Canonical COO jumps clear after 10 months

"Balanced," really?

"Balanced" because it agrees with your view point? Because it tries to paint Matt as openly hostile to open source? Where do you come to the conclusion that particular thread is balanced?

Now, I have never met the man - indeed I have only every exchanged one e-mail with him - but I would not go so far as to say he was hostile towards open source. He is pragmatic. He is a business man. I think it's fair to say that his tenure at canonical represented someone concerned with the dollars and cents whilst having little time whatsoever for zealotry of /ANY/ stripe.

That doesn’t make him hostile to open source…it just makes him pragmatic. I think you’ll find that pragmatism (as opposed to idealistic zealotry) is a fairly common trait amongst people who have titles like “Chief Operating Officer.” This isn't to say I agree with Matt about everything: his views on things have set my teeth on edge many times. Almost every time though it's because they hit a little too close to home. A few weeks later, I would think back on what he wrote and grudgingly admit he MIGHT have a point.

So an open attack thread is not exactly “more balanced.” That’s just my $0.02, everyone else is welcome to think their own thoughts on the matter…

And the point would be ... ?

Just beyond your grasp, apparently. The fundamentalist rants and whines in that lwn thread are just bloody pathetic.

This is not about one man's opinions. Assay's views as published and Canonical's general approach to FLOSS (or whichever acronym suits you best) are not at odds. Canonical was never intended to be a funded mouthpiece for twats who get all butthurt because bad, nasty Nvidia won't open their drivers.