5 ms·

> Canonical is just all over the place. We should encourage experimentation and risk taking. No company can always get things right. Phones are a duopoly, but

by jeswin 6y ago

> Canonical is just all over the place. We should encourage experimentation and risk taking. No company can always get things right. Phones are a duopoly, but I'm glad they tried. Unity was fairly decent, but in the end adopting Gnome benefitted everyone. Ads were the only bad idea I can think of; but hey I've been using their wonderful software for 15 years now at a total cost of zero.

ampdepolymerase 6y ago
There was literally nothing wrong with Canonical technology. They just kept cancelling projects to satisfy a vocal minority of Ubuntu users.
- popey 6y ago
  No, we didn't. Unity was cancelled when we downsized in 2017 (4 years ago). It wasn't due to any vocal minority at all. We just refocused our energy.
axaxs 6y ago
In theory I agree, but Canonical really seem to do it over and over. Whether it's NIH or something else, it seems every time technology starts shifting, Ubuntu goes its own way only to drop it a year or two later. Unity/compiz, Mir , Ubuntu One, Upstart, Bazaar. And currently baking are Snaps and LXD. This isn't to say any of these are bad products, but it has real effects to the end user, who invest time in something that just seems to get vaporized.
- scaladev 6y ago
  Don't forget that snaps came almost a year before flatpak. This is being parroted all over HN and still many don't know it and blame Canonical for reinventing the wheel, which is why I'm posting this. (I agree with your general idea and the rest of your comment.) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snap_(package_manager) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snap_(package_manager) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flatpak https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flatpak
  - the_why_of_y 6y ago
    Don't forget that FlatPak has been designed out in the open and plans were presented as far back as GUADEC 2013. https://www.superlectures.com/guadec2013/sandboxed-applications-for-gnome https://www.superlectures.com/guadec2013/sandboxed-applicati...
- jamesponddotco 6y ago
  What is wrong with LXD? It provides a nice REST API and better user experience for those of us who like LXC.
- snicker7 6y ago
  Bazaar and snaps came before git and flatpak. Unity came about with the Gnome 2 to 3 transition (and earlier versions of Gnome 3 were widely agreed to be a step backwards). Upstart has a very different design philosophy than systemd. Hard to say its NIH when it was different tech. NIH apparently means "not adopting whatever RedHat develops/supports".
  - axaxs 6y ago
    Bzr and Git started at about the same time, but Git moved much faster and its 1.0 was way before bzr(not that that matters much, honestly). Flatpak was known about and talked about before snaps, as another pointed out. Upstart - that's fair, upstart was something new that didn't get replaced by systemd for a couple cycles. Like it or not, Red Hat controls gnome which is a huge ecosystem. Your best bet for effecting change there is collaboration, not hacking together your own UI for yourself. I mean, sure they are free to do that, but the writing was on the wall before it even started.

by jeswin 6y ago

ampdepolymerase 6y ago

There was literally nothing wrong with Canonical technology. They just kept cancelling projects to satisfy a vocal minority of Ubuntu users.

popey 6y ago
No, we didn't. Unity was cancelled when we downsized in 2017 (4 years ago). It wasn't due to any vocal minority at all. We just refocused our energy.

axaxs 6y ago

In theory I agree, but Canonical really seem to do it over and over. Whether it's NIH or something else, it seems every time technology starts shifting, Ubuntu goes its own way only to drop it a year or two later. Unity/compiz, Mir , Ubuntu One, Upstart, Bazaar. And currently baking are Snaps and LXD. This isn't to say any of these are bad products, but it has real effects to the end user, who invest time in something that just seems to get vaporized.

scaladev 6y ago
Don't forget that snaps came almost a year before flatpak. This is being parroted all over HN and still many don't know it and blame Canonical for reinventing the wheel, which is why I'm posting this. (I agree with your general idea and the rest of your comment.) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snap_(package_manager) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snap_(package_manager) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flatpak https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flatpak
- the_why_of_y 6y ago
  Don't forget that FlatPak has been designed out in the open and plans were presented as far back as GUADEC 2013. https://www.superlectures.com/guadec2013/sandboxed-applications-for-gnome https://www.superlectures.com/guadec2013/sandboxed-applicati...
jamesponddotco 6y ago
What is wrong with LXD? It provides a nice REST API and better user experience for those of us who like LXC.
snicker7 6y ago
Bazaar and snaps came before git and flatpak. Unity came about with the Gnome 2 to 3 transition (and earlier versions of Gnome 3 were widely agreed to be a step backwards). Upstart has a very different design philosophy than systemd. Hard to say its NIH when it was different tech. NIH apparently means "not adopting whatever RedHat develops/supports".
- axaxs 6y ago
  Bzr and Git started at about the same time, but Git moved much faster and its 1.0 was way before bzr(not that that matters much, honestly). Flatpak was known about and talked about before snaps, as another pointed out. Upstart - that's fair, upstart was something new that didn't get replaced by systemd for a couple cycles. Like it or not, Red Hat controls gnome which is a huge ecosystem. Your best bet for effecting change there is collaboration, not hacking together your own UI for yourself. I mean, sure they are free to do that, but the writing was on the wall before it even started.