The Ubuntu Welfare Program

Ken Hess khess is online now Online | Aug 24th, 2009, 5:15 pm |
0
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.
Quick reply to this message  
0
dandart dandart is offline Offline | Aug 24th, 2009
He's bloody rich and is doing it for the thrill.
 
0
zelrik zelrik is offline Offline | Aug 24th, 2009
In case you didnt know, Canonical is protitable. So that makes the discussion pointless.
 
0
khess khess is online now Online | Aug 24th, 2009
How would one know if it's profitable or not?
 
0
rochestersoftex rochestersoftex is offline Offline | Aug 25th, 2009
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.
 
0
jimwelchok jimwelchok is offline Offline | Aug 26th, 2009
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
brubuntu brubuntu is offline Offline | Aug 26th, 2009
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
timinski timinski is offline Offline | Aug 26th, 2009
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!
 
0
bart.nicolotti bart.nicolotti is offline Offline | Aug 28th, 2009
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
 
0
as901 as901 is offline Offline | Aug 28th, 2009
Perhaps you have been pro Bush for too long? The concept of charity is not to make money. The idea is to help another human being.

It is sad that you cannot see this.

Mark Heinemann
 
 


Message:


Similar Threads
Thread Tools Search this Thread



About Us | Contact Us | Advertise | DaniWeb | Acceptable Use Policy | RSS Feed

©2003 - 2009 DaniWeb® LLC