Comment Re:Yes. (Score 2, Insightful) 631
On way to state it is that they started as the friendly libre desktop and then at some point decided to become the "cheaper macintoch".
It's not just the design, they, or rather Mark, gave a full u-turn to the entire philosophy of the project. Sould we go back in time, you'd find that the project was full of idealism. Ubuntu was a philantropic project, free CDs were shiped, at Canonical's expense, to those willing to help others become free.
The promise was that together, as a comunity, we could overcome the technical and political issues that held FOSS back.
That's not the way ubuntu is advertised nowadays. Now ubuntu is advertised as this wonderful OS that does some of the same things MS and Apple can do but won't run any of the software you bought for those.
Personally, I blame the iPad. Ok it's Mark's fault first, but the iPad showed that people would ignore the problem of software incompatibilty as long a the thing was easy to use, had a web browser and was shiny.
So Mark decided to give the finger to the communy, called "Ubuntu is not a democracy" and embarked in a campaing to make ubunty the desktop version of an iPad: Shiny, dumbed down and incompatible with most Windows software, but with Firefox.
Actually I'm surprised ubuntu hasn't decided on Google chrome as their default browser, but even Mark realizes that would be handling the keys of the kingdom to a potential rival.
The obviousl problem is that, most people, including most ipad owners, already have a Windows PC where they do most of their work and any matter of serious gaming.
MS is the path of least resistance, and since it comes with most computers, it's "free". Apple is the luxury vendor. Ubuntu was de idealist but has lost it's original vision. Ubuntu really has nothing going for it nowadays. Mark is trying to fix that problem techically where it was a political problem to begin with.