4 ms·
That doesn't mean Canonical gets paid whenever someone spins up an Ubuntu VM. AFAIK there is no public info about Canonical revenue anyway
by vrutkovs 8y ago
That doesn't mean Canonical gets paid whenever someone spins up an Ubuntu VM. AFAIK there is no public info about Canonical revenue anyway
- pmontra 8y agoThere are some info about Canonical's revenues at https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Canonical-2009-2017-Fin-Perf https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Canonica... Full accounts at https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/05055134/filing-history https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/05055134/filing-h... If they'll make an IPO next year they'll have to tell us how they are making money. Just wait and see.
- knbknb 8y agoSo, 125 Million US$ revenue / 566 employees = $221000 revenue / employee. Not bad for a software company. According to my own personal regression analysis I did many years ago, a company is sustainable with at least $50000 revenue per employee. That's my personal ballpark number.
- bryanlarsen 8y agoCanonical very definitely gets paid every time someone spins up an Ubuntu VM on AWS or any other cloud provider. Not much, perhaps, but there are a lot of Ubuntu VM's spun up. AWS doesn't necessarily have to pay Canonical for Ubuntu VM's, but if they didn't, they wouldn't be able to use the trademark "Ubuntu". OVH wasn't paying Canonical, got sued because of it, and had to settle.
- vrutkovs 8y agoAh, interesting. So they basically sell the right to use their trademark?
- bryanlarsen 8y agoThey also supply support and custom images.
- aritmo 8y agoNo, see the simbling reply.
- mmcclellan 8y agoIn the OVH case, a modified kernel was being shipped without (apparently) following the guidelines. I've seen an AWS suffix on kernel upgrades and they may or may not have an agreement to pay, but I'm thinking _very definitely_ is stated too strongly.