[kwlug-disc] Re-thinking the Ubuntu/Yahoo deal

Raul Suarez rarsa at yahoo.com
Wed Feb 3 08:02:35 EST 2010


Hi Chris, 

Regarding you preparing for flames: Flame retardant suits tend to get too hot and have a very narrow window that limit visibility.

I think you read too much into my comments to the point that you read things that I didn't say or maybe I am reading too much into yours and you are not responding to my post but adding to it.

--- On Tue, 2/2/10, Chris Irwin <chris at chrisirwin.ca> wrote:

> There is a common misconception that if you're not the only
> party benefiting from a situation, then the situation is not
> desirable. But the Internet functions on the very idea that 
> things are not always zero-sum.

Actually if you read it again without the expectation of flames, you'll see that I'm explicitly OK with commercial partnerships.

It was the idea that Microsoft is paying to advance Ubuntu what didn't seem right as I think it is the other way around.

> You don't need to be shoving Microsoft's face in the dirt to
> get ahead (We're supposed to be better than that, right?).

Again, you read too much here. I diligently re-read my post and there is no Microsoft bashing at all. Not that I'll ever preclude my self from doing it when they deserve it.

> Musings about backdoor deals and secret agendas are
> captivating...

I'm sure you find them captivating as you brought issues that have nothing to do with my post. I didn't even consider this a backdoor deal or secret agenda. It is a public deal and Microsoft's agenda is clear.

> But even saying Google is a good company ignores the bad
> things they've done...

Now I am really thinking that you didn't even read my post. Here I quote my self to save you the time : "Google may not be the beacon of purity they want to portrait but at least they support Free software."

Then you bring Yahoo's contributions. I purposely left Yahoo, and how it benefits from the deal out of the reflection. I was talking about a direct line in this deal between Canonical and Microsoft and the direction of the flow of money.

I wasn't even bashing Canonical for the deal, I posted it with the clear purpose to understand the deal. I was thinking aloud as I do in all my other posts.

In the end I think that you properly answered the question of "How does this deal with Yahoo makes sense?":
"Canonical is in the red and this deal brings them more money than the previous deal".

I will consider editing my post as it seems that it has hidden lines that I didn't intend and cannot even see. I will start by changing the title to "Reflecting on..."

Raul Suarez

Technology consultant
Software, Hardware and Practices
_________________
http://rarsa.blogspot.com/ 
An eclectic collection of random thoughts



      __________________________________________________________________
Looking for the perfect gift? Give the gift of Flickr! 

http://www.flickr.com/gift/



More information about the kwlug-disc_kwlug.org mailing list