[ubuntu-in] Canonical kills free Ubuntu CD program

[Stereotactic]

On 04/07/2011 02:40 AM, Manish Sinha wrote:
> On 04/06/2011 07:53 PM, Stereotactic wrote:
>> Yes. This is also a pointer towards a larger goal of moving towards an
>> ecosystem. First, they move towards Unity instead of supporting Gnome,
>> then they refuse to contribute much to the "code",
>
> I think you read just too many blogs than actually investigating. I
> know a lot of Ubuntu developers who are *actually* contributing
> upstream.
This debate can *never* be settled; so let it be.
>
> Another thing - Please understand the meaning of upstream first. Ubuntu
> has more than one upstream and not only GNOME.
Thats good. Still, it's main flagship was always Gnome and hence there 
are going to be murmurs of protest at how it has abadoned the ship. It 
would take time for Unity to mature, no doubt, but the real interest 
would be focussed on how Gnome is able to battle it out.
>
>> the roots; i.e. Debian and I am downloading the rolling release.
>
> Ubuntu isn't a rolling release and wont be ever. It should never be a
> rolling release.
>
Thats where the power of choice really is. However, Mark has mentioned 
somewhere that Ubuntu *might* become one; its an unsettled question. 
However, thats NOT the point of debate here.
> Rolling release dont work for non-techie user. 
That's an abberation. Again your opinion.
I never said that Ubuntu should be rolling release. Please read 
carefully. There are other options, as well though.
> We geeks find it proud
> to be using latest versions of everything and continuously updating our
> system. Non-techies don't.
Rolling release can be based on Unstable or Testing versions; Unstable 
is not so cool as testing really is. But I let that pass. And I mention 
*again* that rolling release is *not* the point of debate.
>
> Whatever you say, Ubuntu would have never gained so much popularity
> with rolling release ever.
Your opinion.
>
>> Paid software in the software centre is a slow pointer towards
>> generation of ecosystem. Make the base OS free and let people pay for
>> the software.
>
> Yes. It a pointer towards a good ecosystem. Paying for software is
> not bad.
This is what I object to. Yes, Ubuntu made it easier for me to switch to 
Linux; it's installer is best in the ecosystem. Period.
I am NOT objecting to say Ubuntu One as a service in the cloud, for 
example. That's an additional module, not really a part of the main OS. 
Canonical has full right to charge whatever it deems fit in the cloud. 
Paid software in software centre really is pushing the commerce in 
user's desktops. When I use Ubuntu (as the base OS), I really care for 
whatever components I choose. Paid software, even when whet with the 
community, would invariably be tagged with terms of "fair use", sooner 
or later.

If someone wants to give software as a service, it's perfectly desirable 
solution; for example, paid support for individuals who are hard pressed 
for time to look for alternative means of support on forums or mailing 
lists or even IRC.

In the long run, it would slowly compromise with the ideals of Debian 
and GNU.

A non-techie user (as per your definition) would again be oblivious of 
"fancy terms and conditions"; once the critical mass, in terms of users, 
is reached, there would perhaps be no stopping Canonical to implement 
it's own (jaundiced) terms. It has already moved towards Unity and 
slowly poisoning it's relation with other companies in the ecosystem 
refusing to play ball with others. Perhaps it has *balls* enough but the 
future is going to stormy for all of them.