It seems sort of unfair to compare kernel contributions from Canonical to a company like Red Hat simply because of the time-frame during Linux's development tha

It seems sort of unfair to compare kernel contributions from Canonical to a company like Red Hat simply because of the time-frame during Linux's development that Red Hat was a part of. Isn't is possible that Red Hat helped out more because it was around closer to the start of the Linux project? Also, Canonical's and Ubuntu's strengths may not lay in kernel development, but instead pushing the boundaries in what can be done on the UI. I certainly don't remember Red Hat or SUSE doing the sort of risky things with their UI that Canonical is willing to try.