I mentioned this in the comment you answered to. But as I said, this might be an issue for people that use Linux because they really hate anything that isn’t GPL, but 97% of the people on this planet care more about whether something is simple to use than what license it uses, as evidenced by the market share of Windows, Android, Chromebooks and Apple products.
Wouldn’t it be better to get some of them to use Ubuntu with snaps than to stay on their proprietary platforms, because packet management sucks and conflicts are basically impossible to solve for someone who’s not a software developer?
Linus swore that Bitkeeper wouldn’t alter the agreement further, like a mad egotistical movie villain.
Canonical is very clearly funneling their userbase towards a Snap-only environment (something that already exists as an option).
As the sole keyholders, and as a for-profit business, what is the next step?
Is it to maintain a wealth of options, even when that cuts into profit margins? What about when those options are competing products (think Gnome and KDE back in the Unity days)?
These things just do not make sense from a business perspective, and they will not be necessary once their userbase is locked into the Snap walled garden.
As to your point about licenses and market share, default non-options and limited choices aren’t compatible with conversations about choice.
I mentioned this in the comment you answered to. But as I said, this might be an issue for people that use Linux because they really hate anything that isn’t GPL, but 97% of the people on this planet care more about whether something is simple to use than what license it uses, as evidenced by the market share of Windows, Android, Chromebooks and Apple products.
Wouldn’t it be better to get some of them to use Ubuntu with snaps than to stay on their proprietary platforms, because packet management sucks and conflicts are basically impossible to solve for someone who’s not a software developer?
Linus swore that Bitkeeper wouldn’t alter the agreement further, like a mad egotistical movie villain.
Canonical is very clearly funneling their userbase towards a Snap-only environment (something that already exists as an option).
As the sole keyholders, and as a for-profit business, what is the next step?
Is it to maintain a wealth of options, even when that cuts into profit margins? What about when those options are competing products (think Gnome and KDE back in the Unity days)?
These things just do not make sense from a business perspective, and they will not be necessary once their userbase is locked into the Snap walled garden.
As to your point about licenses and market share, default non-options and limited choices aren’t compatible with conversations about choice.
How many major distros aren’t run by for-profit entities nowadays? If you want any sort of enterprise use, you need to offer a 24/7 live support plan.
I guess the big difference is that Canonical is hoping to make money off the home users too.