Ubuntu 9.10 is the Appetizer; Ubuntu 10.04 is the Meal
As Ubuntu 9.10 nears its official Oct. 29 debut, the hype around this new Ubuntu is reaching a fever pitch. Some folks wonder if it can be the de facto alternative to Windows. I’ve obviously bet a portion of my IT media career on Ubuntu’s continued advancement. But let’s keep Ubuntu 9.10’s debut in perspective. Here’s a reality check — including a longer-term look at Canonical’s server and cloud strategy, which hinges far more heavily on Ubuntu 10.04 (Lucid Lynx).
There’s a lot to like about Ubuntu 9.10, and its emphasis on design and ease of use. Pundits say confidence is running high within Canonical. And Internetnews openly wonders if Ubuntu 9.10 can become the “default alternative to Windows.”
I prefer not to make such lofty predictions. Especially since Ubuntu 9.10 is like an appetizer before the main course: Ubuntu 10.04, a Long Term Service (LTS) release, could define Canonical’s success — or failure — on the server and in the cloud.
Beyond Desktop Linux
Let’s remember: Canonical CEO Mark Shuttleworth has an end-to-end strategy for Ubuntu. It involves mobile systems, desktops, servers, private and public clouds, and a growing list of sister services (Landscape, UbuntuOne, etc.).
I get a bit frustrated when readers criticize Canonical for thinking big and looking beyond the desktop. Let me state it another way:
- What if Microsoft had stopped at Windows 3.1?
- What if Microsoft never built out Windows NT Server, Microsoft BackOffice, SQL Server, Exchange Server and now Windows Azure and Microsoft Business Productivity Online Suite (BPOS)?
My point: By diversifying its product line and building end-to-end solutions, Microsoft became infinitely more powerful. And let’s be honest: Microsoft’s server software freed many corporations from Unix systems running on very expensive RISC processors. Canonical hopes to deliver infinitely more freedom, if the company can execute on Shuttleworth’s end-to-end strategy.
Getting the Message
Already, I’m hearing from WorksWithU readers who intend to give Ubuntu 9.10 a close look on a range of systems. Consider the situation Rezitech, a managed service provider and IT consulting firm in La Habra, Calif. Notes Rezitech Senior Systems Engineer Troy Ready:
“I obviously like the neat things slowly changing on the desktop, but I think the UEC [Ubuntu Enterprise Cloud] focus on the server side is what’s really fascinating now. Our (Rezitech) UEC plans are still up in the air (pardon the pun), but I’m really excited for how the aggressive Ubuntu development will (hopefully) shape up for a stable LTS next year — it might really change the layout of our infrastructure.”
More Ways to Run Ubuntu
A year ago, Ubuntu and cloud computing didn’t belong in the same sentence. But now, a respectable 3% of WorksWithU readers say they’re going to run Ubuntu 9.10 in a cloud configuration, according to our recent reader poll (nearly 700 readers have so far participated).
In some ways, the Ubuntu 9.10 hype is ironic. Even if the release is rock-solid and well-received, Canonical’s server and partner teams already have their eyes on Ubuntu 10.04 (Lucid Lynx), a Long Term Support (LTS) release expected in April 2010.
At Atlanta Linux Fest in September 2009, Canonical’s John Pugh told me he was focused entirely on Ubuntu 10.04 — since LTS releases represent a prime opportunity to attract more ISVs (independent software vendors) onto the Ubuntu Server Edition platform.
Here again, Canonical faces a situation that’s similar to Microsoft’s old challenges. When Windows 95 arrive in August 1995, everyone hyped Microsoft on the desktop. But the real “Windows Everywhere” synergies surfaced when Windows NT Server 4.0 arrived in August 2006 1996.
Apply the same example to Canonical and you’ll see some striking similarities. The open source media is hyping Ubuntu 9.10 on the desktop. But keep a close eye on Canonical’s Ubuntu 10.04 server and cloud efforts. When Ubuntu 10.04 arrives, we’ll get a far better feel for how Shuttleworth’s end-to-end vision is playing out.
Please note: I realize I skipped a key topic of discussion — whether Canonical can actually be profitable offering all of these different Ubuntu releases and add-on services. I posed the question briefly to Shuttleworth on Oct. 26 during a media call. I recapped his thoughts briefly in this blog post.
As we begin to hear about more corporate Ubuntu deployments, I’ll be sure to ask if the projects involved revenue flowing in Canonical’s direction.
Follow WorksWithU via Identi.ca, Twitter and RSS (available now) and our newsletter (coming soon).
Joe:
There is a key different between MS and Canonical. MS diversified out into servers from a core revenue strength..its desktop operating system. They didn’t push into servers 5 years into their company’s life. They got there by solidifying a core competency and expanding outward from that…and it took time. They set a marathon pace, not a sprint.
Canonical on the other hand, doesn’t have a clearly identified area of competency that can be described as a solid revenue strength that can fund diversification. Shuttleworth thinks he can build the whole platform at once, instead of growing organically from a core business…pretty much contrary to every historic example you could choose for comparison..even Microsoft. I very much doubt any competent venture capital company would be interested in investing in Canonical based on the business plan implied by Shuttleworth’s public comments.
-jef
I agree with Jef. Aside from obvious business implications of such a scatter-shot strategy, this also affects the morale of regular, rank-and-file Ubuntu proponents, those who helped to establish Ubuntu in the first place.
Take my own story for example:
I originally got involved with Ubuntu because I finally saw someone willing to put some work into the Linux desktop. We all believed that Canonical was really going to make it happen. We were hopeful that the best Linux desktop OS was just a few releases away. Then each release came and went: Edgy, Feisty, Gutsy, Hardy, Intrepid, Jaunty, Karmic.
Despite years of development, those of us who helped to hype Ubuntu early on are left with a system that is virtually identical to everything else out there, sans a few half-baked “user-friendly” features. There has been almost no real attempt to fix the platform’s major problems.
I have since stopped contributing to Ubuntu. If I wanted to contribute to a Linux-based server ecosystem, I would have joined the Fedora team. With RHEL, they are in a much better position to deliver a usable Linux desktop anyway. From my perspective, Canonical bailed on us. Now I’m watching and waiting to see what Google does with Chrome OS… but now I do my trend-watching from a Mac.
“But the real “Windows Everywhere” synergies surfaced when Windows NT Server 4.0 arrived in August 2006.”
I think the 2006 is a typo and should read 1996. IIRC Windows NT 4 Workstation was released July 29th 2006. I am not sure about the server edition.
I’m really excited for the release of Karmic, and eventually Lucid. Ubuntu is already light years ahead of Windows on the home desktop. My computer is my life. It’s my stereo, home theater, television, work station, and connection to my family stateside. Ubuntu is capable of handling everything I do with it in a way my last computer (a Windows computer) only ever teased at. Tomorrow I’m throwing a release party where three of my friends plan on switching from Vista to Karmic. It’s an exciting time to be a Linux user!
@jeff: I think Canonical’s challenge, and this has been clear if you read Mark inbetween lines, and not so much inbetween, that Ubuntu has a clear edge somewhere: the desktop. Just like MS in the early times, just like you said. BUT: making money out of open source desktops is very tough, and this was admitted by Mark more than once. Where does he go from there?
I think going for the big iron is not the solution, as this is overpopulated and already owned by RedHat, which also has a very strong presence in kernel and core component development.
Going for desktop-cousins like OEM installs in netbooks and MID’s, even phones, that is a biggie and they are pursuing that.
Going for the Cloud, that’s brilliant, it’s early enough to get a piece of it.
The two biggies they are missing IMHO are:
1. SMB’s. Give them a full solution, a server/client/desktop small solution to satisfy all their basic needs. You may even partner with hardware vendors (including Dell) to sell a complete, turn key solution
2. Corporate Desktop, this is a no-brainer. Again, you need to partner, but Desktop Linux is already way ahead of the corporate needs for many things, and if you need a couple Win/Only apps you can run them in a server and get remote access.
This is an interesting comparison; Canonical to Microsoft. Yeah, there are differences but there are enough similarities to make me wonder if a page (or two) haven’t been taken out of Microsoft’s playbook.
Wouldn’t be the first time Canonical takes somebody else’s plan and spin it around so it works better! Look at how Ubuntu is following pre-Fedora Red Hat (up to Red Hat 9) with one community/enterprise version.
I’m considering holding off on upgrading until the LTS release (10.04) instead of jumping on Karmic… oh, who am I fooling, I like things “shiny” 🙂
Jef, Josh: Thanks for describing your perspectives without flaming me. You’ve made some clear, strong arguments. In particular, Jef’s point about Microsoft having a core revenue stream (the desktop) to fuel diversification is dead on.
I believe in Canonical’s strategy. I don’t have access to their financial records. So it’s difficult for me to say if Canonical is spreading itself too thin. But I respect your points.
Sindhudweep@3: Thanks for catching that typo. I made the correction.
However Canonical plays the game they need ISVs to start targeting Ubuntu as a viable platform to develop for. That includes software for businesses and consumers. Hopefully the new software store/center/app-thingy will allow that to happen.
Aikiwolfie: You are spot on. Canonical needs to focus on ISVs. I believe that’s a prime area of focus for John Pugh. And I also think Ubuntu 10.04 LTS could help to bolster the ISV story, since ISVs are likely more inclined to jump on the bandwagon when a Long Term Support (LTS) release surfaces.
@Jef: “MS diversified out into servers from a core revenue strength.”
Maybe they did have some decent revenue as an SMB company selling BASIC by then, but Microsoft released their first server OS in 1980, one year before MS-DOS amp; the IBM/PC were released… 😉
personally, I somehow agree with ‘Josh’, there is a hype surrounding Ubuntu, and yes it made enhancement to the desktop, but seriously talking what make it ‘ahead’ of other linux desktops? windows desktop or even Mac?
I’m not saying that Canonical is not doing anything or looking down at their desktop contribution, no, my point is they made linux desktop usable. Okay, what then?
Hence, Ubuntu is what I would say an average, there is no ‘real’ thing in the manner of ‘extra’ feature, ‘special’ feature, or its ‘own’ feature.
Take for example the dock, coverflow, spotlight that Mac invented, they distinguish Mac from others. Look at windows – i’m not believing i’m saying this – the Messenger looks just fabulous, and when Google Chrome OS will come, it will definitely come with a ‘wow’.
At the time that Canonical decides to make its ‘own’ enhancement/version of Gnome, then the hype will be for real.
The thing that puts Ubuntu as a desktop OS a head of other OSs is the way it brings together almost all the good things from FOSS/Linux, Windows and the Mac. It also happens to be free. The one major thing that is missing is sufficient ISV support to really make it a major competitor to Windows.
Hopefully that will change with support from the likes of Dell, IBM and the other smaller system builders.
Have been using Ubuntu for about 3 years now, and it still remains my default OS. The holes that remain are:
– Video rendering still needs work despite vdpau drivers
– Robust email client (Evolution is too heavy, T.bird buckles under load)
– Better ntfs-3g support: too many errors on NTFS drives still
– WiFi is still a weak spot
– Bloat should be reduced, user should have options to remove unnecessary elements
0 Get a decent DVD burner, for God’s sake!
“But now, a RESPECTABLE 3% of WorksWithU readers say they’re going to run Ubuntu 9.10 in a cloud configuration, according to our recent reader poll (nearly 700 readers have so far participated).”
Is that supposed to be a joke or mistyped? not funny to me. What`s respectable in 21 user of Ubuntu One.
“Get a decent DVD burner, for God’s sake!”
Agree with Deepak 101%
I don’t understand the hate on Brasero. I think it’s one of the more usable tools I’ve encountered.
The 3% comment for cloud offerings is an embarrassing number to boast about.
All that said, I think Ubuntu needs to have an end-to-end platform to succeed. It’s looking to get into the enterprise, and I think it will succeed at this only by making enterprise deployments easy and scalable. This requires a server backend for a custom repository and installation server, at the least. Then of course, it would be good if Ubuntu could get into the general server market, which I think it’s doing a pretty good job at honing.
Someone else stated, and I agree, that targeting SMB would be a market not yet targeted by a ton of vendors, like large companies are.
waterfront@15:
That poll isn’t talking about UbuntuOne.
And WorksWithU really needs a fivicon.
To reiterate: The poll was referring to Ubuntu in a cloud such as Amazon Elastic Compute Cloud (EC2) or Ubuntu Enterprise Cloud (UEC) — not Ubuntu One, which is a storage and file sharing service.
Yeah but will it run crisis?
I made my copy of the Ubuntu 9.10 LTS and I was very pleased at the performance. Only one thing was at fault: the stability of the system was marginal at some points. Would I buy it? Yes! as soon as the minor, but important issues of stability are completed. Would I sell it? Again, with great enthusiasm, under the previous mentioned required improvements… I have never checked the cloud option, considering it utter luxury and cost, to replace the entire system, which I have and it works well.
Just installed Ubuntu Server 10.04 now and it’s looking good. I went with the minimal virtual machine install which is very straight forward. I’ve posted a screen shot walk through of the installation process so others know what to expect. Hope others find it useful: http://www.greatwhiteit.com/web/guest/technology-blog/-/blogs/thirty-screenshots-to-install-ubuntu-10-04-lucid-lynx-server