There used to be a lot more public open source companies but a lot of them were bought out. Sun Microsystems, Novell, Silicon Graphics, RedHat, Caldera, Oracle, etc. all are or were companies that made open source software and were publicly traded.
post
This could lead to an early demise of Linux Mint. It's great we have LMDE ready
- Take Debian
- Make it worse
- ???
- IPO
It would be nice if the most of the money went into things that would help the linux ecosystem (I know canonical contributes to debian, sometimes makes usability improvements, and isn't all negative). But it'll probably just go into AI bullshit.
Well, Mint could just fall back to LMDE if Ubuntu starts going in the same direction as RHEL and starts account-walling their source code and blocking redistribution under the penalty of an account ban, but I don't know about other Ubuntu clones.
Kde is building their own non ubuntu Linux distro, pretty cool imo
Note that KDE Linux is completely different from Neon:
- Arch-based
- Immutable
/usris a read-only, atomically updatederofsvolume backed by a single file, allowing rollback to any of the last 5 OS images- No system package management allowed, only Flatpak, AppImage, distrobox, etc
I love the direction they're going with it, but I personally won't be running it because I like to tinker.
https://linux.kde.org/#what-kind-of-base-technology-does-kde-linux-use
They disagree with calling it arch based:
What kind of base technology does KDE Linux use?
KDE Linux is an “immutable base OS” Linux distro created using Arch Linux packages, but it should not be considered an “Arch-based distro”; Arch is simply a means to an end, and KDE Linux doesn’t even ship with the pacman package manager.
KDE Linux leans on Systemd for a great deal of functionality. Updates are atomic and image-based, with the last 5 OS images cached on disk. Only the Wayland session is supported. Apps primarily come from Flatpak.
Learn more about KDE Linux’s architecture.
They can disagree, but if I take your recipe and then change it, no matter how much, my starting point is still based on your recipe….
Absolutely, it looks like it's mostly managing expectations that come with calling something arch based.
In your recipe analogy, calling your new cookie recipe, which you based on your granny's chocolate chip cookie recipe, "chocolate chip cookie based", but ending up with a raisin cookie (you removed the chocolate chips) would be false advertising, even if technically true in the way you describe.
Look at rocky linux and alma linux even if they restrict code, ubuntu foss won't die, but debian base seem more sustainable.
Probably very little, its like how rehl being a commercial product doesn't mean fedora isn't open source. In the absolute worst case scenario distros can switch their base to Debian unstable.
Affect other distros?
Hopefully, they'll all get something better then cloud-init.
Canonical pumps out dumb stuff.
Ubuntu was a critical part of the Linux ecosystem for many years. It is probably the first distro of many of us (myself included).
But last ~10 years have not been kind to Canonical. They are losing ground everywhere, and they are no longer the engine of Linux adoption that they used to be. Others have taken over.
I always felt like Canonical had a big problem with going all-in on something they thought was neat (the Unity desktop, Mir, that thing where phones and desktops were supposed to merge, now Snaps) and letting everything else stagnate, then getting the thing they were working on to the point where it was almost good, then dumping it and going after the next shiny thing.
But yeah these days I think things like Pop!OS and Mint are better Ubuntus than Ubuntu is.
It won't. Well. Perhaps some distros might see new users/customers when everyone's abandoning Ubuntu.
Snap is like the IE of the Linux world but worse (IE at least installs <INSERT_BROWSER_HERE>). Nothing is lost.
More money into Linux? Probably a good thing in the grand scheme of things. I'd avoid Ubuntu though.
Not necessarily, Red Hat is a public company and their software is open source.
In Canonical's case, it being open source is an asset, it gives users transparency.
Going public just means that the shares will be traded on a public market (stock market) rather than being held privately. So anyone who wants to buy shares can. There are some legal requirements to be publicly traded, largely regarding public disclosure of finances and assets.
The major difference would be that suddenly anyone who wants to have a say in how they are run can buy shares, and if they buy enough shares, they can pressure leadership in to making decisions they would not have otherwise made. also, people buying the shares probably will want to see their shares increase in value, and thus leadership will be pressured to please the stock market hive mind. Potentially it opens them up to a hostile takeover where some outside group buys up enough shares to replaces the leadership with people they want in charge.
That's a good question.
Short answer, no.
Long answer, Jeff Gerling did a great blog on Red Hat restricting access to its flagship RHEL while still providing upstream access. https://www.jeffgeerling.com/blog/2023/clearing-fud-surrounding-red-hats-actions/
It's not as if Canonical hasn't already enshittified. I don't think going public is going to change that much.
For a company whose main product is developing and supporting linux the ipo is the first step to being bought.
What does this mean? The same thing that it meant for other linux companies, except the brand is not worth preserving because it’s toxic.
What effect will this have on other distros? See red hat.
top 44 comments