Memo to Mark Shuttleworth: Don’t Settle for Ubuntu Linux Desktops
Dear Mark: You’ve made Ubuntu the most popular Linux distribution on desktops. You’ve established a footprint on notebooks and netbooks. But a lot of people wonder why you’re marching Canonical — and Ubuntu — in new directions like the server. Don’t listen to your critics. Keep marching upward. Here’s why.
Software companies die when they start to rely on a single cash cow or one big hit product. Consider the evidence:
- Novell nearly died because it relied too long on NetWare.
- Lotus nearly died because it relied too long on 1-2-3.
- Software companies like Artisoft and Banyan Systems essentially died because they relied too long on a single cash cow.
Can’t See Beyond PCs?
Now, some pundits want Canonical to maintain its primary focus on desktops (including notebooks and netbooks). Keep enhancing Ubuntu for consumers, the pundits say, and you’ll free the world from Windows.
I think that’s faulty logic. Relying on a single product or revenue stream is too risky. Mark, you’re smart to diversify your revenue streams with Landscape and soon, Ubuntu Server Edition 9.10 in the Amazon.com cloud.
Mark: If Canonical focused only on desktop wins, you’d be limiting Ubuntu to legacy markets (PCs and laptops) that no longer sit at the center of the IT universe. Today’s IT is all about virtualized data centers. It’s about centralized information that anyone can access, from anywhere.
Learn From Windows NT
Critics consider Ubuntu a toy that isn’t ready to sit in a data center. Critics said the same thing when Microsoft launched Windows NT Advanced Server in 1993. The “experts” said NT was a New Toy… a joke compared to Unix.
But the joke was on the Unix establishment. NT chipped away at the Unix market and buried Novell’s NetWare along the way.
I’m betting Canonical will eventually enjoy similar success on the server. But it’s going to take time. HP has already agreed to certify its servers for Ubuntu. Fingers crossed, I suspect Dell and IBM will do the same before my next birthday. (I promise to reveal whether I was right or wrong when I blog on my next birthday…)
Your ISV (independent software vendor) and channel partner efforts have been hit-and-miss so far. I know the Canonical team is working hard on both fronts, but the industry doesn’t see the results of the hard work. At least not yet.
Defend the Desktop, Attack the Server
But don’t slow down your server efforts. Accelerate them. Red Hat and Novell are now coming after you on the desktop — at least in certain corporate niches. Hold your ground on the desktop, but return fire on the server.
Mark, if Canonical retreats to the desktop, you’ll be just another one-hit wonder software company. And those companies don’t survive over the long haul.
WorksWithU is updated multiple times per week. Don’t miss a single post. Sign up for our RSS and Twitter feeds (available now) and newsletter (coming in 2009).
WorksWithU on Identi.ca
WorksWithU on Twitter
WorksWithU's RSS Feed
Dear Joe,
I use different versions of Linux nine years, and migrated from Windows desktop to Linux (ubuntu 6.10) only two years ago. Reasons were simple: poor hardware support in Linux and poor localization (I need Russian language support in operating systems).
There are many things to complete in Ubuntu desktop. One of them is netbook hardware support (netbooks quickly took big share on the personal computer market). I’m using eee pc 900 and it lack support of wifi, sound and F keys in ubuntu “from the box”. I began to use ubuntu 8.04, then upgraded to 8.10. There are no changes: I have to use special kernel, I have to use many customization scrips and special drivers for my netbook. This way not for customers but for geeks only. Next things is convertible laptops and touch screen netbooks support. IMHO, better to make one great product, instead to distribute valued resources between many and fail to reach the goals…
Sorry for my English.
I have to agree with both of you, easy way out
Diversifying is fantastic, but I would like to see some commonality between the server (cloud) offerings and the pc market. No one is doing that currently, not seamlessly at least. What am I talking about?
Seamless integration of a local OS and a workspace in the clouds. I want the ability to have a lightweight OS on a netbook, desktop, workstation or media server. I want this all to be integrated with a piece in the clouds that can store, backup, stream and host applications. I want this to be available all the time from anywhere.
By the way, I’d pay for this “service”
thoughts?
The are also going for some of the consumer embeded device market with ubuntu mobile and embeded. this is devices between a netbook and a pda.
With eucalyptus going to be in ubuntu+2 who knows they may build a cloud themselves and sell cpu power.
Comparison with Novell/Lotus is not relevant. It’s general business concept: create a cash cow and milk it like there’s no tomorrow.
In OSS it is quite different. Unlike commercial companies, OSS houses mostly get it when it comes to communication with their users. Ubuntu has healthy community and no usual to commercial houses rift between technology and its user would happen.
Actually I can argue that its negligence of business to user feedback, what results in companies relying on single cash cow. They simply do not know (and do not want to) what else their customers need.
As it is established fact that most *nix folks work with servers – expertise is abundant, it is only a common sense to also offer a server distro. Long winged parallels (with infamous WinNT) are not needed.
Ubuntu needs marketing (For their server and desktop lines)
And they need some kind of “Active Directory” or “NT domain” style clone.
If they can get those two things down they will take Linux and Ubuntu to a whole nother level.
Right now no version of Linux is really pushing into the office file and print server market. Novell could if they wanted to with E-Directory. But Novell has ALWAYS fallen short in the other catigory.. Marketing. Novell always made good if not great software but Microsoft out marketed them.
I remember when I was a Novell CNA and the people from MS used to come and tell the CIO of our company how it was so much more cost effective to use NT domains. You didn’t need Novell CNE (Certified Netware Engineers) You could have MS come in and set up the network for you and then hire low cost NT server MCP’s to do the work. And they were right. Netware was better but it required someone with the skill to run it. While NT server just required someone with a general knowledge of Windows to manage it.
The point is right now if you want to set up file, print serving and user management you can use Windows, Mac Server (If you buy Mac hardware) And Novell E-Directory (But you need to know rocket science to get that crap working right)
Perfect nitch to fill!
Hope they can see this HOLE and fill it.
Joe wrote: “Software companies die when they start to rely on a single cash cow or one big hit product.”
That may be true, but I don’t think anyone would call Ubuntu a “cash cow” (yet) or even a “big hit product.” We have yet to see 1% market penetration into the desktop. Fragmenting one’s effort at this point dilutes resources and reduces Ubuntu’s forward momentum.
Ubuntu doesn’t need to simply “hold ground” on the desktop, it needs to conquer much more territory before Canonical declares mission accomplished.
You’ve all opened my eyes to some key perspectives.
And I must concede: I have a media bias on this topic. If Ubuntu conquers new markets (such as the server), it gives WorksWithU a greater opportunity to serve sponsors in those markets. So how’s that for a biased, honest, full-disclosure.
But even if I wasn’t co-founder of WorksWithU, I’d be pushing for Canonical to move onto the server because many customers are quietly demanding the move.
And a note to Ty: You mention Ubuntu needing a directory service. I used to cover Novell Directory Services and Active Directory in the 1990s. So I understand your perspective. I will check with Canonical about their strategy when it comes to a directory/domain strategy.
I thought Canonical lost money hand over fist on Ubuntu so I would hardly describe it as a cash cow.
If they can make money from the server market then they better do it quick. Shuttleworth’s pockets can only be so deep.
I’m a sysadmin. I run Ubuntu on my desktop.
Dist-upgrades fail more often than not. Tell you what: do a few dist-upgrades and you’ll turn into a Debian sysadmin whether you wanted to or not.
Ubuntu cannot do server credibly until they learn to properly bug-check dist-upgrades.
Note that Debian does it flawlessly. How do they do it flawlessly? What does it take? Ubuntu needs to actually work to duplicate that.
RPCutts: I think Canonical can make money faster on the server than on the desktop. Remember: Corporations are used to paying Novell and Red Hat for support contracts. So, they’ll likely welcome a departmental alternative from Ubuntu Server Edition.
rpcutts Says: “I thought Canonical lost money hand over fist on Ubuntu”
That’s not the right way to put it. Shuttleworth has invested a small amount of his own (well earned) personal fortune into Canonical/Ubuntu. He as been building the business for a few years and now the company is more or less self-sustaining, i.e. doesn’t require help from Shuttleworth’s own pocket.
“Defend the desktop. Attack the server.”
Isn’t this what is MS trying to do?
Canonical has done a great job in demystifying Linux to a great number of people. But a lot remains to be done in the server area.
When you post a question in a forum about Linux server and GUI, you are very likely to get a bit of flaming. “If you can not do with the CLI, you should not be setting up a server!” Comments like this pushes people to MS and Apple for their server needs.
I think the Ubuntu server needs a proper GUI. And by that, I mean it needs to run KDE or GNOME as the rest of the line. But most important – it needs proper GUI tools to configure the different aspects of the server from the desktop. Not a web interface. Why should it use something else than the tried and tested? This is exactly what MS and Apple do – use the same interface for both desktop and server. Just add some applications for the server.
Some things seems to be kept like a secret and people do not want to say too much so the “club” do not expand too much. I have tried to set up a small caching DNS at home to both learn a bit and to prepare for a much bigger house with a much bigger network. What I have realised is that someone that really knows DNS setup could build a website that spit out the correct text to be pasted into the right files. What information do you need? The IP the server should have, the gateway, the server name, the domain and the DNS’es outside. The rest is just formatting, and this is what we use computers for! Give us the right GUI and my mom could be setting up a DNS (at least with me on the phone
) It is not a shame to admit that you can learn something from MS and Apple. What they have done is lowering the level for people to get into servers. I know this seems like cursing in church to some Linux fans that would rather keep normal users out, but it is not about becoming like MS and Apple, it is about making sure Linux grows into new markets that so far has been reluctant to use it because they think they need to hire more people to manage the Linux servers since it does not come with a GUI.
I know you can install GNOME or KDE on Ubuntu Server, but it does not help when every desktop tool I have tried to manage it makes a mess of all configuration files. A tool is only as good as the stuff it delivers. And if you are unable to manage the config files from the commandline after touching them with the GUI tool, then the GUI tool is useless. So these tools need to be made from scratch and completely tailor made to Ubuntu Server. Here is a short wishlist of desktop tools:
Basic server setup: IP address, server name
File server setup (including SAMBA)
Print Server (CUPS) setup
DNS setup
Apache setup
MySQL setup (admittedly, I am using phpMySQL a lot, but would like to have this on the desktop together with the rest)
Php setup
LDAP setup and management
UPS management
This is just a start. I am sure others have more to add to this list.
I don’t get me wrong, I love ubuntu and love the ability to set up directory services within; however, I agree with the comments about directory services needing good user interfaces, I can set them up, but my staff are completely lost because they come from windows backgrounds. We need an easy and standard way to manage directories on ubuntu that is friendly to the average it guy.
How about an Ubuntu TV Edition: a platform for multimedia and gaming in your living-room. The revenue can come from online stores, similar to how Firefox gets money from search engines.
Ubutu made fan of Linux. Now I have helped lot of my collegues switch to Ubuntu from VISTA !!!. I feel directory services is the first priority for Ubuntu to get critical mass in Corporates from where real money comes. Desktop is good way to get popularity but it’s not for earning money.
Josh:
From what I have heard Ubuntu has somewhere in the range of 4% desktop market share now. Of course it is extremely hard to accurately measure desktop market share when there are no license fees, etc.
David Gerard:
apt-get dist-upgrade is not a supported method of upgrading between Ubuntu versions and that is the only time that command is really supposed to be used even on Debian. The officially supported way is by using the gui update-manager and is documented on the Ubuntu website. That said I have never personally had a problem using apt-get dist-upgrade except when trying to upgrade during a development release. Also note upgrading and skipping releases is not supported, eg upgrading from Ubuntu 8.04 to 9.04 isn’t support, but 8.04 -> 8.10 -> 9.04 is supported.
One of the (few) strengths I’ve seen with openSUSE on the server is the availability of Yast at the command line. All of the menu selections are there in roughly the same place and fully available to me over ssh.
Ubuntu, I’ve noticed, is viewed as more of a “Mom and Pop” type Linux; for the not-so-technical user. Why not orientate it towards the S&M Businesses with ease of setting up and maintaining for people who are not overly computer savvy but are also not computer illiterate. There’s a good chance they are already using Ubuntu on the desktops, so this would extend them into the server room.
As they grow, make sure Ubuntu can handle it so they don’t want to move into something bigger like Red Hat or Novell.
I have a friend who does IT work for a number of small companies and I’m trying to get him to explore using Ubuntu for his client’s needs (web, email, database, etc.). I don’t know the details of Canonical support, but for somebody like this being able to get support for all of the servers he manages would have to not break the bank.
@Svein: Gnome and KDE are desktop managers. Why would you want to install this on a server? I’m not sure this would increase stability or security. Admins who need a GUI use X Windows.
Jason: So do you at least agree Linux needs a Gui on the server to increasingly go mainstream?
[...] Memo to Mark Shuttleworth [workswithu.com] [...]
We are trying to switch from ms 2003 servers to ubuntu but we have run into a wall trying to install directory services for single sign on. We are already using ubuntu at the network edge to filter spam, for ftp and other services. However, we need a ‘domain controller’ or something similar to AD. This week, I am exploring installing Fedora-ds on a virtual fedora 10 system. If it works, we will go with Fedora instead of Ubuntu. Mr. Shuttleworth, please give us directory services.
I love Ubuntu on the desktop and I have 3 laptops running it.
I agree with Mark Shuttleworth’s dual approach of working at improving desktop and server aspects of Ubuntu. The only way to improve the quality of a product is to get as much feedback from the general public, corporate users and software developers and distributors as possible. MS made themselves the dominant OS by doing this.
My only question about Ubuntu or Linux in general is: why can you not download and install programs directly from the internet instead of needing a repository? Why not include both ways of installing software in Ubuntu? I believe that the Linux distros that are prepared to do this will take Linux to the next level.