Slashdot Mirror
Belgium: A Computer in Every Home
joost writes "In an article published online by Belgian newspaper 'Het Nieuwsblad' (sorry only a dutch link), Belgian minister Miss Laurette Onkelinx speaks about her plan to provide every Belgian household with a computer. The minister is (amongst other things) responsible for 'equality' and therefore pushes the plan to provide the less fortunate with a pc. In the same article, she said she already started talking to Compaq for the hardware and Microsoft for the OS. Belgian Linux users are starting a campaign to petition Miss Onkelinx's departement, explaining their concern about the decision, and advising to look towards linux for an alternative.(more on be.comp.os.linux) You too can send an email by clicking here."
Who's going to pay for all of the O'Reilly Books if they do use linux? And then you bet there'll be a flame war about which distro to use.
Miss Onkelinx speaks about her plan to provide every Belgian household with a computer
With a name like that, she could even get distro named after her
...if she does the right thing
You put an email address on the front page of /. and you do not even obscure it.
/. reader is not going to be objective or polite. It mostly certainly is not going to aid the cause of putting Linux on these machines.
/. hurts more than helps the wide spread adoption of Linux?
/. is _NOT_ the place to post email addresses of individuals who are percieved not to get it. The typical
I wonder if
Every Belgian citizen has been given a new computer thanks to minister Miss Laurette Onkelinx's campaign for equality however many of them are not using them for their intended purpose.
One Belgian used his as a stepping stool while cleaning his windows. "I powered the [darn] thing up and played around with it for a few minutes but I couldn't get anything done," said Hermsh Obernikle, "then the bulb in the hallway went out and so I toted the box over then to stand on, it works great!"
One homemaker, who asked not to be identified, was at home testing out her new computer when a bandwidth crazed crimi-geek broke into her house. "Thank goodness my new computer had linux on it", she said, "the [intruder] was so mesmerized that he stayed on the computer for hours doing something with the [kernel] thing until the police arrived." She went on to say that she was glad that linux saved her life but was unsure what she was going to do with it after that.
42 - So long and thanks for all the fish.
Windows is "easy" for many because it's what they are used to. It's not intuitive (Click on "Start" button to shut down machine is not intuitive or "easy) as people keep making it seem to be.
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
Maybe they should learn a lesson from this: Free PCs for the poor on sale in black market... not everyone wants a PC, some people would rather have food and other basic needs.
Predictably, this article generated a storm of posts about how Linux isn't ready for this, or Linux would confuse users, or Windows is better supported or...
However, when you read the actual, detailed arguments about why Linux is a bad choice for this project they boil down to two things: Linux is too hard to install and there aren't enough people around who know how to use it.
In the first case, do you really think the Belgian government is going to ship each user a PC without any software on it, and a pile of CDs to install? Why don't they just ship a pile of components, while they're at it? The government is going to buy a whole bunch of identical machines pre-installed with some idential collection of software, all configured so it will run right out of the box. Whether Linux is hard or easy to install isn't really all that relevant, since the users won't have to install it. And, unlike Windows 9x systems that experience an "entropy" effect whereby they gradually become less and less usable until finally you have to reinstall them, Linux boxes tend to run forever.
Second, in an environment filled with Linux boxes, how long do you think it'll be before the average person can call the neighbor kid over to fix any problems? Not long at all. On well-known hardware, with a nice GUI installed Linux isn't any harder to use than Windows, it's just *different* (and not really all that much different). Not to mention the fact that if the Belgian government took all of that cash that they were going to spend on Windows and Office licenses and instead spent it on setting up a support infrastructure for those machines, the net result would probably be *better* support.
There are also some really significant advantages to free software in this situation. The largest one is the application software available. What? Absolutely. Yes, there is more software available for Windows machines, but there is more *free* software available for Linux. Both environments include the most basic stuff by default; browser, e-mail client and multimedia player. Unless you buy Office for each machine ($$) Windows doesn't have a word processor, spreadsheet, etc. Unless you buy Quicken or Money for each machine, no personal accounting system. MS Paint hardly counts as an image editing program.
A pre-installed Linux box with KDE, an office suite (StarOffice would be ideal, I'll bet Sun would give them free licenses) and the standard collection of packages that come with every distro would provide a low-cost, easy to support solution that does pretty much everything a basic user needs right out of the box. No command lines, no arcane syntax -- except for the kids who have tons of time to invest in learning how this thing ticks, and what better system could an up-and-coming techie have? (And don't give me that "They should have a Windows box because that's what they'll use in the workplace" crap. What they'll use in the workplace will change five times before they get there, and it will be deep understanding of how one system fundamentally works under the covers that will translate well and stand them in good stead, not superficial knowledge of which buttons to click. Hell, I grew up on a Timex Sinclar 1000, a TI-99/4A, a Commodore 64 and an Atari 520ST.)
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
With a Linux system there could be specially constructed versions for different levels of experience and different needs, there could be 'upgrade' CDs that will reconfigure machines to take users to a new level.
With Windows/Office you _must_ do it the way MS want, and must pay. If a Linux system is used it can be done the way that users want.
Garbage. Just to address your example, double-clicking a menu item will work fine, and I see people do this at work all the time, as well as people who double-click hyperlinks. As far as single clicking, ever since IE 4.0 Desktop integration you've been able to make any icon, file, or executable in an Explorer window (the desktop is one) launchable with a single click.
On the whole, people who are only interested in trashing Microsoft don't realize how customizeable it truly is. One day my interest got piqued, and I started browsing around msdn.microsoft.com/library to figure out how the Google toolbar manages to add items to the IE right-click context menu. It turns out that I was able to write my own mini-script which allowed me to select text in an IE window, right-click and select "ROT-13" and, obviously, ROT-13 the text right in place. I was able to do the same thing with a textbox (like what I am typing in right now). I did this solely with the information in the MSDN library on the API and a little VBScript knowhow, in about an hour. One can develop plug-ins and add-ins for just about any feature in Windows or any of the Office suite apps, anywhere from writing VBA (Visual Basic for Applications, which is built into every Office App) up to writing and compiling a dll in Visual C and using it as an add-in. In short, the argument that MS is not configurable is complete shite.
I think the poster has a perfectly valid point. Unless the e-mail address is intended for receiving huge amounts of e-mail, it IS inconsiderate to post it on the front page of a news site that gets several hundred thousand viewers a day.
Step back a second and consider what is being proposed. *Every home* in Belgium would have a machine, which by default runs OS N. (I'd use "X" as my variable but that's taken. :-) )
Under these circumstances, damn near every objection raised to every OS I've seen mentioned are meaningless. If this went through, it would be a different world.
So OS N has some rough spots. So what? You neighbors all have OS N too. Every kid on the block has been exposed to OS N. A country full of people are working on helping each other learn the OS and "making it go".
Frankly, the discussion boils down to ONLY one issue, and that's "Proprietary or open?" And the answer is clear: Open.
A proprietary OS puts an entire country at the mercy of the vendor. While the country will certainly have a lot of "pull", you can bet that the marketing department of the company is going to get more and more brazen over time, and they DON'T have your best interests at heart.
An Open OS, be it Linux, FreeBSD, or whatever, imposes nothing on Belgium. Certainly if Belgium is going to put a computer in every home, they can afford to make their own distro, which can be as easy or as hard to use as they want, even to the TiVo extreme.
Everything changes when you're talking about a country in which every person you meet on the street has had experience with the OS you're using. (God knows Windows isn't the dream it's being portrayed as... or haven't you helped a new person learn Windows lately?)
Upshot: A proprietary OS will meet the needs of the developing company. An open OS meets the needs of Belgium. The choice is clear. Old arguments are irrelevant. Willingly selling an entire country into vendor-lockin is analogous to selling Manhatten Island for the proverbial handful of glass beads.
I'm all for free software just as you are, but I would never advocate sticking Debian on computers for people who have never had a computer before. apt-get is extremely useful but do you really think putting it in the hands of the masses is a good idea? Look at the recent libpng thing (I know it's not a common occurrence, but...). You and I are able to deal with that sort of thing really easily, but most people are not like us.
If you want Linux on these computers, try the more user-friendly distros like Mandrake or SuSE. The latter now automatically sets up TV cards on the initial install.
I'm not saying these distros are perfect, but they're much easier to install and maintain *for the average user* than Debian, Slackware or Redhat.
Look, I live in the Central American country of Panama. I was born here and have dedicated a lot of time to understanding why third world countries are what they are (for better or worse).
Where I live, people are generally quick to accept technology, and like everywhere else, it has become a symbol of status. The guy that _tries_ to wash your windshield in a streetlight has a pre-paid cellphone here. Hell, ALL cellphone accessories are sold AT streetlights here. There are entire towns where houses are put together, rather than built, using materials and methods I still cannot comprehend, boldly defying conventional wisdom and the laws of physics, and yet they all have 2-3 25"+ TV sets, Big Stereo equipment, VHS, one generation old video game systems and more. Some even have satellite TV. We're talking about people that make $200-$500/month. And that's household income.
And yet I'm of the opinion that putting a computer in every home would not solve the problem of the so called digital divide, in fact, I think it would make it worse. Here's my rationale:
If a computer was given for free to every person in my country that can't (or won't) afford one, more than 95% of the people would break it, put it away, sell it (if market price doesn't go down too much), and in general, not value them for what they're worth (economically and intelectually). There are a lot of legitimate cases where people really need one and can't afford it, but even those would probably not value them as much as if they had worked and saved money for their own.
Sure, some 5% of the people would change their lives by having access to a computer, learning how to use it, hooking up to the Intenret an having access to all the information that's available (the good AND the bad which forces you to develop critical thinking). After all, this is similar to what happened to me when my parents won $10,000 in the lottery and bought me a $2,000 PC 10 years ago (now I have a consulting firm and i'm doing pretty well, thank you).
The problem is, you would still have a mayority that not only can't but won't use a computer, and a minority that does. Digital Divide anyone? Only this time it's not economically based, but intelectually based.
It's all a cultural problem. Most people don't use computers because they don't know how good it would be for them, for their carriers, for developing critical thinking, for improving their competitivenes (professionally), for having access to much more information, for improving productivity, etc.
This is not very different from someone giving you a supersonic jet for free, and telling you it's much better than your Honda Civic. There isn't much I can do with a supersonic jet to be honest, I see no reason to learn to fly if I can get around with my Jetta pretty well. Besides, they say learning to fly is very very hard, so why waste my time? Well, maybe I could sell that Jet to someone that does fly!
I believe the only way to actually close the Digital Divide (God, I hate clichés) is to improve the cultural level of developing populations, promote critical thinking, make people understand that they have to "work for it", and that in the end it's worth it (what capitalism is based on), and THEN let them BUY computers real cheap. Never give them away.
There's this little anectdote I want to share before I wrap this up. About 30 years ago there was this military dictator in Panama. A guy called Torrijos. Most people agree he was a pretty cool guy. You've probably heard that name if you're older than 20 and know a bit of history. Anyways, he used to give food and money away to people in a provice called Colon, the second largest city here. After a very short while, they got used to getting everything for free, and just adored the guy. Torrijos died in 1981 (they say it was Noriega, but who knows...)
Three years ago we were going to build an earth station in Colon, wire the area with fiber optics, provide local ISP service, etc. I interviewed over 40 Colon residents for different low level possitions. Nobody would work after 5PM (even when you pay the extra hours). The few we actually hired, would never, ever show up on time for work, and when they did you could still smell the alcohol. We decided to close the shop very quickly. Last week, MONADESCO (Colon Unemployed Movement) was barricading the streets of Colon. They want Jobs (as long as they don't have to work). They want food. They want money. You wanna give these guys free computers? right.
There are two kinds of people in the world: Those with good memory.
This is unfortunately true - despite huge gains in ease-of-use, Linux is still not ready for my grandma.
My Grandma has no problem with it. I find I do a lot *less* maintenance on her computer since I switched her over. Well, actually, I find I do none. From her point of view it's pretty much the same as it always was: click this icon for e-mail, this one to type letters, this one to work on your genealogy...
The only way that I can see your Grandma would have a hard time with Linux is if she was middling-competent with Windows, i.e. able to install and remove software, change configuration options, etc.
Linux is easier for experts, the same level of difficulty for the clueless and somewhat harder for the intermediate user, IMO.
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
This sig under construction. Please check back later.
In order to evaluate the proposal to give away free computers to everyone, one has to know one or two things about Belgium.
First (and hopefully commonly known) Belgium is divided in two parts, one part speaking Dutch (5.5 million inhabitants), and another part speaking French (4.5 million inhabitants).
Second: the Dutch part is economically doing a great deal better than the French part. This is true when you evaluate on number of unemployed people, average wages, ...
Third: There have been socialists in our government for the last 50 years or so. Hence there is a lot of protection for the 'needy'. For example: Belgium has just about the highest income-tax in Europe (to startle some Americans: I (and my wife) pay 55% taxes on our income. Another example: Belgium has the highest rate of people getting money from government compared to working people. A staggering 103 people getting unemployment, disability, pension, ... per 100 working people. For comparison: France has 90/100, US has 60/100.
Last: As people are most concerned about themselves (this merrits a '-1 obvious') the 103 vote socialist to get more money/computers/free healthcare/whatever from the government. The 100 vote liberal (or central Christian) to pay less taxes.
Minister Onckelinckx is, as you may have gathered by now, a member of the socialist party of the French speaking part of Belgium. Her proposal is therefore perhaps great for the people that vote for her, but it obviously isn't for those (like me) that have to pay the bills.
On a side note: I wouldn't be at all surprised if that would turn out to be 'Pay the Bill'.
This proposal will eventually be burried, like so many other proposals from our ministers. A green party minister once suggested to close our national airport at night because of noise-problems. It's like all ministers agreed to each get a week in which they can try to step into the light by making the silliest possible suggestions. I'd suggest not paying too much attention to it.
I have a photographic memory for numbers. I know almost a hundred of them.
Wout,
please note that me and my family relied on public assistance in the past (unfortunately). We never voted for socialists. Also, there are a lot of working people who vote for socialists.
I think your opinion is full of manicheism. the Dutch part is economically doing a great deal better than the French part mmh yes but what's the point ? The region of Liège is doing better than the region of Charleroi, the region of Brussels (french speaking at 80 pc) is doing better than some places in the dutch part and the dutch part is doing better than a lot of places in Europe (congratulations).
So what's the point of comparing linguistic regions on an economic basis ? Maybe the propaganda of some political people works in a way. What is funny is that some (all ?) of them want brussels as the capital of Vlaanderen. Looks like some french speaking people are necessary anyway.
All in all, I also think that some people are cheating on the welfare state and it is also possible that there are more of them in the french speaking side of the country (though some do not speak french). BUT I REFUSE THAT ANY CITIZEN CAN BE PUT IN A CATEGORY BECAUSE OF HIS LANGUAGE OR ETHNICS OR RELIGION, etc. More precisely, I consider stupid the opinions that "unemployed people are lazy", "walloons are lazy" and so on.
Concerning the silly suggestion concerning the airport, I suppose you do not live in Zaventem.
Men are born ignorant, not stupid; they are made stupid by education. Bertrand Russel
Why? because it is free, it can never be taken away from you (Windows,os2,BeOS,OSX all can be taken from you) Let's completely ignore any technical advantages, or design differences. Let's look at only one tiny little aspect of it.
You have a computer, your friend buys a computer. 5 years down the road, you being rich and having gobs of money has upgraded or replaced your computer at least 3 times. your friend? she is poor, she saved for 3 years to buy that computer she has now. Her hardware is really behind yours now, (Why didnt you give her your last 3 processors, your SBLive you sold on ebay for $40.00, or your ATI all in wonder you sold to the computer shop for $30.00?)
You can run XP while she still has win95. well microsoft is now telling her that they are intentionally making windows95 incompatable now. (Sorry but adding code to check for win95 and bail on the install in directX is intentional)
she is now screwed, as in order to be productive she cant use windows95 and office 95 anymore she is now forced to upgrade. Windows98? cant buy it, WindowsME? cant buy it anymore. she is FORCED to buy XP which will NOT run on a pentium 200 nor fit in a 2 gig hard drive.
what is she to do? XP costs $100.00(about) and that is 2 weeks worth of groceries, or her car insurance this month. and a computer upgrade is more expensive than a new box now.. so she is forced to buy a new computer whuich will have XP on it, but that is $600-$800 something that will take another 2 years to save.
(rich geeks have no clue what it's like to struggle with not having enough money to live... and not having that latest processor is not struggling.... try not affording food this week.)
What can she do? Linux. with linux you can give her 100% free and legal copies of redhat 7.2 and she get's KDE that works well in stripped down mode on a Pentium200 (Stripped down mode is easy to set up, on first run, you set the slider bar from fast commputer to slow computer) comes with an office suite, games, full internet connetivity and apps.
being older hardware there is a 97% chance that it will install flawlessly (better odds than windows ME ot 2000 or XP... Microsoft removed older hardware drivers... dont believe me, look for yourself!)
So if you aren't rich? use linux... it's the only way to be legal and to avoid the temptation of Sorftware Piracy that runs rampant in the windows world.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.