Ubuntu turns to crowdfunding

[Qqmike]

whatthefunk's point: "The people buying these phones are mostly their fanboys. If they screw them all over, theyre toast."

Yeah! That is certainly one big way that I was referring to above where "this is the type of thing that could blow up in a big way."

This whole deal just doesn't smell good. Is this the best type of consumer product to do this experiment with, being high-tech, complicated, requiring ongoing support, keeping users on-board and happy, and such? Meanwhile, during development, technology changes, competitive threats evolve, the market is dynamic--time horizon for roll-out? I really don't know, not informed enough, don't have time to do a formal business-plan analysis. It just doesn't smell right to my business mind. OTOH, if it works, if this puppy flies right, it could be one heck of an exemplary, successful case study with some positive lessons learned, and good press. Risky, which is one of kubicle's points. People know it at some level, but I think many people don't really understand risk until they end up on a losing end of it, like in the big market bust impacting 401-k's. Risk is a fashionable word that few people really relate to in a meaningful way.

[oshunluvr]

All smells aside, I bought in at $675.

I'm not a Canonical fanboi, but I'm not a hater like some of you are either. Mostly I see them as ineffectual, not evil like MicroSith or AppHell (I just made that up!). Steve and I alluded previously to failed/abandoned Canonical projects - the one that sticks out for me was Ubuntu TV or whatever it was called. I stopped paying for TV 2 years ago ( a.k.a. "cutting the cable") and am patiently waiting for more convergence in the home entertainment field. It's happening, but very slowly - that's how they make money doing it.

I see the Edge as a move toward convergence in a different area. Anyone who owns a smartphone knows by now it's really nothing more than a very small computer with a radio in it. As the power of these devices increases, I think phones with the capabilities that the Edge is supposed to have are inevitable. I also think that Samsung, Sony, and Apple among others have a vested financial interest in slowing down the convergence because they'd rather sell me a phone, tablet, and laptop rather than just one of these devices. Why don't tablet's have cell radios? Not enough room or battery power? No. They have bluetooth so I could easily make a call from one. Oh, but then they couldn't wring another $500 out of me for a phone.

I'm sorry to rain on your parade(s), but the math works (for the buyer) on this project. If I can in fact do basic computer stuff (office, internet, email, solitaire - let's face it, that's 95% of what most computers are used for) - like on my $400 Dell laptop, and also do all the cool android stuff - like on my (future) $300 7" tablet, and make phone calls and SMS like I do on my $500 phone, I'm IN. Add the convenience of total portability of function and files it's a good value and a sapphire screen seals the deal.

SIDEBAR: Anyone seen the PhonePad? Only works on Samsung phones for now, but how cool is that idea!

Is this an "investment" for me? No, of course not. Although I did consider buying more than one. Anyone heard of Ebay? IF this phone hits the streets, IMO there will be many people out there who will pay well over cost to get their hands on one. Of course, this too is not guaranteed. I ultimately decided not to buy extras because the potential payoff isn't worth my time. On the other hand, I have virtually no doubt I will be able to get my money back if I don't like it once it's in hand - if I act quickly

What this transaction actually is: a Gamble. Canonical is betting they can pull this off if the interest exists. I'm betting the device will live up to expectations or at the very least I can get my money back. Gainsay what you will, but the concept of the Edge is genius. Whether or not they will do it right or or the market is ready for this yet remains to be seen.

Frankly, I suspect some of you are simply too risk adverse to take chances on the role of the dice once in awhile or maybe this device just isn't for you. In the absolute worst case scenario I will be out a little cash and have a device that may not do what I hoped. But that's it. The word "Risk" doesn't really enter into it, for me. Obviously, if one can't afford to role snake-eyes, one shouldn't play. I think if you re-read some of the comments above, you may see that a reader with a different mind-set will see some of them as just silly. Come on guys, comparing this transaction to Black Friday in the markets or worrying that a multi-national, multi-million, company with 100's of employees will forget insurance? Really? Ok, so you exaggerated to make a point?

Besides, sometimes getting in on the ground floor of something new actually pays benefits. Maybe not financial, but does everything in life have to be about the dollar? Can't some of us just live to have some fun once in awhile? BTW: Without risk, there is no profit, no innovation, no fun.

[Snowhog]

Thank you oshunluvr. Nicely said.

I bought in at the $775 level. I want this endeavor to succeed. I want one of these smart phones and won't deny it. I think the concept behind the Ubuntu Edge; what Canonical is calling convergence, is where smart phone technology has to go. The buying public has, if not overtly or loudly, been calling (no pun intended) for this for quiet some time. The Big Corporate enterprises just don't want to give their public what they want, because, as you pointed out, they want to sell you multiple devices so they can continue to suck more of your dollars out of your wallet.

What this transaction actually is: a Gamble. Canonical is betting they can pull this off if the interest exists. I'm betting the device will live up to expectations or at the very least I can get my money back. Gainsay what you will, but the concept of the Edge is genius. Whether or not they will do it right or or the market is ready for this yet remains to be seen.

Canonical is the one taking the gamble, and that is a salient point. They are risking that their vision to physically produce the Ubuntu Edge, a full-featured convergent smartphone, will actually occur. And keep in mind, they limited themselves to a narrow window of time to raise the funds. Now, what gamble are they taking? Is it financial? Obviously not, as the public is providing the funding to the tune of $32 million dollars. So what is Canonical risking? Their reputation and credibility. But not even that really, as if the fundraising campaign doesn't reach the goal by the deadline, it only means that the Ubuntu Edge, a Canonical patented and owned smartphone doesn't come onto the market. But as contained in the FAQ for the Ubuntu Edge, Canonical says:

If we don’t reach our target then we will focus only on commercially available handsets and there will not be an Ubuntu Edge. All contributions will be fully refunded.

There are going to be two camps, two points of view on this endeavor by Canonical. I (and oshunluvr) seem to be in one, and others seem to be in the other. That's okay. We agree to disagree. Would I like to sway the other camps opinion? Sure. But that's what friendly discourse is about.

[ronw]

It's not a poll, but I join the oshunluvr and Snowhog camp on this one.

Final line in the article claydoh linked to:

"Mark Shuttleworth and the rest of Canonical aren't sending a plea for help but a call to arms, rallying for everyone to join together in support of a greater cause."

Isn't there more to it than 'too risky', 'unlikely/no chance to succeed', 'too expensive'? I hope so.

[kubicle]

I'm not a Canonical fanboi, but I'm not a hater like some of you are either.

That's just a cheap shot, I'm sure you can do better .

I don't hate Canonical, I reserve hate for things that are actually worth hating (like spiders). Personally, I don't think Canonical has shown anything so far that would tell me they can produce a device I would find worth using...and I don't approve some of their business practices, but I don't hate companies in general...or Canonical in particular. I don't hate Microsoft either, I just don't like their software. Nor am I against making a profit with open source software...or making a profit in general (I've done that myself).

I'm sorry to rain on your parade(s), but the math works (for the buyer) on this project. If I can in fact do basic computer stuff (office, internet, email, solitaire - let's face it, that's 95% of what most computers are used for) - like on my $400 Dell laptop, and also do all the cool android stuff - like on my (future) $300 7" tablet, and make phone calls and SMS like I do on my $500 phone, I'm IN.

This assumes that you actually can replace all of the above with the device. This sounds like an overly optimistic view. I'd definitely go for a device that I knew could do all those, but I don't think the technology is there yet (how's the battery life on the device, for example)...you'll likely need an external monitor and keyboard to actually do any real work on it (so I don't think it'll compare favourably to a laptop)...I'm quite sure convergence *will* eventually be the way to go...but expecting these on a "first generation" prototype from a newcomer at the mobile market with a poor track record on following through with their plans, I'm not convinced.

Is this an "investment" for me? No, of course not. Although I did consider buying more than one. Anyone heard of Ebay? IF this phone hits the streets, IMO there will be many people out there who will pay well over cost to get their hands on one. Of course, this too is not guaranteed. I ultimately decided not to buy extras because the potential payoff isn't worth my time. On the other hand, I have virtually no doubt I will be able to get my money back if I don't like it once it's in hand - if I act quickly :wink:

I didn't say it was a big investment, nor that it was necessarily a bad investment...nor that it was a high risk investment. But it shouldn't be portrayed as a purchase...investment is investment whether you are investing 1$, 675$ or 1.000.000$ (not that these would generally need the same amount of consideration). But judging by the comments on the fund raiser page, most people don't really understand the difference.

Frankly, I suspect some of you are simply too risk adverse to take chances on the role of the dice once in awhile or maybe this device just isn't for you. In the absolute worst case scenario I will be out a little cash and have a device that may not do what I hoped. But that's it. The word "Risk" doesn't really enter into it, for me. Obviously, if one can't afford to role snake-eyes, one shouldn't play. I think if you re-read some of the comments above, you may see that a reader with a different mind-set will see some of them as just silly. Come on guys, comparing this transaction to Black Friday in the markets or worrying that a multi-national, multi-million, company with 100's of employees will forget insurance? Really? Ok, so you exaggerated to make a point?

Of course I was exaggerating, I was demonstrating the difference between an investment and a purchase...I made no claim that the example was a likely event. However companies do start ventures that fail for one reason or another all the time (I have, too), even when they've done everything right...and investors can lose all their money.

And Canonical isn't really that big of a company, in the open source world or on the mobile market...It's remarkably small for the press it gets (getting press is what they're good at...not coding).

BTW: Without risk, there is no profit, no innovation, no fun.

I have nothing against profit (or risk, innovation or fun), but Canonical is using the good will it still has among it's fan base to play on their emotions to socialize risk/costs and privatize profits...and that sounds a tad unethical (at least from the view point of the open source community that they rely on very heavily). I'm not referring to the people that actually have thought it through, you probably have...if it's a good "investment" for you, by all means go for it...I haven't once said that you couldn't actually get a great device for your money.

[kubicle]

"Mark Shuttleworth and the rest of Canonical aren't sending a plea for help but a call to arms, rallying for everyone to join together in support of a greater cause."

Yup, that's the "warm an fuzzy feeling" I referred to earlier

I have no problem with people going for the campaign, but do it for the right reasons and not go for the cheap, rosy, marketing lingo. There is no "great cause", but possibly there is a fine mobile device.

[Snowhog]

Complete honesty in marketing is an oxymoron. In the competitive world of business, the two simply can't co-exist (for very long anyway). There is/will always be hyperbole, and the consumer "in general" is counted on to be enticed by it. The 'truth' has always been this: Caveat emptor. "Let the buyer beware."

[kubicle]

Caveat emptor.

Caveat emptor. "Let the buyer beware."

See, we aren't that far apart (on everything). :smile:

[Snowhog]

See, we aren't that far apart (on everything). :smile:

Of course not! We, I think, actually have a fare amount in common. In this particular case, Canonical's effort to produce the Ubuntu Edge and the way it is promoting the effort is viewed in different lights by both of us. That is neither a good or a bad thing, and neither of our views should be seen as right or wrong.

[SteveRiley]

Canonical is using the good will it still has among it's fan base to play on their emotions to socialize risk/costs and privatize profits...and that sounds a tad unethical (at least from the view point of the open source community that they rely on very heavily).

The right thing for Canonical to do, then, would be to return profits to the community. Of the total profit earned, Canonical should keep only that percentage which matches their own contribution towards the development of Edge. If they kick in 25% of development funds, they keep 25% of the profit. If they kick in $0, they keep $0. Every other business has to spend their own money to make more money. Why shouldn't the same hold true here?

[SteveRiley]

I also think that Samsung, Sony, and Apple among others have a vested financial interest in slowing down the convergence because they'd rather sell me a phone, tablet, and laptop rather than just one of these devices. Why don't tablet's have cell radios? Not enough room or battery power? No. They have bluetooth so I could easily make a call from one. Oh, but then they couldn't wring another $500 out of me for a phone.

Some tablets have radios -- the first Nexus 7 had a 3G model. The new one appears not to, however, or it could simply be coming later.

I have attended meetings where the Apple fanbois -- and it's always Apple here -- array about themselves a Macbook Pro, an iPad, and an iPhone. These people never pay attention because they are constantly fiddling with their gadgetry. It's awful to watch the morons, really.

[Snowhog]

The right thing for Canonical to do, then, would be to return profits to the community. Of the total profit earned, Canonical should keep only that percentage which matches their own contribution towards the development of Edge. If they kick in 25% of development funds, they keep 25% of the profit. If they kick in $0, they keep $0. Every other business has to spend their own money to make more money. Why shouldn't the same hold true here?

I guess I have to answer your question with this answer: Canonical is talking about an 'exclusive production run' from the $32 million needed. This, as I understand it, covers the full cost of that production run. Maybe there is 'profit' built into the calculation that resulted in the $32 million figure. If it does, I don't care.

This is about a proof of concept, working production run. What happens afterwards is anyone's guess.

[Qqmike]

Reading this thread, there's too much going on! If we are simply talking about goofing around, playing on a hunch, conducting an experiment (social, technological, love and religion), devil may care, tossing $600 to the wind, well, then, we are just goofing, aren't we. Difficult to logically dissect and attack goofing. Back to some logic, pretty hard to argue convincingly against kubicle's post #50

http://www.kubuntuforums.net/showthr...l=1#post331915

or SteveRiley's post #55

http://www.kubuntuforums.net/showthr...l=1#post331938

As for you, Snowhog,
:-)
"Complete honesty in marketing is an oxymoron. In the competitive world of business, the two simply can't co-exist (for very long anyway). There is/will always be hyperbole, and the consumer 'in general' is counted on to be enticed by it. The 'truth' has always been this: Caveat emptor. 'Let the buyer beware.'"

yes, here it comes, I try to be kind here ...

Nothing could be further from the truth (in America, in business, anyway). Honest marketing makes and builds good companies. If you lie, or have no benefits (vs price), you will not survive long. Long-term, good companies rely on an honest presentation of their benefits (vs features vs price) to the consumer. Yeah, "Sales" will always have its fun and flair, but that's not the issue. This is true for IBM, it is true for Bounty paper towels, it is true for the local hamburger joint making the best cheeseburger and fries in town.

[kubicle]

Maybe there is 'profit' built into the calculation that resulted in the $32 million figure. If it does, I don't care.

You see, that IMO is the essence of the problem. If open source "enthusiasts" (for the lack of a better word) don't hold open source vendors accountable...if they think "anything goes as long as open source is successful", they aren't doing any service to open source software or devices.

If the open source vendors think that "anything goes"...you can be sure anything will go. We'll end up with mediocre products at outlandish prices and no innovation. Why bother if you can sell mediocre products at outlandish prices and forget about innovation (that's where apple is today).

Wanting open source to succeed is not wrong, but wanting it to succeed no matter what is ultimately just a disservice to "the cause".

[oshunluvr]

I guess I have to answer your question with this answer: Canonical is talking about an 'exclusive production run' from the $32 million needed. This, as I understand it, covers the full cost of that production run. Maybe there is 'profit' built into the calculation that resulted in the $32 million figure. If it does, I don't care.

This is about a proof of concept, working production run. What happens afterwards is anyone's guess.

Some others that I have read speculate that the $32M won't actually cover the cost of the phone at all and this is an attempt by Canonical to prove the concept as a way to move forward and into the cellular marketplace directly instead of through other makers. One could wager that if this project completes successfully the "Edge II" will be wildly so and the other cell makers will be playing catch-up. This is the main reason why I support this project. If it fly's then we'll all have the opportunity to get a better device and much sooner than otherwise.

@Steve, None of the tablets I've has access to let you make a call from them. At least here, T-Mobile won't let you. Possibly with a rooted device and a sim card assigned to a cell phone you could get away with it. Why buy a cell phone at all if you have a tablet and a couple bluetooth devices?

@kubicle: I used the term "hater" to mean the opposite of "fanboy" not anything worse. Both are commonly socially used words in my world (four kids from 25 to 9 years old) and if you took offense, I truly apologize. Frankly, I do actually hate Apple and Microsoft at some level for what I think are unbelievably damaging business practices. I believe in Democracy and Capitalism but I don't believe businesses should be allowed to play unfairly to the point of victimizing the marketplace. Mostly our legal and political system is to blame for allowing this - but I digress. I vote against this with my wallet as I should and therefore contributing to a company who at least tries to do something different is at least a small thing I can do.

As you said, I agree that many people mis-apply the words investment and purchase. However, I also think that's because those words are not finite in definition. A rock is a rock. Is a house a purchase or an investment? Yes; either or both. How about a car? My point is, it's all in the beholder's point of view. Ask the 17,000 so far "purchasers" or "investors" or even "gamblers" which is which to them and you'll get a lot more than one or two answers and even if it's 17,000 different answers they'll all be right because they get to decide for themselves which it is. With very few exceptions, I can define almost everything as an investment or purchase and back again by simply changing the context. If you're being literal with the word investment: In the finance world it means "putting money into an asset with the expectation of future gain through appreciation" and in the economics world it means "capital placed in goods or services not immediately consumed but reserved for future production." Actually to be totally fair, I came across a better word that might fit better into this situation: Speculation.

As far as the device itself, have you reviewed the propaganda (sorry, I meant "advertising") on the phone yet? It is expected that you would use an external monitor and keyboard to do real computer work. That's part of Canonical's concept. Seems obvious that real work wouldn't be possible at the PC replacement level without them.

Here's how I envision this device working for me:
I have two homes, an RV, a business, and a job with an office, and I occasionally travel to my company's headquarters and we travel for pleasure.
I have several computers at my homes, at the office (several), a heavy laptop (old company Dell), a light laptop (my own for travel). My primary residence has a server, power desktop, and media computer. Obviously, this one phone could not do all these things.

I see this as possible: replacing my personal laptop and my desktop with the phone and a docking station, monitor, and keyboard. Combine the missing desktop functions into the home server - like DVD ripping, photo editing, etc - thus combining those two large devices into one. A small touchscreen monitor goes into my RV, my second home, and maybe my office. Thus giving me access to my personal, professional, and business stuff where ever I am with real capability instead of squinting at it on my phone. I reduce my overhead by combining two computers into one (server/desktop) and ditching the hated laptop. If I really have my way (it is MY world after all! ) someone will build a tablet-like device with built in docking for the Edge so I can go totally portable when needed - like RVing.

EDIT: Battery life, although something to be considered, has a lesser value in my world. My desk, my car, my office, and my night stand all have charging capability.

Overall and if you add it all up, am I saving any real money? Probably not. But as I said, it's not a solely a financial issue for me. I have been planning on getting a tablet and ditching the personal laptop but I might be able to choose a different course if this thing pans out.

Or maybe I'll get my self a t-shirt that say "Ubuntu Edge Founder" with a picture of a giant sucker in the background