Comments on: Launchpad and Microsoft http://mdzlog.alcor.net/2009/07/21/launchpad-and-microsoft/ a potpourri of mirth and madness Fri, 19 Mar 2010 04:16:57 +0000 http://wordpress.com/ hourly 1 By: mdz http://mdzlog.alcor.net/2009/07/21/launchpad-and-microsoft/#comment-1429 mdz Wed, 05 Aug 2009 07:53:19 +0000 http://mdzlog.alcor.net/?p=533#comment-1429 Thanks for clarifying that, John. An uninitiated reader could certainly get the wrong impression from your comment, and see it as a cheap shot at your competitor, which wouldn't reflect very well on you or your organization. Thanks for clarifying that, John. An uninitiated reader could certainly get the wrong impression from your comment, and see it as a cheap shot at your competitor, which wouldn’t reflect very well on you or your organization.

]]> By: eyerouge http://mdzlog.alcor.net/2009/07/21/launchpad-and-microsoft/#comment-1426 eyerouge Tue, 04 Aug 2009 20:55:34 +0000 http://mdzlog.alcor.net/?p=533#comment-1426 From what I've understood MS was more or less forced to "contribute" since they had already used open source code to build on. They couldn't keep it all to them self because it would be illegal. So, the truth about their contribution seems to have some legal motivation more than anything else. From what I’ve understood MS was more or less forced to “contribute” since they had already used open source code to build on. They couldn’t keep it all to them self because it would be illegal. So, the truth about their contribution seems to have some legal motivation more than anything else.

]]> By: John Dragoon http://mdzlog.alcor.net/2009/07/21/launchpad-and-microsoft/#comment-1343 John Dragoon Mon, 27 Jul 2009 17:39:24 +0000 http://mdzlog.alcor.net/?p=533#comment-1343 Matt, I've made no attempt in my post what so ever to quantify the utility or usefulness of Microsoft's kernel contributions over Canonical's. Indeed a full read of the post would see beyond this soundbite and realize my point of view is that this is good for Linux and Open source and the growing numbers of enterprises depending on Linux as their core and primary OS. If you saw my comments as a cheap shot at Canonical I assure you that was not the intent - the intent was to give Microsoft credit for doing something only a few short months and years ago would have been seen as impossible. John Matt,

I’ve made no attempt in my post what so ever to quantify the utility or usefulness of Microsoft’s kernel contributions over Canonical’s. Indeed a full read of the post would see beyond this soundbite and realize my point of view is that this is good for Linux and Open source and the growing numbers of enterprises depending on Linux as their core and primary OS. If you saw my comments as a cheap shot at Canonical I assure you that was not the intent – the intent was to give Microsoft credit for doing something only a few short months and years ago would have been seen as impossible.

John

]]> By: Novell is Insulting Ubuntu/Canonical Again | Boycott Novell http://mdzlog.alcor.net/2009/07/21/launchpad-and-microsoft/#comment-1323 Novell is Insulting Ubuntu/Canonical Again | Boycott Novell Mon, 27 Jul 2009 06:46:46 +0000 http://mdzlog.alcor.net/?p=533#comment-1323 [...] CMO is being disingenuous. As Canonical’s CTO correctly points out, Novell uses Microsoft’s self-serving code [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7] to take a shot at a poster [...] [...] CMO is being disingenuous. As Canonical’s CTO correctly points out, Novell uses Microsoft’s self-serving code [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7] to take a shot at a poster [...]

]]> By: mdz http://mdzlog.alcor.net/2009/07/21/launchpad-and-microsoft/#comment-1286 mdz Fri, 24 Jul 2009 15:06:09 +0000 http://mdzlog.alcor.net/?p=533#comment-1286 I appreciate your advice, but I don't think it's appropriate for me to discuss Canonical business strategy here. Suffice to say that I don't agree with your conclusion. The source code for the Ubuntu One server-side applications is currently Canonical proprietary, just like most other web services (including the ones you're using, like Google's). I don't see why you feel that question is relevant to this discussion. Canonical doesn't release every last bit of source code to the public, though the proprietary code is certainly a small minority. I appreciate your advice, but I don’t think it’s appropriate for me to discuss Canonical business strategy here. Suffice to say that I don’t agree with your conclusion.

The source code for the Ubuntu One server-side applications is currently Canonical proprietary, just like most other web services (including the ones you’re using, like Google’s). I don’t see why you feel that question is relevant to this discussion.

Canonical doesn’t release every last bit of source code to the public, though the proprietary code is certainly a small minority.

]]> By: . http://mdzlog.alcor.net/2009/07/21/launchpad-and-microsoft/#comment-1285 . Fri, 24 Jul 2009 07:21:24 +0000 http://mdzlog.alcor.net/?p=533#comment-1285 And now we know why Microsoft released the code, too: http://linux-network-plumber.blogspot.com/2009/07/congratulations-microsoft.html And now we know why Microsoft released the code, too:
http://linux-network-plumber.blogspot.com/2009/07/congratulations-microsoft.html

]]> By: Emmanuel http://mdzlog.alcor.net/2009/07/21/launchpad-and-microsoft/#comment-1283 Emmanuel Thu, 23 Jul 2009 02:03:02 +0000 http://mdzlog.alcor.net/?p=533#comment-1283 Um... Windows Server isn't that expensive. We are talking about servers people. Especially when it comes to Hyper-V, which is completely free stand-alone. I don't think Microsoft is trying to put a fast one on the open source community and this is something that I really hate about the general open source community. Microsoft is always the bad guy. Sure it works great with their product, but it allows Linux to work better. If Microsoft didn't care, they wouldn't bother. Microsoft made a good contribution to the kernel, and we should not badger them with these claims of taking over Linux or stuff like that. Um… Windows Server isn’t that expensive. We are talking about servers people. Especially when it comes to Hyper-V, which is completely free stand-alone. I don’t think Microsoft is trying to put a fast one on the open source community and this is something that I really hate about the general open source community. Microsoft is always the bad guy.

Sure it works great with their product, but it allows Linux to work better. If Microsoft didn’t care, they wouldn’t bother.

Microsoft made a good contribution to the kernel, and we should not badger them with these claims of taking over Linux or stuff like that.

]]> By: Neo http://mdzlog.alcor.net/2009/07/21/launchpad-and-microsoft/#comment-1282 Neo Wed, 22 Jul 2009 21:09:42 +0000 http://mdzlog.alcor.net/?p=533#comment-1282 "As a distribution vendor, we aren’t focused on deep development on specific components like the kernel, but on packaging and integrating all of the necessary components together to make a complete system" You want to compete with Red Hat for the enterprise market? Correct? Then you need to focus on key pieces of the distribution more and that certainly includes the kernel. "Modest" portions that is less than Microsoft are just not going to cut it at all. Also where is the source code for the server side pieces of Ubuntu One? That is Canonical authored proprietary code still. “As a distribution vendor, we aren’t focused on deep development on specific components like the kernel, but on packaging and integrating all of the necessary components together to make a complete system”

You want to compete with Red Hat for the enterprise market? Correct? Then you need to focus on key pieces of the distribution more and that certainly includes the kernel. “Modest” portions that is less than Microsoft are just not going to cut it at all.

Also where is the source code for the server side pieces of Ubuntu One? That is Canonical authored proprietary code still.

]]> By: mdz http://mdzlog.alcor.net/2009/07/21/launchpad-and-microsoft/#comment-1279 mdz Wed, 22 Jul 2009 14:45:52 +0000 http://mdzlog.alcor.net/?p=533#comment-1279 Launchpad happens to only run <em>on</em> Ubuntu at the moment, but that shouldn't stop anyone from using it. For nearly all projects, it's much more convenient and beneficial to use Canonical's launchpad instance rather than setting up all the infrastructure to run a separate one. The second paragraph on that page explains: Note that right now, Launchpad can only be built and run on Ubuntu (8.04 "Hardy" to 9.04 "Jaunty"). That's not a design decision, it's just a consequence of the fact that, until now, all its developers have been running Ubuntu. We'd be happy to see Launchpad work on other platforms too; perhaps starting with Debian GNU/Linux would be easiest, since Debian and Ubuntu are similar and many Debian developers use Launchpad anyway. Launchpad happens to only run on Ubuntu at the moment, but that shouldn’t stop anyone from using it. For nearly all projects, it’s much more convenient and beneficial to use Canonical’s launchpad instance rather than setting up all the infrastructure to run a separate one.

The second paragraph on that page explains:

Note that right now, Launchpad can only be built and run on Ubuntu (8.04 “Hardy” to 9.04 “Jaunty”). That’s not a design decision, it’s just a consequence of the fact that, until now, all its developers have been running Ubuntu. We’d be happy to see Launchpad work on other platforms too; perhaps starting with Debian GNU/Linux would be easiest, since Debian and Ubuntu are similar and many Debian developers use Launchpad anyway.

]]> By: John Drinkwater http://mdzlog.alcor.net/2009/07/21/launchpad-and-microsoft/#comment-1278 John Drinkwater Wed, 22 Jul 2009 14:40:59 +0000 http://mdzlog.alcor.net/?p=533#comment-1278 This might be related to having the same name for a project hosting site and the code that runs it. Quotes such as ‘The rocketfuel-setup script first determines what release of Ubuntu you're running, then installs various lines into files under /etc, to enable you to run Launchpad services locally.’ doesn’t bode well and re-enforces my first point that you misunderstood. From https://dev.launchpad.net/Getting This might be related to having the same name for a project hosting site and the code that runs it.

Quotes such as ‘The rocketfuel-setup script first determines what release of Ubuntu you’re running, then installs various lines into files under /etc, to enable you to run Launchpad services locally.’ doesn’t bode well and re-enforces my first point that you misunderstood.
From https://dev.launchpad.net/Getting

]]>