Slashdot Mirror


Opera Running on the OLPC

An anonymous reader writes "The Opera developers have ported their browser to the $100 laptop. Håkon Wium Lie writes: 'Seeing Opera run on the OLPC for first time was a revelation — no browser has ever been more beautiful. The resolution of the screen is stunning (200dpi) and Opera makes the most of the embedded DejaVu fonts.' Claudio Santambrogio writes: 'Opera runs beautifully on it. The machine is not really the fastest, but Opera's performance is excellent — the browsing experience is beautifully smooth: all sites load fine and quickly, and even complex DHTML pages with heavy animations do not suffer.'"

39 of 193 comments (clear)

  1. I still want one by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Great. So when can we buy one?

    When can we buy one at 3 times the target price to make a donation to poorer countries?

    Will this only ever be vapourware over here?

    1. Re:I still want one by TrisexualPuppy · · Score: 3, Informative

      Here's a little snippet of the availability of the OLPC. It's looking really good for us OLPC supporters. I was in contact with one of the designers a few months ago, and he said by March '07, they would be down to about $60-$90 to produce and that they might even start wholesaling them if they could get the proper government contracts in Pakistan. It's looking very interesting from an economist's standpoint.

    2. Re:I still want one by Overzeetop · · Score: 2

      Man, I would drop $200 on this just for the browsing and ebook mode. Heck, I'd probably buy two at $200 a piece so my daughter could have one too. I'm a little suprised its taken this long, and that there isn't a drive to make them commerically as well. Make the ones "for sale" to us commoners in black or white, to distinguish from the governmentally purchased ones if you're concerned about resales.

      --
      Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
    3. Re:I still want one by WillAdams · · Score: 4, Interesting

      An interesting thought here is how useful it might be as an accessory to a normal desktop or laptop?

      It'll certainly make a much nicer ebook reader than most which are already available.

      I'm surprised that companies like vTech and Leapster haven't looked into licensing these.

      William

      --
      Sphinx of black quartz, judge my vow.
  2. screen is stunning? by Toby+The+Economist · · Score: 3, Funny

    I paid 700 quid for my monitor. The entire laptop is 100 USD. How exactly is the screen "stunning", in the slightly breathless tone of the article?

    1. Re:screen is stunning? by ambrosen · · Score: 3, Informative

      You almost certainly don't have a 200ppi screen. My mobile phone has one, and it is indeed stunning. My laptop has a premium 127ppi screen, and that is nice, but 200ppi does look very good on a computer.

    2. Re:screen is stunning? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Technology moves on....

      I paid over EUR1600 for my LCD monitor, back in the day.

      200DPI is very high resolution for a monitor, 2/3rds that of the 300 DPI considered acceptable for print. Add in subpixel rendering, and it means the screen should near enough be clear enough to read comfortably. Due to windoze brain-damage, lots of computer users still think in resolution-dependent pixel sizes.

      But on a monitor, a font that is 10 points high (a real-world unit) should be the same height on a 640x480 display and a 2048x1560 one. It should just be far clearer on the latter.

    3. Re:screen is stunning? by Toby+The+Economist · · Score: 3, Interesting

      If 200dpi is so good, how come regular LCD monitors are *not* 200 dpi, when a 100 USD *entire laptop* can have such a screen?

    4. Re:screen is stunning? by crow5599 · · Score: 5, Informative

      The OLPC's screen has a black and white 200dpi mode. I imagine that has something to do with the price.

    5. Re:screen is stunning? by iabervon · · Score: 3, Informative

      The screen is small in total size, probably has a lot of dead pixels (which are tiny, so who cares?) and doesn't have good color accuracy or consistency. There was an article a while back about how the OLPC project visionary went to an LCD manufacturer and told them that the OLPC screen didn't need any of the features that make LCDs expensive to make, and did need a bunch of different features. They laughed at him, and then he told them that he wanted quantities of millions, and they were suddenly very nice.

      The number of LCDs which need to be produced to get a single LCD that works perfectly is exponential in the physical area of the screen, because defects are independant, based on the size of the crystal, and cannot be repaired. This factor means that a "stunning" tiny screen is a whole lot cheaper than a big screen of worse image quality. The OLPC computer is actually smaller than the pictures make it look, because the whole thing is uniformly child-sized.

    6. Re:screen is stunning? by ajs318 · · Score: 3, Informative

      The 200DPI is with sub-pixel rendering. The OLPC's LCD has a colour mode and a hi-res mono mode.

      You're right, a "point" is technically 0.35277... mm (and is the standard measurement unit in PostScript) but the definition has become altered by popular usage so that 1 point now means 1 pixel on screen.

      I usually put the line
      /mm { 360 mul 127 div } def
      near the beginning of all my PostScript documents. Then I can write things like 10 mm 10 mm moveto.

      I hope that the OLPC people stand their ground and refuse to allow a closed-source browser, however beautiful it may look, anywhere near this thing. For one thing, it's the thin end of the wedge; the world and his cat will be wanting their slaveryware on the machine. For another, it's the absolute antithesis of what the OLPC project is about; everything on the machine must be open if we're not to be encouraging dependency.

      --
      Je fume. Tu fumes. Nous fûmes!
    7. Re:screen is stunning? by Brazilian+Joe · · Score: 2, Informative

      Color mode is not 200dpi, but new development technologies allowed it to consume just 1 watt. This new tech is eventually going to be used on all LCDs, as its development was meant for both power consumption *and* production cost reduction.
      200 dpi mode is monochrome, e-ink mode for ebook mode, capable of being read comfortably even under direct sunlight. and yes, having pixels so small you can't see them without a magnifying glass DOES look nice.

    8. Re:screen is stunning? by Tyler+Eaves · · Score: 2, Informative

      Because of the amount of horsepower that would be required to drive such a display. For instance, a typical 19" 4:3 monitor at 200ppi would be a 3000x2400 display.

      --
      TODO: Something witty here...
    9. Re:screen is stunning? by DragonWriter · · Score: 3, Informative
      If 200dpi is so good, how come regular LCD monitors are *not* 200 dpi, when a 100 USD *entire laptop* can have such a screen?


      Because "regular LCD monitors" don't have a special, black-and-white, high-resolution mode designed for use as an e-book reader under a wide variety of conditions with a small screen, instead being optimized for bright, vivid color use, and dealing with readability by making bigger screens.
    10. Re:screen is stunning? by TheRaven64 · · Score: 2, Interesting
      The screen on the Nokia 770 is 225dpi and it looks stunning. IBM made some 23" workstation monitors that were also 225dpi, but they pre-dated dual-link DVI so they used two DVI inputs and Xinerama for a single screen.

      At that resolution, you don't need anti-aliasing, because you really can't see anything much smaller than a pixel. The 770 comes with Opera as standard, and it really does look amazing. I use mine as an eBook reader quite a lot (hats off to the FBReader guys); it's not quite as good as paper, but it's not far off and the convenience of being able to carry a lot of books in a jacket pocket makes up for it in a lot of situations. It's ideal for flying when space is at a real premium; I can load enough books to last me several weeks onto something that fits in a pocket.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    11. Re:screen is stunning? by h4rm0ny · · Score: 3, Funny


      Quick - somebody post a screenshot!

      --

      Aide-toi, le Ciel t'aidera - Jeanne D'Arc.
    12. Re:screen is stunning? by Tyler+Eaves · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I'm not sure even a dual-DVI link can provide the nessesary bandwidth. A 24bit 3000x2400 pixel display is going to be 21.6MB per frame, at a typical 60hz that's 1.2*GB* per second of bandwidth.

      --
      TODO: Something witty here...
  3. Not too suprising... by i.r.id10t · · Score: 3, Informative

    Not too suprising - the browser built into the Nokia 770 is a customized Opera, it works great...

    --
    Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos
  4. Opera is better on any system by CDMA_Demo · · Score: 4, Informative

    For those who don't know, Opera has been the browser of choice for embedded platforms like Qtopia because of it speed and small footprint. I'm glad to see its full potential finally realized.

  5. Re:So? by fireboy1919 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    A good deed is its own reward - even for companies.

    If you don't believe that, believe this - respect has monetary value. It affects who will buy, the price of stocks, the confidence of shareholders, and lots of other unmentioned things. By doing this, Opera buys themselves some respect for fairly cheap which they can cash in later at a premium.

    --
    Mod me down and I will become more powerful than you can possibly imagine!
  6. Not enough revert from free to proprietary by H4x0r+Jim+Duggan · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I think I'd be happier running free software, and giving free software to developing nations. Let them tinker, let them become experts, let them become self sustaining rather than start them on a path to dependency.

    1. Re:Not enough revert from free to proprietary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Unfortunately, Gecko is far too big and bloated for the OLPC. It doesn't run good at all on the machine, from what I've heard (even requiring extra memory to be installed), and frankly, I don't think it has its place there. Opera might not be the best choice since it's proprietary (although it's the perfect fit for such a device given the available resources), but perhaps something based on KHTML could have found its way to the OLPC.

      I think I'll post this anonymously... It's not good to bash Gecko on /. :(

  7. Unless Opera open sources its browser... by ezh · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Unles Opera open sources its browser, this news of little value. There is little chance closed source Opera will be installed on any standard OLPC distribution. The OLPC guys made such a huge issue out of close-source wireless Marvel chips, the only closed-source hardware component of the laptop that Marvel finally open source its drivers. So whoever thinks they would allow close-source browser on the 100$ laptops must be out of little mad...

    1. Re:Unless Opera open sources its browser... by ezh · · Score: 2, Insightful

      OLPC has its own browser that uses Gecko engine. Do you imply that Gecko engine does not work well?

  8. Site is slow - here's the text by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative
    As A/C - I've plenty of karma.

    Opera on the green machine

    On Friday, I received a call from Opera's accounting department. That normally means trouble. My warning lights starts flashing.

    There's a package for you waiting here. I'm looking for the invoice for customs purposes. Can I open it?

    Sure, I said, hoping to quickly return to whatever I was doing.

    There's no invoice inside. Strange. The value has been declared to be 100 dollars

    100 dollars?

    Yes. There's a machine inside the package. It's cute. Green.

    GREEN? A GREEN MACHINE? 100 DOLLARS?

    Yes.

    DON'T MOVE. DON'T LET ANYONE ELSE SEE IT. LOCK THE DOORS. I'LL BE RIGHT THERE!

    --> -->

    As the alert reader has figured out by now, the machine inside the box was a prototype of the $100 laptop from the OLPC project. Since then, I've kept the machine close to me, but lots of people around here have seen it. The Opera geeks gathered around it at the Friday night beer bash. Someone suggested testing to see if the machine could keep running in rough environments. For example, would the rubbery keyboard withstand beer? Better not try.

    Invariably, the machine gets attention. It attracts people more than any other unit I've seen. (Only Wii comes close.) People want to see it, touch it, and feel it. They want to know why the USB ports are placed where they are (on both sides of the screen), how the SD card can be inserted (the SD port is under the screen), and where the crank is. The crank, meant to generate power to run the machine, was part of an early design. It has been replaced with a foot pedal which is still under construction. However, it seems that people somehow got emotionally attached to the hand crank and want it back.

    Once the machine is turned on, a Linux boot sequence appears. Red Hat is one of the sponsors and the machine comes with a tuned version of Fedora. New boot images are published regularly, and the first thing to do was to install the latest build. All of this is documented at the project's Wiki. The next thing to do was to find a shell. The magical key combination is Alt-Shift-F11. However, the keys don't have function numbers and finding F11 requires counting. When you get it right, a shell appears and you can start typing. Typing would have been easier if my hands were smaller. That's a feature, not a bug.

    For me, the next thing to do was to install Opera. This is also the reason why the OLPC people are kind enough to send us an early prototype: we want to make sure the machine has a choice of good browsers. The browser is easily the most important application on the machine. In fact, a modern browser is more than an application — it could be the platform onto which OLPC applications are built, like Opera Platform is for mobile phones. OLPC has decided to only include open source software on the machine. I have discussed this issue at length with Nicholas, Walter and Mako. At Opera, we think that what really counts is open standards. It's less important what runs inside the box as long as what crosses the wire is standards-compliant. They argue that, in an education project, students must be allowed to peek inside the box. That's nice, I say, but if Opera makes the difference between a usable or an unusable machine, perhaps you will reconsider?

    Getting Opera to run was quite simp

    1. Re:Site is slow - here's the text by nicomen · · Score: 2, Informative
      --
      Nicolas Mendoza
      Prepare for MSIE 7
  9. Title is misleading! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    I was expecting to see Opera running on one of the children... :(

  10. Re:overrated? by xiong.chiamiov · · Score: 2, Funny

    It's over-rated because, well, that's a moderation. If I want to mark you down, but you're not really a troll or flamebaiter, I just mod you overrated.

  11. mirror by davek · · Score: 4, Informative

    The site has a robots.txt that doesn't allow a quick mirror. I had to cut-y-paste the image links into a terminal and use wget for each one.

    http://6thstreetradio.org/~davek/olpc/

    The 4 images are there, though, which is probably what most people want.

    --
    6th Street Radio @ddombrowsky
  12. Opera is everywhere by Yvan256 · · Score: 2, Informative

    After playing with Opera for Nintendo DS since last friday, it doesn't surprise me one bit to see Opera running on the OLPC. After all, they even have a mobile version for cellphones, so they're used to make their software work with extremely limited hardware.

  13. Most important image ;) by Nachtwind · · Score: 5, Interesting

    http://people.opera.com/howcome/2006/olpc/img/SH10 6875-m.JPG Yes, that thing can display slashdot. Just what the third world needs, more geeks!

  14. Re:the real important question by trashbat · · Score: 4, Funny
    can it run flash videos like youtube.
    If so then let's hope they don't start blowing a load of aid money on two-litre bottles of Diet Coke and rolls of Mentos.
  15. Re:Why not konqueror? by ajs318 · · Score: 2, Informative

    Unfortunately, Konqueror is tied into KDE. You could maybe wrap the KHTML rendering engine in an alternate skin, but that'd be a huge project. It might be less bother to persuade Opera to open up their source code.

    --
    Je fume. Tu fumes. Nous fûmes!
  16. Dillo by Kelson · · Score: 2, Informative

    Dillo is philosophically a perfect match for this project. One of its goals is to bridge the "digital divide" by providing a fast, low-footprint browser that can run on cheap or old hardware.

    Unfortunately, current versions have no support for JavaScript or CSS, and character sets other than Latin1 currently require a patch. The next version will have Unicode support, due to the switch from GTK1 to FLTK2, and CSS is being worked on. But the project is bogged down due to lack of funding, and the main developers are having to spend time on other projects so they can do stuff like eat and pay rent. Jorge Arellano Cid describes it as a chicken-and-egg problem:

    People in the embedded market want a small featured browser, but don't want to invest in it. This is: if we develop it they'll use it, but there's not much interest in funding the development.

    From a business perspective it makes sense. Investing in Dillo to make a full featured embedable web browser of it, is a three years plan (and who knows what the Web will look like in three years). Now if they only need an embedable web browser that evolves into a full-featured one. They could start deploying it in a year.

    Unfortunately, those gaps severely limit Dillo's suitability for a large-scale "here's all you need!" project. In an ideal world, OLPC would invest some cash in Dillo so that they developers could at least finish the port to FLTK2 and basic CSS support, which would go a long way toward making it fit with the project's goals, and maybe even get started on JavaScript.

  17. Re:Why not konqueror? by chill · · Score: 4, Informative

    Actually, it is not. The Konqueror-Embedded project has had a working browser for some time. It does require QT or QT/Embedded, but then again so does the version of Opera they were testing.

    --
    Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
  18. I don't think OLPC means what you think it means by Dorceon · · Score: 2, Funny
    Opera Running on the OLPC
    The PC in OLPC does not stand for Personal Computer. If it was
    Opera Running on the One Laptop Per Child
    the problem with this title would be obvious. It's bad form to rearrange other peoples' acronyms, so
    Opera Running on the One-Per-Child Laptop
    is right out. I suggest:
    Opera Running on $100 Laptop
    --
    What sound do people on rollercoasters make? Hint: it's not Xbox 360.
  19. OLPC is a cunning conspiracy . . . by mmell · · Score: 2, Interesting
    The goal was never to send these things to developing nations.

    At some point, somebody realized that a super-cheap laptop could do 90% of what people want to do with laptops. How to get them made? Try to make it yourself, you'll end up like DeLorean - the industry'll see to it that you fail before you can upset their applecarts! So . . . yeah! Pretend you're trying to make it for third world children! Think of the children!

    CEO's, captains of industry, unaware of what they're doing begin working to be involved in making the last thing in the world they want to make - exactly what the consuming public really wants - a tough, reliable laptop computer suitable for on-the-go use at rock-bottom (true commodity) prices! I wonder if any of them are stopping to think that these things will have an impact on how we (collectively) see computers and computing, and the price associated with them? Just look around this post - half the comments are "I'd like one of those!". If I knew that the manufacturer was able to make 'em and sell 'em for $100.00, it'd sure make me think twice about plunking down $700.00 for a machine which, while shinier, is unlikely to do a lot more for me as a mobile computing platform.

    In a way, this could be vaguely akin to Henry Ford's contribution to the automotive industry - utility and pricing set to put one in every garage (on every laptop). You can have it any color you like - as long as it's green!

  20. Re:Just like IBM by mmell · · Score: 2, Insightful
    just like IBM inviting MS to produce their OS

    Uh, help me see it - so the guys at Opera are going to mass-produce a parallel product, OOLPC (One Opera Laptop Per Child), for which they will maintain identical standards to the competition's OLPC until their OOLPC machine becomes the standard, which they will then use to eliminate all competing laptop manufacturers? After that, I presume they will force all the OOLPC users to upgrade their hardware regularly, in accordance with some onerous and despicable "click-wrap" license?

    Sorry, dude - I followed you right up to the point where you said "Just like IBM" - after that, you lost me!

  21. What I want by StarKruzr · · Score: 2, Funny
    --

    +++ATH0