1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
|
<p>In October of 2004 a new Linux distro appeared on the scene with the curious name, Ubuntu.</p>
<p>There are hundreds, if not thousands, of different Linux distros available, and a new one isn't particularly unusual. Indeed, for some time after its quiet preview announcement Ubuntu went largely unnoticed. It was yet another Debian derivative. It wasn't long, however, before that changed.</p>
<p>Today, Canonical, the company behind Ubuntu, estimates that there are 25 million Ubuntu users worldwide. Now Ubuntu is poised to launch a mobile version that may well send that number skyrocketing again.</p>
<p>This month marks the tenth anniversary of Ubuntu, here's a look back at the distro through the years, its major ups and downs and a finally a look at the mobile future.</p>
<h2 id="warty-warthog-whats-an-ubuntu">Warty Warthog: What's an Ubuntu?</h2>
[image="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d0/Ubuntu-desktop-2-410-20080706.png" caption="The default desktop of Ubuntu 4.10, Warty Warthog"]
<p>From its launch in 2004, Ubuntu took a different approach to Linux, one that was perhaps best defined by its slogan at the time: "Linux for human beings". The word Ubuntu also recalls the same idea, coming from South African philosophy where it means, literally, "humanness", or, more broadly translated, "humanity toward others".</p>
<p>This distinction is more than simple semantics. It is what makes Ubuntu unique in the annals of Linux history.</p>
<p>The name, combined with the slogan, "Linux for human beings", set Ubuntu apart from other Linux distros of the day, which tended to focus more narrowly on what developers and enterprise users wanted, rather than what "ordinary" desktop users might need. Fedora, for example, takes a very different approach, aiming for users who are also developers and will <a href="http://www.linuxtoday.com/infrastructure/2010052601135RVRHRL">contribute back to open source</a>.</p>
<p>The focus on "Linux for human beings" set the tone and direction of the Ubuntu project from the beginning. Ubuntu never chased developers. It also did not seem interested in the server market. Instead it was aimed squarely at desktop users (of whom there were significantly fewer in October 2004) and Linux newcomers. The idea was to win over "ordinary" users from Windows.</p>
<p>Ubuntu was started by Mark Shuttleworth, who sold his company Thawte to VeriSign in December 1999 for $575 million. After a short vacation in space, he founded Canonical Ltd. and started work on Ubuntu. Shuttleworth's <a href="https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-announce/2004-October/000003.html">announcement</a> of the very first Ubuntu release, defines the fledgeling project as a "new Linux distribution that brings together the extraordinary breadth of Debian with a fast and easy install, regular releases... (and) a tight selection of excellent packages."</p>
<p>Those goals -- fast and easy to install, regular releases with support, and a wide range of applications available -- are indeed the basis of what powered Ubuntu to the top of the Linux charts.</p>
<p>Perhaps the most significant of these three goals though, especially in terms of Ubuntu's focus on new, beginning Linux users is the first one -- making Linux easy to install.</p>
<p>By 2004 Debian wasn't difficult to install if you had prior experience with Linux. But for someone accustomed to the installation process offered by Windows XP or Mac OS X, it was, at the very least, intimidating.</p>
<p>Ubuntu on the other hand was just as easy to install as Windows or OS X. You inserted the CD, it booted and you double-clicked the installer.</p>
<p>When prominent Apple supporter Mark Pilgrim switched to Linux he chose Ubuntu, <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20060707010812/http://diveintomark.org/archives/2006/06/27/diveintomark-show">joking</a> that it was the African word for "can't install Debian."</p>
<p>The focus on newcomers also meant that Ubuntu valued tools experienced Linux users did not, namely graphical installers, well-polished themes and design details like font rendering. Indeed Ubuntu's designers sweated details about anti-aliasing that had previously (seemingly) never been considered in the Linux desktop world.</p>
<p>Ubuntu also distinguished itself by something that was all too uncommon in the free software world of 2004 -- humor. While Shuttleworth's announcement of the initial release is clearly very serious about Ubuntu's goals, don't forget that the nickname for the first version of Ubuntu was "Warty Warthog", a playful reference to the rough edges that any brand new release will likely have.</p>
<p>The cheeky, silly and often awkward naming convention continues to this day (the latest release is nicknamed Utopic Unicorn).</p>
<p>The humor also extended to the famous bug number one. The first bug ever filed for Ubuntu was "<a href="https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bug/1">Microsoft has a majority market share</a>". The tongue in cheek reference to Windows dominance was a nod to the broader Linux community too, which was then drawn together at least as much by what it opposed as what it supported. These days that's not really a concern for Linux. Indeed when he closed it in 2013, Shuttleworth wrote that it was "better for us to focus our intent on excellence in our own right, rather than our impact on someone else's product."</p>
<p>In many ways the closing of bug number one marks Ubuntu's transition from yet another Linux distro to something else, something that the Linux world has never really seen before.</p>
<h2 id="dapper-drake-rising-to-the-top">Dapper Drake: Rising to the top</h2>
[image="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/0f/Dapper_with_apps.jpg" caption="The default desktop of Ubuntu 6.06, Dapper Drake, the only release to miss the April release date."]
<p>Ubuntu stuck to its every six months plan, churning out progressively more polished releases from 2004 on. In ten years it has only missed a release deadline once. By 2008 Ubuntu had established itself as the distro of choice for "switchers" moving away from Windows or OS X or even other distros lacking the ease of use Ubuntu offered.</p>
<p>Ubuntu put a friendly face on the otherwise cryptic world of desktop Linux. It offered a simple installation process, the promise of easy updates and great selection of applications all available at the click of a button in the Ubuntu Software Center.</p>
<p>In short Ubuntu achieved its goals.</p>
<p>Even those who don't like Ubuntu's take on the Linux desktop benefited from it over the years as many of its defining characteristics, particularly the installation process and focus on well designed desktop experience, became a priority in other projects. The result of Ubuntu's design efforts rippled out through the wider Linux world.</p>
<p>Then came the GNOME 3 fork in the road. GNOME, which had been Ubuntu's default desktop since it launched, decided to redesign its desktop interface. The new GNOME Shell interface was not what Ubuntu wanted. Instead the company decided to write its own shell and desktop interface.</p>
<p>End users wouldn't actually see the results of Ubuntu's decision for some time, but the project's decision to move away from GNOME started a trickle of criticism that would continue to build until Ubuntu's Unity desktop was revealed in 11.04.</p>
<h2 id="intrepid-ibex-its-lonely-at-the-top">Intrepid Ibex: It's lonely at the top</h2>
[image="intrepid-ibex.png" caption="The default desktop of Ubuntu 8.10, Intrepid Ibex"]
<p>The move away from GNOME did not hurt Ubuntu's adoption rate. It remains the most popular Linux distro by a wide margin, which makes it, among other things, the most popular target for critics. Linux, like every other tightly knit subculture on the internet, seems to hate a runaway success, especially one that violates so many of the subculture's taboos.</p>
<p>Violating unwritten Linux taboos became something of an Ubuntu sport over the years. And the critics were there at every turn, even right at the start.</p>
<p>As part of its initial launch, Canonical also unveiled the Launchpad project hosting platform, but did not release it under an open source license for another four years which angered some who saw Canonical as saying one thing and doing another.</p>
<p>Then there were gripes about Ubuntu developers not contributing to the kernel. And then there was the brown theme. Then the purple theme. Then the window buttons moved to the left of the window. The changes got smaller, the nits got pickier, but no quieter or less vehement. There's always someone very vocally unhappy about what Ubuntu is doing.</p>
<p>For many though it all culminated in Unity, which first debuted in 11.04 or Natty Narwhal (technically it debuted in the netbook remix of 10.10, but that was not widely used). Unity began life as an alternative shell for GNOME 3, but wasn't all that different than GNOME 3. Each successive release though has used fewer and fewer underlying GNOME and GTK tools. Whether you love Unity or hate it, it is very clearly Ubuntu's own thing at this point. GNOME is still there under the hood (it needs to be for all the third-party GNOME-based apps that ship with Ubuntu), but Unity relies on it less and less.</p>
<p>Unity was, at least initially, a bit rough around the edges, but what seemed to irk most angry users was simply that it was different. It was not the Ubuntu they had come to know and love.</p>
<p>But Ubuntu has rarely backed down due to criticism. And when it has reversed course it's usually been a result of feedback from its actual community of users rather than outside critics. Instead, Ubuntu just keeps on pushing ahead with its vision of Linux which, increasingly, bears little resemblance to the rest of the Linux community.</p>
<p>These days Ubuntu is less a traditional Linux distro and more somewhat like OS X is to BSD. That is, Ubuntu still runs atop a Debian GNU/Linux base and it still uses a Linux kernel, just as somewhere underneath the OS X paint job lies BSD. But much of what the desktop user experiences and interacts with on a daily basis in Ubuntu is a wholly Ubuntu creation.</p>
<p>This chasm between Ubuntu and the rest of the Linux world will be widening in the next few years as Ubuntu builds its own Mir display server and moves into the mobile space with Ubuntu Touch running on phones and tablets.</p>
<p>No matter how that ends up there's one very safe prediction: Ubuntu will continue to blaze its own path through the Linux woods.</p>
<p>It's also a safe bet to assume the critics will continue as well. Critics hate utopias. If there's nothing wrong there's nothing to scream about. This seems especially true of Linux reviewers (myself included at times). That's not, however, to say that all criticisms leveled at Ubuntu are without merit.</p>
<p>The lack of contributions to the kernel project relative to other distros is worrying for anyone interested in the overall health of the Linux ecosystem. If the most popular Linux distro in the world has nothing to contribute, well, that doesn't bode well for the future.</p>
<p>For every storm brewed in the Ubuntu teacup there is another worth talking about. Ubuntu is far from perfect, but it is one of the distros most willing to experiment and, perhaps most importantly, admit when it's wrong.</p>
<h2 id="utopic-unicorn-imagining-utopia">Utopic Unicorn: Imagining Utopia</h2>
[image="utopic-unicorn.png" caption="The default desktop of Ubuntu 14.10, Utopic Unicorn"]
<p>There's almost nothing new in the latest version of Ubuntu, 14.10, which arrives alongside the ten year anniversary of the project. There's a kernel update, a few application updates, but nothing major from Ubuntu itself.</p>
<p>There is one bit of good news in the daily builds though, Ubuntu has started work on a major change that will fix the perhaps the biggest tarnishing marks in Ubuntu's history -- removing the privacy-invading online search features.</p>
<p>One of the best parts of Unity is the Dash, a single search interface that will find apps, documents, music, images and all sorts of other data on your machine. It's the cornerstone of the Unity interface. The first few releases of Unity focused on local search, but in 12.04 Ubuntu added a feature that enabled online searches as well.</p>
<p>Some users found this incredibly useful. Others, myself included, found it incredibly invasive and the fact that Ubuntu suddenly started shipping with a <a href="http://www.ubuntu.com/privacy-policy/third-parties">privacy policy</a> sent many a privacy conscious user scurrying to less "innovative" distros.</p>
<p>What has always been most troubling about the search features in Unity Dash is that they are enabled by default. Given that very few users change default settings, especially new Linux users, which is Ubuntu's target audience, it effectively means that users may not even be aware that their data is being transmitted to Canonical's servers and then routed on to Amazon and elsewhere.</p>
<p>Free software icon Richard Stallman branded Ubuntu 12.04 "<a href="https://www.fsf.org/blogs/rms/ubuntu-spyware-what-to-do">spyware</a>". Even the more restrained Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) <a href="https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2012/10/privacy-ubuntu-1210-amazon-ads-and-data-leaks">asked</a> Canonical to turn off the Amazon Lens by default and devoted a series of how-tos on securing Ubuntu.</p>
<p>For two years Canonical has not backed down on the Amazon search lens, though it did eventually make sure that Amazon responses were served over HTTPS, making it somewhat more secure for users.</p>
<p>It wasn't simply the Amazon controversy that bothered many users though, it was Canonical and specifically Shuttleworth's response to the criticism that riled many.</p>
<p>When asked about it Shuttleworth defended the search tools <a href="http://www.markshuttleworth.com/archives/1182">writing</a>, "We are not telling Amazon what you are searching for. Your anonymity is preserved because we handle the query on your behalf. Don't trust us? Erm, we have root." While technically correct in the sense that you have to trust someone, there's a huge difference between trusting FLOSS software updates with published source code and trusting Canonical to keep your private data secure. The former requires trust, the latter asks for blind faith.</p>
<p>Canonical further fanned the flames of the privacy fire by <a href="http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2013/11/canonical-abused-trademark-law-to-target-a-site-critical-of-ubuntu-privacy/">sending a DMCA takedown notice</a> to an EFF staffer who created a site fixubuntu.com, which was critical of Unity's search tools. The DMCA notice protested the use of Canonical trademarks, but, as the EFF put it in a response, "your request is not supported by trademark law and interferes with protected speech." While fixubuntu ended up complying, the move felt heavy-handed. (It's worth noting that fixubuntu was recently forked to create <a href="https://fix-macosx.com/">fix-macosx.com</a>, which addresses a similar on-by-default search tool in OS X Yosemite).</p>
<p>No matter what their intentions may have been, Canonical and Shuttleworth came across like bullies, claiming to have root access to your machine and unafraid to twist trademark law to silence critics. That's about what you'd expect from Microsoft, but this kind of bullying is less common in the free software world.</p>
<p>It's worth looking at the rest of what what Shuttleworth wrote in that post though. "You do trust us with your data already," he continues. "You trust us not to screw up on your machine with every update. You trust Debian, and you trust a large swathe of the open source community. And most importantly, you trust us to address it when, being human, we err."</p>
<p>That last bit is especially relevant in this case, and it matters for two reasons. First, Shuttleworth <a href="http://www.markshuttleworth.com/archives/1299">apologized for the DMCA takedown notice</a> and it has never happened again.</p>
<p>More importantly, Ubuntu is reversing course on the Amazon search lens. Sally Radwan, Product Marketing Manager at Canonical, tells Ars that, "the opt-in by default is not set to land in 14.10... [but] it is in the development pipeline for 15.04." That is, Amazon and the rest of the online search features will soon be opt-in (if you update from an existing install it will still be there, but it's disabled for fresh installs of the latest daily builds). In short, Ubuntu is fixing its mistake, though it has taken a little while.</p>
<p>Still, better late than never. Because you do have to trust someone. Like it or not Ubuntu or whatever your OS of choice is does have root access to your machine. Not literally of course, but effectively given that their code is running with root privileges on your machine and chances are you haven't reviewed it lately. You trust your distro to make sure that code is secure, stable and acting in your best interests and you trust them to update it when something goes wrong.</p>
<p>You could look at Ubuntu's privacy fiasco pessimistically, as proof that Ubuntu is out to get you. Or, you could take the more optimistic view that Ubuntu is willing to fix things when it makes bad decisions.</p>
<p>Ubuntu rebranded itself on 2010 and dropped the "Linux for human beings" slogan. It's not as catchy, but Ubuntu might do well to bring back its old slogan with slight update: Linux for human beings who make mistakes, but try to fix them.</p>
<h2 id="vivid-vervet-the-mobile-future">Vivid Vervet: The Mobile Future</h2>
<p>Ubuntu recently announced that next year's 15.04 release will be named Vivid Vervet. While Shuttleworth tends to focus on the animal names in his announcement, looking back over Ubuntu's history reveals that the word accompanying the animal is often the more defining element. From "Warty", which was a warts and all release, to Lucid, when Ubuntu seems to have developed a more distinct sense of visual and UI direction, to Vivid, which envisions a bright future.</p>
<p>I mentioned earlier that there is almost nothing new from Canonical in Ubuntu 14.10. The reason for that is that the project has had all available hands working on its Unity 8 mobile interface. The Ubuntu Phone is coming and for now the desktop is taking a back seat.</p>
<p>Eventually the two will, to use Shuttleworth's word, converge. Convergence for Ubuntu isn't just a marketing term, it also seems to be the development strategy. That is, Unity 8 is taking shape on mobile devices and eventually that work will be extended to embrace the desktop as well. There's already a "flavor" known as Ubuntu Next if you'd like to preview Unity 8 today.</p>
<p>The only problem for Ubuntu is, well, what if it builds a Linux phone and no one comes?</p>
<p>The proposed Ubuntu Edge phone already has the vivid distinction of being the largest and most <a href="http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2013/08/ubuntu-edge-is-dead-long-live-ubuntu-phones/">spectacularly failed campaign</a> in crowdfunding history.</p>
<p>Ubuntu missed its grandiose $32 million dollar goal by nearly $19 million in last year's effort to raise money from Linux enthusiasts directly. Seen from a more optimistic angle, the $12 million it did raise makes the Edge the biggest ever fixed crowdfunding campaign.</p>
<p>Canonical is having better luck on the software front. It's not something most people would want to use yet, but Ubuntu Touch exists and will <a href="http://developer.ubuntu.com/start/ubuntu-for-devices/devices/">run on a variety of Nexus devices</a>. Devices with Ubuntu Touch preloaded are rumored to be in coming any day now.</p>
<h2 id="warty-warthog-the-sequel">Warty Warthog, The Sequel</h2>
<p>Any numbers surrounding the use of Linux are suspect simply because it's very hard to track by distro, but, that said, Canonical tells Ars that the company estimates there are "around 25 million Ubuntu desktop users in over 240 countries."</p>
<p>Those numbers make Ubuntu the world’s third most popular PC OS, and Canonical claims to have around 90 percent of the Linux market.</p>
<p>While this retrospective focused on the desktop, Ubuntu is no slouch in the server market these days. It now accounts for over <a href="http://www.markshuttleworth.com/archives/1373">55% of all OpenStack deployments</a> and around, according to the company, 70 percent of guest OSes "on major global public cloud environments."</p>
<p>Even if Ubuntu Touch tanks and Ubuntu goes crawling home with its tail between its legs it will have an impressive home to return to.</p>
<p>It's hasn't been a perfect ten years, but it's difficult to imagine where Linux would be today without Ubuntu. When it debuted in 2004 the most popular desktop was KDE 3.5, the default theme of which looked like a sad clone of Windows 95.</p>
<p>Ten years later Linux is everywhere you look and most often it's Ubuntu Linux that you see.</p>
<p>Ubuntu has become the friendly public face of Linux. But, As Shuttleworth <a href="http://www.markshuttleworth.com/archives/517">wrote on his blog</a> several years ago, "free software is bigger than any one project. It's bigger than the Linux kernel, it's bigger than GNU, it's bigger than GNOME and KDE, it's bigger than Ubuntu and Fedora and Debian. Each of those projects plays a role, but it is the whole which is really changing the world."</p>
|
