Hi guys,
I was just checking out distrowatch for the latest progress on Ubuntu 13.10 and noticed something that piqued my curiousity.
According to the distrowatch blurb Ubuntu 13.10 is based on the " Ubuntu-Linux Kernel".
I never knew there was such a thing.
Certainly, not according to Jane Ferrer's and Mark Shuttleworth's previous assertions.Previously, Ferrer has stated that Ubuntu does not use the " linux-kernel" but the Ubuntu Kernel and anyone who has been using Linux for more than twelve months should be aware by now that Canonical has been trying to distance itself from Linux for years. Now, we apparently have the latest spin of the Ubuntu-Linux Kernel , or are we to assume that Canonical & Co have decided rather shamefacedly to return as the prodigal son to the linux community?
Somehow, I doulbt that, I think it more likely that Ubuntu is attempting to place itself in a position to start a " software-patent " claim to further it's increasingly proprietary aims to replace Windows as the number one desktop and eventually to freeze out other non-ubuntu distros like Arch & Gentoo via its manipulation of " secure-boot".
Am I serious here?
Yes I am, especially after reading an interview by the great man himself in a Linux-mag ( I can't remember which one, right now, unfortunately! ) where, after having been criticised for attempting to monopolise certain aspects of open-source code, Mark Shutttleworth suggested that open-code developers should give their code freely to software developers without strings.That is, if the software-developers wanted to use the code in non-free products and then appropriate every aspect of that free code as their own in the new " completed " non-free product that , in itself, should be accepted in the spirit of " freely-giving ".
These are not the exact words used by M.S. and unitil I find the appropriate article I can't supply them, but the interpretation emphasises the gist of the original content.
Think of it, a future ,where to get on a P.C. you had to apply directly for approval for " Ubuntu-Certification ." It would certainly explain Ubuntu's eagerness to accept the signing-key process as dictated by Microsoft.
Who knows, one day Microsoft and Ubuntu might even merge? What would they call themselves, Microbuntu, UberWindows,Micronon, Canonosoft,etc?
Perhaps it is just me ,but after so many years of Canonical trying to distance themselves from the very mention of the word Linux, to then, very quietly, and with no trumpet-blaring announcement of what amazing innovations have been introduced to justify this verbal and psychological appropriation, claim the linux-kernel as their own is more than a little hypocritical.( Not to mention sneaky )
Perhaps, I read too much into things, but I have yet to hear of a Space-hopping millionaire who doesn't live on a completely different planet.Anyway, I think it is a suitable topic for debate.What do you think guys?Image may be NSFW.
Clik here to view.
Image may be NSFW.
Clik here to view.
I was just checking out distrowatch for the latest progress on Ubuntu 13.10 and noticed something that piqued my curiousity.
According to the distrowatch blurb Ubuntu 13.10 is based on the " Ubuntu-Linux Kernel".
I never knew there was such a thing.
Certainly, not according to Jane Ferrer's and Mark Shuttleworth's previous assertions.Previously, Ferrer has stated that Ubuntu does not use the " linux-kernel" but the Ubuntu Kernel and anyone who has been using Linux for more than twelve months should be aware by now that Canonical has been trying to distance itself from Linux for years. Now, we apparently have the latest spin of the Ubuntu-Linux Kernel , or are we to assume that Canonical & Co have decided rather shamefacedly to return as the prodigal son to the linux community?
Somehow, I doulbt that, I think it more likely that Ubuntu is attempting to place itself in a position to start a " software-patent " claim to further it's increasingly proprietary aims to replace Windows as the number one desktop and eventually to freeze out other non-ubuntu distros like Arch & Gentoo via its manipulation of " secure-boot".
Am I serious here?
Yes I am, especially after reading an interview by the great man himself in a Linux-mag ( I can't remember which one, right now, unfortunately! ) where, after having been criticised for attempting to monopolise certain aspects of open-source code, Mark Shutttleworth suggested that open-code developers should give their code freely to software developers without strings.That is, if the software-developers wanted to use the code in non-free products and then appropriate every aspect of that free code as their own in the new " completed " non-free product that , in itself, should be accepted in the spirit of " freely-giving ".
These are not the exact words used by M.S. and unitil I find the appropriate article I can't supply them, but the interpretation emphasises the gist of the original content.
Think of it, a future ,where to get on a P.C. you had to apply directly for approval for " Ubuntu-Certification ." It would certainly explain Ubuntu's eagerness to accept the signing-key process as dictated by Microsoft.
Who knows, one day Microsoft and Ubuntu might even merge? What would they call themselves, Microbuntu, UberWindows,Micronon, Canonosoft,etc?
Perhaps it is just me ,but after so many years of Canonical trying to distance themselves from the very mention of the word Linux, to then, very quietly, and with no trumpet-blaring announcement of what amazing innovations have been introduced to justify this verbal and psychological appropriation, claim the linux-kernel as their own is more than a little hypocritical.( Not to mention sneaky )
Perhaps, I read too much into things, but I have yet to hear of a Space-hopping millionaire who doesn't live on a completely different planet.Anyway, I think it is a suitable topic for debate.What do you think guys?Image may be NSFW.
Clik here to view.
Image may be NSFW.Clik here to view.
