Re: [Fsuk-manchester] Re: Canonical's bad decisions

[MJ Ray]

Lucy <address@hidden> wrote: [...]
> What people don't realise is that Canonical are a very small company,
> much smaller than Red Hat or Suse so aren't able to commit as much
> back to upstream projects.

Canonical has "over 200 employees" according to their website.  I
think that's on the top border of the current UK definition of a
medium-sized enterprise (50-250 IIRC).

What people don't realise is that there are much smaller companies who
spend over a third of their time committing back to upstream projects,
but all this blind love for Canonical and their proprietary software
business models increases the pressure on the rest of us to cut back
on committing upstream because, after all, being a bit anti-social
isn't hurting the famous Canonical's reputation much, is it?

On the other hand, Canonical is a private-sector company, so I don't
find it very surprising that they'll take what they can get and profit
from it whatever way they can get away with.  Buy from cooperatives
and other social enterprises if you want to support people working for
more than profit!

Regards,
-- 
MJ Ray (slef)
Webmaster for hire, statistician and online shop builder for a small
worker cooperative http://www.ttllp.co.uk/ http://mjr.towers.org.uk/
(Notice http://mjr.towers.org.uk/email.html) tel:+44-844-4437-237