Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Using Kickstarter Data To Predict Ubuntu Edge's Success

samzenpus posted about a year ago | from the what-do-the-numbers-say dept.

Ubuntu 113

First time accepted submitter Jason Waddell writes "According to Kickstarter's historic backing data, crowdfunding follows a very predictable pattern: a strong opening, a mid-campaign 'dead zone', and a small resurgence at the end of the campaign. We combine Kickstarter's trends with the Ubuntu Edge Indiegogo crowdfunding data to forecast whether the innovative Ubuntu phone will reach its $32 million campaign goal."

cancel ×

113 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

CORRECTION: LACK OF SUCCESS !! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44454615)

You can only measure failure with it !!

Re:CORRECTION: LACK OF SUCCESS !! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44456725)

Microsoft captured a record share of the global smartphone market — its highest in three years.

The global smartphone market is up 47 percent year over year for a total 230 million units shipped in the second quarter.

Android is the greatest benefactor of the uptick, having captured a record 80 percent share of the global smartphone OS market. Strategy Analytics executive director Neil Mawston chalks the success up to competitive licensing costs, numerous hardware partners, and a large app store.

Meanwhile, Apple's iOS reached 14 percent share this quarter — its lowest level since Q2 2010. Microsoft slipped into third place, with 4 percent share — its highest in three years.

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2422611,00.asp [pcmag.com] [pcmag.com]

Strangely enough, Slashdot does not consider this to be news.

Summary of the article (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44454627)

It won't succeed.

Re:Summary of the article (1)

MightyYar (622222) | about a year ago | (#44455115)

Those bastards should have phrased it as a question!

Unicorn Tears (0)

kmf (792603) | about a year ago | (#44454629)

Even though it looks like they aren't going to make it, I really hope they do.

slashdot effect (1)

hurwak-feg (2955853) | about a year ago | (#44454641)

Maybe the slashdot effect will bring them donors while bringing their servers to a crawl.

Re: slashdot effect (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44454859)

There is no slashdot effect for at least 5 years now. Slashdot's peak came and went 6-7 years ago. Why do you think the old names in management left? Stories usually easily got 100+ comments are now down to double digits. Call it the reddit effect if anything.

http://www.google.com/trends/explore#q=slashdot&cmpt=q

Re: slashdot effect (1)

datavirtue (1104259) | about a year ago | (#44456653)

I remember seeing stories get hundreds and hundreds of comments on average just a year or two ago, but you are right slashdot has declined but it is still good.

Re: slashdot effect (1)

rolfwind (528248) | about a year ago | (#44456867)

The comment quality is still okay, but they could have been reddit (in terms of userbase) since they were here already here in the late 90s... but they puttered around on code changes that did next-to-nothing user interface wise since then. It was a really wasted opportunity.

But reddit sucks anyway, so the lament is just over quantity, nothing else.

Re:slashdot effect (1)

dugancent (2616577) | about a year ago | (#44455049)

Slashdot doesn't have the userbase anymore.

Who the hell wants an Ubuntu phone? (-1, Troll)

rolfwind (528248) | about a year ago | (#44454645)

They can't even make a decent desktop OS after years of trying.... I dumped it years ago for Mint.

Re:Who the hell wants an Ubuntu phone? (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44454667)

The same mint that is based on Ubuntu?

Re:Who the hell wants an Ubuntu phone? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44454699)

Mint is based on Ubuntu AND Debian.
Just like Ubuntu is based on Debian.

Re:Who the hell wants an Ubuntu phone? (1)

readingaccount (2909349) | about a year ago | (#44454947)

There is more than one version of Mint. There's a spin of Linux Mint that uses Debian as its base instead of Ubuntu, which is good if Ubuntu ever becomes too much of a burden.

Par for the course. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44455051)

The same mint that is based on Ubuntu?

What do you expect? People laugh about the "failed" GNU project and use Linux "instead". They decry Debian as a failure and use Ubuntu "instead". So why not lambast Ubuntu and promote Mint "instead"?

Yes the same Mint (1)

DrYak (748999) | about a year ago | (#44455637)

The same mint that is based on Ubuntu?

Yes the same mint that decided NOT to impose a not-yet stable fucked up unity desktop environment to their end users, unlike up-stream Ubuntu which tries to make mandatory their toy project reinventing the UI. (Well for a certain definition of "mandate". It's still opensource)

Yes, also the same mint that, regarding the current biggest holywar on Linux - Wayland vs. Mir - will probably side with the rest of the echo-system including most Linux distros, including several other Ubuntu derivative and decide to support Wayland, like just anybody else, and not go for up-stream Ubuntu own NIH-Syndrome induced Mir. (and that's neglecting all the shit that Cannonical has done during the whole Mir/XMir debacle).

We've reached the point where, to get a decent experience, if you still want to use Ubuntu, is to install it, rip it most of the component which are ubuntu specific, and install other from 3rd party repositories (either PPAs or even straight from Debian). At that point, it's getting quicker and easier to just go for a Ubuntu derivative which is without all the bad bit and already contain what's needed instead. That's Mint.

Re:Yes the same Mint (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44456079)

The same that gives you KUbuntu, XUbuntu, MythUbuntu etc etc?

Re:Who the hell wants an Ubuntu phone? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44454683)

Concur. Mint and other flavours such as Pinguy OS are far superior.

Re:Who the hell wants an Ubuntu phone? (1, Informative)

Stormwatch (703920) | about a year ago | (#44454709)

No, they did make a decent desktop OS. Then they threw it away and introduced that Unity piece of shit.

Re:Who the hell wants an Ubuntu phone? (1)

tyroneking (258793) | about a year ago | (#44454773)

Disagree - IMHO Unity is innovative and easy to use.

Re:Who the hell wants an Ubuntu phone? (1)

jopsen (885607) | about a year ago | (#44454895)

Disagree - IMHO Unity is innovative and easy to use.

I agree... and I respect the chances they've taken...
Unfortunately, there's some basic things, very basic things in Unity that just doesn't work right. For instance drag-and-drop, doesn't work unless you wait for the animations to finish.
It's a small thing, but it's extremely basic and it's one of those things we'll just expect to work.

Re:Who the hell wants an Ubuntu phone? (1)

tyroneking (258793) | about a year ago | (#44455197)

You're right, some small things are wrong - but,again IMHO, I find it a good mix of Linux utility and Gnome Do productivity. Compared to Windows 7 (far too flashy), Windows 8 (odd) and Mac OSX (frustrating) it's by far the best UI I've used in the last few years.

Re: Who the hell wants an Ubuntu phone? (1)

AvitarX (172628) | about a year ago | (#44455255)

Also, on a maximized window the close button is of infinite size in two directions (it's in a corner), and adjacent to the start button.

This is one of the biggest failures of design I've seen. It clutters the rather small (since it's vertical) with a huge start button too.

A major regression from early unity, one that I cannot fathom the cause of, I suppose they wanted the ubuntu logo to be bigger.

Re: Who the hell wants an Ubuntu phone? (2)

Immerman (2627577) | about a year ago | (#44456435)

Actually, since they moved the close button to be adjacent to the task bar it's no longer in a physical corner and loses the "infinitely wide" feature, which now belongs to the start button (which like with Win95 didn't seem to actually extend all the way into the corner so that it would actually work). Meanwhile the infinitely-large upper-right hand corner where everyone is accustomed to finding their close button is wasted by the non-responsive title bar.

For me the real killer was that worthless sidebar - no option for a cluster of quick-launch icons for the half-dozen apps I use 90% of the time. Giant icons that make it impossible to use more than a handful of applications simultaneously without having to continuously scroll the taskbar (seriously?). And no option to just get rid of the damned thing if you can't stomach it. The complete lack of a program menu wasn't exactly a big selling point either.

Re: Who the hell wants an Ubuntu phone? (1)

Derek Pomery (2028) | about a year ago | (#44457577)

Hm. I haven't used Unity in ages (switched back to MATE after trying it for a few months) but I seem to recall you can shrink the icon size quite a bit, and pin/unpin to customise what apps you want.

The requirement to make a launcher using a text editor is seriously annoying tho.

When I was trying mint, I found it more convenient to create a .desktop file to add to the sidebar by booting into Gnome2/MATE.

Re:Who the hell wants an Ubuntu phone? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44454957)

Yes, thank you! I'm adverse to change generally and at first I too thought about dumping Ubuntu and returning to "pure" Debian, but I stuck with it and now I really like the simplicity of Unity. My 60+ year old parents who can barely remember how to logon to their email accounts sometimes can use Unity just fine.

Linux geeks are very particular. At one point everyone was all for Linux on the desktop and ease of use for the typical user. Ubuntu grows and creates the momentum and has really grown worldwide (cause there is a world beyond the United States), but then Linux geeks turn on Ubuntu for growth and trying to innovate in new directions. I applaud Ubuntu for at least pushing the boundaries.

Whatever, go use Mint or something else and be happy. Even better don't use GUI interfaces at all and go back to the good ole command line only days. Just go do your thing, but let Ubuntu users be happy. ;-)

Re: Who the hell wants an Ubuntu phone? (1)

AvitarX (172628) | about a year ago | (#44455267)

The interface to unity feels like it's designed to accidently close windows, I can't imagine people uncomfortable with a mouse being able to use it.

Re:Who the hell wants an Ubuntu phone? (1)

Windwraith (932426) | about a year ago | (#44454959)

Unity is not for me. But for someone that has never used a computer, I can see it working.
I have this custom of reinstalling Ubuntu every major release. For kicks and giggles and to take a little tour while at it. I just lose a few hours every time (since partitioning is sensible) and I get to play with the "world I don't touch" since I use a different desktop and default apps.
The 3 previous versions were kind of meh. But I actually found the latest version to be kinda pleasant and smoother-looking. It still didn't work the way I wanted for myself, but I did manage to find some respect for it.

Re:Who the hell wants an Ubuntu phone? (1)

tyroneking (258793) | about a year ago | (#44455187)

I think it doesn't suit everyone, but it's not just newbies who like it - I'm no newbie myself and I've used vast numbers of systems (CP/M, DEC, AS400 thru to NeXT and Windows) and whilst I still long for the days of lovely orange screen character-only UIs, I actually have grown to love Unity.

Re:Who the hell wants an Ubuntu phone? (1)

datavirtue (1104259) | about a year ago | (#44457047)

I've started building my web apps with green screen type interfaces. I too long for the simplicity and direct nature of the old systems. Full circle.

Re:Who the hell wants an Ubuntu phone? (1)

tyroneking (258793) | about a year ago | (#44457329)

Sadly, it'll never come back - all those generations of kids who won't look in wonder at smooth scrolling orange-on-black text user interfaces - I feel for them ;) Though you know I actually feel much happier about well designed touch interfaces --- they have the same magic for me. I think WIMP - especially M - has failed, and Touch is the true descendent of text user interfaces. Not sure why I feel like that.

Re:Who the hell wants an Ubuntu phone? (1)

datavirtue (1104259) | about a year ago | (#44457039)

Downloading 12 LTS 64bit right now to give it a another whirl. It has been about 1- 2 years since I last tried, and it was a disaster. Hoping for a good experience.

Re:Who the hell wants an Ubuntu phone? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44455569)

What is "innovative" about it? Putting a task bar on the left side of the screen? Nope. Using left-hand buttons? Nope. Using a global menu bar? Nope. Overlay scrollbars? Nope. Aero-like effects? Nope.

Yeah, pretty much nothing about it is innovative.

Re:Who the hell wants an Ubuntu phone? (4, Informative)

Windwraith (932426) | about a year ago | (#44454893)

Are you aware of what you complain about? Unity is not Ubuntu, it's just the default window manager. You can change it at will, no impediments at all.
And, an ubuntu phone would give you almost as much power as Mint does because the insides are pretty much the same.
So...what are you complaining about again?

Re:Who the hell wants an Ubuntu phone? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44455101)

Are you aware of what you complain about? Unity is not Ubuntu, it's just the default window manager.

The Window Manager is Compiz. Unity is ...... ineffable.

Re:Who the hell wants an Ubuntu phone? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44455301)

You won't be able to change window manager for long. Ubuntu is switching to Mir, which requires changes to Mesa that make it incompatible with Wayland (and possibly X, but I don't know).

Re:Who the hell wants an Ubuntu phone? (1, Troll)

rolfwind (528248) | about a year ago | (#44455523)

So...what are you complaining about again?

Unlike my teens and early 20s, I have too much of a life to fiddle with every stupid thing to get things just so. Maybe you can appreciate that one day.

Re:Who the hell wants an Ubuntu phone? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44456235)

Umm, then why the hell are you even using Linux? Sounds like you belong in your walled garden, somebody get this foggy back into Appleland.

Re:Who the hell wants an Ubuntu phone? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44456607)

fogey

Re:Who the hell wants an Ubuntu phone? (1)

rolfwind (528248) | about a year ago | (#44456767)

Umm, then why the hell are you even using Linux?

Because I grew up on it in my teens and early 20s, when I did have the time to fuck around. Now, any more stupid questions?

Re:Who the hell wants an Ubuntu phone? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44454985)

I don't want an Ubuntu phone--I want a general purpose computer I can carry in my pocket. If it also makes phone calls it saves me carryting an extra device, so that's nice. But the point is: computer in your pocket. Duh.

Re:Who the hell wants an Ubuntu phone? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44455063)

Windows CE on a keyboard-enabled device has been the closest I've seen to that.

I could get a JDK, Emacs and a command line on it. It was sweet.

Re:Who the hell wants an Ubuntu phone? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44455081)

Windows CE was never sweet but a pile of dog turd.

Re:Who the hell wants an Ubuntu phone? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44455307)

That would be the Nokia N900.

Re:Who the hell wants an Ubuntu phone? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44455013)

By the RMSs' beard, Linux turf wars are upon us!

Re:Who the hell wants an Ubuntu phone? (1)

Xicor (2738029) | about a year ago | (#44456167)

even if you dont like ubuntu, it will still be the most powerful phone being used by people.

Waiting for MS shills to troll this article (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44454753)

or how clearly you can see your face's reflection in BG's penis head any time now, surprised it wasn't the opening FP.

Re:Waiting for MS shills to troll this article (2)

Stormwatch (703920) | about a year ago | (#44454769)

Why should they bother? Linux fans are perfectly capable of bashing Canonical on their own.

Re:Waiting for MS shills to troll this article (1)

Tridus (79566) | about a year ago | (#44454973)

I'm pretty sure they're too busy trying to make the Surface look like a success and doing Xbox One damage control to worry about a niche vanity phone like this one that will have no market impact.

Re:Waiting for MS shills to troll this article (1)

Xicor (2738029) | about a year ago | (#44456175)

assuming the campaign succeeds, the only thing this will do to the market is show that there is a market for high end phones. the edge willl never be sold on the open market.

on the move (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44454797)

can i carry it safely within my rectum inside a baggy?

Short form: they won't make it (4, Informative)

Maury Markowitz (452832) | about a year ago | (#44454825)

Talk about click bait. Can the topic header be edited after posting to save everyone having to waste their time?

Re:Short form: they won't make it (1)

Psychotria (953670) | about a year ago | (#44454863)

Thanks for saving me the click. They're really after $32 million? I could have predicted they wouldn't reach their goal without any analysis at all.

Re:Short form: they won't make it (1)

CastrTroy (595695) | about a year ago | (#44454951)

Especially with the price of stuff. You can spend $20 and get nothing physical at all. You can spend $50 for a t-shirt, or your can spend $775 (sold out, now $780) and get the actual phone. If it actually get released. For that kind of money you can go out and buy a phone right now, and still have lots of money to spare. And you will actually have a phone. Instead of having the chance of getting a phone if the project is actually completed.

Re:Short form: they won't make it (1)

jkflying (2190798) | about a year ago | (#44454967)

You won't have a phone with a sapphire screen. Those aren't available *anywhere*, at *any* price.

Re:Short form: they won't make it (1)

jkflying (2190798) | about a year ago | (#44455305)

Never mind the 4GB of RAM and 128GB of flash.
Seriously. Where do you intend to get a phone with those specs?

Re:Short form: they won't make it (1)

h4rr4r (612664) | about a year ago | (#44455923)

The same place you do, the land of dreams and wishes.

Re:Short form: they won't make it (1)

CastrTroy (595695) | about a year ago | (#44455965)

It's not a question of "where", but "when". I would expect that next year, this probably won't be unattainable. Which is probably the earliest I would expect them to actually get this phone in my hands. They are comparing it to an iPhone 5, which was released almost a year ago, and the Samsung Galaxy Galaxy S4, which is newer, but still probably due up for a new model to surpass by the time they release this phone. Also, you get the Galaxy S4 with 64 GB internally (hard to find though), and then add an additional 64 GB of storage using the SDXC card giving you 128 GB of storage.

Re:Short form: they won't make it (1)

Xicor (2738029) | about a year ago | (#44456215)

if this campaign does not succeed, next year there still wont be anything close to it. why? because the phone manufacturers have no reason to push the limits on hardware when ppl are willing to pay 600-900$ on hardware that is 3-5 years old.

Re:Short form: they won't make it (1)

samwichse (1056268) | about a year ago | (#44456475)

Oh good, something far more brittle than gorilla glass to make a large screen out of.

Sounds like an anti-feature to me.

Re: Short form: they won't make it (1)

AvitarX (172628) | about a year ago | (#44455337)

The article does predict they'll raise 20 million, I would of said that was absurd too.

Re: Short form: they won't make it (1)

Xicor (2738029) | about a year ago | (#44456233)

i think 20 million is easily possible. if the campaign hits the kickstarter 11M record, there will be a TON of press and news articles. the word would get out there, thats what the campaign needs most atm. it doesnt need new perks or cheaper phones, it needs ppl to know about it. if the word gets spread out there, the campaign might even get to 32M

Critical flaw of campaign (1)

bucaneer (1594601) | about a year ago | (#44454873)

For all the impressive tech and design that went into Edge, there's one glaring technical problem that will prevent it from reaching the target - it doesn't have a picture of an apple on the back.

Re:Critical flaw of campaign (1)

feds (3005861) | about a year ago | (#44455735)

I guess the Ubuntu picture on the back is not the same ;)
anyway there are other/bigger flaws:
- expensive: sure, it's a dev edition but I've been reading articles in the Interweb about the market pushing for cheaper phones, not more expensive (talking about big numbers here, not just a few thousands hard core fan)
- too far in the future: in one year there will probably smart watches around, and who knows what else!
- user experience: I don't think a dual OS device gives a good user experience, Jolla capability of running android applications without android sounds better
- monitors: I can carry around a keyboard/mouse (well a laptop too...) but a monitor? the main feature of the phone is usable only at home or office (if businesses jump on the wagon but considering how conservative they are I doubt it)
- Canonical and the community: Canonical is not good at communicating/convincing the community, maybe they are good in the business sector, I don't know, but here they have to convince the community to pay for their R&D...
- Is it really that useful? anyone with a proper personal computer can already have data perfectly synced with the smartphone. Launching the smarthphone applications on the desktop would be cool though...
- This is not the Linux way: well, this is just a personal opinion, but creating a custom closed solution doesn't sound right. A software stack that permit to use a smartphone as a server for a client computer could be a better solution. The software stack would let the desktop get data from the phone and applications as well to be launched on the client side. The hardware is already there, any smartphone (even not powerful ones since the client wound have it's own CPU/GPU) and a thumb PC (let's call it Ubuntu Wedge, so if it breaks can be recycled to stop doors).
Advantages:
* cheaper, definitely less than $32M
* any Ubuntu Wedge could be used: I could simply attach wirelessly to any Ubuntu Wedge available and connected to a monitor and automatically have a desktop at my disposal.
* if it becomes a standard the Ubuntu Wedge could be easily embedded in any monitor and have the Ubuntu Wedge Inside sticker ;)
* way more powerful than Ubuntu Edge solution since there would be no strict power/size constraint on a device attached to the monitor (MHL or external power brick)
* better user experience, if the smartphone is flashed with ubuntu-touch or the same OS that is in the Ubuntu Wedge there would be no dual OS bad experience
* the software stack could be used on any existing desktop/laptop, as much as the difference in platform permit (I'm talking about the capability to launch android apps on a x86 client). This is a major advantage since would make the adoption MUCH faster
Disadvantages:
* another device to carry around (the Ubuntu Wedge) ... I'm already carrying keyboard and mouse for the Ubuntu Wedge, I can live with that. Actually, instead of a thumb PC make it a keyboard with the thumb PC inside it, and add a few usb port to connect other peripherals, and ethernet port for some serious bandwidth... wait, add mic and webcam in the keyboard too! now we are talking :)

OpenBSD phone FTW! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44454881)

and OS/2 for my bung hole

CrunchBang Phone (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44454903)

What's in your wallet?

CRUNCHBANG!

can't wait to shit through it (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44454925)

their logo would make a grand toilet seat id love to pee and poo through while listening to a rap mix of that old black guy talking about ubuntu

i'd smear a little poo under my nose and salute an ubuntu flag wrung from toilet paper

Second article without link to the campaign (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44454945)

This is the second time the Edge is being mentioned on slashdot, and its the second time there's no link to the actual campaign. I'm starting to sense a pattern...

Re:Second article without link to the campaign (2)

Jason Waddell (3001873) | about a year ago | (#44455173)

Not sure why that happened, my submission had a link to the Indiegogo campaign: http://slashdot.org/submission/2846335/using-kickstarter-data-to-predict-ubuntu-edges-success [slashdot.org]

Re:Second article without link to the campaign (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44455447)

Perhaps because your link was broken and the editor was too lazy to fix it?

executive summary: (2)

gbjbaanb (229885) | about a year ago | (#44454955)

If you didn't want to RTFA, it says they project it'll get somewhere between $18 to $22 million of the requested $32m.

(which ids damn good, $20m of real people's cash. Imagine what could happen if Google, Microsoft or Yahoo stopped buying stupid internet companies for many $billion and spent a fraction on stuff like this - or gave it to these kickstarters!)

Re:executive summary: (3, Interesting)

Windwraith (932426) | about a year ago | (#44454993)

I've been following several ubuntu blogs and they got a ton of cash in mere days. Like you'd at times get updates with the $3K milestone and the $4K milestone in the same one-hour period.
Besides, $18-22M is still a pretty kickass amount of money...and there is always the possibility of some larger sponsor kicking in.
Personally, if I could afford it right now, I'd make sure to get myself one. I always wanted a linux phone with decent specs and without the risk of having to flash stuff everywhere and/or making clumsy chroots inside Android to have my favorite tools ready.

Re:executive summary: (0)

DogDude (805747) | about a year ago | (#44455077)

Personally, if I could afford it right now, I'd make sure to get myself one. I always wanted a linux phone with decent specs and without the risk of having to flash stuff everywhere and/or making clumsy chroots inside Android to have my favorite tools ready.

Well, then you should consider buying one once somebody makes one. This isn't a way to purchase a phone. This is a way to donate a large amount of money to a for-profit, private company.

Re: executive summary: (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44457993)

You should have bought a N900 back when they were new (it did have "decent specs" then, of course with Moore's law it's feeling old now, but still works well enough for everything I want it to do), or maybe an N9 (if you can get past the lack of physical keyboard, it's really a remarkable combo of "end-user" GUI with fully accessible unixy guts), and these days you should be looking towards Jolla.

Nothing about Canonical should make anyone trust them to make their phone hacker-friendly -- IMO you're falling to wishful thinking.

Re:executive summary: (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44455091)

With kickstarter they'll get $0 unless they reach or exceed their target won't they?

Re:executive summary: (1)

phriot (2736421) | about a year ago | (#44455211)

First, this is Indiegogo, not Kickstarter. Second, yeah, the way they have the campaign set up, all contributions are returned to the backers if they don't meet their goal.

Analysis? (1)

Registered Coward v2 (447531) | about a year ago | (#44454977)

Using averages for this sort of analysis is problematic because it ignores variance in the data based on factors such as total amount requested, how long KS promotes a project on the front page and via email, change in pricing for early bird via later funders, and type of project. Unless you take into account and look at the distribution of funding results you really have very little data to back a conclusion. Sure, the funding pattern is interesting but provides little insight on chances of success. You might as well simply say "XX% of KS projects fail to fund, so the UP has a YY% of success" and be done with it.

As a side note, one of the biggest problems with KS is how hard it is to find projects of interest, especially early on. Unless they search for phone will a significant percentage of KS users even know there is a project funding one?

Re:Analysis? (1)

Nemyst (1383049) | about a year ago | (#44455545)

Probably not, considering it's on IndieGogo, not on Kickstarter ;)

Re:Analysis? (1)

Registered Coward v2 (447531) | about a year ago | (#44455939)

Probably not, considering it's on IndieGogo, not on Kickstarter ;)

Thanks for the clarification. I wasn't sure if they were setting up a KS campaign. If not, the data is even less relevant.

I'd back something worth backing (1)

Life2Death (801594) | about a year ago | (#44455039)

This project isn't it. I'd put money in it if they were to unify their efforts to make linux suck less and stop changing for the sake of change. Instead of blowing time making a phone they could have succeeded at making their desktop product rock solid and keep it that way. (Ubuntu has this thing about changing everything in every version far too much.)

If you don't agree with me, consider that Windows has at the core barely changed. Apps from 15 years ago still work for the most part, without much fuss. Documentation is basically the same, perhaps a few target directories have changed. This helps documentation people write in their struggles stay relevant. Linux on the other hand, appears to have no solid consistency between subversions sometimes, making documentation written a year ago for 10.0 not work with 10.1 or 10.2 so doing anything rapidly isn't as easy any longer. Why does this matter, you should know what you're doing! Well mom and pop shops, and one man IT shops don't have that kind of time to re-learn everything all the time.

Re:I'd back something worth backing (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44455067)

I'd take the contrarian view. Windows is awful because it's held back by these mom and pop types and businesses that will have to spend millions retraining people where buttons are. It's stagnated - hard-to-use dialogs haven't changed, and any changes they try to make are either so incremental they make it worse (control panel) or all the greybeards complain they can't use it without learning something (Win8).

MS could fire its UX team and churn out versions of Windows that are incrementally faster, ship with nicer APIs but still look the same, just with a different default desktop background and they'd score a win every time. It's great for them - they don't have to innovate - but for new users it sucks.

Re:I'd back something worth backing (2)

Tridus (79566) | about a year ago | (#44455243)

The problems with Windows 8 go far beyond unhappy greybeards. Trying to point a mouse at invisible hot corners is just a fucking stupid idea for a desktop OS. Metro is a touch UI and it sucks with a mouse. It also sucks for multitasking productivity, multiple monitors, and really anything else that people doing real work are using a PC for.

You sound like the people who think that "innovation" is always good, even when it's just change for the sake of change that actually makes the product less usable.

Re:I'd back something worth backing (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44455343)

Well, the alternative to the Windows GUI is the Linux GUI. As much as I love Linux (philosophically as well as technically), the GUI has always been third-rate. I'm not even talking about window managers (the shittiness of Unity should be readily apparent); I'm talking about application GUIs. It is rare to find a Linux application with a professionally designed and coded, full-featured GUI that does not glitch or having annoying user experience issues (bad error messages, popups everywhere, etc).

Most Linux programs with GUIs have partial rendering problems, controls not aligned properly, resizing the window repositions things in strange ways, or they are just plain buggy or missing large amounts of features. Even operating system config settings never seem to be done cleanly.

The problem is that the CLI is used as a crutch, as an excuse for having a shitty GUI. "Oh, you can't do that in the UI", or "yeah, the GUI is buggy for that". Or even "do it from the command prompt, GUIs are for windows noobs!". Followed by: "Just type this command instead: skjdfh --skjdfh kjh | kj3425 | $kdj | awk `$sldkjf kdjfkj` > /etc/crap 2>&1". And then, "why don't more people use Linux? Windows sux!"

It saddens me to say this, but the GUI experience in Windows applications and in the OS is far less hit-and-miss than on Linux. (I'm going to just ignore the whole Windows 8 disaster for the moment. It does not exist.) The apps may not often be very pretty, but they function without the constant annoyances I experience with Linux GUIs.

Ironically, it's the historical lack of a decent CLI in Windows which ensured much more effort went into application's GUIs - because developers had no reasonable choice. This is what I meant by the CLI being a crutch. The additional emphasis on GUIs in Windows most definitely shows.

It's well past time for Linux developers to take application GUI design seriously, assuming they themselves want to be taken seriously by the market. You want new users to Linux? That's what needs to happen.

Re:I'd back something worth backing (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44455453)

Tired, old and whiny complaints are tired, old, and whiny.

Re:I'd back something worth backing (2)

hAckz0r (989977) | about a year ago | (#44456191)

"Windows has at the core barely changed. Apps from 15 years ago still work for the most part"

And there in lie Microsoft's biggest security problem. Their refusal to jettison bad ideas only leaves them wide open to all kinds of security issues. Bad applications and old API's never get upgraded, patched, or fixed. They can apply all the band-aids they can think of (ASLR/SEP, etc.), but if you leave vulnerable hooks into your OS then its just a matter of time before someone comes along and tries the door knob.

When Microsoft squeezes all the cash out of a technology, they simply move on, leaving the old cruft to fester. That old technology just languishes out in the field, completely unsupported, but still being used by people that don't even know any better. Those old API's are the foothold of many many BotNets world wide. There are times when its better just to pull the plug on a technology and to replace it with a better model, and what better time to do that than with an OS upgrade? But Microsoft chooses not to anger anyone allowing old and insecure programs and drivers to be moved forward as they themselves reinvent things, and thus the bloat-ware challenge comes to bare. There is no such thing as a lean and mean Windows box, unless you are smart enough to be able to build it yourself. Windows is the defacto playground for malware, because its so easy a target.

I think partially wrong assumption (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44455075)

"This is further evidence that would-be backers are turned-off by Canonical’s incremental pricing structure."

I think it is rather proof that Shuttleworth and a lot of canonical people pumped in money early (persuaded, so to speak) to try and make it look successful, hoping it would generate momentum, hence an early surge. Real world demand is clearly actually much flatter, and I really doubt it has to do with "pricing structure" alone. At least that is the most likely reason for the unusual early shape of the curve, and the present flatlining.

Not many big projects to judge by (2, Informative)

PhilHibbs (4537) | about a year ago | (#44455083)

Elite: Dangerous [kicktraq.com] looked the same as Ubuntu Edge's progress in the early stages, and it got funded.

Re: Not many big projects to judge by (3, Insightful)

AvitarX (172628) | about a year ago | (#44455451)

No it didn't, it had a very normal progression from what I can tell. I assume in this graph the green is the average daily amount predicting the total earned. http://www.kicktraq.com/projects/1461411552/elite-dangerous/#chart-exp-trend [kicktraq.com]

Compare that to the graph in the article with the diagonal line, see how successful projects generally stay above the line (the diagonal one in the article, the flat one in my link). The edge is already well below it unfortunatly, and is quite early in funding. It shouldn't dip below until quite late in a campaign of at all, and it should never get anywhere near as low as it is now.

Re: Not many big projects to judge by (1)

PhilHibbs (4537) | about a year ago | (#44455753)

Yeah I guess you're right.

Re:Not many big projects to judge by (1)

Nemyst (1383049) | about a year ago | (#44455577)

Elite also had a thirtieth of the funding goal, used the more popular Kickstarter platform, and had nostalgia and big names to help it. Whether Ubuntu is a popular enough brand to reach their lofty ambitions or not remains to be seen. The biggest crowdsourced project to date is Star Citizen, which managed to garner about 10 million dollars across two campaigns (their own site and Kickstarter later on). They've since taken the long approach and added another 4 million to the pile through extended preordering. Even that is not even half of the Edge.

tl;dr - their answer is NO (1)

tulcod (1056476) | about a year ago | (#44455167)

"This projection puts the Ubuntu Edge campaign on pace for a $18 million total."

Re:tl;dr - their answer is NO (1)

leonbev (111395) | about a year ago | (#44455629)

By predicting that the Kickstarter is going to come up short of their goal, these armchair analysts have likely (and amusingly) impacted their own projections. Now that more people think that the project is going to fail, even fewer people will bother to invest in it. Depending on how many people read the article on Slashdot, it might cost Canonical another $500,000 to a million in contributions.

Re:tl;dr - their answer is NO (1)

Vintermann (400722) | about a year ago | (#44457539)

Now that more people think that the project is going to fail, even fewer people will bother to invest in it.

The point of Kickstarter (and IndieGoGo projects that don't use the greedy and buyer-hostile "flexible funding" option) is that there's no reason to do that. If you think the project will fail, it's still rational to pledge - if you were wrong, you're happy, and if you were right, you've lost nothing.

That is the KEY point of treshold pledge funding, and by extension Kickstarter, to counteract this self-fulfilling pessimism. (IndieGoGo, as mentioned, haven't quite got it, and are willing to sacrifice buyers to attract a few more dumb and greedy project starters).

market price: about 650$ per unit (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44455237)

That's apparently what people think the value of Edge is.

If Shuttleworth really wants the project to reach the goal they should be back to that price. It would mean a 22% loss for them, or about 7 millions. if the estimates in TFA are correct they will fall short about 10 millions instead.

Re:market price: about 650$ per unit (1)

jkflying (2190798) | about a year ago | (#44455347)

You can't get a phone with 4GB RAM and 128GB flash for $650, and those are the specs this has. Also, fuck Gorilla Glass, it has a sapphire crystal screen.

Re:market price: about 650$ per unit (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44455977)

Yeah but does it Linux? Hm? And it is 775 now if you had RTGDMFA! And it is $## not ##$. Youropeons need to get learned more!

Missing option (1)

pkphilip (6861) | about a year ago | (#44455263)

They should have had another option below $10,000/-. Something like a $5000 option which includes 3 phones + and invite to the unveiling meeting. I think the $10,000/- with a single phone option won't be attractive to a lot of people.

tfrist stop (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44455955)

BSD culminated i8 Come on baby...and

The headline should have been punctuated with "?" (1)

hduff (570443) | about a year ago | (#44456737)

From reading TFA, it seems that the headline should have been punctuated with a question mark, so Betteridge's Law could be applied identifying this effort as a failure.

They forgot... (1)

briancox2 (2417470) | about a year ago | (#44456927)

This campaign can be paid off immediately on any morning that Mark wakes up, yawns and decides to click donate in his own campaign.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?