Ubuntu Developer Summits Shifting Online, Increasing Frequency 49
hypnosec writes "Ubuntu Developer Summits Community Manager Jono Bacon has announced that the bi-annual Ubuntu Developer Summits, which were held at different locations like Brussels, Oakland, Copenhagen will be replaced by online events by moving to the cloud. Bacon revealed that the event has been successful, but in a bid to bring about improvements and refinement in the openness and accessibility of the event, it is going to transition into an online event."
They are also going to be held every three months instead of every six.
TO THE CLOUD (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:TO THE CLOUD (Score:4, Informative)
Didn't you know that Ubuntu, formerly a beloved Linux
distribution, became a PR-Machine some time ago.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I hate marketing jargon especially "cloud".
It does not take much to annoy you, then. :P
Re: (Score:2)
Gentlemen, I would like to make a motion for a "Rule 35" of the Internet.
Anyone who says "cloud" in relation to online services has to PUNCHED IN THE FUCKING HEAD.
All in favor?
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Eliminating physical events is a bad idea. Bad sid (Score:5, Insightful)
The bad side of technology (*), those that wanted face to face events are now denied it. The benefits of that are now gone.
Online in addition, ok, but canceling physical events, including one already scheduled and that people have already made arrangements for (travel, time off, etc) is bad.
People can socialize and network at a physical event, there are somethings online only lacks.
(*) Technology has also caused the loss of video stores, CD stores, so many things are hard to buy locally now. Technology should add options, not destroy them!
Re: (Score:2)
I wouldn't start by assuming Canonical ever made money to begin with.
Re: (Score:2)
I wouldn't start by assuming Canonical ever made money to begin with.
at some point they were touting around numbers that they were "just about breaking even".
but seriously.. none of the shit they've done in past two years has been the stuff that profitable/healthy os tech company would do.
moving to the cloud? fuck - you can't just move a summit into the cloud. the summit is every fucking day then, hardly a summit. if it's a website, it's not a summit. if they're web streamed shit - then it makes no difference to watch them later so again not a summit. it just becomes a publi
Re: (Score:2)
Well, none of their attempts at being profitable came to fruition - not Ubuntu desktops, not Ubuntu server, not Ubuntu TV, not Myth TV. Ubuntu is the latest example of why companies tied to the GPL can't make money on GPL software, unless they are from one of the blessed 4 - hardware, services, advertizing or donations. Donations never are good enough - let's get that out of the way. Hardware is now at the point where its margins couldn't be thinner. Services is something that Red Hat has succeeded w/,
Re: (Score:2)
(*) Technology has also caused the loss of video stores, CD stores, so many things are hard to buy locally now. Technology should add options, not destroy them!
Technology is invented not unvented, you can only abandon it. CD and video stores are dying because neither I nor anyone I know go there anymore. Should we keep pizza places open if everybody wants to eat sushi instead? Don't be silly, technology adds options and when people overwhelmingly choose them over the old ones, the old will go away just like people all sorts of fashions and trends and other fads.
"Refining" Openness and Accessibility = Reducing (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Professionals already use their real names on forums where they discuss professional topics. Did you expect people to take someone called TrueSatan seriously in a professional environment? Anonymity is for people under tyrannical regimes, and for recreational forums where we don't want our unprofessional posts to merge with our professional life.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, but there is a difference between using your real name when discussing professional topics, and giving your real name to Google who can now associate it with everything you do online, professional, recreational or otherwise.
Re: (Score:2)
wait a minute "Anonymous Coward", if that is your real name*... are you suggesting this, our beloved /., is not a "professional environment"?
*Dr. Strangelove reference
The best part! (Score:4, Funny)
Even better, the online summits will feature a constant "Sponsor sidebar" containing products selected algorithmically based on keywords detected within the conversation! It's going to be the ultimate in integrated consumer infotainment...
Here's why I'm glad it's all open source (Score:3)
I don't have to concern myself with Ubuntu anymore. They've had their run, and have pretty clearly jumped the shark. And thankfully, because most of their work is on GPL'd code, we can abandon the organization entirely without losing any of the work that they did.
In other words, Mr Shuttleworth, so long and thanks for all the fish.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It sounds like we're operating from two completely different goals: My goal is to have a great operating system that's basically free and can run well on servers, desktops, laptops, phones, toasters, etc. Your goal seems to be extract as much revenue as possible from customers, advertisers, sponsors, etc for an organization that builds that operating system.
If your definition of "success" is defined by a quarterly earnings report, then yes, this will lead to Ubuntu's ultimate failure. If your definition of
Dead companies can't write FOSS (Score:2)
Like the fable of the goose that laid golden eggs, /. readers like yourself don't really seem to care whether the goose lives or not. Well, newsflash - if Canonical or Red Hat cease to exist, they won't keep writing FOSS. And when companies/organizations - profit or non-profit - can't fund themselves for their daily operations, writing great software would be one of the last things on their mind.
Also, despite the theoretical possibility that everybody in the world can edit it and make a great system, in
Re:Here's why I'm glad it's all open source (Score:4, Informative)
In other words, Mr Shuttleworth, so long and thanks for all the fish.
Actually, I would say thanks for spending a lot of money to create and promote a Linux distribution that even non-linux geeks have heard about. He has done more to increase exposure of Linux than most anyone. It's unfortunate that Canonical isn't doing well since I think most people would say that building a sustainable model to keep Linux in the spotlight is a good thing for the community as a whole. Guess what?... servers and bandwidth cost money. Advertising and putting on events cost money. When was the last time you contributed to your local LUG to keep it afloat?
Re: (Score:2)
That's the point. Too many Linux users seem to miss the fact that for their beloved OS and assorted software to exist, companies like Red Hat, Canonical and so on have to actually survive. Yet, they are only too happy to cheer knock-offs like CentOS - which brings nothing to the table. In the case of Canonical, everybody loved them when they were pissing away cash throwing CDs around, but the moment Canonical needs help in staying afloat, these leeches are gone.
I agree that Canonical did a lot of their
Re: (Score:1)
The problem with Linspire was there was no "there" there. Their office was a wiring closet in San Diego.
Canonical hired no Linspire employees. Zero. None. Nada. Not that the six of them didn't need work after they were sold to Xandros, which itself then disappeared in a puff of debtload and sold themselves to the devil.
Bi-annual != biennial (Score:1)
Bi-annual == once every two years
Biennial == twice a year
c'mon now /. ...
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:1)
The OED says biannual is twice a year and biennial is every two years. That appears to be the opposite of what you're claiming.
You're right. It's been a long day