Canonical to Banshee: either we disable affiliate code by default or we take 75%(gburt.blogspot.com)
gburt.blogspot.com
Canonical to Banshee: either we disable affiliate code by default or we take 75%
http://gburt.blogspot.com/2011/02/banshee-supporting-gnome-on-ubuntu.html
4 comments
For some reason, I have no clue what this means. I don't know what Ubuntu One, Banshee or the Amazon store they refer to are, can someone elucidate? Thanks.
Ubuntu currently uses Rhythmbox as a music player. Ubuntu added an integrated music store (https://one.ubuntu.com/music/) to Rhythmbox that is part of a service called Ubuntu One. Revenue from this is part of what funds Canonical.
Ubuntu has decided to use Banshee for the official music player instead of Rhythmbox. Banshee already has Amazon mp3 purchases integrated into the application. Purchases through Banshee use the project's own referral link. Banshee gives this money to the GNOME Foundation which is a nonprofit that coordinates GNOME development.
Ubuntu is going to use Banshee but they don't want it displacing Ubuntu One. They gave the Banshee project two choices. Either
a) Disable Amazon store by default, and if switched on by users it will still use the Banshee referral link where they get %100 of the funds
or
b) Leave the Amazon store enabled by default, but use a Canonical referral link that gives %15 percent to the Banshee project.
This probably isn't that controversial but I thought it might be worth discussing as it relates to the Apple marketplace restrictions.
Ubuntu has decided to use Banshee for the official music player instead of Rhythmbox. Banshee already has Amazon mp3 purchases integrated into the application. Purchases through Banshee use the project's own referral link. Banshee gives this money to the GNOME Foundation which is a nonprofit that coordinates GNOME development.
Ubuntu is going to use Banshee but they don't want it displacing Ubuntu One. They gave the Banshee project two choices. Either
a) Disable Amazon store by default, and if switched on by users it will still use the Banshee referral link where they get %100 of the funds
or
b) Leave the Amazon store enabled by default, but use a Canonical referral link that gives %15 percent to the Banshee project.
This probably isn't that controversial but I thought it might be worth discussing as it relates to the Apple marketplace restrictions.
"...I thought it might be worth discussing as it relates to the Apple marketplace restrictions."
How exactly? Not everything has to do with Apple.
How exactly? Not everything has to do with Apple.
Banshee is a music player that uses Amazon as an in-app music store, with affiliate connections that feed the Banshee people. The Ubuntu people are making Banshee their default music player, but this whole money thing has broken everybody's brain.
It all makes sense now, thanks. Honestly, Canonical has to make money somehow, and these two choices seem much less evil than other companies' actions...
Makes sense. The exposition Banshee will get by being the official media player on Ubuntu is huge.
Banshee is Mono-based, right?
Banshee is Mono-based, right?
I, for one, always install Banshee and make it my default music player. Rhythmbox is not bad lately, but it was way behind Banshee in features and polish.
FWIW, the second thing I do on Banshee? I disable Amazon Store...
FWIW, the second thing I do on Banshee? I disable Amazon Store...
You are correct, it uses Mono.
I am a little behind the times these days (used debian/ubuntu for a few years of laptop use), but this article seems to have a number of links to the issues, which date back to April 2009.
http://techrights.org/2009/10/22/disinformation-about-banshe...
Too bad Amarok is KDE and not Gnome, it is such a better music player and doesn't carry the MS/Novell stigma (just QT/KDE).
I am a little behind the times these days (used debian/ubuntu for a few years of laptop use), but this article seems to have a number of links to the issues, which date back to April 2009.
http://techrights.org/2009/10/22/disinformation-about-banshe...
Too bad Amarok is KDE and not Gnome, it is such a better music player and doesn't carry the MS/Novell stigma (just QT/KDE).
Have you used Amarok 2.x? It's different than Amarok 1.x. Lots of people don't like it. There are a few projects out there whose purpose is to clone Amarok 1.x and continue development (Clementine is one). Not sure why people didn't just fork it, but whatever.
The Mono thing is tricky because MS could at the very least drag it through a hellish tangle in the court system with all the MS-held .NET oriented patents out there. MS doesn't have Sun to keep them in check anymore and as Windows declines they'll get increasingly desperate and start targeting open systems. They snuggle up to de Icaza and Novell now when they don't think they're a threat, but if that situation changes MS and Mono will be mortal enemies, technically and legally.
MS's whole life is about promoting Windows. At the moment Mono is seen as a way to get more people into C# dev, because MS believe they have the best tools for C#/.NET dev (Visual Studio) and you need Windows to run them. If you get a bunch of OSS hackers on C# and .NET, when they need some extra cash they'll take a freelance job and use/buy Visual Studio and/or C#. Things won't always be that way, though.
Mono is kind of a wildcard because everyone knows subconsciously that when MS gets desperate enough they'll be out to squeeze as much blood as possible from patent infringement suits, etc. related to Mono. They may seize the opportunity to try to kill Canonical or other relevant players in the not-Windows market.
That said, I think it's fine to use it for now. :)
The Mono thing is tricky because MS could at the very least drag it through a hellish tangle in the court system with all the MS-held .NET oriented patents out there. MS doesn't have Sun to keep them in check anymore and as Windows declines they'll get increasingly desperate and start targeting open systems. They snuggle up to de Icaza and Novell now when they don't think they're a threat, but if that situation changes MS and Mono will be mortal enemies, technically and legally.
MS's whole life is about promoting Windows. At the moment Mono is seen as a way to get more people into C# dev, because MS believe they have the best tools for C#/.NET dev (Visual Studio) and you need Windows to run them. If you get a bunch of OSS hackers on C# and .NET, when they need some extra cash they'll take a freelance job and use/buy Visual Studio and/or C#. Things won't always be that way, though.
Mono is kind of a wildcard because everyone knows subconsciously that when MS gets desperate enough they'll be out to squeeze as much blood as possible from patent infringement suits, etc. related to Mono. They may seize the opportunity to try to kill Canonical or other relevant players in the not-Windows market.
That said, I think it's fine to use it for now. :)
Google is a search engine which can be used to find information about particular topics of interest ;)
(Ubuntu cloud services product for Ubuntu users. Banshee == media player, kinda like iTunes. Amazon store == mp3 store)
(Ubuntu cloud services product for Ubuntu users. Banshee == media player, kinda like iTunes. Amazon store == mp3 store)
Ubuntu One is also the name of the Ubuntu music store (which is a branded version of 7digital.com, a European competitor to AmazonMP3 and iTunes).
Ubuntu One isn't just music. It's primarily something like MobileMe, the music thing is only a piece.
Is this serious or a joke about the latest Apple policy?
Indeed. See also the epic shitstorm on HN over subscription revenue. From elsewhere in the comments:
"This probably isn't that controversial"
No no, trying to take 75% of someone else's revenue isn't bad at all. Now if it was say... less than a third that would be purest evil. /s
This illustrates one of my two main points about the Apple bashers either
(a) that whenever people discuss Apple there's a vocal minority for whom all logic seems to fly out the window and it becomes opposites day or
(b) Apple is held to a different standard than others, e.g. it's okay for Canonical to throw their weight around and take a massive slice of someone else's pie, but if Apple tries to take a small slice of a pie everyone screams blue murder.
---
@Linux fans: sorry to post in your thread yo, but some of your guys were trolling in the Apple bashing threads recently (and getting mighty fine karma for doing so) so turn about is fair play.
"This probably isn't that controversial"
No no, trying to take 75% of someone else's revenue isn't bad at all. Now if it was say... less than a third that would be purest evil. /s
This illustrates one of my two main points about the Apple bashers either
(a) that whenever people discuss Apple there's a vocal minority for whom all logic seems to fly out the window and it becomes opposites day or
(b) Apple is held to a different standard than others, e.g. it's okay for Canonical to throw their weight around and take a massive slice of someone else's pie, but if Apple tries to take a small slice of a pie everyone screams blue murder.
---
@Linux fans: sorry to post in your thread yo, but some of your guys were trolling in the Apple bashing threads recently (and getting mighty fine karma for doing so) so turn about is fair play.
As I understand it after reading http://quatermain.tumblr.com/post/3345687143/why-are-vendors... , there's a big difference:
Canonical wants to take 75% of revenue, leaving 25% to Gnome/Banshee.
Apple takes 30% of the sales price - the same part a vendor would get, taking away 100% of the revenue.
Canonical wants to take 75% of revenue, leaving 25% to Gnome/Banshee.
Apple takes 30% of the sales price - the same part a vendor would get, taking away 100% of the revenue.
Wow. This was seriously a bad move on Canonical's part. I really wonder if Canonical knew that the revenue was going to GNOME. I simply have trouble believing that Canonical would do something so boneheaded.
As others have said, the Amazon referrals would compete directly with Ubuntu One, meaning they would lose money if they left it in place. Canonical still needs money to function, just like everyone else. Their offer was to either disable the Amazon links by default, driving people to use Ubuntu One, or to enable them by default and take a big cut.
Not that unreasonable at all.
Not that unreasonable at all.
So, to paraphrase your argument using another recent example:
"As others have said, the Amazon Kindle app browser redirect competes directly with Apple iBooks, meaning Apple would lose money if they left it in place. Apple still needs money to function, just like everybody else. Their updated terms are to either disable the browser redirect, driving people to use iBooks, or to enable in-app book purchases and take a 30% cut."
I guess "unreasonable" is a somewhat flexible term in the community depending on the players involved...
"As others have said, the Amazon Kindle app browser redirect competes directly with Apple iBooks, meaning Apple would lose money if they left it in place. Apple still needs money to function, just like everybody else. Their updated terms are to either disable the browser redirect, driving people to use iBooks, or to enable in-app book purchases and take a 30% cut."
I guess "unreasonable" is a somewhat flexible term in the community depending on the players involved...
That's not quite correct in this case, here's another example:
"The Amazon Kindle app browser competes directly with Apple iBooks, meaning Apple would lose money if they left it in place. So Apple doesn't ship the Kindle app browser by default, but can easily be installed."
Actually, it's easier than that. Banshee's store will be installed, you just have to enable it.
So no, not the same thing.
Actually, it's easier than that. Banshee's store will be installed, you just have to enable it.
So no, not the same thing.
Another thing worth considering is that while Amazon offers an official client for Linux systems, it is very difficult to install unless you have a 32-bit system for some reason.
It also doesn't run on the latest Ubuntu- some sort of Boost versioning issue.