In other words, LibreOffice was a successful because it was able to attain momentum near equal or greater than that of the project it was forking. Otherwise, companies would have had no reason to use or help develop the fork, and the original would continue to progress at a pace more attractive than the fork, and the company behind the original product would still have incentive to make a commercially licensed version available.
It's the exact same for projects under MIT or similar licenses, except there's the freedom for many other failed attempts at commercial forks to be made, and the possibility for one or two successful commercial forks, at less cost to the company.
I shall write a general message here.
First, will people stop complaining that Larabel is in everyone's pocket please? Seriously, the amount of times I have seen people say he is being paid by someone, by rights he should be richer than Bill Gates (or Mark Shuttleworth) by now. Larabel may be boisterous and sometimes a little cooky, but his opinions are his own, and I do not think he has ever adapted them to suit anyone's agenda. He can sometimes be a bit of a dick, but the dick he is waving is all his own (my apologies for putting that image in you guy's heads). He is not working for Canonical, he is not working Red Hat (remember all the bitching he did about the new Anaconda?), he is not working for Microsoft, he is not working for Martin Gräßlin, he is not working for Lennart Pottering, and he is not working for the Illuminati. He is just Larabel.
Second, I do not appreciate all of the thread carpet bombing from new users who are just coming here to bitch and call people whiners when that is the whole reason they joined this forum. Especially when they have not posted any real cohesive argument other than calling people butt-hurts.
Going on to a more personal argument, Ubuntu is not god's gift to Linux and I find it offensive that people would say so, not because it is praising Canonical, but because it is burying the hard work of thousands of developers off all stripes who have over the years got us to where we are now. The simple truth is Canonical does not have all that much to it's name besides it's name, and the fact that people are touting that lone asset as a justification for their attacks on many of these hard working developers is just asinine, entitled, and spoiled behaviour.
People have legitimate concerns about Mir. And like it or not it is going to affect everyone, regardless of if they are using Ubuntu or not. So people are going to express these concerns (eloquently or not) and they should be, because this is supposed to be a community. People who are saying you can not express your opinion about Canonical simply because they have the right to do what they want and can not see the hypocrisy are kidding themselves. As are the people trying to brush this off as a smear campaign against Ubuntu, when they are trying to blindly smear the rest of the Linux community (just as Canonical was trying to smear Wayland).
There. Will you please stop carpet-bombing this thread with this ill-conceived vitriol and actually try and find a proper justification for Mir? Maybe then you could convince people, especially since the Wayland "butthurt trolls" seem to have offered a lot more substantive technical and fact based arguments than the people lining up to blindly defend Canonical.
Last edited by Hamish Wilson; 03-07-2013 at 10:24 PM.
Found via http://www.berkeleylug.com/?p=43
While this growth can be considered modest by some (not me), the other important aspect is that Ubuntu has become synonymous with the Linux desktop. And not only the desktop: Ubuntu is displacing the "classic" server distributions at an astonishing rate. See e.g. Amazon EC2 stats:
So the claim of the previous poster that Ubuntu is where commercial Linux development happens or is going to happen is plausible.
The justification is probably what we already know: for whatever reasons, they just want to roll their own way. Some of that is because they don't feel the community-provided stuff is good enough for consumer use (hence Unity rather than GNOME Shell). Regarding Mir, it's probably a combo of wanting to have control of their own destiny and likely something they can easily scoop from SF to have a broad and mature base for existing Android drivers.There. Will you please stop carpet-bombing this thread with this ill-conceived vitriol and actually try and find a proper justification for Mir? Maybe then you could convince people, especially since the Wayland "butthurt trolls" seem to have offered a lot more substantive technical and fact based arguments than the people lining up to blindly defend Canonical.
The thing is, if their goal is 100% control of their own software and nothing else, even that is a 100% valid, legitimate reason to make their own display server and so to line them up as some kind of evil organization or a backstabber is just obnoxious.
Last edited by Luke_Wolf; 03-07-2013 at 11:05 PM.
Last edited by Luke_Wolf; 03-07-2013 at 11:13 PM.