Slashdot Mirror

See this. It's pretty damn good.

I think my laptop would require a slightly larger weight to pull this off.

Thanks! If you know of any more please post them either to http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Books or its discussion page!

But because it uses binary blobs for the driver and firmware, RMS fees it is hopelessly compromised?!

When most people talk about closed-source code shipped on the XO, they talk specifically of the wireless driver, which is odd because this is actually open-source (git tree here).

What they are actually thinking of is the wireless firmware, which is a closed-source binary blob loaded onto the wireless hardware on system startup. My (admittedly limited) understanding of the situation is that while the driver runs on the main CPU, the firmware runs only on the wireless processor and thus can't tamper with (e.g.) operating system memory protection. So insisting on having the source to the wireless firmware is something like insisting having on the circuit diagram to your printer -- sure, the manufacturer could sneak in some malicious behavior, but the damage is limited to that device.

That said, the reason for the closed-source firmware appears to be that Marvell, the wireless manufacturer, licensed an embedded operating system to handle the low-level wireless functions, in order to get their product to market more quickly. They can't release the code due to licensing constraints, but they also appear to be willing to collaborate with developers to put together a free/libre replacement -- and there are some OLPC volunteers making progress on it. See this OLPC trac ticket for details.

When most people talk about closed-source code shipped on the XO, they talk specifically of the wireless driver, which is odd because this is actually open-source (git tree here).

What they are actually thinking of is the wireless firmware, which is a closed-source binary blob loaded onto the wireless hardware on system startup. My (admittedly limited) understanding of the situation is that while the driver runs on the main CPU, the firmware runs only on the wireless processor and thus can't tamper with (e.g.) operating system memory protection. So insisting on having the source to the wireless firmware is something like insisting having on the circuit diagram to your printer -- sure, the manufacturer could sneak in some malicious behavior, but the damage is limited to that device.

That said, the reason for the closed-source firmware appears to be that Marvell, the wireless manufacturer, licensed an embedded operating system to handle the low-level wireless functions, in order to get their product to market more quickly. They can't release the code due to licensing constraints, but they also appear to be willing to collaborate with developers to put together a free/libre replacement -- and there are some OLPC volunteers making progress on it. See this OLPC trac ticket for details.

Well, I guess somebody better tell the OLPC project that they don't include GTK+ or PyGTK so they can fix their wiki.

The microkernel on the Marvell 88W8388 wireless chip is one of 2 to 4 pieces of non-Free user-modifiable software on the XO laptop. (the others being the EC firmware, and possibly the touchpad and keyboard firmware) This is where we explain what needs to be done to create a Free replacement, who is doing it, and what progress we have made.

I did get my OLPC XO. I bought it the first day the you can order via the buy-one-get-one program. I received it some time back in late December. I showed it around the office, to some friends, and gave it a good shake down test. It was impressive and I thought was fairly well designed.

Then, I gave it away;

http://lists.laptop.org/pipermail/devel/2008-January/009361.html

I would encourage others who have received XOs and don't know what to do with them to do similar. Find a developer or someone who can really use it, and then give it away. Otherwise, contribute to the cause by helping with educational programs, improving the code, or writing documentation. Porting Doom, writing a new MP3 player, or bitching about performance is not helping.

It is not a general-use laptop. It's an educational tool. I don't think most Slashdot readers understand that.

I've shelled out $423.95 x 2 and am still waiting. And it's a shame that it's taking so long. But I'm happier that working-class kids in Mongolia (no, not "starving to death" people) have laptops, and I can wait. (I'm posting about it on THE INTERNET so clearly I'm not exactly struggling for 'net access.)

They had pro-bono donation of services from three (or more) different companies to handle ordering and distribution. Not having a logistics manager or dealing with the process openly *is* a shame. Lots of individuals unaffiliated have been volunteering their time, trying to help, but have been powerless to actually *do* anything, since the volunteers don't have access to all of the data sets.

Hopefully the next time they offer G1G1 they'll manage the order/delivery status themselves, they *should* be able to track each laptop from Quanta, to the shipping carrier, to the port, to FedEx.

The actually source of all these stories might be interesting to people, instead of articles about the source. Since when did people stop being able to read primary sources and start being able to only read "news" articles.

http://wiki.laptop.org/go/How_laptop_delivery_breaks

Oddly, that is who OLPC partnered with to do G1G1, and who share the blame for the screwups.

Please see the draft flowchart, if you like:
http://wiki.laptop.org/go/How_laptop_delivery_works

You're right, it's kind of a stretch to call anything in that article hacking, but it is designed to be (software) hackable. Though, the line in voltmeter is unique in that the audio hardware was chosen to make that possible.

It's the only laptop I've ever heard of that uses Open Firmware, or any open source BIOS. There are even tutorials on hacking it in the wiki. Plus, most of the GUI and applications are written in Python and are designed to be relatively easy to modify.

The hardware itself is far from hackable though. There is very little, if anything, that can be modified inside the thing, even though it is easy to disassemble. I imagine its the result of making it as cheap and rugged as possible.

The Opera web browser and the Real Networks Helix(TM) platform have been ported to the laptop and are available for download but not part of the standard distribution.

Next up we decided to pull Opera down onto the XO since the built-in browser gets the job done, but not quite the way we want. In order to do that we created a nested X server, since there's already one running that you don't want to disrupt. So, we basically ran one X server within another, and the nested server-software called Xephyr-ran outside of the other applications we had running. Doing this you can have a traditional Linux desktop running at the same time as your XO stuff, as long as your memory holds out.

By the way, one of the configuration changes that we showed in a picture above was to the dot pitch. By default Opera is basically unreadable in the X server, due to the XO's screen resolution.

Apparently, there's been several issues with G1G1 fulfillment. They expected to have shipped every laptop by now, but discovered at least 5,000 orders that have fallen through the cracks. Those will be sent tomorrow, if possible. More information is at http://wiki.laptop.org/go/G1G1_Fulfillment_Information

pfft, that's not hacking

http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Inferno

You're right that Unix-style permissions aren't all that great. What's cool though is that now there are flavors of Linux that allow permissions by *application* instead of just by user. Per app permissions are much better, because it means you can say that MailAttachmentApp is not allowed to erase anything or that DriveByDownloadApp isn't allowed to use your webcam. See the OLPC project's security page. They've incorporated this kind of security into their machine. Sure, it's still not perfect or a guaranty that you won't lose data -- but it's better than any current system.

One Laptop Per child has no moving parts. Sooo you don't have to wait for 10 years. http://laptop.org/en/laptop/hardware/specs.shtml

Of course it's possible to rewrite the simulator in any other language. It's just a question of how much work would it be, and how sure you would be that it did the same thing.

It was comparatively little work to rewrite C code in C++, because that's exactly what C++ was designed to do: take old C code with global variables and functions, and encapsulate it in a class with a well defined interface. Because C++ has the implicit this parameter to each member function, and it's not necessary to explicitly specify this when accessing member variables and methods, you don't have to change C code very much to translate it to C++. A different language with explicit this (or self) would require meticulously changing every line of code, and that would be orders of magnitude more work.

The first step to translating a big pile of C code to another higher level language is understanding and strictly defining what it does. Translating it to C++ is the first step in that process. That gives the code a lot more structure and coherence, without disrupting how it works.

The next step is to clean it up and toss out everything that isn't relevent -- all the old user interface and operating system hacks that no longer are necessary and have nothing to do with the simulator.

Once you have a clean core of code that verifyable works with well defined interfaces and without any irrelavent crap in it, it's much easier to start rewriting it in other languages like Python or Lua. (I would NOT suggest using Perl, though. That is a horrible, dead end language, antithetical to teaching kids how to program.)

Alan Kay and I have been having an interesting discussion about how to rewrite SimCity in much higher level languages than Python and Perl, specifically visual programming languages like eToys, Star Logo, Max/MSP, KidSim (Stagecraft Creator), Bounce (Body Electric), SimAntics, etc, along the lines of Robot Odyssey.

What we want to do is to open up SimCity to the Python scripting language as a first step, and then write a high level visual programming language in Python, easy enough for kids to use, but powerful enough for real programming.

Here are some references:
Ideas for Sugar development environment from HyperLook SimCity
OLPC Visual Programming Languages for Education
Discussion with Alan Kay about Visual Programming
Discussion with Alan Kay about Robot Odyssey
OLPC Visual Programming Language Discussion with Guido van Rossum and Alan Kay
Alan Kay on Programming Languages
The Shape of PSIBER Space: PostScript Interactive Bug Eradication Routines
Kurt Schmucker (inventor of the C++ Barf Bag ;-) at Apple wrote "A Taxonomy of Simulation Software"
Tim Smith at Anglia Polytechnic University in Essex wrote "A review of simulated and micro-world environments"
Brad Myers: Taxonomies of Visual Programming and Program Visualization

-Don

If you really believe that the XO is the best thing since sliced bread then why is it that companies arent lining up to buy them for their employees? If it really was the best deal wouldnt everyone want them?

The target for the OLPC is education for children. It's not available for general sale so companies don't have anywhere to line up even if they wanted to.

The OLPC is a non-profit organization that is able to get non-profit prices from the manufacturer. They avoid much of the cost with a commercial laptop by doing bulk sales with the local ministries of education who in turn take care of the distribution. Much of the price for commercial machines is due to sales/marketing/distribution costs.

Also note that it is not just a laptop project but an educational project. There's some more infrastructure involved such as the XS school server.

Over time I expect to see variants of the OLPC-XO laptop itself as well as commercial alternatives available using some of the interesting technologies introduced such as:

• Bitfrost computer security
• Per laptop activation/developer keys for firmware security
• Dual mode display

The XO has only just started to be mass-produced so be a bit patient and even though it may not have OLPC in its name there will be some products available which will contain some OLPC based innovation within them.

If you really believe that the XO is the best thing since sliced bread then why is it that companies arent lining up to buy them for their employees? If it really was the best deal wouldnt everyone want them?

The target for the OLPC is education for children. It's not available for general sale so companies don't have anywhere to line up even if they wanted to.

The OLPC is a non-profit organization that is able to get non-profit prices from the manufacturer. They avoid much of the cost with a commercial laptop by doing bulk sales with the local ministries of education who in turn take care of the distribution. Much of the price for commercial machines is due to sales/marketing/distribution costs.

Also note that it is not just a laptop project but an educational project. There's some more infrastructure involved such as the XS school server.

Over time I expect to see variants of the OLPC-XO laptop itself as well as commercial alternatives available using some of the interesting technologies introduced such as:

• Bitfrost computer security
• Per laptop activation/developer keys for firmware security
• Dual mode display

The XO has only just started to be mass-produced so be a bit patient and even though it may not have OLPC in its name there will be some products available which will contain some OLPC based innovation within them.

If you really believe that the XO is the best thing since sliced bread then why is it that companies arent lining up to buy them for their employees? If it really was the best deal wouldnt everyone want them?

The target for the OLPC is education for children. It's not available for general sale so companies don't have anywhere to line up even if they wanted to.

The OLPC is a non-profit organization that is able to get non-profit prices from the manufacturer. They avoid much of the cost with a commercial laptop by doing bulk sales with the local ministries of education who in turn take care of the distribution. Much of the price for commercial machines is due to sales/marketing/distribution costs.

Also note that it is not just a laptop project but an educational project. There's some more infrastructure involved such as the XS school server.

Over time I expect to see variants of the OLPC-XO laptop itself as well as commercial alternatives available using some of the interesting technologies introduced such as:

• Bitfrost computer security
• Per laptop activation/developer keys for firmware security
• Dual mode display

The XO has only just started to be mass-produced so be a bit patient and even though it may not have OLPC in its name there will be some products available which will contain some OLPC based innovation within them.

Dear Molly,

You may be a bit_itch, but you ain't never been goth anything.

You said it best; "Look at me, I'm an attention whore!" yes, you are indeed a dogma/money slut.

Do you work for Int$l, M$, and/or are you just another of the mighty clueless?

I have two OLPC, they work great across my *.11n. They ain't my box-beast, but for school kids ... they are extremely well designed and thought-out.

The cost faux-truth you spun like a corporate politician/tele-clergy.

The OLPC project originally aimed for a price of 100 United States dollars. The USD exchange rate is down globally. A $200 laptop, considering school book prices/revisionist content spin being feed to school children, poor quality education ... we are all better off with more education tools in the hands of all students. No child left behind is more likely to succeed with OLPC then with test-teaching.

Kids can teach each other more in a shorter amount of time then most adults or any politician can perceive as possible for kids learning collaboratively in a community of their peers.

http://laptop.org/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/$100_laptop
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XO-1_(laptop)

Our Failure, as a nation, is not an option for US children!

How many wannabe POTUS have committed to impeach Bush for crimes and treason, or moved to prosecute scavenger-bank mortgage loan-shark CEOs and personnel, attempted to evict religion from politics/government, demand fair and honest election machines/receipts .... There is not one of the wannabe POTUS I can trust to work for a better stronger US, eliminate Citizen/personal income tax ... replaced by a fair-flat business sales tax at each point of sale in the USA ... the customer buyer still pays/buys, but no more annual tax filling for the private citizens, and the tax rate floats annually to balance the budget; So, everyone rich and poor pay their fair share. Skipping a middle man point of sale ... tax evasion crime, unless the appropriate greater-tax portion is paid at point of sale. No wannabe POTUS talks about the Corporate (oil, tobacco, ADM ...) welfare, DMCA/RIAA... IPR laws, legacy or innovative economic models ... I expect the wannabe POTUS will prove to be great friends of the Corporate States America just like Nazi-Lover Bush.

Just one wannabe POTUS really for US and The USA Constitution (in the batch) ... I would vote again ... for the patriotic honorable loser.

!HAVEFUN!

it costs too much...

It's $200, for an extremely low power laptop with an innovative daylight readable screen and mesh networking built in. It costs the governments little or nothing. It costs the kids themselves nothing. Come on. You can do better than that.

... isn't being used in anyway that it keeps being promoted as being.

it costs too much...

It's $200, for an extremely low power laptop with an innovative daylight readable screen and mesh networking built in. It costs the governments little or nothing. It costs the kids themselves nothing. Come on. You can do better than that.

... isn't being used in anyway that it keeps being promoted as being.

it costs too much...

It's $200, for an extremely low power laptop with an innovative daylight readable screen and mesh networking built in. It costs the governments little or nothing. It costs the kids themselves nothing. Come on. You can do better than that.

... isn't being used in anyway that it keeps being promoted as being.

I'm sure most people working at Intel or Microsoft probably are cool.. Such as the people who probably worked hard for many months making an Intel chip work inside of an Intel version of the XO and having all their work scrapped by a strategical decision at the managment. Or the Microsoft employees who have worked over a year on the XO version of Windows XP. Anyways, I've suggested OLPC to release many more videos on the Internet to let people know what's going on and to let people know the truth while there are all these positive and sometimes negative stories going around on all the big and small media. OLPC is a huge hope for many people following this industry and in my opinion there should be a bit more blogging and video-blogging going on from within, more then http://planet.laptop.org/ I do what I can as an independent fan at http://olpc.tv/

I haven't read olpcnews.com often but I thought it was VERY well written. It took me over 15 minutes to get a nagging feeling that something was very wrong with what I read (and I hadn't heard of the site before, I found it while googling for OLPC; olpcnews.com sounded more appropriate than "laptop.org"). I think it is quite difficult to impart on your readership the feeling that a project is well-meaning but delusional ("trust me, I've worked in the third world" - ffs).

What annoys me personally is to find this anti-OLPC criticism site BEFORE finding the project website; it really doesn't bother me too much that this Wayan person tries to wipe the floor with the OLPC project; in case it's fair criticism it can be used to improve and strengthen the project, and else, well everyone is entitled to their own opinion.

But I think it's really bad that he chose to deck out the website in OLPC-XO green and white and doesn't have a clear disclaimer saying he's working for a direct competitor, because it may confuse some of the readers (say, oh, ministers of education) that this is a more or less independent source of information.

BTW if you made an anti-Microsoft site microsoftnews.com, using Microsoft's logos and colour schemes, run by a RedHat employee, I think you'd get sued by Microsoft for trademark infringement (Mike Rowe Soft, anyone?). But maybe I've seen too many American lawyer drama's.

P.S. it seems microsoftnews.com is still available, I just checked to see if it was a RedHat-run covert operation ;-)

this blog never really had that big of a following

The red and yellow machines were prototypes. Models beginning with the letter C are green and white, as are the MP (mass production) machines. More here: http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Pictures

Whilst over the years computers have grown more compact, and display sizes are varied without argument, there remains widespread majority preference for one aspect: the 'normal' proportions of a keyboard.

The squashed keyboards/keypads on mobile/handheld devices and on Eee PC may be useful, but they're not as useful, easy or widely-appreciated as a normal-sized keyboard.

For devices with squashed or no keyboards: there exist, as peripherals, plenty of normal-size projected or peripheral foldaway/fabric keyboards.

For devices with normal keyboards: I know no-one who prefers to use a sqaushed peripheral alternative (though there are probably very rare cases when people do so).

I guess that normal-sized keyboards are ergonomcally good and it does seem that XO fits.

Why use an inferior tool (squashed keyboard) for learning --which is what the XO and OLPC are all about -- if it's near-inevitable that sooner or later, you'll require additional learning -- to use a device that truly fits one's fingers whilst typing)? As you learn through doing so I can't view Eee PC as an ideal device for learners.

Don't misunderstand me: I'm not disrespecting the Eee PC in itself. A colleague has one, and he loves it, and I realise its usefulness, but the keyboard is peculiarly small and I can't view Eee PC hardware as a recommended substitute for XO.

Best,
Graham

Whilst over the years computers have grown more compact, and display sizes are varied without argument, there remains widespread majority preference for one aspect: the 'normal' proportions of a keyboard.

The squashed keyboards/keypads on mobile/handheld devices and on Eee PC may be useful, but they're not as useful, easy or widely-appreciated as a normal-sized keyboard.

For devices with squashed or no keyboards: there exist, as peripherals, plenty of normal-size projected or peripheral foldaway/fabric keyboards.

For devices with normal keyboards: I know no-one who prefers to use a sqaushed peripheral alternative (though there are probably very rare cases when people do so).

I guess that normal-sized keyboards are ergonomcally good and it does seem that XO fits.

Why use an inferior tool (squashed keyboard) for learning --which is what the XO and OLPC are all about -- if it's near-inevitable that sooner or later, you'll require additional learning -- to use a device that truly fits one's fingers whilst typing)? As you learn through doing so I can't view Eee PC as an ideal device for learners.

Don't misunderstand me: I'm not disrespecting the Eee PC in itself. A colleague has one, and he loves it, and I realise its usefulness, but the keyboard is peculiarly small and I can't view Eee PC hardware as a recommended substitute for XO.

Best,
Graham

As long as we're questioning the educational value of a "standard" OS, let's question the educational value of "standard" end-user software. Face it, 10 year olds aren't very interested in playing with a word processor or spreadsheet. How about something that will actually engage and challenge them? Even if they don't go for the XO, schools should consider installing some of the software from that system. Which is not terribly tied to the OLPC project, or even to Linux. OLPC's innovative user interface also deserves a close look.

As long as we're questioning the educational value of a "standard" OS, let's question the educational value of "standard" end-user software. Face it, 10 year olds aren't very interested in playing with a word processor or spreadsheet. How about something that will actually engage and challenge them? Even if they don't go for the XO, schools should consider installing some of the software from that system. Which is not terribly tied to the OLPC project, or even to Linux. OLPC's innovative user interface also deserves a close look.

An average laptop consumes about 50 watts.

I don't think so. That's a page off the OLPC wiki, it says that laptops average about 20 watts idle. This is closer to my experience.

On an IBM T-40, the power measuring tool that comes with the computer (software) shows the laptop will use between 16 and 18 watts on lowest power consumption and up to about 25 with everything maxed and some peripherals plugged in (wi-fi, usb-powered hard drive).

On a friend's macbook pro: I think the system normally runs around 20 watts, and will use 11-12 W minimum and 40 to 50 max. This is a modern model: the latest, highest end one released, not including these new ones that will be coming out in a few days.

Here's another link. They estimate laptops average 10 watts, and I suppose your laptop would draw less ehile you were pedaling their generator (the laptop being idle).

I just want to tell everyone that 50 W is a bad number to assume for laptops, and 20 W is much better, and google is your friend.

They're lovely machines, to be sure. I was given a late prototype to test back in August, and when my normal laptop ceased to function, I started using the OLPC exclusively. I found it was dead easy to learn the interface, and for casual purposes the beta interface was slow but useable.

The keyboard, however, is designed to by suitable for children - or, more to the point unsuitable for adults. The idea is to make it less likely that dad (or big brother) will come home, crack open a beer and say, "C'mere kid, gimme the laptop for a few minutes..." and then spend the rest of the evening using it to browse pr0n while the child sits helplessly by.

In short, the XO is a close-to-ideal laptop in so many ways, but it's been designed to be most useful for children only. You may find it possible to accommodate yourself to this (I did), but don't expect too much assistance from the OLPC project in this regard.

Hopefully soon the OLPC will be available to buy here in the UK. It seems to fill a niche of being ultraportable (7 inch screen), good battery life (9-10 hours, 2-3W consumption, long life NiMH battery) and low cost ($200, dropping towards $100 in the future perhaps).

  I've already got several desktops and laptops, but would buy one of these in a second, given the chance.

http://wiki.laptop.org/go/OLPC_myths#The_laptop_will_run_a_Microsoft_Windows_operating_system

The goal of the OLPC project is not "to educate children about how computers work". There seem to be some delusional folks in our community who think that the project is trying to breed the next generation of Linux-hackers and open source developers. It's not about teaching computer science, it's not about developing Open Office plugins and it's not about learning to write bug-free code. It's about providing an educational tool to give children a "window on the world, as well as a highly programmable tool for exploring it" and that's very different from what some people think it is. Perhaps you should read about the project's mission from their site: http://laptop.org/vision/mission/ One of the most important lines they have in there is that the "OLPC is not, at heart, a technology program".

Something Pez forgot to mention is that you can emulate an XO relatively painlessly. There is even a premade image file that is available that you can drop into say QEMU and see what it's all about.

A few caveats: Use something with virtualization which unfortunately means x86. Trying to run this emulated on a high end PowerPC system was saddening. Yes it is only a 433MHz target, but 433MHz is pretty high when you think about it. The other thing to keep in mind is that the premade image wants to change the display to about 1024x768 instead of the XO native 1200x900. The Sugar manager seems to be fine with it but most activities (XO apps) will not display properly.

Maybe Negroponte should just pull off the gloves and make a deal with Wal-Mart and Costco to carry
OLPC's. Use the profits to donate machines to developing nations. Or use the profits to cut schools in
this country a big discount. If Intel and MS want a war, give them a war.

Reading this article made my blood boil. Intel very clearly acted in bad faith, and their actions against OLPC will no doubt result in poor kids being deprived of access to technology. Immediately, my thoughts turned to the business I've given Intel and whether I could ever buy from them again.

But my second, more constructive thought was "what can I do to help OLPC?" and I easily found two great answers.

1. Donate. For just $200, you can give an XO laptop to a child in a developing nation. It immediately makes a difference in the life of one child, and it's an opportunity for the XO to prove itself. Our donations no doubt will drive future sales for OLPC. Donations are entirely tax-deductible (Question: does anyone know they're tax-deductible for Canadians?).

2. Develop. If you're a programmer, you can donate some of your time and work on an XO Activity. There's already a pretty impressive array of available software, but there's lots of room for work, and this is one way that OLPC can really differentiate itself. Think about it: thousands of passionate hackers contributing quality free software, all targeted at this machine. That's something that Intel and Microsoft will never be able to compete with because no one else is ever going to be passionate about Classmate & Windows.

Let's make a difference!

Reading this article made my blood boil. Intel very clearly acted in bad faith, and their actions against OLPC will no doubt result in poor kids being deprived of access to technology. Immediately, my thoughts turned to the business I've given Intel and whether I could ever buy from them again.

But my second, more constructive thought was "what can I do to help OLPC?" and I easily found two great answers.

1. Donate. For just $200, you can give an XO laptop to a child in a developing nation. It immediately makes a difference in the life of one child, and it's an opportunity for the XO to prove itself. Our donations no doubt will drive future sales for OLPC. Donations are entirely tax-deductible (Question: does anyone know they're tax-deductible for Canadians?).

2. Develop. If you're a programmer, you can donate some of your time and work on an XO Activity. There's already a pretty impressive array of available software, but there's lots of room for work, and this is one way that OLPC can really differentiate itself. Think about it: thousands of passionate hackers contributing quality free software, all targeted at this machine. That's something that Intel and Microsoft will never be able to compete with because no one else is ever going to be passionate about Classmate & Windows.

Let's make a difference!

How about electricity for every child?

We're like the World Food Program and they're McDonald's. They can't compete. They are both food organizations but for completely different purposes. If the Classmate were in the hands of every single child in the world, that would be pretty good. Could it have better power charcteristics, a better display, etc.? Sure, that would be good. But I don't care if kids get the XO so much as that they get laptops.

Expect to hear all the usual "Intel is a business" bullsh*t that always comes up.

What has to be remembered is that Google is a business, Red Hat is a business, News Corp is a business too, and yet none of them actively tried to sabotage the OLPC foundation they had contracted to be a part of. Somehow they can justify their participation to the stockholders, but Intel can't? Intel was acting competitively before they joined the OLPC foundation in July of last year. After that time they continued to do so, only now they had access to a lot more information about XO potential buyers. Their behavior was despicable and only further enforces my decision long ago to buy AMD processors exclusively.

Adding insult to injury, Intel holds a press conference call announcing the decision to split, without informing the OLPC board. Read through the stories from last Thursday. The olpc foundation had no response because they were shocked.

They recovered nicely in my view with this official response. http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Intel#INTEL_RESIGNS_FROM_OLPC

I hope Negroponte & company sues for breach of contract.

I agree with all of your judgments, and am relieved to see I'm not alone.

The UI is not awful, and is good enough, and it was probably correct to think it through from scratch instead of trying to riff on the Alto/Star/Lisa/Mac/Windows. But it still tastes to me like other not-so-good UIs, in which the designer and people that can be coaxed into the same mindspace can be convinced that it's better than it is.

I read the human interface guidelines and I'm not convinced. I've often talked to people who have believed their UI was easy to use because "you always do thus-and-such to achieve this-and-that, and the frammises are always on the left edge, and you ferthboinder toward the top to glorp persistent quibinicks..."

One of the things that was fascinating about the Mac in 1984, which I approached with virtually no previous experience, was that you could intuit it and use it without ever formulating or deducing the consistent left-brained rules by which it operated. For about three days I used it effectively without understanding it at all. I wanted to achieve something, I took a wild guess as to what might work, and it usually did.

I don't feel that way about Sugar, although maybe my brain has just ossified.

If the Journal functioned the way it's supposed to, I don't understand why it, rather than the "home view," isn't the center of the user experience, and the thing you boot into. Seems to me that you'd more often be returning to an old activity than starting a new one.

I "get" the idea of a linear, chronological arrangement of activities rather than a hierarchical tree of documents, but I don't understand how you navigate that arrangement unless you are punctilious about giving each saved activity a good name, and clever at naming them in such a way that you can search for them by typing search strings (which I think only search the name of the journal entry, not the content of the saved activity).

2. Mary Lou Jepsen: Mary Lou's last day at OLPC is December 31. She will be continuing to consult with us on a number of different fronts as she chases after her next miracle in display technology. Mary Lou was OLPC employee Number One, both in terms of when she joined the organization and in terms of the breadth and depth of her contributions. Thank you and best of luck with your adventures in a new role and new year.

Heh. There should be a Star in the toolbar towards the right (try all the tabs), and it will add a Boomark, and the bottom toolbar to hold it.

The trick is that you need to rename your Browser activity session, and resume it from Journal to see the Bookmarks again.

Swing by #olpc-help or check out the wiki for other hints :) http://support.laptop.org/

hth,
adric