Ubuntu: Featuring Closed-Source Technology
Posted by ushimitsudoki on July 5, 2009
I ran across an interesting idea on Brainstorm today: Idea #20508: Emphasize Ubuntu’s reliance on closed-source technology on Ubuntu.com
The title is a bit unclear, but the suggestion and the comments actually provide some interesting discussion material: is Ubuntu featuring and delivering freedom and openness? Or is it focused on “just works”?
Here’s the idea itself, just to put you in the frame of mind for my comments:
Instead of this “freedom” talk, we should emphasize the cool development systems that’re part of Launchpad that no one can duplicate because of Canonical’s copyrights, like Soyuz and Codehosting. And when Ubuntu One comes out, we should make a HUGE deal about its seamless integration with Ubuntu, and only Ubuntu. And about how it’s not Free / Open-Source, and you can only get it from Canonical.
When I first read this, I wanted to implement the deliver-bitchslap-over-TCP/IP RFC I’ve been working on, but on reflection I think it illustrates an area where Ubuntu is stumbling a bit.
Let me try to illustrate why I have a bit of a problem with the “users just want something that works” line of thought:
Ubuntu User Spectrum
Who benefits the most from blindly following the “user’s don’t care about freedom, only what works” trail?
Who benefits the most from all this “freedom” talk?
bambambox said
Good post. And something that needs saying, too. I’ve seen lots of Linux folk who couldn’t give a damn about freedom around, lately. This sort of argument you highlight in your post usually comes from the “Linux has too much choice!” crowd. These people never seem to realise that incorporating exclusive features into Ubuntu that none of the other distros can similarly implement only serves to make the community more fragmented, less cohesive, and ultimately, much more lame. When the Wine project went GPL, development speed nearly doubled because everyone could play. They’re forgetting the meaning behind Ubuntu, too: “I am who I am because of who we all are.” So not only being wrong for technical reasons, these people are missing the point of free software is all about. “Free as in freedom” isn’t just a neat way of making software, it has a profound meaning that goes way beyond having the ability to make annoying Compiz videos appear on Youtube.
Jared Spurbeck said
Hello. I’m the person who wrote the idea. And just so you know, I was being facetious / sarcastic, which was not one of my better ideas. >.> Apologies if I offended.
I’m just bitter / cynical because the “meaning behind Ubuntu” seems to have been lost, if the people in charge ever really cared about it to begin with. It feels like they’re leveraging Free / Open-Source Software in order to make a buck … which, I really have no problems with that in and of itself. It’s when they use proprietary things to tie us into using it, and then keep going on about how awesome Free / Open-Source is, that I begin to get upset with their hypocrisy.
If shinies were my only consideration, I’d use a Mac. Although I have to say I’ve considered it numerous times, especially since finding out about the proprietary technologies behind Ubuntu. >.> I just don’t feel right promoting Ubuntu anymore.
ushimitsudoki said
@Jared,
No no, I got the point you were trying to make – I didn’t take the text literally.
I’m not quite as opposed to the commercial activities – companies have to make money, and Canonical has to find sources of revenue because Mark Shuttleworth can’t pay out-of-pocket forever.
I look at that sort of a thing more as a “necessary evil”. It deserves to be watched, but not necessarily condemned.
Jared Spurbeck said
No no, I’m not opposed to it either. A lot of people are making money from Free / Open-Source Software, and I’d like for it to continue. I’m hoping to make money from Creative Commons-licensed projects, myself. Canonical making money off of Ubuntu isn’t a necessary evil, it’s a good thing.
The problem is that, in the case of Ubuntu One, they’re not making money off of Free / Open-Source Software. They’re making money off of a proprietary service, which they are tying into a Free / Open-Source operating system. And Ubuntu has proprietary components already, but they’re labeled and kept separate and have big warning labels attached. This is going to be part of the OS, and it’s being advertised as something cool and useful. There’s a disconnect here … it’s like they’re taking advantage of us, and trying to lock us in. And I don’t like it.
Likewise with Launchpad’s proprietary components. It feels like their goal is just to make money. And they don’t mind using Free / Open-Source rhetoric if it gets idealists like us interested enough to volunteer for them … to spread Ubuntu, associate it with the ideal of ubuntu, and put in unpaid hours fixing and tweaking and sharing Ubuntu. But in the end, they’re not really concerned with helping the disadvantaged or sharing or freedom or any of it … they just want free labor. And they had to be big on the freedom rhetoric at the outset, to get Linux hackers / idealists involved, but now they’re so big that most of their user base won’t mind.
With the release of Ubuntu One, they’re making the transition from a Free / Open-Source operating system to a proprietary service with Free / Open-Source parts at its core … less like Debian, and more like Mac OS X. And I don’t mind that so much either … I’m just sad that I put so much time and energy into promoting Ubuntu, and actually believing in it, when it’s not really what I thought it was.
I filed a bug against it here: LINK
I also switched to Linux Mint. And I’m glad that you’re at least mentioning this, because I remember your blog and respect you.
sujben said
this sites is trememndous
FoolishOwl said
I signed up for the Ubuntu One beta test, and have been following the official email list for it, and have generally been unclear on what’s going on. That is, I signed up for it since a little free online storage sounded handy, and sooner or later I intend to get a laptop or netbook with GNU/Linux on it and I’d like to make it easy to move my files between them. However, the weird thing about Ubuntu One is that I’ve not yet found a straightforward explanation of what the point is, just cryptic hints that it’s supposed to work with TomBoy and Firefox bookmarks somehow, maybe, and other things, too.
In general, I’m fine with Canonical making money selling services while supporting free software. But, making money is a necessary evil, for the sake of survival, while we try to work towards a world in which no evils are necessary.
On the Ubuntu forums and elsewhere, there are Ubuntu fans who have no concern for free software, as such. In no small part, that’s doubtless because they don’t really understand what free software is about. Also, free software is one of the last expressions of ideals that have elsewhere been subverted or suppressed. That sharing things of value enriches everyone is a simple idea that is routinely denied to even be possible, so it’s little wonder that people can look right at it and not understand that, given the right circumstances, it works.