| | |
The Ubuntu Welfare Program
Since its inception in 2004, Ubuntu has been the beneficiary in what seems like a bottomless money pit for South African entrepreneur, Mark Shuttleworth via his commercial support and development venture, Canonical. Since Canonical, Ltd. isn't an American publicly-owned company (and I don't know South African law), it's unlikely that a full disclosure of profits and losses is forthcoming. I have read that the investment made so far is approximately $20 million US.
How long can anyone keep pumping money into a project that might not ever turn a profit?
Red Hat is the world's most successful Linux-oriented company and has turned its open source business into a very profitable one with licensing, professional services and support, training and certification and other products like JBOSS.
Although if you think about it, Shuttleworth might have the money to burn for a while since he blew $20 million US to go into space and to the International Space Station in 2002. Apparently he doesn't look for a return on investment for everything he does.
No one knows for sure, except Shuttleworth and his accountant, whether there's any hope that Ubuntu and Canonical will ever be self-sufficient entities. My guess is that it will take a few more years with the current economic downturn to realize any profits from either venture and I'm not sure whether Ubuntu will ever make money or is even expected to.
I'm willing to speak with someone from Canonical or Ubuntu but so far have had no luck in making a connection with anyone for an interview via phone, email or The Frugal Tech Show.
What do you think?
Will the Ubuntu project eventually lose its bankroll or will Shuttleworth maintain the piggy bank for it?
Is Canonical profitable?
Write back and let me know what you think.
How long can anyone keep pumping money into a project that might not ever turn a profit?
Red Hat is the world's most successful Linux-oriented company and has turned its open source business into a very profitable one with licensing, professional services and support, training and certification and other products like JBOSS.
Although if you think about it, Shuttleworth might have the money to burn for a while since he blew $20 million US to go into space and to the International Space Station in 2002. Apparently he doesn't look for a return on investment for everything he does.
No one knows for sure, except Shuttleworth and his accountant, whether there's any hope that Ubuntu and Canonical will ever be self-sufficient entities. My guess is that it will take a few more years with the current economic downturn to realize any profits from either venture and I'm not sure whether Ubuntu will ever make money or is even expected to.
I'm willing to speak with someone from Canonical or Ubuntu but so far have had no luck in making a connection with anyone for an interview via phone, email or The Frugal Tech Show.
What do you think?
Will the Ubuntu project eventually lose its bankroll or will Shuttleworth maintain the piggy bank for it?
Is Canonical profitable?
Write back and let me know what you think.
0
•
•
•
•
I'm not sure what the point of your blog entry is, other than to point out that Shuttleworth has the money to go to the ISS... Canonical may turn a profit... Or it may not.
"How long can anyone keep pumping money into a project that might not ever turn a profit?"... Until they run out of money, or until they decide not to.
What does welfare have to do with anything in this article? Shuttleworth has his money and has the right to spend or invest (or waste) it, whatever the case may be, however he wants.
Ubuntu may never make money. Canonical may or may not ever make money. Who cares? Ubuntu is a great thing for those who like it. If you don't like it, don't use it. I'm pretty sure Canonical and Shuttleworth don't want to force Ubuntu on you if you don't want it. Take it or leave it. It is a valuable thing that is offered to you for free.
I think Canonical will probably lose money in the current economic situation (who knows, though).
Shuttleworth will probably continue to fund it - because he can, despite Canonical's profitability. I hope he does.
"How long can anyone keep pumping money into a project that might not ever turn a profit?"... Until they run out of money, or until they decide not to.
What does welfare have to do with anything in this article? Shuttleworth has his money and has the right to spend or invest (or waste) it, whatever the case may be, however he wants.
Ubuntu may never make money. Canonical may or may not ever make money. Who cares? Ubuntu is a great thing for those who like it. If you don't like it, don't use it. I'm pretty sure Canonical and Shuttleworth don't want to force Ubuntu on you if you don't want it. Take it or leave it. It is a valuable thing that is offered to you for free.
I think Canonical will probably lose money in the current economic situation (who knows, though).
Shuttleworth will probably continue to fund it - because he can, despite Canonical's profitability. I hope he does.
0
•
•
•
•
If you look at "who we are" on Canonical, most Bio's say: "Based in London", including Mark! DistroWatch lists origin as: Isle of Man (UK Crown Dependency).
0
•
•
•
•
I'm probably not as well informed as other readers (my first comment on first read article) but if Ubuntu is a significant part of the Open Source community (I think it is) it would seem that profit is more of a personal option/preference for anyone involved with Ubuntu including Shuttleworth. If the current construct he has is working and sustainable - I'm really glad that it works. Ubuntu has allowed my wife and I to both completely abandon the windoze swindle (we both own our own businesses (IT related). I would prefer to contribute (as I see fit) to Ubuntu to keep it alive and viable than to see it become a money trap.
0
•
•
•
•
Hello zelrik,
How do you know that Canonical is profitable? This may be the case however I'm curious what is your source from which this claim is made.
Cheers!
How do you know that Canonical is profitable? This may be the case however I'm curious what is your source from which this claim is made.
Cheers!
0
•
•
•
•
Hello,
not to be polemic, but up to my knowledge, Windows Vista cost has been esteemed of:
10'000'000'000 USD:
http://lvlug.org/pipermail/lvlug/200...er/028748.html
The result is one operating system that one third of the user replace with the previous version
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/08...ws_xp_vista_7/
No comment
Bye
not to be polemic, but up to my knowledge, Windows Vista cost has been esteemed of:
10'000'000'000 USD:
http://lvlug.org/pipermail/lvlug/200...er/028748.html
The result is one operating system that one third of the user replace with the previous version
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/08...ws_xp_vista_7/
No comment
Bye
Similar Threads
- Installing Ubuntu Studio over Ubuntu!? (Getting Started and Choosing a Distro)
- C++ in ubuntu (C++)
- Putty-like Ubuntu program (*nix Software)
- Hello from Ubuntu (Geeks' Lounge)
- C in Ubuntu (Window and Desktop Managers)
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Tag cloud for canonical, internationalspacestation, linux, redhat, shuttleworth, ubuntu
age amd apple appliances avatar bbc bluegene canonical centos chips cisco citrix cloud cloudcomputing cpanel database debian dell desktop desktops development distributions dos economy energy enterprise fedora fsf gadgets gnome google gos gpl hardware hosting hp ibm ibm.news intel intelibm java jobs kde kernel kvm laptop laptops linustorvalds linux linuxfoundation mac macosx medicine memory microsoft mobile netbooks news novell open openoffice opensource opensuse operatingsystem operatingsystems oracle os osx patents pc ps3 python recession redhat russia sco security server servers slackware software source sun supercomputer supercomputing suse technology tivo trends ubuntu unix virtualization vista vmware web windows working x86 xen xp




