No and I did not say they were, just that it was one of the things that some people took issue with. There are others I didn't mention, like the opt-out Amazon Lens integration some time back for example, the point is that they have done some questionable things over the years that left the wider community with a sour taste towards Canonical.
> No and I did not say they were, just that it was one of the things that some people took issue with
Who were those people taking issue with the lack of eagerness on adopting systemd and were they in Raleigh?[1] Systemd is a rather radical shift from the "*nix philosophy".
I don't have patience for RH "UX contributions don't count" saltiness when they intentionally abandoned desktop Linux in favor of chasing the enterprise market (successfully!). No, I'm not bitter about RHEL[2] at all.
1. Tongue firmly in cheek
2. I do know Fedora exists, I read the very 1st announcement. It's not the same
Ha! Obviously RH and Ubuntu have different points of emphasis, so any particular person might prefer one over the other. ISTM most of the complaints about Ubuntu, however, aren't about their focus on the GUI user, but rather on their occasionally doing their own thing. As if RH don't do the same, except more!
2. Most people who actually use it daily think that it's a good change, yes, it may not be 100 "one thing", but it "does do it well" and the fact is, booting up a modern computer involves more than one thing anyway, I think it's better to have it this way, writing systemd unit files is much saner than crazy shell scripts. Opinions may differ, of course.
The 50+ years old design needs upgrading from time to time.
C is also not perfect etc.
3. systemd is easy to get going on any distro, not just RH, unlike many of Canonical's creations.
4. Unlike Canonical, RH employs many people that benefit the wider community* as a whole, ie GNOME, kernel devs etc.
* ie Arch Linux is independent of RedHat, yet we (its users) greatly benefit from their work, not much from Canonical's.
> 3. systemd is easy to get going on any distro, not just RH, unlike many of Canonical's creations.
I don't know where you're going with this, but didn't "Canonical's creation" upstart ship with RHEL6?
> 4. Unlike Canonical, RH employs many people that benefit the wider community* as a whole, ie GNOME, kernel devs etc.
No shit. RH has 14-times as many employees as Canonical (Google suggests 9 870 vs 700). I didn't bother to check revenue figures, but it's obvious that Canonical has to choose it's battles.
In some cases, I find the nebulous benefits to the "community" dubious: Gnome3 and systemd seem to have been conceived fully formed from the minds of their RH-employed leads who are pretty headstrong and won't easily accept criticism of their vision by the said community. I'm sure there are enough rants online about features dropped from Gnome3 with no real reason.
The late Pieter Hintjens had something to say about who benefited as Red Hat interacted with the AMQP community[1]
