:11 PM EDT |
kingttx: my apologies, i didn't intend to lecture you. i changed the message to add a quote to show that i am not just talking to you but to anyone who reads this. greetings, eMBee. |
| number6x Mar 30, 2012 7:38 AM EDT |
I think the term of art is 'Branding'. At least one of the following things has happened: 1) Someone with a recently minted MBA has been hired or promoted (they did really good in the class on marketing your brand) 2) An outside consulting firm has been paid big bucks to do a review and produce a market strategy. 3) Someone, already there has been watching 'Mad Men' and is just awakening to the possibilities of developing a marketing aura around the companie's beloved brand name. Either way, this is the result of a policy developed that is going to make sure everything is 'Ubuntu' this and 'Ubuntu' that. (The Mad Men guy should have awakened to the possibilities of martinis and left the marketing alone.) |
| Khamul Mar 30, 2012 12:49 PM EDT |
@CBob: No, Ubuntu should release any kernel changes they make, no matter how awful or ill-conceived. Just because they release them doesn't mean Linus is going to accept them (probably not), and then the world can see what they're doing. However, I don't expect them to, because frankly, I don't think they do any work on the kernel. They just package it up and use it; there's no great new features (kernel-wise) in any Ubuntu release, they just don't bother with that, and instead deal with UI stuff (poorly these days). To make the obligatory car analogy, it's like a car company that makes bodies and just buys engines from someone else and drops them in, rather than making their own engines. Lotus is a pretty good example of this (I think they use Toyota engines in most of their cars these days), except that Lotus actually does a really great job with their bodies and suspensions, so the analogy isn't perfect. |
| gus3 Mar 30, 2012 2:11 PM EDT |
Uh, doesn't the GPLv2 require the release of source code changes for distributed binaries? It isn't a question of good, ugly, upstream-only, or whatnot. Whoever distributes a binary compiled from patched GPLv2 source, has the obligation under said GPLv2 to make available those patches to whoever received the binary. So, it isn't a question of "should or should not." It's "must" in order to remain compliant. |
| Khamul Mar 30, 2012 2:49 PM EDT |
@gus3: It's almost exactly like how you "must" pay use tax to your state for any purchases you make on the internet from out-of-state. Even if Amazon doesn't charge you sales tax, you "must" keep a record of everything you buy tax-free, and then remit the sales tax to your state's department of revenue at the end of the year (or with your income tax return). Now, how many people actually do this? Three? This law is generally ignored, because it's impossible to enforce without resorting to totalitarian-style surveillance. It's the same with requiring release of source code changes for distributed binaries: unless the changes are significant, and someone (who downloads and uses the binaries) notices that the distributed binaries have some functionality not in the upstream sources or in the sources officially released with the binaries, no one's going to know. Now of course, if Canonical made some huge new change to the kernel that resulted in articles in the tech press talking about it, then it'd be pretty hard for them to get away with this. But if the changes are minor, it's doubtful anyone would notice. How many people are going to spend their spare time looking for small GPL violations in Ubuntu? And Ubuntu never makes any significant kernel contributions; Red Hat, Oracle, etc. contribute big changes, filesystems, etc., but Canonical never bothers with that kind of stuff, they just make a crappy UI (which no one in their right mind would want to copy). |
| ComputerBob Mar 30, 2012 5:07 PM EDT |
@Khamul, yes, I know. I was joking. I thought that fact was obvious, but apparently it wasn't. |
| Steven_Rosenber Mar 30, 2012 8:30 PM EDT |
I confess that I'm skimming at this point. I'm not one to defend Ubuntu -- they're more downstream than not, building on Debian, using Linux and the GNU tools, layering on dozens if not hundreds of upstream applications and utilities. And then you have the whole Linux vs. GNU/Linux controversy coupled with Ubuntu's beginnings (not to mention continuing status) standing on the shoulders of Debian. It's a lot of semantics. Look at all that's involved: from Firefox and Thunderbird to LibreOffice, GIMP and Inkscape, the parts of GNOME that remain in Ubuntu proper, things in the background like CUPS, ssh, OpenSSL, Perl, Python, Ruby, Bash, GNU everything -- and dozens and dozens of other upstream projects that all come together to make a complete, modern Linux-kernel-based software distribution. Android mentions Linux much less than Ubuntu does, and yes, Android doesn't use a whole lot of marketing about "community," while deferring to the underlying corporation in real control of the project all of the time. The licenses allow companies to do this sort of thing. They don't have to give "credit" in the naming or marketing of their products. They have to provide source. We all know Android's purpose is to a) counter Apple's phone OS, b) provide advertising eyeballs for Google while giving people more reasons to stay logged into Google services so they can be tracked and marketed to more effectively with Google-delivered advertising. Not a whole lot of Kumbaya there. I don't think Ubuntu loses a whole lot of its own Kunbaya by mentioning Linux less and pushing the Ubuntu name and Ubuntu-coded Unity bits more and the GNOME-coded ones less. What Mark Shuttleworth wants you to believe (and I'm staying out of this one) is that combination of community-delivered fervor along with some top-down, father-knows-best design is a more targeted and effective way to counteract the likes of Apple, Microsoft and Google than a completely community-driven effort. In other words, only by becoming somewhat Apple-like (helmed and guided by a SABDFL like Jobs for Apple and Shuttleworth for Canonical) can one truly fight that particular power. Has there ever been a time when Mark Shuttleworth hasn't been in full control of Ubuntu? Starting out as an easier-to-use Debian didn't mean it was always going to be repackaged Sid with a coat of brown. I've said it before, I don't know Jono Bacon, but he bears the brunt of this (though doing so is completely his choice). What we call the PC desktop is sitting on very shaky ground. All of the major systems (Linux in the form of GNOME and KDE, Apple's Mac OS and Microsoft's Windows) are undergoing cataclysmic change and trying to drag users along with them. Maybe mobile, tablet and TV are the places where there is a real chance for a free-software-based UI to take hold. If Shuttleworth can pull this off, it'll be huge. Same goes for Mozilla and Boot to Gecko, or Google and Chrome. All Ubuntu's abandonment of GNOME means to me is that Debian, Fedora, Suse, Mint and any other distribution that packages and puts GNOME out there become more relevant. GNOME will live without Ubuntu. GNOME will live without GNOME 2. And PC-based desktop Linux is alive and well, with ARM-based Linux rapidly ramping up to become something we can all benefit from. Ubuntu is delivering innovation, just like GNOME (and Android, Apple and even Microsoft). If the Ubuntu "community" isn't your cup of cocoa, there are plenty of other places in the free-software world to put your time as a user, volunteer and cheerleader/fanboy. |
| flufferbeer Apr 02, 2012 2:56 AM EDT |
@Steven_Rosenber > I'm not one to defend Ubuntu... OF COURSE no one would EVER think that you're one to defend Ubuntu or its fanbois. But then later > Android mentions Linux much less than Ubuntu does, and yes, Android doesn't use a whole lot of marketing about "community," while deferring to the underlying corporation in real control of the project all of the time. Of course you're not defending Ubuntu here in any manner whatsoever, right? And again later > I don't think Ubuntu loses a whole lot of its own Kunbaya by mentioning Linux less and pushing the Ubuntu name and Ubuntu-coded Unity bits more and the GNOME-coded ones less. Of course you're STILL not defending Ubuntu here, right? Finally > Ubuntu is delivering innovation, just like GNOME (and Android, Apple and even Microsoft). In no way are you trying to defend Ubuntu here, right?? Of course not! ;) -fb |
| Khamul Apr 02, 2012 9:39 PM EDT |
Ubuntu is delivering innovation, just like GNOME (and Android, Apple and even Microsoft). Simply being different doesn't make something "innovative". It has to be better than what came before. Unity and Gnome aren't. And removing functionality (like being able to turn off the power) is not innovation, it's stupid. What we call the PC desktop is sitting on very shaky ground. It's only "shaky" because the morons who control the most popular desktop UIs have decided they need more profit, so they have to chase stupid fads to try to get those profits. Maybe mobile, tablet and TV are the places where there is a real chance for a free-software-based UI to take hold. Nope. Showing up an hour late to a race after all the other contestants have started running usually means you'll lose. Worse, mobile, tablet, and TV are places where the manufacturers exercise great control over the software, not the users. PCs are the only places where the users have real control over things, though users do seem to have more control with Android OS. However, PCs are not growing (I'm not going to say "dying" like the morons who think lack of growth equates to "dying"), while mobile and tablet are growing quickly. FOSS was too late to this game; Apple was there first with the first serious entry, Android was second (which is partly FOSS, which is why users have more control with Android devices), and finally MS was third and doing very poorly. There's no way that FOSS is going to make a serious dent here; the best it can hope for is to do what it did on the desktop, become a minor contender that's large enough to be taken seriously and not be completely laughed at. It's only barely done that on the desktop after ~15 years, and it remains to be seen how well it'll do in mobile/tablet, but it doesn't look good thanks to a total lack of focus and the most-prominent UI organizations making horrible UIs, while the only one that really has a quality product for tablets/mobile (KDE) being mostly ignored. |
| Steven_Rosenber Apr 03, 2012 12:47 AM EDT |
I'll spell it out for you: Legions of fanboys aren't enough to take Ubuntu/Canonical the extra thousand miles and make it profitable. Problem: Ubuntu was built on a community of geeky fanboys. People like you and me. But the great unwashed (i.e. those who aren't in our little Linux-desktop-running club) don't care about GNOME or what side of a window the buttons are on -- they just want something like Apple's Mac OS (or, these days, iOS) without having to pay for it. Ubuntu is saying that they can offer something better than that. Yes, it's all marketing. Right now, Ubuntu isn't for me, but I'm not the target market. If you're happy running Linux distributions that aren't Ubuntu, you're not the target market. Telling Canonical that mobile and tablet are lost causes and the only place to stake a claim is on the traditional laptop/desktop -- that dog won't hunt. I'd rather see something like Ubuntu on my tablet or phone than iOS or Android, but I'm sticking with Debian on my PC desktop. |
| jdixon Apr 03, 2012 8:32 AM EDT |
> Simply being different doesn't make something "innovative". It has to be better than what came before. Uhm. No. In fact, the last gasp of a dying technology is usually (I considered saying almost always, but I doubt that's true with computer technology) better than the first attempts at a replacement. |
| Khamul Apr 03, 2012 1:10 PM EDT |
I'll spell it out for you: Canonical doesn't have a prayer of competing with 1) Apple, 2) Google/Android, and 3) Windows, all at the same time, and building any significant marketshare on devices that are used solely for consumption. You're not going to be able to watch TV shows on Ubuntu devices, or download apps from major publishers, or do anything else except geeky stuff. The TV/movie studios aren't going to get involved with Canonical so you can, for instance, download and watch the latest "Games of Thrones" on your Ubuntu tablet or phone. The cellular carriers are not going to carry Ubuntu phones. Why would they? They're already carrying devices from 3 major vendors; why would they waste effort on a small #4 from South Africa? Gimme a break. If Canonical wanted to really break into this space, they should have done it 5 years ago. Worse, they don't bring anything new to the table: mobile devices already have perfectly good UIs, and you have 3 to choose from. It's not like Unity is going to be heads and tails better than iOS, Android, or WP7 (in fact, for a touchscreen device, it sounds like it'd be a big PITA, since they don't want to use menus to find apps for some stupid reason. Having to type in "angry" on a tiny touchscreen virtual keyboard every time you want to play Angry Birds is just idiotic). And the technology that Unity is trying to replace isn't dying, except in the minds of morons. Try typing a novel or a few thousand lines of C code on a touchscreen. |
| jdixon Apr 03, 2012 1:38 PM EDT |
> Canonical doesn't have a prayer of competing with 1) Apple, 2) Google/Android, and 3) Windows, all at the same time... Where did Steven say they did? He said (effectively) that they're going to try, not that they're going to succeed. |
| Steven_Rosenber Apr 03, 2012 1:53 PM EDT |
Thanks @jdixon -- I'm in no way predicting success or failure in Canonical's current and future endeavors. I've always said that key to success in laptop/desktop computing, which my interlocutors say is the only pool Ubuntu should be swimming in, is one thing and one thing only: Preloads. Canonical has had years during which to make this happen, to get Ubuntu preloaded by OEMs and sold, even to us geeky folks, as a more complete, saner, cheaper, less-troublesome way to compute than either Windows or Macintosh. That's where they could be using all this marketing -- showing the world how a Linux desktop solves so many problems for users. Didn't happen. Maybe it couldn't happen. Maybe Canonical tried and failed at this and is now looking forward to other opportunities. Maybe now that the traditional desktop is technology's red-headed stepchild (i.e. half the world thinks it's dead) Canonical (or other) can have a go at OEM desktops and laptops. But I'm not working at Canonical or any other company in a similar position. Regarding tablet, mobile and TV devices, success for any new player in this space is far from assured. Failure will strike more ventures than not. All I know is that I'm glad to see Mozilla's Boot to Gecko potentially bringing some freedom to devices that aren't seeing much of it. Same with Ubuntu. As unattractive as Ubuntu is for me personally on the desktop, given the hundreds of other choices in terms of Linux distributions, Ubuntu looks a whole lot better stacked up against the very few, very proprietary options we have now on mobile and tablet devices. Any move into mobile is bold. I prefer to give credit now knowing that nobody but us geeks cares about the desktop. |
| Fettoosh Apr 03, 2012 3:30 PM EDT |
Quoting:Canonical doesn't have a prayer of competing with ... I say Canonical has very good chance in succeeding if they become their own independent OEM. True, it does take a good amount of capital investment, but it is the only way it is going to be able to compete against Apple & MS. Google is not a competitor of Canonical and they are giving Android for free because they have a much bigger primary revenue generators than little computer devices. MS has all OEMs under control, the minute it loses its grip over them, it will have its own devices too. The way the technology is going for it, I believe they will have their own devices eventually. By then, it is probably going to be too late. Apple have their own hardware and software and that is a critical reason for its success. It enables it to create products that just work and that is a key attribute that average users look for. The average user needs portability, reliability, and functionality to do the various trivial task they do day in day out. Netbooks, Tablets, Smart Phones and hand held devices in general going to be much more popular than desktop because there are many more novice user than power user in both business and house hold worlds that need no more than sending e-mail, plays multimedia, take pictures, create small documents, and run specialized little applications locally and access more sophisticated apps on the cloud. If Canonical becomes its own OEM, they only have to compete against Apple. It will be difficult, but it is doable. If they keep improving Unity to run on tablets with all desktop applications available, I think they might have pretty good chance to compete against Apple. That is feasible because the resources on tables these day could be made to match full fledged desktop resources. I don't know what was the reason Canonical didn't do that with desktops earlier, but with tablets, they aren't too far behind and could catch up with Apple and go beyond by adding desktop apps and functions. If KDE are giving it a try with Vivaldi relying only on donations, I believe Canonical should have no problem, especially with the resources it has available for it. |
| caitlyn Apr 03, 2012 5:04 PM EDT |
I'm with Steven on this one. I've been saying for years that the only way for Linux to make headway in consumer space and even corporate desktop space is for it to be preloaded. We saw that work with the Asus EeePC in 2007-08 as well as offerings by Acer and Dell. Linux held onto about a third of the netbook market even after Windows started competing there seriously. We still see Linux (in the form of Android) doing very well indeed on mobile devices, tablets and low end ARM-based netbooks. All it took was preloading. Most people don't know how to install an operating system and never will bother to try. |
| jdixon Apr 03, 2012 5:29 PM EDT |
> I'm with Steven on this one. I've been saying for years that the only way for Linux to make headway in consumer space and even corporate desktop space is for it to be preloaded. Well, that's missing one minor detail: Preloaded at a competitive price. Android devices are price competitive with iOS devices. With laptops, desktops, and netbooks, it doesn't have to match Windows, but you can't expect someone to pay $350 for a netbook with Linux when they can get the same thing with Windows for $250. $275, maybe, but not $350. That's where the existing Linux vendors fall down. |
| caitlyn Apr 03, 2012 5:34 PM EDT |
I agree with you, jdixon. I bought my HP netbook with Ubuntu preloaded and it was the same cost as the Windows version. There is no way I would pay what System 76 or ZaReason want for a netbook if I was in the market again. I'd buy one of the major brands, wipe the storage, and install Linux. I hate to be on the wrong side of the marketshare numbers, but those numbers are distorted to the point of meaningless anyway. A $100 (or more) premium just to have Linux loaded is insane. |
| Khamul Apr 03, 2012 6:50 PM EDT |
You're all forgetting the big thing that made Apple's iDevices such a hit: apps. It's also the big thing that kept Linux from really taking off on the desktop. Apple has its iTunes app store with 10s of thousands of apps, Google/Android has the Google Play store with even more apps, even WP7 has a crappy app store with a few dozen apps (I exaggerate, it's more, but nowhere near as large as the other two). In addition, you can download and play movies, music, and TV shows from these stores. How is Canonical going to match that? Simple: they aren't. Not many people are going to buy Ubuntu tablets that they can't play Angry Birds on, and that they can only download Free software on, and independent software vendors aren't going to bother making non-free apps for them either, for good reason: they already have 3 platforms to deal with. In fact, this is one of the big problems MS is running into: many ISVs don't want to bother with WP7 because they're already busy with iOS and Android, which both have ~98% of the market, so they don't want to waste resources porting their software to a totally different environment for a small number of users. MS was too little, too late, and they're probably going to fail in the phone/tablet market; the ISVs have already gotten situated with the two dominant platforms, just the way that 10+ years ago, the ISVs got situated with Windows and didn't want to waste resources chasing other platforms (they might pursue Mac, but they didn't waste time with OS/2, BeOS, or Linux). Apparently MS totally forgot the lesson about being early to market with a platform ISVs could develop for and use to sell their wares. Canonical, now #4 (actually #5 if you count RIM) to the game, doesn't have a chance of getting ISV attention. Sure, they could make their own hardware, but it's going to be like the Atari Jaguar or Sega Saturn: a possibly nice piece of hardware, with very little software to run on it. Remember how well those worked out? Both those companies died after those debacles. The KDE tablet looks OK, but they have a shoestring budget and as such, aren't depending on big revenues to make it all work out, so they probably don't care that much if they only get 0.1% of the tablet market; Canonical can't afford to keep paying the bills if all they can manage is to sell tablets to a small number of geeks. |
| Fettoosh Apr 03, 2012 7:27 PM EDT |
What prevents Canonical from developing similar apps? Nothing other than resources and I bet you they would be willing to flash some dough to have similar apps. Another thing, if Ubuntu is ready on Ubuntu's tablets, they will be cheaper than many. And I bet you they will spend enough to make it well known. If all fails, they will try harder or fold shop. Or Is that what you want them do before even trying? |
| gus3 Apr 03, 2012 8:23 PM EDT |
Khamul wrote:You're all forgetting the big thing that made Apple's iDevices such a hit: apps.I disagree: it's the Apple name. The iFanbois would buy cr@p on a silver platter, if it were called iCr@p. |
| caitlyn Apr 04, 2012 12:20 AM EDT |
I'll also point out that an Ubuntu tablet would have access to everything in the Ubuntu repos, and that's a five digit number worth of packages. Granted, some aren't terribly useful on a tablet, but still... I don't see lack of software as a big issue. In the case of netbooks there certainly isn't much lacking in the Ubuntu repo. |
| Khamul Apr 04, 2012 1:53 AM EDT |
@Fettoosh:
What prevents Microsoft from developing similar apps? Nothing other than resources and I bet you they would be willing to flash some dough to have similar apps. Microsoft has a lot more dough than Canonical. How's that working out for them with WP7 and courting app developers? @caitlyn: regular users don't care about using FOSS apps, especially when they're going to be horrible on a tablet which they were never designed for. Regular users want commercial applications like Angry Birds, Flixster, Pandora radio, and countless other non-Free apps which are ubiquitous on Android and iOS. Android with its Linux kernel is succeeding because it has these things; Windows Phone 7 doesn't have many of them, and has a 1% marketshare despite the tons of money MS is throwing at the platform. How far do you think Windows 95 would have gotten if independent software vendors had ignored it, and instead all concentrated their efforts on OS/2 back in the early 90s? |
| lxerguest Apr 04, 2012 10:19 AM EDT |
I don't know about other peoples' grubby little requirements,but I think I could get use of the vast library of FOSS apps on a tablet that is a)sufficiently powerful, and b) has a slideout keyboard, or great virtual keyboard,i.e. stable and highly configurable,e.g. split keyboard option for thumb typing. Since these kinds of wish lists tend to get ignored,I suppose I would have to program it myself,which means you won't be seeing it any time soon,unless someone is willing to accept donations to do it a la kickstarter.*also high priority is a really fast VNC for running chrooted X environments like Plasma on Android devices that don't have native X drivers. |
| lxerguest Apr 04, 2012 10:35 AM EDT |
I should have added the requirement of a built-in touchpad mouse on the slideout/virtual keyboard, to get the finer cursor control that some desktop apps require for enjoyable use. |
| Fettoosh Apr 04, 2012 11:48 AM EDT |
Quoting:The iFanbois would buy cr@p on a silver platter, if it were called iCr@p. So true, buying Apple products is a fashion statement these days, except, although the IPad III is not the best in its category, it is not Cr@p either. It is well designed, elegant, well thought off, intuitive and functional. It still doesn't have some of the key apps. like libreoffice and such, which my wife as many others, use quite a bit. Quoting:What prevents Microsoft from developing similar apps? Like you said nothing. As a matter of fact, MS already is trying to get into the game with its new Metro interface and adopting Web html 5 as their development platform and possibly dropping their .Net platform. But, its problem is that its Windows platform being so bulky and old fashion it is going to be a major effort to build a new one for hand held devices. On the contrary, Canonical has Linux, which being used for the majority of such devices and I don't expect MS to switch to it. I believe if Ubuntu could have a tablet of their own to make sure of good driver support and follow similar steps as the KDE team by next year along with good customer support for many of FOSS applications (LibreOffice, Gimp, Inkscape & many of KDE apps), I think they have a good chance to make a good product that many will go for. Mind you, those apps on tablets are not to use for heavy production of but simply to use for information consumption and light editing/modifications. FOSS apps are key for many users to use tablets as a productive device and not for entertainment-leisure only while on the road. |
| caitlyn Apr 04, 2012 11:55 AM EDT |
@Khamul: I don't think users care whether an app is commerical or FOSS. I don't think they are necessarily sold on particular branded apps. I think they are sold on functionality: does it do what they want and is it easy for them to install and use? If the answer to those questions is yes then it's fine. The access to a very large repository of app, as @lxerguest points out, is a plus for the more technical among us provided there is a decent way to use those apps on a tablet. |
| Khamul Apr 04, 2012 12:55 PM EDT |
@Fettoosh: I'm talking about apps, not UI. MS already has Metro on their phones, and the users aren't buying it, and the ISVs aren't writing for it. Their app store is much, much smaller than the iTunes and Android stores. MS can make the platform, but apparently just being MS is no longer sufficient to entice ISVs to develop for their platform. The ISVs are probably sick of MS's constant platform and API churn anyway: they keep making new and incompatible mobile OSes: WinCE, WinMo, now WinPhone7, and expecting everyone to follow along. @caitlyn: Users don't care about licenses, but they certainly care about two things: 1) getting certain apps that are popular (e.g. Angry Birds), and 2) having a large selection of apps. A quick Google search shows that Angry Birds is actually the most popular app for WinPhone7, and there seems to be some disagreement whether they're going to bother making Angry Birds Space for the platform at all (some articles say yes, some say no; maybe Rovio changed their mind). Even then, that's not enough to make the platform popular, and the mixed signals from Rovio don't bode well for MS; if they're hesitant to spend time writing for the platform, what does that say about other ISVs who are less profitable and have fewer resources? Also, it turns out I forgot another platform: Symbian. Nokia's Ovi store is the 3rd-largest app store, behind Apple and Android. So an Ubuntu entry into the market would actually put it at #6. Angry Birds isn't the only important app out there; there's tons of other popular games. People like to play games on their phones, such as when they're sitting somewhere (doctor's office waiting room?) and are bored. You talk about functionality, as if productivity apps are all that matter, and games aren't important. RIM tried that approach; look where it got them. I think games are even more important on phones than on PCs. With PCs, you don't really need games so much, because you can always just buy a console and use that for games. But you can't bring a console (and big-screen TV) with you to the doctor's office to play while you wait (which is also probably why simple games like Angry Birds are so popular on phones, and not highly involved games like FPSs). Finally, where there's lots of FOSS apps out there, the development cycle on them is much longer, and none of them are optimized for small touchscreens. You could use them anyway, but it's not going to work well. Microsoft tried this approach with their previous mobile platforms; they looked and worked much like their desktop platform, and required a stylus to use. That didn't work out too well for them. |
| caitlyn Apr 04, 2012 1:11 PM EDT |
@Khamul: Sorry, not buying. I don't believe a game, no matter how popular, is make or break to a platform. When the Asus Eee PC and Acer Aspire One first came out as Linux only devices they had no popular apps, as in zero, and still sold like prout verbial hotcakes. The Eee PC put Asus on the map as a PC vendor. Before that all they were known for were their motherboards. Having ISVs developing for you is nice but not essential if the FOSS community is churning out compelling apps. The problem Canonical has is that they have done an outstanding job of alienating the FOSS developer community, without which they won't have compelling apps without ISV buy-in and I just don't see ISVs buying in. In other words, we agree Canonical will probably fail in their bid for the tablet/mobile market. We just disagree as to why. |
| Steven_Rosenber Apr 04, 2012 1:29 PM EDT |
I'm probably not the typical tablet user, but there are many like me. I have the iPad 2 -- won it in a drawing after doing a business-related survey. I use the Twitter app, which is very good by the way, and the web browser. That's pretty much it for apps. Because most of them stink. The iPad is a nightmare for writing. You can't get your cursor placed with the precision of even my Android phone. My daughter uses it to play Angry Birds and Fruit Ninja. The thing about the tablet form factor is that most web sites look pretty good on the screen, you don't need to do anything crazy on the client side or server side to get an acceptable view of a web site. So for me, any tablet device with a decent web browser is about 95 percent of what I need. There are plenty of little apps in Linux that would either work great out of the box, or better with a little UI attention in a specialized tablet distro. This wouldn't be hard to do. The KDE team is already doing it. |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!