Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Looking to Run Windows on OLPC
pete314 writes "Microsoft has been provided with a number of test models of Nicholas Negroponte's One Laptop per Child computers and is trying to get Windows installed on them. The current design runs a custom version of Red Hat's Fedora Linux. Running Windows will take quite a bit of additional memory: the OLPC has 512Mb of Flash, where XP requires a minimum of 1.5Gb storage."
I thought the OLPC project had definativly decided to be open source so that no company would have control.
Great webhosting, cheap rates! Enter code SlashdotDiscount
This is Microsoft wanting to get a grip of a future potential market, and locking them in. That's what this is all about; before you know it they get slapped with activating their laptops, DRM-enabled features and what not.
I really hope the OLPC-project wont get seduced by the money Microsoft is willing to put into this, it wont pay off in the long run.
It's clear Microsoft wants to do anything to stop alternatives from spreading; just imagine a future where these OLPCs have sprouted a whole new generation of Linux developers who now write code to feed themselves instead. But they don't know Windows, and Microsoft has an entire continent of PC users who they cannot sell licenses to, while they're writing their own applications building further on an alternative to Microsoft.
I think we can keep recursing like this until someone returns 1
What happens when thousands of these laptops are connected to the internet by little kids with no prior experience? What next, install AVG, Spybot, and the rest before distribution? Teach kids about spyware, bots and viruses before they even learn how to browse?
I can explain it for you, but I can't understand it for you.
As long as it has a programming language included, and a course on how to use it (Basic has lots of open courses available ... and I kinda don't think C++ would be very appropriate :-p)
I don't always use unix-like operating systems; but when I do, I prefer FreeBSD.
I can't quite imagine how this would work. Windows is a much harder OS to maintain in the long run. All this virus, spyware and adware crap - those poor kids' lives are bad enough without it.
Besides that, I don't trust MS's intentions. I bet they are now working on how to squeeze some money out of this in the future. This is not exactly what I've expected from OLPC.
You might be a tad disappointed then.
Believe it or not, there are plenty of versions of Windows, including Windows Embedded and Windows CE, which run in a lot less RAM and reside on a lot less Flash. And even from the "normal" XP, there are a _lot_ of things which can be removed without the end user noticing much.
Sure, at that point you can still do the retarded thing and go "ha ha, so the full install didn't fit and they had to strip it down", but may I point out that the average Linux distro is even bigger than the full XP? SuSE Linux for example (to use an example from everyone's favourite, Novell) comes on a DVD or more than half a dozen CDs. Compressed. So that wouldn't fit there either.
As for slow, I don't know where you get your data from, but comparing my gaming XP box to my SuSE Linux 10.0 box, XP actually boots faster, and the GUI is quite a bit more responsive than X with either KDE or Gnome too.
I think MicroSoft's best bet at success would be a heavily stripped down version of Windows CE.
It might come as a surprise, but some of the devices running Windows CE actually have less RAM and ROM/Flash than an OLPC. So why would MS need to strip it down?
So please, let's cut it down on the arrogant-fanboy-disconnected-from-reality act. MS does have a lot of faults, but being stupid isn't one of them. They _do_ employ some of the best programmers, and can (and do) throw ridiculous amounts of money at a problem, if they really want to. And both Windows and compilers are something they have two decades of experience with.
They already know how to compile something for size instead of unrolling and inlining everything for performance. It's not like they have yet to discover "wow, there's this 'size' option in the compile options of MSVC."
And they already have the experience with porting and stripping Windows to a variety of platforms. They actually used to have NT versions for pretty much everything including RISC and a few other architectures. The XBox 360 itself isn't an Intel machine either. And there even was a version of CE that ran on the Dreamcast.
The only question is whether they want to, exactly what they want to do there, and how much effort do they want to put into a computer whose price would more than double if they actually sold a Windows OEM license with it.
Then again, they already know how to play the fake-charity card by giving away a 50 cent CD and counting it as the price of a full Windows license generously donated. (In addition to some real charity too, it must be said.) So they could just give away a locked down version of Windows to some kids who otherwise couldn't afford a Windows computer anyway, thus ensuring that a whole generation in those countries grows on Windows and Windows Media Player formats. It's good marketting. _And_ write it off a some hundreds of millions of dollars in Windows licenses generously donated to the poor countries.
On the whole, I wouldn't be surprised if the effort right now isn't getting Windows installed, but figuring out how best to lock it down and how much and what bait they can build into it.
A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
Like a 'pharmaceutical' dealer or cigarette company they are trying any trick in the play book to extend their 'product'.
First hit will be free.
Back end for networking will be free at first.
Then the small hits start.
Upgrades. Support costs.
Before you know it, low cost open source is turned into a revenue stream.
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
You're out of date, I'm afraid. As of the current version, windows Mobile 5, introduced I believe over a year ago, data storage is on non-volatile flash memory, no data is lost when the battery dies anymore.
However I still use a Windows Mobile 2003 device, but I've never lost any data, you get plenty of warning about low battery, you have a backup battery, and you sync all your data with your PC anyway. So enough with the FUD, okay.
Oh no... it's the future.
Strip it down. Throw Gnome or KDE and their memory-hungry associated daemons away and put a simple user interface upfront (FluxBox, XFCE), put in a good autonomous file-manager configured to proxy the right files to the right applications, make sure XMMS is fully loaded of plugins and is the only media player (light and lean) and give the kids some GIMP fun. Don't mind putting Apache, MySQL or PostgreSQL in there: kids are not likely to use them. If high-level scripting is really needed to run anything, just chose one out of perl/python/ruby, ok? Run as few services/daemons as possible. Save the memory for the inevitable resource hogs: Firefox (much lower) and OpenOffice (much higher)...
It'll fly like as if running on a dual-core...
I don't feel like it...
Whatever I might think of the technical and design features of MS software it does get the job done not to mention it's extreme ubiquity means that knowing how to use windows is a more useful skill than knowing how to use some random other interface.
So you're suggesting that the under-developed world should similarly spawn generations of clueless lusers who "know" the interface (to the degree any interface today is substantively different from another) and measure their knowledge in terms of how fast they can can click and point, or memorising what, by default, is listed on the menus?
Hopefully more companies start taking a long term view of things and donating their products to the third world to prepare for when they become consumers.
Indeed. So the goal of the potent learning tool [designed so that] the emerging world can leapfrog decades of development--immediately transforming the content and quality of their children's learning is to enable them to become consumers? Dunno about you, but I tend to be optimistic when it comes to kids, and trust in the belief that, given the chance, they could grow up to become anything. My guess is that if you asked a randomly-selected child targetted by this program what they want to be when they grow up, they might say something like astronaut, or scientist. Aspiring to become an office drone, or a consumer, happens only at a later age, when you've forgotten your own potential or settled for something less.
Sorry to sound so critical, but your argument has taken Teach a Man to Fish, and reduced it to Teach a Man to Recognise a Fish, and then reduced even further to Teach a Man How to Buy a Fish with his Credit Card. Computers are an increasingly large part of our daily lives. Maybe we should be encouraging people to actually learn something about them and the world they're creating around us, to say nothing of what else is freely available? Or at least give them the opportunity.
As for the article, I'm not surprised, but that doesn't mean I'm any less disturbed by a monopoly with a living history of crushing anything and everything that threatens its bottom line becoming involved with a project that offers freedom and knowledge. Then, again, that monopoly is chaired by a philanthropist, so now worries, right?
Windows XPe, as the wikipedia entry at which you point says, is a componentized version of Windows. By striping out components, you can reduce it to the bare minimum - just the strict minimum needed to run Win 32 API with the specific drivers needed for such hardware.
.NET Framework, ASP.NET, IIS, Media Player.
:
And that's where the problem is : Once you've crammed Windows XP inside 32MB of flash, what do you do ?
According to the entry, Win XPe is mostly used for embed device. The kind of device on which you run one single function-specific application, and Win XPe is only here to provide kernel functionnality.
You can use it in ATMs in which case WinXPe is only here to provide a kernel, a graphics driver, an input driver and a network stack. And all you run next to it is a single application that does all the ATM stuff. And nothing else.
Robotics is another even better exemple. Sure it can be cramed into 32MB : because, all you need is a kernel to provide a communication stack and memory management. There's even no display and regular HID devices.
Compared to the Linux world, that's akin to having a system with only a striped down Kernel (with only a couple of necessary drivers compiled in), busybox (to provide all the necessary tools with minimal foot-print) and a micro C-lib and nothing more. All of which you run along a few simplified server inside a router. It's something you could run on This kind of boards.
*BUT* that's *NOT* what the OLPC needs. The OLPC needs to provide a full desktop environment. They a GUI. The need a desktop. They need application to browse the PC, they need graphical wizards to connect to the WiFi mesh. They need a browser, they need a mail clients, and mayber IRC and/or IM too. They need software to display ebooks. They need an office suite that covers most functionality that the kids need to write their own stuff. They need various developing environment (classical C/C++, scripts like Python or Perl, maybe web scripting like PHP) because, all OLPC was initially about was to encourage the kids to hack. Maybe also some multimedia apps.
Not just a single application.
Does this exist on WinXPe ? Yes because it's fully compatible with it's older brother, WinXP Pro. You have plenty of microsoft apps already available that could provide such functionality : Windows Desktop, Explorer, IE7, Outlook express, MSN, XForm viewer, Office, Visual Studio,
But can it all get crammed together inside the OLPC ? Hell no. You'll need a rather beefy setup with eleventeen gazillions of gigabytes just to install this madness. (And that's all functionnality most non-custom Linux distros offer out of the box for a foot-print of only a few gigs).
What the OLPC needs isn't the Microsoft equivalent of an embed linux. What it needs is something similar to Damn Small Linux (or, I guess, what the current customized Red Hat is), id est : most desktop functionnality crammed inside a small space of only a few dozens of MB. *Not* GB.
And thats something WinXPe fails to provide. It only provides the envrionment (kernel, etc.) not all the apps.
If they want to cram WinXPe inside, the would have to put along specialized applications. Applications that already exists in the open-source world, do the needed task nicely, but are NOT made by Microsoft. I would be mostly like just replacing the kernel on the customized Linux distro with a Windows Kernel, and keeping the same apps. And admitting defeat, that they can't provide a fully microsoft alternative.
The closest thing Microsoft could provide is a Windows CE-based solution (and Pocket- / -CE version of office, IE, etc...). And then again it won't be optimal for them because
- Win CE still lacks some functionality that is granted on Linux (hackability, programming and scripting tools in standard with a tiny memory foot print).
-
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
If Windows is installed on the OLPC laptops, then we'll have to also get antivirus, anti-spyware, anti-adware and perhaps a few system recovery apps. There will also have to be a Windows key on the keyboard, which in my view, may be a stopper right there.
Why? If they're using XP Embedded or CE then the OS is held in ROM/NVRAM. It's fixed, it can't be over written, so the only system recovery app needed is a full reset. OK sure, spyware and viruses could install, but they would be running in user space from the Startup folder just like they could do under Linux. The only thing that is not making this a stopper for the current OLPC is that no-one has written any yet.
Why would I want to sync my data with my PC? My pocket PC didn't come with a backup battery, and no I don't have plenty of warning about a low battery (hint I don't spend every hour of every day looking at my pocket pc)
If it took them that many years to sort out something as simple as not storing your data in volitile ram how long is it going to take them to sort out the rest of the mess? Does it remember your setting when the battery dies? My mobile phone has had that feature since, well ever. Can you change the extension of a document in the file explorer? Does IE work. Can you open reasonable sized text documents (try alice in wonderland from project goutenberg) in word? etc....
what is this fud that you talk about?
thank God the internet isn't a human right.
I have a bunch of routers with Linux based small footprint OS's on them and by small I mean a coupla meg. My print server does too (I think) and my cable modem has an RTOS microkernel. So from the perspective of why would you plunk Windows on an OLPC, the real question is what benefit do you get by bootstrapping Windows to an OLPC in order to take advantage of the applications that you can't get otherwise? Seems to me, we ALREADY have solved the OLPC OS problem - the question now is how many interesting applications can we cram on it.
For the purposes of this project, Open Source is as much a non-negotiable requirement as low power consumption. The intention is to produce a whole generation of computer-literate people. This requires that they have access to the internals, in order to learn to work with the hardware and software. Anything else would just be creating dependency -- and it would be wrong on many levels for the West to try to keep the Third World dependent.
Of course this means that there will be a whole generation of programmers who will never have known of any development methodology besides Open Source. Isn't that a good thing? Closed Source is no more or less than electronic slavery. Its time -- if it ever had one -- has been and gone.
Je fume. Tu fumes. Nous fûmes!
And I'm not talking about some Redmond VP's income.
Rich And Stupid is not so bad as Working For Rich And Stupid.
To be fair, it only says that Microsoft want to "make [Windows] available" on the device, not pre-install it.
Here's my theory: MS wants to create a version of Windows for these devices, which it can let out into the wild, where it will be relentlessly pirated. They hope that the first thing that people do with their shiny new OLPC is zap the Linux install and dump Windows XP Micro (or whatever) on there instead -- even if it's pirated. It may not make them any money immediately, but it might give them a future customer, or at least prevent someone from growing up as a Linux user.
Or maybe, rather than relying on piracy, they could co-opt governments and teachers as a way of forcing Windows down onto students' computers. They'd "give" "free" copies of Windows (taking it as a charitable contribution no doubt) to schools, along with some sort of incentive package. Maybe a free 'real PC' for the teacher, running a full version of Windows. It would have educational software on it, but in order to be useful, all the students would need to be running the Windows OLPC version. So they can effectively leverage schools to use their power to eliminate Linux and replace it with Windows, even if Windows is less functional for the students themselves. All they have to do is make it a sweet enough looking deal for the government or administration, which they can easily do by making it look like a substantial "gift" on paper -- even though most of that dollar value will be in software. A "free" $99 copy of Windows has to be better than a $0 copy of Linux, right?
I had more hopes for OLPC when Microsoft was just ignoring it. Microsoft's attentions are like the Eye of Sauron -- you really don't want it resting on you for any length of time, and when it does, it probably means something bad is going to happen.
"Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
"Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
Talk with any sales person and he'll tell why you are wrong.
It's not a matter of license fee - $1 is just like drop in ocean. But. Even if license rounds at $0, you still have to have accounting for them. Accounting == bureaucracy. IOW, in otherwise completely technical company you suddenly need to have large amount of bureaucrats to handle the millions of licenses. And then handle all associated costs: license transfer on OS replacement, on hardware replacement, on upgrade/update, handling of returned units, etc. Also, add here more management to do nothing else but control all the bureaucracy. And then you realize even the license fee of $0 - it isn't completely gratis. The cost runs quickly high.
GPL/BSD licenses scale easily - they have no accounting overhead. That's why BSD and Linux had took over embedded market long time ago. CE device fitted with FLOSS now is something absolutely normal, though seven years ago finding embedded/real-time OS w/o per-installation fee was next to impossible.
All hope abandon ye who enter here.