Canonical CEO Mark Shuttleworth on Oct. 26 is set to speak with the press about Ubuntu 9.10 Desktop Edition and Server Edition. WorksWithU will be extra careful not to “hype” Ubuntu 9.10 over the next few days. Instead, we hope to ask Shuttleworth some timely questions about the new Ubuntu and Canonical’s long-term business strategy. Here’s a sampling of issues on our mind.
Admittedly, we’re long-term believers in Ubuntu. Otherwise why would we have launched WorksWithU? But that doesn’t mean Canonical and Ubuntu 9.10 are guaranteed to succeed. Eight key questions include:
1. Any new Netbook wins? This is actually a multi-part question.
First up, Canonical and Dell in September 2009 announced a preview of Ubuntu Moblin Developer Remix Edition, available on a Dell Mini 10v netbook. What’s the early reaction?
Second, can we expect more PC makers to ship Ubuntu netbooks, particularly in North America. I’m familiar with ZaReason and System76 Ubuntu netbooks. But my recent conversations with Lenovo Director of SMB Jay McBain leads me to believe that the vast majority of North American netbook buyers want Windows. Does Shuttleworth see the netbook market differently?
2. Any new Ubuntu desktop preloads?: Dell has finally re-introduced an Ubuntu desktop PC — a rather impressive move, considering Dell also has its hands full prepping for Windows 7′s Oct. 22 debut.
Does Shuttleworth think Canonical can win more Ubuntu Desktop Edition deals with PC vendors — especially as Windows 7 generates buzz on main street?
3. Any new server relationships? This is a particularly difficult market for Canonical to crack, since Windows Server, Red Hat Enterprise Server and Novell SUSE Linux have such strong server followings.
Back in April 2009, Shuttleworth said Ubuntu Server Edition 9.04 had been tested to run on 45 different server configurations from IBM, Sun Microsystems, Hewlett-Packard, Dell, Lenovo and smaller providers. Impressive. But most hardware providers don’t yet preinstall Ubuntu Server Edition on their systems.
Key question marks include:
- Sun Microsystems — one of Ubuntu’s more vocal server advocates — is slashing staff as the pending Oracle-Sun business combo awaits regulatory reviews. If Oracle does digest Sun, will Sun maintain server relations with Canonical?
- Hewlett-Packard showed Canonical a little bit of server love back in April 2009, but is that relationship growing or stagnant?
- Dell told me in August 2009 that they don’t have any Ubuntu server plans…
- IBM does offer virtualized Ubuntu desktops on centralized Linux servers. Can we expect specific Ubuntu server moves from Big Blue?
4. Is Ubuntu in the cloud for real?: If Canonical can’t convince hardware makers to preload Ubuntu on servers, cloud computing represents a back door into the server market.
Nicolas (“Nick”) Barcet, server product manager at Canonical, recently described the Ubuntu Enterprise Cloud (UEC) strategy on WorksWithU. And Canonical’s key cloud partners now include Eucalyptus Systems Inc., Cohesive Flexible Technologies, Amazon Elastic Compute Cloud (EC2) and RightScale.
But Canonical has made it clear Ubuntu 9.10 is a stepping stone to more comprehensive cloud offerings in Ubuntu 10.04 (Lucid Lynx, scheduled for April 2010 debut).
In the meantime, a key question: Can Canonical point to specific customers, universities and organizations that are running Ubuntu applications in the cloud?
5. Are ISVs embracing Ubuntu Server Edition?: During the April 2009 kick-off for Ubuntu 9.04, Shuttleworth conceded that Canonical needed to bring more ISVs (such as Oracle) onto Ubuntu Server Edition. Since that time, some key ISVs — such as Alfresco and OpenBravo — have expanded their Ubuntu Server Edition support. Are more ISVs on the way?
6. Ubuntu One and Landscape – Money Makers?: Canonical has been working hard to launch cloud and SaaS services around Ubuntu. Two examples include Ubuntu One (for shared storage) and Landscape (for remote Ubuntu management). Both are fairly new but how soon will they potentially generate profits for Canonical? Also, who are the early adopters of Landscape? And what’s the early reaction to Canonical’s on-premise version of Landscape?
7. How is the Ubuntu partner ecosystem growing?: When IBM and Canonical launched a joint Ubuntu desktop initiative in North America on Oct. 20, 2009, IBM claimed that “hundreds” of partners would back the effort in 2010. Sounds promising.
I also know training partners like Fast Lane and Bridge Education are helping to educate Ubuntu VARs and IT managers. But what other steps is Canonical taking to grow the Ubuntu channel partner ecosystem?
8. When will Canonical be profitable?: I realize Canonical is privately held. And Shuttleworth isn’t obligated to answer this question. But WorksWithU readers keep pushing us to cover Canonical’s business responsibly. No hype. Instead, real discussion — including an ongoing look at Canonical’s potential march to profitability. We’ll keep financial topics in mind as we cover Canonical’s business strategy.
Got additional questions for Shuttleworth? I’m all ears.
Follow WorksWithU via Identi.ca, Twitter and RSS (available now) and our newsletter (coming soon).
Read More About This Topic
Share This Post
Tags: Canonical Landscape | Ubuntu 10.04
Interact: Add a Comment | Trackback Link | Permalink
Subscribe: RSS Feed
Don't miss Charlene O'Hanlon's weekly columns...
One more question:
How does Canonical actually estimate the number of Ubuntu users.
Canonical reps, Shuttleworth included, seem quite happy to pull seemingly random numbers out of thin air when talking to the press about the number of “estimated” users but none of them will go on record and describe how that estimate is generated. Is it estimated from popcon stats? From mirror activity? Are there empirical scaling factors being used?
-jef
Jef: Assuming we have the opportunity we will ask about Ubuntu’s installed base and how Canonical pulls together the estimate.
I’d like some user numbers, too. Over at Lifehacker.com, a recent Hive Five for best software update tool crowned APT/Synaptic the winner against three Windows software update tools and one OS X tool. Some were surprised there were so many Linux users among Lifehacker readers. Though, not all of them are Ubuntu users, it still suggests there may be more Linux users, regardless of distribution used, than is generally believed.
Scott:
Self-selecting strawpolls like that are not suggestive of anything of the sort. Its just as plausible that linux users in the lifehacker readerbase are more likely to respond and skew the sampling. Sort if like Glen Beck held a poll about his viewers opinions about health care reform…a guaranteed skewed result.
At best you can say that a larger than expected number of readers of lifehacker (a niche website for technology enthusiasts) use linux. You can’t make the leap from lifehacker readership demographics to general public without doing a lot more work to show that lifehacker’s readership is a representative demographic… or to weight the poll results to take away the skew in demographics. Political pollsters make a living out of correcting for sampling demographic skew.
-jef
from what i understand about Canonical’s business strategy that: when it comes to Desktop they opensource everything relate, but when it comes to Server they only show some parts or non.
for me i can agree on that strategy, because:
1. in desktop if one distribution Wins and become dominant it opens the door for other Linux distributions
2. in the Server market the situation is different, the dominant platform is Linux so its a competition between distribution.
3. no one will look to Ubuntu unless it got something that no body else got.
4. having a part in the server market will get more money and that means more developers and more projects.
– For a clue, you might try checking with Yahoo & see if you can get them to reveal some stats on their Yahoo mail users. That would seem to be an agnostic source of general population percentages.
— I notice when logging in (via Ubuntu/Firefox) to check on-line mail, a notice pops up that the “The all-new Yahoo! Mail has not been tested with your operating system.” Of course, when selecting the “To continue to the all-new Yahoo! Mail anyway…” option to “Go to Yahoo! Mail” no problems arise.
Hi Joe
I think it’s a nice array of questions. But I believe you are missing a large piece of the pie, and really I am surprised Ubuntu is not targeting that more aggressively: Corporate Desktop deployments. This is Desktop Linux, where Ubuntu has massive mindshare and almost unanimous recognition. And it is highly profitable (unlike home, open source Desktops, only profitable though OEM customizations, which can be a revenue stream but not as significant as a corporate desktop deployment would).
Leo@7: As the old Lethal Weapon line goes, “Whatever Leo wants, Leo Gets.” Translation: I love your question and will try to ask it during the call. I think this week’s Canonical-IBM news is a step in the corporate desktop direction. But certainly, WorksWithU can dig for more information and we’ll do so.
@Joe: LOL! And yes, I agree about IBM’s bit, I was surprised not to see it covered here. Cheers!
Talk about overfiling: http://www.ubuntu-pics.de/bild/28230/screenshot_08_lesHFf.png
Joe, good to see you asking the harder questions! I applaud your efforts.
I seem to remember in past posts of yours that Shuttleworth has been dismissive of the SMB market. I’m of the opinion that this is a big mistake. This is where Microsoft hit hard in the beginning and it worked like a charm for them – they under-cut IBM with software and functionality parity that was good enough – and it worked.
I still believe that if Shuttleworth were to build a solid SMB solution that covers the basics (Email+Groupware+Push, File Server – done, Intranet – done, centralised auth – done) then he could really crack into the server market.
Canonical seems intent on trying to bust its way into the toughest market in IT – big iron – which has a number of very settled and well placed players. Conversely, the SMB market is dominated in very large part by Microsoft with little or no competition from others.
While it may take longer to get ready a solution for that market, I believe it would be the ideal path to world domination.
Pester them about it. I think Mark needs to reconsider or at least properly explain his lack of regard for this particular market.
@Socceroos:
Is Ebox the sort of SMB solution you are looking for?
It’s a derivative of Ubuntu.. and it has corporate backing… just not Canonical’s.
Ebox Technologies is yet another example of how a different company other than Canonical is building a service business around Ubuntu without driving revenue back into Canonical or paying for the core Ubuntu infrastructure or release maintenance in some other way.
If you are correct.. and the SMB market is a ripe target…you should keep a close eye on how fast EBox Technologies builds its partner network and watch their press releases and any hints they drop about revenue targets. Even if Canonical decided to jump it with both feet, can they really compete in the space more effectively as the linux for SMB than Ebox Technologies?
-jef
i would like to know why it appears that Ubuntu is becoming more about Mono than Quality. What’s with the dead set desire to use Evolution, Banshee, and the other Mono apps? Shouldn’t the focus be on freedom and not just free?
Vadim@10: I’m guilty as charged.
Socceroos@11: I can’t really speak for Shuttleworth’s views on the SMB market, but Canonical insiders have told me there are no plans to offer a small business server.
Personally, I think Canonical needs to build a channel for its current server offering before taking aim at the SMB market.
I do believe Canonical can succeed in SMB — but it might involve the cloud strategy. Most start-up businesses (including the one I co-own) adopt a range of cloud and SaaS offerings because they don’t want to buy IT infrastructure. If Canonical can find some application partners in the cloud, I bet they could catch on in SMB… …
But I will try to ask Shuttleworth about the SMB market during the Oct. 26 briefing. Thanks for your note and readership.
-jp
Jef@12: thank you for your nice comments on eBox!
Socceroos@11: You said:
“[...] While it may take longer to get ready a solution for that market, I believe it would be the ideal path to world domination. [...]”
Well, somehow, the solution you mention already exists, as Jef pointed out, it’s what we are working in at eBox.
I totally agree with you on Canonical targeting the wrong market regarding to the server space. The Microsoft-IBM case is an “Innovation’s dilemma” typical example, and IMHO Canonical should apply a similar strategy instead of struggling for the upper part of the market.
If you -Jef, Socceroos- are interested in knowing more about any stuff related to eBox Technologies, please let me know. I would be very glad to share our thoughts and experiences.
A question: Hot does Mark see the feature of One Hundred Paper-cuts project? It seems it hasn’t been given enough manpower, as many bugs were not fixed (even those critical ones, like https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/nautilus/+bug/61237 ). On the other hand, it was praised and indeed solved many visible issues.
@m:
I think expecting a 100% success rate for a first time effort is unrealistic. That particular bug in question has been known by the upstream GNOME project since 2002 if you believe the GNOME bug ticket..with patches presented in a discussion dating back to 2005. The question really isn’t why hasn’t Canonical fixed it. The real question is why has upstream GNOME not incorporated already existing patches even before the papercuts effort? Maybe there is a manpower bottleneck, but perhaps its in a different spot that you realize.
But in evaluatating the papercuts project, what really matters is that the bugs that were fixed as part of the papercuts effort were fixed in collaboration with upstream projects and patches were submitted appropriately back to the upstream projects and were accepted for inclusion. And from my own spot checking, I think its fair to say it was successful as they have done a good job of forwarding patches back up.
If Papercuts team can show the produced high quality patches that are acceptable to upstream projects during the first run, it will make it easier for them to work with upstream projects again in the future. The more trust upstreams have that papercuts is going to produce acceptable patchesets the more willing upstreams will be to work with the papercuts team..maybe even to the point where upstream projects plan for a papercuts sprint as part of their own development cycle.
-jef