One big thing Microsoft, Apple, and all CTOs can learn from Ubuntu

Summary: Ubuntu is known as the friendliest Linux distribution, but it also has a important quality that Microsoft, Apple, and software developers can learn from.

Ubuntu has earned a reputation as the most user-friendly version of Linux on the planet, but I would argue that the secret of success for Canonical (the company behind Ubuntu) is not really about a great UI or an extensive hardware compatibility list.

What Canonical does really well is to methodically produce incremental upgrades to its OS. It is transparent about its goals and plans, and it releases its software on schedule. In fact, this incremental approach is Ubuntu's most potent competitive weapon against rivals Microsoft Windows and Mac OS X. It is also an approach that CTOs and other IT leaders who produce software, Web sites, and other product-based Web services can learn from.

For perspectives on the latest in tech, follow me on Twitter: @jasonhiner.

Since the first version (4.10) of Ubuntu was released in October 2004, there have been 10 OS releases of Ubuntu (see chart below). During that same time period, there have been three new releases of Mac OS X and two new releases of Windows. If you want to include service packs, then you could kick up the number of Windows releases to four.

This preference toward incremental releases on a reliable schedule is a quality that appeals to IT departments. In fact, many IT leaders have asked software makers such as Microsoft to stop doing massive upgrades, but instead update Windows in smaller steps.

That allows IT to test and roll out OS updates much easier and quicker. IT has become averse to massive software upgrades, like Windows Vista and Windows 7. They cause too much pain -- both in hardware/software incompatibilities and user re-training -- and don't offer enough benefits in return to make all of that pain worth the effort.

Some will argue that the business model is the primary reason why Microsoft takes a different approach to upgrades than Canonical. After all, Windows upgrades have a price tag attached to them and all of Ubuntu's software releases are open source and free of charge (they make their money from support contracts). However, the financial impact is overstated.

Microsoft makes the majority of its money from Windows in two ways:

  1. From the versions of Windows preloaded on retail PCs
  2. From OS licenses sold in bulk to large organizations

No matter which version of Windows is preloaded on a retail PC, Microsoft still makes the same amount of money. The company doesn't make any more money on a Windows 7 PC than it did on a Windows Vista PC last year.

With volume licensing agreements such as Software Assurance, Microsoft has pushed many organizations into renewable licensing agreements that give them access to all the latest Microsoft software. Whether a company upgrades its machines to Windows 7 or not, it still pays Microsoft a regular licensing fee.

So Microsoft has the financial foundation to switch to a more incremental upgrade cycle. The fact that during the past decade it has moved companies to Software Assurance and that with Windows XP it broke from its version numbering system (the XP was for "eXPerience"), is evidence that Microsoft had been preparing for a day when it would deliver OS updates on a more incremental basis.

But, it never happened. That probably has as much to do with legacy and momentum as anything else. The bottom line is that Microsoft's huge Windows upgrades have put the OS at risk of massive stagnation, especially in the business world, which largely skipped Windows Vista altogether and is still on the fence about Windows 7. That has left most business PCs running Windows XP, while consumer machines have moved on to Vista or Windows 7.

Conversely, Ubuntu has established a disciplined upgrade cycle, made it a top priority, and stuck to it. Canonical releases a new version of Ubuntu every six months. It has major releases, which it calls LTS (Long Term Support) releases, and those come out every two years. The first one, 6.06, landed in June 2006. The second one, 8.04, landed in April 2008. The next LTS, 10.04, arrives at the end of this month (April 2010).

Ubuntu supports these LTS releases for three years (five years for the server versions). There are companies who only use the LTS versions of Ubuntu for that reason. Canonical supports the interim versions of Ubuntu for 18 months (basically assuming you'll move to the next LTS version when it arrives).

This type of transparent, methodical, and incremental upgrade cycle is the future of software. If you want to see another example, take a look at Zoho, an online productivity suite that offers an alternative to both Microsoft Office and Google Docs. Zoho pushes out new features, fixes, and updates on a continual basis. In fact, for some products there are Zoho updates as often as once a week.

This is not a matter of resources. Zoho has a very small team. Meanwhile, Canonical only has about 300 employees in the whole company (as well as its volunteer army of open source contributors). This is a matter of focus, priorities, and leadership. The successful software and Web companies of the next decade will learn this lesson well.

This article was originally published on TechRepublic.

Also read: I'm not breaking up with Windows, but we're seeing other people

Subscribe in one click: TechRepublic's Linux newsletter

Topics: Software, Apple, CXO, Microsoft, Open Source, Operating Systems, IT Employment, Windows

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Talkback

102 comments
Log in or register to join the discussion
  • Another big thing Microsoft and Apple can learn from Ubuntu

    Another big thing Microsoft and Apple can learn
    from Ubuntu is giving more value.

    Ubuntu gives so much for free. If Microsoft and
    Apple cant give their OS for free then they
    could reduce their prices. This would ensure
    their users get absolutely great value like
    Ubuntu.

    Like Ubuntu they should bundle great software
    like OpenOffice and the Firefox Browser.
    IndianArt
    • THEY FORCE UPGRADES ON YOU CONSTANTLY. THAT STINKS..!!!!

      All we hear about MS is how they want you to upgrade so they can make more money and XP is just fine.

      Well what's wrong with all of the deprecated versions of Ubuntu? Apparenlty this great OS isn't so great and needs updates constantly which over time forces companies to upgrade and as we've learned from the ABM shills, this means:
      Retraining of all staff, new UI elements. More retraining and why should the UI change? The ABM shills scream and shout about the win7 GUI, after years of the "fisher Price" comments on XP.

      Of course my CAPS is just sarcastic and I realize that the ABM shills, including many zdnet bloggers have such double standards they would tell you to stay away from fatty foods as they shoved lard sandwiches down their throats, but the point is we need to get past the double standard.

      If MS released new code regularly the outcry would be immense. Enterprise can't implement new code constantly.

      Hell, according the ABM shills, they can't even manage it every 10 years. LOL!!

      This article is nothing but BS.

      There is a reason Linux only has <1% marketshare and this is just another of them.
      xuniL_z
      • You're missing the point

        Its awesome that programmers rarely comment on
        this. I can tell that you are an IT Admin or
        even a help desker.

        Here's the problem. Releasing a large patch
        requires tons of extra testing to ensure that
        all parts of the update are going to work
        correctly.

        The benefit to many smaller patches is, if one
        breaks something, you can pinpoint exactly what
        it was that broke, rather than a service pack
        that incorporates tons of updates. Plus,
        rolling back a smaller update is much less
        strenuous than having to roll-back an entire OS
        upgrade or service pack.

        The problem lies in the IT Help desk / Admin
        sector. They are notorious for not wanting /
        not knowing how to do their work. Any time
        they are asked to do something, there is always
        100 steps of bureaucracy to jump through.
        What's worse is that 90% of the time after
        completing the rigorous steps to get something
        done, they screw it up and it requires another
        try to get them to do things right.

        Finally, one final point. Who ever said that
        every OS update is a patch to fix something?
        Most updates are additional features or things
        that users request. Its very rare that a full
        OS goes into production where something is
        extremely wrong with it, that is why it is sent
        through beta, alpha, etc. So the argument that
        "if it were so good, it wouldn't update, is,
        like this article, complete BS."
        mperkins874
        • No, you missed the point.

          I'm fine with updates, how ever often.

          Since you didn't catch my less than subtle message, it was all about how every MS update is treated like a venerial disease here, while the open source method is lauded at every step.
          I'm not saying having updates more often or less often is better either way.

          I'm saying let's have this same kind of blog about Windows and discuss it like adults instead of attacking it like rabid dogs.

          I think once every 8 to 15 months for a full blown service pack is often enough. There are many reasons inside the enterprise that is true.
          For one, with Windows if you are up on your monthly patching, and out of cycle patching, then you've already got half of the service pack, so you should have very little bug fix testing to do if you did it monthly along the way.
          Sure there are some new fixes with the SP but they are normally very low severity/priority.

          The rest is new code, like you said. I think the 2 service packs Vista had over 2 years was plenty, and again, since all serious patches come in monthly or out of cycle, that testing is all done and it's only the new code mostly left to consider to use or not.

          But to deprecate an OS in just over a year of availability makes no sense to me.
          Even though Ubuntu is an evolving OS and code should remain compatible, it's not always the reality.

          What does EOL really mean to an open source OS anyway, there is no real ownership that backs it anyway.
          We hear OSes should be free because they are just knowledge. Make that all software. That is what the FOSS world has told us. But what is there in an OS that is knowledge to the average person? they can't disseminate an OS and get "knowledge" from it. It's an engineering effort combined wtih application level efforts and so on. Testing, maintenance for years to come (at least with Windows).
          It's not knowledge anymore than the inner working of your DVD player is knowledge. An engineer put that design together too.

          but what really is knowledge is how to use these systems and for some reason FOSS doesn't count that knowledge as what should be free? What the hell? Of any knowledge that should be free, it should be what is useful to people. How to run and maintain the OS, now that is "knowledge" and that is what should be free. But no, that is what FOSS people want to charge out the azz for.
          The idea of knowledge is screwed up in the FOSS world and it's easy to see why. That was just an "excuse" for free code, even though millions of geeks bought into it, never thinking that it's not even close to knowledge to the average person, but a system they normally pay for, which makes the economy run, which creates jobs, which keeps that person employed and taking care of his family.
          But the real effort by the zealots, not Linus Torvalds, his vision was true and it wasn't about taking over the software world, is to kill off proprietary software and any excuse is a good one.
          They have no answer as to why the knowledge of how to use the OS isn't free however. They skirt around that one cause it would uncover their true motives.
          The really funny part? They think nobody has caught onto their motives. LOL!!
          xuniL_z
          • RE:No, you missed the point.

            You don't seem that smart.
            LegendarySandwich
          • As Your Post Evidenced...

            ...and certainly neither are you!


            I think there are advantages and disadvantages of incessant bit upgrading vs. routine bulk system upgrades. I will leave the discussion to those in IT who are more familiar with the challenges each schema presents.

            However, if it is not critical, I don't see much advantage of trickling out non-essential upgrades.
            brianpeterson@...
    • They can't bundle

      At least Microsoft can't. Microsoft *tried* to bundle software, and
      everyone started crying "MONOPOLY! ANTITRUST!", so, slowly but
      surely, more and more of their bundled software has been stripped
      away. So that now, in Europe, they can't even bundle a web browser.

      Microsoft has, at some point in its history, bundled the following
      software with its OS:

      A lightweight word processor
      A video editor
      A web browser
      A chat client
      A text editor
      A media player
      An image editor
      A calculator
      An image display, organize, and print program
      System maintenance software
      A firewall
      Anti-virus/malware software
      Archive/unarchive software
      Just off the top of my head...

      And time after time they have been sued to either remove, or make
      optional more and more of that software. If they tried to include
      Microsoft Office, or even Works, with Windows - they'd get hauled into
      15 different courts at once.

      Apple has it a bit better. They don't get sued for bundling. But they do
      usually include at least iLife with every new Mac, (and sometimes
      iWork), and have the Mac Box Set, which is the latest OS, iWork, and
      iLife. But even with their base OS they include:

      A lightweight word processor/ text editor
      A web browser
      A chat client
      A media player/organizer
      A calculator
      An image display, organize, and print program
      System maintenance software
      Disc image burner
      Archive/unarchive software
      again, just some of the things I can thing of

      So it's not like the base OS is useless or without software. It's just we're
      all used to having all that stuff included these days, and/or we don't
      even know it's all there.
      ChadWSmith
    • Slaves give everything free

      ... to their masters. Apparently MSFT and AAPL are smarter than that.
      LBiege
    • How does one give something away

      How does one give something away, something it doesnt own, when it was free for download in the first place?? This is one of the main reasons we laugh at you linux zelots. The old adage of you get what you pay for is soooooooooo true with linux or anything else given away for free.
      Stan57
      • You must be a Gamer

        Name calling, biased, Typical.

        May I suggest a book for you? It's called "Green Eggs and Ham", and it's by Dr. Suess. You may learn a thing or two from it's teaching.
        ewanchic
        • Prove me wrong and i will shut up

          Prove me wrong and i will shut up. name calling,biased,typical, yep i call zealots freetards, biased, like i said prove me wrong or just shut up,typical,yep a person like you judging me for what i write but you do the same suggesting i read a child's book. look in the mirror freetard.
          Stan57
  • RE: One big thing Microsoft, Apple, and all CTOs can learn from Ubuntu

    Here is what CTO's can learn from Ubuntu:
    1. If your the founder of said company pour millions of dollars into it with no return on investment
    2. Then quit your job
    3. Force upgrades every 6 months
    4. Require users to recompile their kernels
    5. Leave telnet port open
    6. Make sure it only plays one sound at a time
    7. Give a general overall poor user experience

    Given all these points I'd agree that any CTO could learn a lot from Ubuntu, especially how not to make a failing business.
    Loverock Davidson
    • Just two or three masterly comments

      away from nailing a permanent blogging position in the Linux and Open Source team along with Dana and Paula. Keep up the good work - you're almost there!
      rikasa
      • He doesn't need it, he already has a steady job.

        Loverock Davidson is earning good money as port-a-potty cleaner assistant. Pretty soon he will own his own business in the port-a-potty industry as he's already planning on taking cleaning assignments on his own terms.
        Great Kahuna
        • RE: He doesn't need it......

          No Kahuna, LD already has a job. In fact, his office is located in a windowless basement at some nondescript building located in Redmond, Washington. The sign on the door says: "Department of Fear, Uncertainity and Doubt - Abject Lies Division".
          fatman65535
          • RE: He doesn't need it......

            .........and that was a promotion!
            1djk1
        • LOL... :D

          Does he do jon-boys, too?

          more LOL... :D
          still not nice
          • The guy from the Waltons?

            Pray tell what is a jon-boy, considering you are the only one laughing, and the only one *ever* laughing at your own "jokes".

            xuniL_z
    • You are so impressive

      with how you can hold to blatant lies with not an ounce of proof and in the face of so much contrary evidence.
      Viva la crank dodo
      • Well, I do compile my kernels. Not required, but I do it anyway.

        I like to fine tune a kernel to run best on the hardware available, Linux gives me that option and I'm most glad to take advantage of it.
        Great Kahuna