Also check out Ubuntu? Not for me, thanks from IT Wire.
Posted on 02/10/2007 3:03:51 PM PST by bigdcaldavis
Apparently, lot of people are thrilled with the whole idea of Canonical and Linspire's technology partnership announced yesterday, citing source code consolidation, non-redundant development efforts, and just good karma about the whole deal.
I, for one, am not one of those people.
Initially, my big problem was worry for the Debian Project. Under the terms of the new partnership (which, for the purposes of this article I will deem "Linbutu" because I am getting lazy in my middle age), the Linspire and Freespire distributions will be based on Ubuntu, not Debian GNU/Linux. Ubuntu, in turn, gets supported access to Linspire's Click n' Run (CNR) install/update toolset.
It sounds like great synergy, doesn't it? And it is. From a business standpoint, I think this is one of those matches made in heaven and I would not be surprised if we actually do see a "Linbutu" distribution for real some day. For now, just the partnership seems like a win-win for everyone.
But out of the gate, my first thought was this seemed like a huge vote of no-confidence for the Debian Project. Again.
For instance, the whole Dunc-Tank plan, where Debian developers tried to raise funding for some of the release managers could get paid and thus could work more on their projects and get them out in a more timely manner, seemed like a good idea at the time. But several developers did not share that opinion, and when Dunc-Tank went forward after a Project vote approved the idea, there were boycotts that ended up delaying the next release of Debian (Etch) anyway. Etch was supposed to be released in December 2006, and now there's talk that it won't go live until March 2007.
Based on that, and Debian's historical tendency to run late, I could not help but cynically wonder if the move by Linspire to an Ubuntu code base was an effort to just get to a code base that had a more predictable schedule.
Oh, but my cynicism had yet to start, and I got concerned about a lot more than the health of the Debian Project.
By separating itself from Debian proper, Linspire not only gets the advantage of less chaotic source of code, but it gets the added advantage of the community that's built up around Ubuntu. I don't mean that suddenly Ubuntu coders will drop what they are doing and go code for Linspire; but what may happen is that suddenly a lot of the anti-proprietary vitriol that's been lobbed at Linspire will die down a bit. Because it would be a bit hard for the Ubuntu folk to toss such accusations around now.
But make no bones about it; the real PR winner in this partnership is going to be Canonical. By throwing in with Linspire, they get more exposure to the slowly-growing desktop Linux market, they get the CNR technology, and they get a blessing from the Linux community for "going proprietary." In recent months, whenever someone from Canonical mentioned that there would be proprietary software available in Ubuntu 7.04 and beyond, there was quite a bit of squawking about it... but never enough to really worry Canonical. The company's street cred amongst its community is huge--more than enough to handle the occasional disgruntled freedom-loving developer who, at worst, would just go back to the Debian Project.
Now? Now the situation is different. In one swoop, Canonical has thrown in with the "props" crowd that is so prevalent in the open source community these days. No more hints anymore, they are now committed to "proprietary is okay." By doing so arm in arm with Linspire, they just gained an ally that has--thus far--effectively countered the "all Free/all the time" arguments.
Like I said, it's a win-win--for them.
The "props" movement within open source has most recently been codified in Eric S. Raymond in a DesktopLinux article posted on Linux Today earlier today.
"I know [there's a] camp that thinks allowing proprietary codecs into Linux distros will corrupt our vital bodily fluids or something. My view is we need to get majority market share so we can crush the proprietary codecs out of existence. If that requires a temporary compromise, I'm for it," Raymond said. It should be noted that Raymond himself has been a member of the Freespire Leadership Board since last September.
But in all of the celebration about how brilliant Linbutu is, am I the only one who's wondering if this may not be such a good idea?
Linux, as we all know, is superior technology than most anything to come out of Redmond in recent years. It is free as in beer and Free as in Freedom, and reflects all that is good about the creativity of humanity. And yet I worry that if it goes down this road of inclusiveness with proprietary software too much more, it may find itself relegated to a field of OS also-rans that tried and failed against the Microsoft juggernaut.
Before you jump on me, I am not channeling Richard Stallman today. While his arguments that Free Software is a moral imperative are noble and attractive, I do not share them. At the end of the day, software is a tool for me, and I will use the tools that do the work I need. My preference is to use Free and Open tools. But it's not a moral line for me.
No, I am going to make this argument based not on hifalutin moral stances--this one's going to be as pragmatic as they come.
One of the things that drives Microsoft absolutely nuts is the fact that Linux is Free. Because it's Free, they have discovered, you can't kill Linux. There's no one to sue, nothing to buy... heck, there's not even a crazy corporate executive to vilify in the media. Not only that, the very Freedom of Linux and its constituent applications becomes a selling point on its own. I, for instance, could not code anything to save my life, but the fact that Linux is Free appeals to me because I know there's no way Linux will ever be unsupported or abandoned. Freedom, from a very real and tangible business standpoint, is a good thing.
But if the Free nature of Linux gets more diluted, I am concerned that suddenly one of our best defensive and offensive weapons will get marginalized. Proprietary software can be bought. Or sued. And, because of its license, proprietary software is usually not lower-case free, either. Which means the price-point of commercial Linux distributions that include it will go up or not be able to ever really go to zero. (Another Linux advantage that could be lost.)
Linspire, and now Canonical, are arguing that the ends justifies the means. Get enough users on board and the hardware and software vendors will be writing Free and Open code so fast Linux developers won't be able to keep up with it. I hope they're right, but it honestly seems unlikely. I don't see any incentive to write Open software if Linux desktop share goes up, not if the proprietary code was allowed in the first place. Sure, they'll write more code if the market share climbs, but what incentive would they have to make that code Free if some Linux distros have been letting in the proprietary stuff already? If one distro maintainer says I can't come in until I open my code, I'll just go to another one that will let me keep my code closed.
I don't think that all of this signifies the End of Linux. But it may be a transition point--the end of Linux as we know it now. We shall see. Good-faith efforts on the part of the commercial distros to really get those vendors to cough up free code will help. Projects like the kernel developers offering to write driver code gratis are a plus as well.
My fear is this: the more like Windows Linux becomes, the better Microsoft will be able to handle Linux on their terms, not ours. Let's keep playing by our rules, not Redmond's.
ping
I remember playing with CNR, and there was something about that made me want to run away, real fast. Ubuntu's "Adept Manager" is about the best manager I've seen yet.
I see. Yes, it was something like that -- and I guess it was the subscription model I didn't like. I've bought distros before (incl. Redmond Linux) to try them out, so it's not like everything has to be free. But between the price and presentation I saw of CNR, it was too much.
Also check out Ubuntu? Not for me, thanks from IT Wire.
Interesting article. About the codecs - The commercial codecs are easy enough to download and install after the OS is built - I can play WMV and other proprietary formats in Linux movie players. I can also play DVD's in a window or full screen.
More interesting is the part about the overall impact on the Linux movement
Disclaimer: I run Ubuntu on my desktop and laptop. I am pretty typical in my views of many, not all Linux desktop users, and I think what I have to say may be surprising to those who have never actually used Linux, or who briefly encountered it in the past, but don't have a lot of real insight into the mindset of the Linux user without reducing it to an abstraction.
I really like that Linux doesn't have complicated OS licensing issues - I can install it on as many machines as I like and upgrade them without having to call the OS vendor to get the license unlocked, as Vista users may have to. I also like UNIX more than Windows, but that's a personal preference as I am a long time UNIX guy.
There is great free software that does a lot of what I need, but I also use commercial software. I use Crossover, which is the commercial version of WINE. It's not perfect but it does run Word, Excel, and Powerpoint 2003 for me with no more problems than under Windows. I can also run IE 6 under Linux, including Windows-only plugins.
It looks like Click n Run is the only thing being ported into Ubuntu, but I don't see what the license for that component will be. Of course I am always free to not install or use it.
"Also check out Ubuntu? Not for me, thanks from IT Wire."
That was a really sour grapes article.
I have used Linux since pre 1.0 Slackware where you had to pick which disk set to download based on your MFM or RLL hard disk controller.
Since then I have used Ubuntu, Debian, Slack, Stampede, Gentoo, SuSE, Red Hat since 4.2, Fedora since the first version, and also OpenBSD, NetBSD, and FreeBSD, and no doubt a few others I am forgetting.
For desktop use and a few servers I use in my business it's very easy to admin, secure, and maintain myself, and accomplish business tasks in, in a very short amount of time. Most of this stuff doesn't take more than a moderate amount of UNIX skills which are very easy to learn.
Oh yeah I was going to say -
I think Ubuntu is one of the most high quality UNIX distributions I've ever used, at this time. It's my UNIX like OS of choice for the past year and forseeable future.
Agreed, but I thought I'd try to show both sides of a discussion.
Personally, I run Fedora and try out others within VMware Server. I'm really liking what I see in openSUSE. I sent off for the Ubuntu disks back in version 4 or so. I thought it was an OK distro, but it wasn't enough for me to switch.
I'm satisfied with Ubuntu 6.10. I might give Ubuntu 7.04 a whirl, just to see what it's like. I do like Linspire's Lsongs music program because it has a built-in web browser for Shoutcast and MP3Tunes (I like Amarok better), but for photo management, I prefer F-Spot and Google's Picasa over Lphoto.
I'll stick with Debian.
I ran Fedora on my desktop until recently when I became hooked up Ubuntu. I was getting frustrated with RPMs poor ability to manage dependencies etc. compared to apt-get and dpkg.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
Ping. I don’t like Adept. I do like Synaptics, but I read we’ll have to wait until June for Ubuntu to get the CNR plug-in.
De gustibus non dispudandum est. I only fault Adept for search & description; it does everything else well.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.