Subscribe to CIO Magazine »

Ubuntu's marketing kick: Is Canonical the next Apple?

Music, Cloud services, apps and user interfaces take Linux to the next level

Ubuntu and Apple have their own unique PC operating systems, Unity on Linux and Mac OS X, respectively

Ubuntu and Apple have their own unique PC operating systems, Unity on Linux and Mac OS X, respectively

Another six months has passed and another version of Ubuntu Linux has been released, right? Wrong. Ubuntu 11.04 ‘Natty Narwhal’ arrived today and so did a new marketing direction from its parent company and principle sponsor, Canonical. And its flavour has a hint of Apple.

See the 11.04 release news here.

With the arrival of Natty, Canonical has switched on a concerted effort to raise awareness that Ubuntu now offers a lot more than just a desktop operating system – it’s content and services as well.

The first thing to notice about the Natty release is the “dumbing down” of Ubuntu the product.

Ubuntu no longer has multiple desktop or netbook “editions”, nor the pesky “Linux” label. It’s Ubuntu the client, Ubuntu the server and Ubuntu the Cloud – plain and simple.

Also with Natty comes a new website for Ubuntu, the essential ingredient of any new marketing initiative.

See this blog from the Canonical design team for information on the project’s new website.

The question is: With this marketing direction can Canonical dumb-down Linux enough with Ubuntu to make it appeal to the masses?

Those who have observed the Linux industry for any length of time will remember Corel’s failed attempt at its own distribution.

The company wanted to make Linux as easy to use as Windows on the desktop with everything point and click, instead of an unfamiliar command line.

But so far, despite 20 years of history on the desktop, Linux and its distributors have failed to make anywhere near an impact on the desktop as Apple or Microsoft.

[Note: Okay, you can easily argue since they have strong control over the hardware supply chain people don’t go out of their way to “buy” an Apple or Microsoft operating system for their desktop, people simply buy a computer with the OS pre-installed, but Linux is free to download and install on any computer. Is that the part that’s held Linux back – the downloading and installing bit?]

Then along came Ubuntu.

Realising this gap in the Linux market remained unfulfilled, from its inception Ubuntu was designed to integrate “best of breed” open source components to make a user-friendly contender on the desktop.

It certainly succeeded in making a name for its self as a user-friendly Linux alongside OpenSUSE and Fedora, but has it really succeeded in living up to its full potential? Perhaps its new direction is set to up the game.

Now Ubuntu seems to be diverging quickly from its original charter of a friendly Linux desktop with the integration of Cloud services and content.

All this activity raises the question of whether Canonical will be the next Apple-like software and services company – all without selling one piece of hardware.

If there is one company that has successfully dumbed-down Unix it is Apple. After struggling for relevance a decade ago it released Mac OS X, a music player and the rest is history.

I won’t argue some far-fetched theory that Canonical is trying to be the next Apple as they are world’s apart when it comes to software freedom, but the two companies now have quite a few things in common.

  • Both have a Unix-like operating systems. Apple has Mac OS X and iOS, Canonical has, well, Ubuntu for client PCs, not “Ubuntu Linux”. Regardless of the name they’re all built around Unix and open source foundations. Granted, Mac OS X has a lot of proprietary software in its stack and Ubuntu has always been open, but Ubuntu appears to be drifting away from its mainstream open source roots by moving to Unity on the desktop instead of GNOME. Sure, Unity is an open source project, but it’s developed and managed by Canonical for Ubuntu and doesn’t have much acceptance with other Linux distributions. In short, Unity is “Ubuntu’s desktop” and unique to Canonical. At the end of the day both Apple and Canonical leverage a truck-load of software from the open source community.
  • Both have app stores. Is anyone apart from Apple allowed to use the term “app store” (no caps). Ubuntu has the “Software Centre” and Apple has the “App Store” (caps) on iTunes. They essentially offer a convenient way of buying and downloading software. Ubuntu has used Debian’s apt system since its inception so the Software Centre is just a nice glossy, one-click wrapper around what it has always had. Ubuntu won’t discard its free apps, but it now makes a point of offering commercial, pay-for apps as well, just like the App Store.
  • Both have music services. Much of Apple’s success in recent years has been on the back of its iTunes music and content service, and now Ubuntu is after a piece of the action with the Ubuntu One Music Store. It’s journey to a paid-for music service hasn’t been all smooth sailing though, with many in the open source community crying foul over Canonical’s decision to use Banshee for its own music service instead of the default Amazon MP3 service. For now, the first thing you’ll see in the Ubuntu “What’s new?” video is the integrated music support.
  • Both have Cloud services. Interestingly, the big news from Apple this week (yeah, apart from a white iPhone 4) is the company has (reportedly) purchased the domain for $4.5 million. This directs to which would fit in nicely with Apple’s existing MobileMe online service. Ubuntu has the Ubuntu One Cloud service for remote storage and it works with Windows clients. So both Apple and Ubuntu are investing heavily in “personal Cloud” services. On the server Ubuntu’s Cloud offerings are more mature than Apple’s, but that could all change if Apple takes an interest in Amazon-style Cloud computing.
  • Both have server operating systems. Ubuntu Server is the new brand for the “server edition” of Ubuntu. Apple has Mac OS X Server, which has seen limited success compared with its client offerings. OS X Server will be bundled with Mac OS X in future releases.

It’s worth noting that Google is already offering a similar collection of software and services through Android. What Google doesn’t have is a footprint on the desktop the way Apple and Ubuntu do. But with Chrome OS (which Canonical has contributed to) due to arrive pre-loaded on hardware sometime this year, who knows where it will end up.

So the only thing holding Ubuntu back from having as much success in the consumer software and content market as Apple is mind and market share.

And Canonical’s marketing switch from Ubuntu the product to Ubuntu the ecosystem is a step towards achieving that market share.

On the new Ubuntu product description page the “Ubuntu operating system” is being directly pitched as an alternative to Windows and Mac OS X.

It will be interesting to see if Canonical can do what countless others have attempted and failed – bring Linux to the mainstream desktop – even if it ends up happening under an Ubuntu-only label.

Follow Rodney Gedda on Twitter: @rodneygedda

Follow TechWorld Australia on Twitter: @Techworld_AU

Tags LinuxAppleapp storesmusiccanonicalunitycloud computingubuntudesktop linux

More about Amazon Web ServicesAppleApple.CorelDebianFedoraGoogleLinuxMicrosoftUbuntu

Join the CIO Australia group on LinkedIn. The group is open to CIOs, IT Directors, COOs, CTOs and senior IT managers.




Good article, but please quit making paragraphs out of single sentences. Be a real writer.



My response.

Aldo Nogueira


Actually Ubuntu had Software Centre since 2009 and had a another application for the same purpose there before. Apple's App Store is weak in comparison with a real package management system such as APT or RPM.

Canonical recognizes they copy a few things from Windows and MacOSX as well from KDE 4 and GNOME 3 and added some new features. Proprietary software also have copied from Linux desktops before. Multiple desktop and some visual effects appeared first on free software.

And there is always a fundamental different that everything is open: the process, the code, the configuration. We can influence the development of Ubuntu in every stage. Try to change the theme in your MacOSX, try to install Windows on a PowerPC machine. You can't.



Ubuntu does not apply design concepts so well... the concepts of colors in Ubuntu is not so right, it is only a Linux distro that a rich guy has injected his money to a massive marketing capaign. Linux is great by its own. Many decisions on Ubuntu is not the standard that Linux distros have agreed, but by the massive marketing injected on it, it breaks many things. Now, what does not follow Canonical concepts is criticized by the same technique that has popularized Ubuntu.



Try to hibernate and resume your Ubuntu machine. You can't.

Try to share your Ubuntu system's files with Samba without touching the command line. You can't.

Try to change your Ubuntu system's hostname without causing side effects. You can't.

Try to upgrade your Ubuntu laptop to the latest release without breaking everything. You can't.



Are you serious? :)

I can hibernate my Ubuntu machine,
I can share my files with Samba without using the command line,
Changing a machines hostname can cause side effects for other machines accessing it on any platform, though I have done with Linux machines in the past without issue (granted my network is a simple one), and
Yes, I did upgrade my laptop (Acer Aspire One) without breaking everything.

I guess if you're going to argue that using any operating system that on occasion has technical issues though you'd also be arguing against the use of Microsoft WIndows as well. I was employed as a PC tech for many years in part thanks to the many issues that a Windows install can have in certain circumstances. Perhaps we should all switch to Macs?

Dan Delaney


Hmmmm. You wrote: "It’s worth nothing that Google is already offering a similar collection of software and services through Android." Did you mean to write "It's worth noting"? That changes the entire meaning of the sentence :-)

On the comment about "Ubuntu does not apply design concepts so well", you're right about that, Andrew. Consider this VERY bad design decision they made with 10.10: popup menus now have dark backgrounds with light text, and the item that is currently selected has a light background with dark text. This is the opposite of the way EVERY GUI-based operating system has displayed popup menu options since the first Mac's were released. As such, it it now quite counter-intuitive. People have grown accustomed to the dark-background indicating the item that is currently selected.



Safer, faster, runs on anything.
Great looking, excellent hardware support.
MS and Apple not needed here since 2005.

Rodney Gedda


Thanks Dan. I have fixed.




Linux is getting its foothold in desktops already.

Do you know all those instant-on solutions? e.g. Browsing net without "full Windows", yeap thats Linux!

Biggest problem with highly successful Linux platform is that its like sniper. Quiet and deadly successful. Ubuntu may be the first that is not so quiet.

Comments are now closed