Bought 20 Ubuntu CD’s from the US Store. I have to wonder, for those of you using shipit, if you have the means why not actually buy them?
UbuntuOne
I think this is a really cool initiative from Canonical. I don’t understand people complaining about being closed source, because the client is fully open sourced from what I can see. So all the code I installed on my system is open source, no problem. If I utilize their service, then it isn’t, as the backend isn’t open source. But the fact that I can edit the client files, or make a compatible backend myself since the client is open means I have absolutely no issue with that. I think people complain to complain, if they only used that energy to write an open backend instead. Oh well.
Related posts:
#1 by Yann on May 13, 2009 - 6:06 pm
Quote
I disagree regarding Ubuntu One.
When you use a service – if it displays the result on the screen – does it make a big difference to you if the the program itself runs on your computer or not?
To go further : would you mind using only windows, if it was running in a Cloud, and the applications running on your laptop (a linux kernel with VNC or RDP) are entirely open?
The goal of using free software is to have the 4 liberties. And I fail to see how this respect them. This is also why the AGPL has been created.
#2 by Corey Burger on May 13, 2009 - 9:55 pm
Quote
I really hate the whole “if you disagree just write you own”. This completely devalues any other contribution to open source. As a non-programmer, this is something I am glad the Ubuntu community has largely overcome.
As for UbuntuOne, see my post about why I dislike the naming.
#3 by sharms on May 13, 2009 - 10:27 pm
Quote
Corey –
That comment isn’t directed straight at you, it was more of a comment against the sea of anti UbuntuOne comments. I think you were talking about trademark usage?
And I agree that it isn’t always the right stance to take. There are a lot of situations where it doesn’t make sense, but something as trivial as file synchronization I personally am good with it, and if Canonical’s hosting doesn’t meet my needs then I can do my own thing because atleast I have the client source.
#4 by Daeng Bo on May 14, 2009 - 3:49 am
Quote
I, too, posted about UbuntuOne being closed source. I’m not demanding that they open it: I just think Launchpad and UbuntuOne shoot Canonical in the foot in the open-source business market. Mercedes salesmen don’t drive BMWs, and all that ….
#5 by Flimm on May 14, 2009 - 4:59 am
Quote
I don’t mind it being closed source, to be honest. I just think it shouldn’t be called “Ubuntu One”. Ubuntu means humanity to others, which implies community and freedom, both of which do not apply to “Ubuntu One”. Why not call it “Canonical One” or something?
You know how annoying it is when programs call themselves “Open Source” when they’re clearly not, according to the OSI? That’s the way I feel about Ubuntu One. It’s clearly not in the same spirit as Ubuntu, according to the Ubuntu promise, the Ubuntu philosophy and the Ubuntu trademark policy.
#6 by Rick on March 7, 2010 - 8:16 pm
Quote
I ordered from the store and load up all machines I can with this powerhouse OS. I use it at work at the shop its great.