Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Dear Canonical: please let me pay for Ubuntu

webstylr.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 91 posts

Re: Dear Canonical: please let me pay for Ubuntu

#51

Post by pedrocr »

nicholassmith wrote: post #41
pedrocr wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This idea that what Ubuntu does is just some light packaging is pretty demeaning to their true value. Ubuntu really pushed the state of the art in terms of polish for Linux distributions. You can argue how much of the total product value that is but I don't think it's at all reasonable to say "Ubuntu isn't a product" and that it's just a "nice community layer with some high level project management". I'm also curious…

It could be taken as pretty demeaning, I accepted that as I wrote it, and I don't think of it in demeaning terms. They do a fantastic job, they have as you say pushed Linux forward a lot, I have nothing but respect for them. I won't however change my opinion. They did push the state of it forward, but so did Knoppix in many ways, and a fairly large amount of other distros. Are they all products? No, they're projects,…

I don't work for Ubuntu, I'm just a satisfied user, who moved from Debian to Ubuntu and noticed how big of a step change that was. That of course doesn't mean I don't appreciate the value of Debian and the rest of the community. In fact the value of Ubuntu for me is really "Debian with a lot more polish". And the value of Debian for me has always been "a huge collection of free software neatly packaged".

I actually wasn't arguing if they should charge for it or not, I don't really have an opinion there. My objections to your comment were:

1) Ubuntu isn't just a community, it's also a product and a successful one. You can download their new distribution every 6 months and get a lot of value out of it directly without ever engaging with the community. 2) If Canonical were to charge for Ubuntu, that does not mean they need to distribute money to any developers. It's certainly not required by any of the licenses of the software they package or even any of the customs of the community (see RHEL).

Re: Dear Canonical: please let me pay for Ubuntu

#52

Post by BCM43 »

ctdonath wrote: post #46
jballanc wrote: post #42

I'm surprised no one here has mentioned the obvious solution: go with the Apple model and build Ubuntu machines. Sure, Apple made some money from selling OS X at $129. It's making less now. But new OS sales were never the reason for Apple to remain closed source. That had more to do with branding/marketing. Not many people remember that one of the reasons Steve killed the affiliate program is that the Mac affiliates…

Just as Apple's goal was to be a hardware company, which sold an operating system to help sell hardware, Canonical would do well to sell a, er, canonical hardware configuration for the purpose of selling the OS. One of the debilitating downfalls of OSS OSes is the lack of reliable/assured compatible hardware (video drivers being a notorious examples). Arrange for manufacture of a "reference design" system with a "it…

You mean this?

https://www.system76.com/

Re: Dear Canonical: please let me pay for Ubuntu

#53

Post by pbhjpbhj »

pgeorgi wrote: post #35
cf0ed2aa-bdf5 wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This seems to be a post in response to Canonical's plans to add amazon ads to searches in your home lens. See: http://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2012/09/online-shopping-features-...

apt-get purge ubuntuone* landscape* unity-lens-shopping # gets rid of all Canonical tie-ins. Not so hard, isn't it?

Why not have a click-through at install or on version upgrades that says something like "we want to install an easy way to add products to your search results for which we get payment: Allow, Deny" ... rather than default install something that is going to cause such negative press.

IFF then there is a wide-scale uptake then there is warrant for auto-install of those features.

Re: Dear Canonical: please let me pay for Ubuntu

#54

Post by takluyver »

Tichy wrote: post #6

Suppose searching shops from the search bar makes sense: what would be a way to launch it that wouldn't freak out a lot of people? Personally I find the new feature interesting, because I already use the DuckDuckGo !-Notation to search Amazon all the time.

An obvious way is to require some sort of deliberate indication that the user wants shopping results, like a separate pane, or a prefix to the search term. It's a problem largely because it's searching Amazon even when you're just looking for a file on your computer.

Re: Dear Canonical: please let me pay for Ubuntu

#55

Post by mariusmg »

jackbravo wrote: post #50
RobAley wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The trouble is Canonical is and has always been a software company, and Apple is a hardware company (or at least its roots were). To make Canonical in a hardware direction under the Canonical brand, at a level to compete with existing hardware manufacturers, would take a fantastic amount of investment. They are making steps in partnering with hardware manufacturers, see the recent Dell linux laptop, and the OEM engin…

Nowdays I think Chinese manufactures make it pretty easy to grab one of those unbranded computers and just sell it with your own brand. Is this not the case?

Yeap. For Android tablets it costs something like 1-2$ to "brand" it.

Re: Dear Canonical: please let me pay for Ubuntu

#56

Post by rst »

nicholassmith wrote: post #15

The bigger issue is Ubuntu isn't a product. It's a nice community layer with some high level project management spearheading the direction and a team of core developers adding nifty features. If there is paying for the product then how is that money distributed to Jack John Johnson the guy doing patch fixes on his free time because he enjoys it. Does he get a salary? Some kind of financial bonus? Then you've got the…

That argument applies to any revenue stream, not just payments to users --- and, in particular, to the controversial deal with Amazon that is making Ubuntu's revenue streams (more precisely, Canonical's) an issue in the larger community in the first place.

Re: Dear Canonical: please let me pay for Ubuntu

#58

Post by flatline3 »

olalonde wrote: post #57

I think Kilo Dalton's comment pretty much sums it up: > 1) make a donation > 2) sudo apt-get remove unity-lens-shopping > 3) grab a tasty beverage

What it sums up is some Linux nerds' complete disconnection from reality.

1) Donations aren't a sustainable revenue model, and won't prevent Ubuntu from taking equally user-hostile actions in the future. What they need is a sustainable revenue model where users are the customer.

2) How is this different than the crapware that comes installed with some OEM Windows PCs? How is that a model to be emulated? What happens when a feature like this can't just be installed with apt-get?

3) Water would almost certainly be healthier.

Apple used to be the reliable alternative to the Microsoft hegemony. They're squandering that position, and we desperately need something like Ubuntu -- consumer focused, polished, and as easy to use as Mac OS X (or at least, Ubuntu is a lot closer to that ideal than Linux has previously been).

For Ubuntu to maintain a consumer focus, they need the consumers to be their customers, not their product. Let me buy Ubuntu, or buy Ubuntu hardware.

Re: Dear Canonical: please let me pay for Ubuntu

#60

Post by statictype »

RyanMcGreal wrote: post #38
realize wrote: post #7

Getting pretty tired of these "dear company, let me pay for your product instead of showing me ads" arguments. They show a lack of understanding of business models.

I think it shows a clear understanding of business models. In an ad-supported service, the advertiser is the customer and the user is the product being sold.

When you read The New York Times or WSJ or even Daring Fireball, do you feel like you're the product being sold?
Post reply on HN