<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Dean Sas's Weblog &#187; ubuntu</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.deansas.org/blog/tag/ubuntu/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.deansas.org/blog</link>
	<description>Tappity tap tap</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 24 Apr 2010 11:21:35 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>Ubuntu One</title>
		<link>http://www.deansas.org/blog/2009/05/14/ubuntu-one/</link>
		<comments>http://www.deansas.org/blog/2009/05/14/ubuntu-one/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 14 May 2009 23:41:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Dean</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[p.u.c & p.u-uk.org]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ubuntu]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.deansas.org/blog/?p=595</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Dave wrote 
The fact of the matter is there are proprietary drives in Ubuntu and you choose whether to use them or not, why should this service be any different?
I think the difference is that this is proprietary software (or at least the back end is) that is branded as Ubuntu. Personally I don&#8217;t have [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://davmor2.blogspot.com/2009/05/ubuntu-one-am-i-missing-something.html">Dave</a> wrote </p>
<blockquote><p>The fact of the matter is there are proprietary drives in Ubuntu and you choose whether to use them or not, why should this service be any different?</p></blockquote>
<p>I think the difference is that this is proprietary software (or at least the back end is) that is branded as Ubuntu. Personally I don&#8217;t have any problem with Canonical making money from this commercial service, just as I don&#8217;t have a problem with them selling Ubuntu t-shirts and mugs. My annoyance is Canonical using the Ubuntu branding to market a closed source program, when closed source programs are against the <a href="http://www.ubuntu.com/community/ubuntustory/philosophy">Ubuntu philosophy</a></p>
<blockquote><p> At the core of the Ubuntu Philosophy are these core philosophical ideals:<br />
   1. Every computer user should have the freedom to download, run, copy, distribute, study, share, change and improve their software for any purpose, without paying licensing fees.<br />
Our philosophy is reflected in the software we produce and included in our distribution. As a result, the licensing terms of the software we distribute are measured against our philosophy, using the Ubuntu License Policy.<br />
&#8230;.<br />
we are working to ensure that every single piece of software you need is available under a license that gives you those freedoms. </p></blockquote>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.deansas.org/blog/2009/05/14/ubuntu-one/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>5</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
