On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 01:50, Faldegast <1...@bugs.launchpad.net> wrote: >> Nobody thinks of paying a yearly license for having tubes in the wall >> - no - people pay the plumber when they need him/her for putting >> additional tubes or doing repair work. I think, it should be the same >> for software. The advantage of software is that it can be easier >> duplicated and easier offered than the tubes. > Actually they do. Its called insurance. You pay a monthly fee and if your > tubes need to be repaired you are not hit with a overwhelming cost.
You are right - and I mixed up a few different models. My tube example was comparing to a Windows license and not to a model where you get the software and pay extra and optional for support - as Red Hat offers for example. > Perhaps this should be integrated with Ubuntu brainstorm, and other sites > where such pledges get more exposure? > There are also cofundos.org, and possibly other sites? I would find it good to combine/link Launchpad with brainstorm and integrate something like pledgebank or cofundos - Whether it is a bug or a new feature request, I don't see so much difference in how it should be handled. Even for bugs sometimes it turns out that a complete different solution is better than a quick-and-dirty fix. > I am talking about a commercial version with support, marketing and > distribution. And more important, an OEM program. Oh, I understand - I thought that such also already exists. ASFAIK everyone can buy support from Canonical. I personally find those extra commercial versions which maybe include additional patches or maybe not is not very attractive. I like to have one thing and pay for the appropriate support when I have a problem that could need the implementation of a particular fix. > Actually i think Microsoft expect Students to buy a computer with an OEM > license and then get the student version, and actually pay more then > they have to.... That was exactly what I meant. They try to create a dependency. >> DonationCoder (http://www.donationcoder.com/) also have several >> approaches for funding software development, from micro-donations up >> to custom-made software request handling through forums. I think, to >> build an "Ubuntu" for people seeking for programs to be written or >> bugs to be fixed, combined with a simple way of donation/payment, >> would be a big gain for Ubuntu. - Especially for companies with need >> to optimize their overall performance (and the computer is often an >> important tool for efficient administration in a company). > Actually i think that is great. But most users don't take time for this. They > would rather buy a box and expect the source of that box to fund such > development. Yes, agree - not the home users - but you were refering to companies with commercial versions and support. The companies are important to address. IMHO in the home user field Ubuntu cannot be stopped any more in the long run - especially if Ubuntu continues to develop so well as it did in the last one or two years. Of course - as also has been mentioned - it is important to attract developers to address Linux also. Most Windows developers I know are completely ignorant of everything else but Windows although they get beaten by their master (this year use winforms, the next year - oh no - switch to wpf please). One reason might be that software development is under pressure anyway already (so many software vendors - and basically no money needed for a startup or single person to get started). Addressing multiple environments increases complexity signiicantly. And packaging then also must be done separately for each platform. And what options are for a platform agnostic way? Java, Python and Mono - and several very little other players. I do not consider C(++) here because it needs recompile on all supported platforms which then must be maintained at developer side (compiling from source is not an option for getting widely adopted). From those 3 only Java is very well established and many try to ban it to server side only although IMHO the option with the least required effort to make it work on all platforms. Python would also be a good choice but the runtime not widely spread so far (I don't know any Windows workstations at customers where the Python runtime is installed). So for the developers or software vendors it is not an easy thing to develop for multiple platforms - maybe a reason why so many new softwares come as web application and desktop applications still focus on the Windows platform. What does Canonical recommend for companies planning a migration to Ubuntu on the desktop within the next - let's say - 5 years? What should companies do if they need some software development now? OK, this maybe again not seems very relevant to Bug #1, but IMHO there are many factors playing together. Home users buy there hardware often at different shops where companies do and I guess Bug #1 would like to address both groups. -- Martin Wildam http://www.google.com/profiles/mwildam -- Microsoft has a majority market share https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is a direct subscriber. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
