Slashdot Mirror


Will OLPC's 'Sugar' Have an Effect on Other OSes?

g8orade wonders: "As a recent article notes: for the OLPC, the software is more important than the hardware. A generation or more of children in developing countries will learn about computers using a computer that doesn't use a desktop from either Apple or Microsoft. Will the OLPC software finally be the license-less tool, the uncharged-for value add that raises the bar for other OS makers to compete, given the same hardware?"

59 comments

  1. The OLPC will have influence by MathFox · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Firstly, all of the discussion about the machine influences the minds of hardware and software developers; I expect to see more low-power / long battery life laptops this year; some of the OLPC hardware innovations (LCD display) will be available in next years models.

    The software will cause a rethinking on how schoolkids could work with computers, but I don't see a quick adoption in PC operating systems. Applications for collaboration may pick up some of the sugar features; PDAs may pick up features quicker than PCs.
    Sugar is such a radical design that it is safe to predict that it won't be adopted for 100%... On the other hand it is safe to predict that some elements will be adopted. Without an in depth review it's hard to tell which features are "good" and likely to be picked up and which are bad and likely to be avoided.

    --
    extern warranty;
    main()
    {
    (void)warranty;
    }
  2. software is more important than the hardware by Threni · · Score: 4, Funny

    > OLPC, the software is more important than the hardware.

    It always is. You don't buy hardware then try and find something to run on it. (Well, not perhaps unless you're an Apple user).

    1. Re:software is more important than the hardware by DavidinAla · · Score: 1

      Some people might find this funny, but the comment is stupid and untrue. It's never been true. Using a Mac has always been more about the software than the hardware. For some reason, a lot of people don't get that. The vast majority of people who use Macs buy the hardware because of how the software works, not the other way around.

      David

    2. Re:software is more important than the hardware by bluemonq · · Score: 1

      GP was referring to the old chestnut about the difficulty in finding all the software you need to run on a Mac versus window. It's marked funny because people aren't taking it seriously. It's a joke. Laugh.

    3. Re:software is more important than the hardware by DavidinAla · · Score: 1

      Maybe, but I find that many people DO take this objection quite seriously, in two different ways. Some people argue that people buy Macs because the like "pretty machines" and aren't interested in anything beyond that. Others still argue that there's no software for Macs. (I still hear that ALL the time.)

      David

    4. Re:software is more important than the hardware by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Defensive much?

    5. Re:software is more important than the hardware by stonecypher · · Score: 1

      Or a playstation fan.

      --
      StoneCypher is Full of BS
    6. Re:software is more important than the hardware by Threni · · Score: 1

      No, there is no shortage of software for the Playstation:

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_PlayStation_1 _games

    7. Re:software is more important than the hardware by stonecypher · · Score: 1

      Maybe you should point the guy making fun of the macs at a list of Apple ][ software, too.

      --
      StoneCypher is Full of BS
    8. Re:software is more important than the hardware by Threni · · Score: 1

      SnEaKeRs! I'm there, dude.

    9. Re:software is more important than the hardware by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You don't buy hardware then try and find something to run on it.

      Except if you happen to live in a country where most (home) computers are sold without a bundled operating system by small computer stores because Dell / HP / Apple is too expensive because in includes never-used features such as tech support. Such as South Africa

      A lot of the users got used to sorting out their problems on their own due to the absence of large PC vendors offering such services due to sanctions (pre-1994). You still get the occasional user buying an overpriced Packard Bell somewhere, but most users order store-built PCs and figure out how to install XP Pro corporate

  3. look back in history! by ecalkin · · Score: 2, Insightful

    many years ago apple made a *huge* push in k-12 to get apple stuff out there. why? when these kids graduated, a lot of them had experience with apples and some had experience with only apples. it was a long term investment.

        any software that gets uses on the olpc system will not make a difference *today* or *tomorrow*, but down the road it might.

        one observation: it will start with educational software. if there are millions of these units out there, there will need to be software for teaching stuff. getting in that market will probably get you into the educational market in developed countries. if you want to see this in action, watch what textbook publishers do to get into the california and texas schools. once in these states, they tend to push into other states from there.

        if the olpc project 'works', these children will grow up and this software is going to be what computers are all about.

        this could be very interesting for ms and apple.

    eric

    1. Re:look back in history! by k_187 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yeah, because that's worked so well for Apple. I know that's the reasoning, but what gets used in business has a lot of inertia, and many school Mac labs were replaced with windows as that's what is out there.

      --
      11 was a racehorse
      12 was 12
      1111 Race
      12112
    2. Re:look back in history! by NekoXP · · Score: 1

      The interesting thing will be when some hardware arrives that does the job better than the OLPC and isn't shipped by an MIT charity project; since all of the OLPC software will be open source, there's no reason to ever really touch the OLPC - apart from today's unique use of the special LCD they have.

      You could run Sugar and the rest of the software on a standard PC, or a small embedded board (why does it HAVE to be a laptop?) of any architecture, price scale, power consumption you like, and use any chipsets and support devices you like (does it have to be SD or a Marvell WiFi chip in the future?)

      The INTERESTING bit will be; who will bother to keep these devices below $100? OLPC is already subsidised up to it's neck. Nobody will be able to justify a $400 laptop-per-child or a $200 computer-in-a-computer-lab-per-child given the insane pricing MIT have offered. Have they killed off their competitors by killing off their own market?

    3. Re:look back in history! by Overzeetop · · Score: 1

      It would have worked, but two things got in the way:

      1. Apple screwed the pooch with their product between the IIe and the Macintosh, effectively taking themselves out of the market. Anyone remember Lisa?

      2. The IBM-PC got genericized hardware, allowing a flood of relatively inexpensive clones and interchangability. Hardware Choice.

      --
      Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
    4. Re:look back in history! by soft_guy · · Score: 1

      Everyone remembers the Lisa, but no one can afford one.

      --
      Avoid Missing Ball for High Score
  4. No by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What we've seen about sugar is not an UI. It is the interface of their "network connections" application, which indeed looks like an UI taken from a game.

  5. A couple of points by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    One, this will be the first ever major large scale distributed computer that goes out the door with linux pre-installed, beating all the big vendors to the punch (nt counting embedded devices or game consoles or cellphones). It's a laptop, with working wireless and mesh networking out of the box, along with being self powered! A lot of serious coolness right there. Two, it will rapidly become the largest used linux distro. Within a few shipments, once you start talking millions at a time, it will surpass Ubuntu and the other "tops on distrowatch" distros.

    I think just those two facts indicate that it will have a profound impact on linux and computing in general. Turn it around, how can it not?

    OK, now, granted, this exact machine won't be offered for sale to joe average user, but... how it is being made and who is set-up to make the components etc, is either all known now or certainly will be soon. This thing is going to be torn apart, reverse engineered all over, and I expect to see clones hitting the market in various configs. Probably not as cheap as the original project, but pretty close, and they will sell, I know I'd go get one right now if it was there at a sub $300 price point, even with the limitations, it is still pretty neat. We have flash based memeory dropping in price quickly, this could probably be easily upgraded. Just the self powered part is enough of a consumer bump for me compared to the competition.

    1. Re:A couple of points by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm playing around with the BTest-1 version of the laptop since last Tuesday, and I must say it's really, really cool!!! =]

      There are just too many small things to list... and I'll surely buy one when it become available to the general public.

    2. Re:A couple of points by MyHair · · Score: 1

      I downloaded a recent version of the software image to run in VMWare. I clicked around on a few things. Sure it's Linux, but at first glance it doesn't seem to be designed to let you get to a command prompt or arbitrary Xwindows. When you say it's the first large scale computer with Linux preinstalled I think it's a bit misleading. Technically "Linux" is a kernel, but when people talk about a Linux OS I usually presume they mean an X desktop with one or more of the familiar environments (Gnome, KDE, various window managers) and a general unix-y feel. The interface for the OLPC--presuming the downloaded image represents that--is more along the lines of a PDA or cell phone than a general-purpose desktop or laptop system. That is to say I don't expect OLPC users to be dropping to shells or customizing their desktop layouts; the interface appears pretty strict, but that's a good thing for this product.

      That's an observation, not a criticism. But I don't immediately see how this thing being distributed as widely as they hope would promote, say, Red Hat / Fedora, Suse / OpenSuse or Ubuntu.

      Also, from what I understand of the goals of the project, compatible systems would be helpful to further distribute the paradigm and help kids everywhere.

      As neat as these things sound and as good as the goals are, I don't think I'd be happy using one myself for my main PC. I'm too used to the "jack of all trades" paradigm in my personal PCs. I think they're a neat idea, though, and hope the project succeeds and is actually beneficial to the users.

      On the other hand, maybe it's trivial to develop a Sugar icon that launches an xterm or xmms. I don't know.

    3. Re:A couple of points by Eccles · · Score: 1

      OK, now, granted, this exact machine won't be offered for sale to joe average user

      Except, of course, on eBay.

      --
      Ooh, a sarcasm detector. Oh, that's a real useful invention.
  6. The more I hear about this project... by MikeRT · · Score: 1, Insightful

    The more I think it is an almost useless academic exercise. Hear me out on this before flaming me. The hardware is severely under-powered; it cannot be reasonably used for most modern experimenting with computers. The software is built with a user interface that borrows very, very little from existing interfaces on everything from UNIX to Windows to BeOS to MacOS X. Let's say that kids want to learn how to write software for this platform. Will the tools available be even comparable to what they would expect with any "real environment?"

    What I don't get, and have never seen a concrete explanation for, is how this will actually help developing countries' classrooms. They've made nebulous, feel-good comments about "kids exploring" and other crap like that. Right. What could they be "exploring" that $100 of school supplies for books, pen and paper couldn't handle? Looking back on my on K-12 experience in some halfway decent public schools in the US, I can think of precious few things that a computer would have been necessary to really help with. Even in high school, we needed subject-specific science supplies more than computers.

    1. Re:The more I hear about this project... by maxume · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yeah, nobody ever learned anything on a computer built before 1990, this thing clearly needs to be more powerful. The kids who end up using this thing will think that it is very real, and it will introduce them to computers just fine.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    2. Re:The more I hear about this project... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      What could they be "exploring" that $100 of school supplies for books, pen and paper couldn't handle?

      $100 of school supplies purchases a limited amount of knowledge.

      Networking these devices creates an essentially unlimited amount of knowledge. And, this knowledge is constantly updated.

      I think your luddite response is well-thought-out, but that doesn't make it right. It's the decision of the participators as to how they spend their resources; if you want to purchase school supplies instead with your resources (or food, or medicine, or aquaducts), nobody is stopping you.

    3. Re:The more I hear about this project... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I heartily concur. Networking the OLPC will open a child's mind into a world of impeccable and unimpeachable sources of knowledge such as Slashdot, Wikipedia, and Democratunderground.

    4. Re:The more I hear about this project... by lawpoop · · Score: 4, Insightful

      This is my opinion on the subject. Simply my humble predictions: this will be a *very* disruptive technology, changing the world in ways that we are not planning and we cannot for see. Children will use these laptops for their own purposes.

      As far as teaching plain ol' reading, writing, and 'rythmetic, a pencil and paper would do just as good a job for a lot less money. As a teaching device, they won't be a smashing success. However, what they will do is usher kids in third world poverty into the global communication revolution.

      Have you read about cell phones in rural Africa? These were places so poor that nobody, not business, not the corrupt government, not international aide programs, could justify the cost of wiring these places for phone service and electricity. However, once cell phone towers started going up, poor people started getting a hold of cell phones. Poor farmers were lining up buyers for fruit they were picking in the fields *as they were picking it*, instead of dragging it all the way to market and having it rot in the sun when there were no buyers. African societies have formalized rules of friendship and obligation, and having these fast communication tools allowed people to better utilize their social network and provide for the daily needs.

      These OLPC laptops will be used more like cell phones than desktop office computers. Yes, children are going to use these laptops to learn a little at school. But far and away, they will use them to talk to each other via the wireless capabilities. They will talk to people everyday that are more that a day's walk away. They will meet new people in neighboring villages electronically; people they have never met in real life.

      All people everywhere provide for their daily needs through their social networks. These rural third world kids will have a much expanded social network on account of these laptop. The tittering, giggling children passing gossip and songs back and forth on these laptops will one day grow up, start families, plant gardens, and conduct business, and uses these communication technologies to improve their lives.

      The paper and pencil model prepares kids for the office of the 1950s, where the only problem solving tools are pens and paper, in/out boxes on each person's desk, and vacuum tubes shuttling papers around. Kids of today will make their lives in a new world where we can organize flash mobs in a hour on a cell phone. They need to play with the tools to tomorrow, so they can creatively explore all the yet-unimagined possibilites they will use in the future.

      --
      Computers are useless. They can only give you answers.
      -- Pablo Picasso
    5. Re:The more I hear about this project... by mrfrostee · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Let's say that kids want to learn how to write software for this platform. Will the tools available be even comparable to what they would expect with any "real environment?"

      It comes with Python and PyGTK, with Squeak eToys for younger kids. To me, that seems like a good way for kids to actually learn. What else would you suggest for kids to start with?

      It seems far better than the rows and rows of Dell/Windows computers at my kid's middle school where they learn "real world" skills like "typing" and "powerpoint". You are correct that the way US K-12 classrooms use their computers is a waste. That's why this is trying to do something different.

    6. Re:The more I hear about this project... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DwzCsOFxT-U

      It's not underpowered. The software will be optimized for the platform, making it possible to make efficient use of resources. Look at the video. Chat client, word processing, drawing, .. All that you have too. The applications are different though. They are supposed to be different.

      You misunderstood the meaning of OLPC. It's *not* for making kids C++ programmers. It's for assisting in the digital divide problem. The first step is a baby step. Teach kids how to read and write well. Nurture that skill, make them chat with each other etc. Then, provide the most basic content connectivity to give them information and possibility to use services. Official services. Stuff like that. If they tried running before learning how to walk they would but fall and hurt themselves. It would lead to a complete failure.

      The GUI doesn't have to be like Windows or other earlier ones because the target group has no knowledge about such. All that matters is that it is usable and it actually seems pretty damned working one. That and EEM ( take a look at http://www.rasterman.com/files/eem.avi ) are imho the most usable user interfaces that spare precious screen resolution estate.

      Did you by the way understand that there might not be classrooms available everywhere? The distance to the nearest school might be in hundreds of kilometers or there might be too severe weather to attend at all times. It's not easy elsewhere to get schooled. OLPC can reduce the actual need for physical classrooms and teachers and such. Furthermore digital "pen and paper" in the long run saves money. You can write 10 000 euros worth paper and pens on that 100$ OLPC.

      Seriously, you have grown in a way too easy and protected environment. You're spoilt.

    7. Re:The more I hear about this project... by Bloater · · Score: 1

      This laptop is for places which can only afford 1 teacher per year per fifty students. For the price of one more teacher for only three years they can provide the vast amount of knowledge of the internet to those fifty students for the lifetime of the laptop (probably about seven years - maybe more since it is small so more rugged and has solid state storage). That is a much cheaper way of increasing the level of education. Also textbooks can be provided much more cheaply as no paper is required.

    8. Re:The more I hear about this project... by hughk · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Good summaey. One of the characteristrics of lesser developed countries was that information = power. In one country that I was in, one of the greatest secrets was the world price of cotton which was a large multiple of that the statte was paying the farmers. Controlled information made it easy to rig markets as well as elections. Telephone lines tended to be limited and there was frequently an elaborate system of corruption around getting a line. The cell towers jumped over the corruption (mind you many of the companies had to pay $$$ to the politicians to get their licenses approved).

      Yes, the OLPC should further improve markets as well as finance for small farmers.

      --
      See my journal, I write things there
    9. Re:The more I hear about this project... by ratboy666 · · Score: 1

      "The hardware is severely under-powered; it cannot be reasonably used for most modern experimenting with computers"

      I am a professional developer. Lets look at what I use, and compare to the OLPC:

      OLPC 500Mhz geode, 128MB RAM, 512..1GB storage

      My main server (external email, httpd, user accounts, time keeping, external portal, ftp server):
      IBM PC365, 200Mhz x 2, 128MB RAM

      My "workstation" (dev, web browsing, email client, media playback (MythTV client): PII 400, 256MB

      Now, my storage is centralized: RAID 5, PII 266 (IBM GL300), 128MB, 4 x 250GB disk.

      I have one faster machine, used as a PVR -- the OLPC however could be a replacement for any of my "main squeeze" boxes.

      The biggest problem the OLPC has is lack of external storage.

      --
      Just another "Cubible(sic) Joe" 2 17 3061
    10. Re:The more I hear about this project... by Tragek · · Score: 1

      Interesting case on Africa there. I remember reading an article, perhaps posted here at slashdot, about it.

      I think you're bang on when you say that the OLPC has similar possibilities to change the way people do things in these developing nations, however, I also think it's going to very strongly matter HOW they are used.

      If these computers are used how I suspect they will be, mostly in an institutionalized setting, sitting on desks in schools, I don't think they'll have the desired effect. If the children are allowed, or even encouraged, to take them home, to use them as they were their machines, we will soon see a generation of children who have learned how to exploit this disruptive technology to their own benefit.

    11. Re:The more I hear about this project... by lawpoop · · Score: 2, Interesting

      "I think you're bang on when you say that the OLPC has similar possibilities to change the way people do things in these developing nations, however, I also think it's going to very strongly matter HOW they are used."

      Well, unless they are going to be total Nazis about it, teachers really won't be able to control how the kids use it. It's like hiding a comic inside the textbook you're pretending to read. The moment the teacher turns their back, the kids will be IMing each other. There will be some nerd in the class who will hurry and finish all of the assignments so he can continue working on his own little program. They will quickly learn how to multi tasks and pay attention to the teacher and the screen.

      I think we both agree that this activity -- children's uncontrolled, creative play and usage -- will really be where the revolution comes from.

      "If these computers are used how I suspect they will be, mostly in an institutionalized setting, sitting on desks in schools, I don't think they'll have the desired effect. If the children are allowed, or even encouraged, to take them home, to use them as they were their machines, we will soon see a generation of children who have learned how to exploit this disruptive technology to their own benefit."

      Your concern is obviously valid. I got the impression that the "One Laptop Per Child" meant that the laptop would belong to the child. But I really don't know.

      I think the real concern would be adults taking the laptops from the children and selling them on the black market. Not every parent is entirely consumed with seeing their child succeed. And there might be relatives or others in the village or wherever who are willing to take advantage of a child in such a way. Maybe it would be safer to keep them at the school.

      --
      Computers are useless. They can only give you answers.
      -- Pablo Picasso
    12. Re:The more I hear about this project... by Tragek · · Score: 1

      Black market is not something I ever thought of, though, it's an interesting question.

      You're completely right about instincts taking over, though, I think the revolution would perhaps happen despite any attempts to institutionalize and lock down the machines: However, also, I think that it's inarguable that the revolution would be _bigger_ if the machines were allowed to go home.

    13. Re:The more I hear about this project... by StrawberryFrog · · Score: 1

      As far as teaching plain ol' reading, writing, and 'rythmetic, a pencil and paper would do just as good a job for a lot less money. As a teaching device, they won't be a smashing success. However, what they will do is usher kids in third world poverty into the global communication revolution.

      I agree with you up to a point, however given a search engine and some other online resources, e.g. wikipedia, science texts, programming texts, online graphing calculators, etc., some of the more self-starting kids will go a lot further a lot faster with a laptop than without.

      Other than that, an excellent post.

      --

      My Karma: ran over your Dogma
      StrawberryFrog

    14. Re:The more I hear about this project... by Elbowgeek · · Score: 1

      The fact is that the way forward in this world is with the computer, so whilst pen an paper and text books are extremely important, they also need to be exposed to the concept of using a computer. And the fact that this can facilitate communication could possibly have beneficial political effects as it helps to promote free speech.

      As for the device not having an interface similar to the most common we see today in the Mac and Windows, bear in mind that just because many of these kids may be non-European, believe it or not they may actually be intelligent enough to adapt once presented with the more mainstream environments.

      Cheers

      --
      Who is this delectable creature with an insatiable love of the dead?
  7. Virtual Machine by ctennenh · · Score: 0

    I wonder if there will ever be a release of an OLPC VM for us all to work (read: play) with. I'd imagine that the project could only benefit from giving us all the opportunity to enhance it, even if the OS ends up closed. Throw out a QEMU VM that looks exactly as the OLPC will and see what happens in the sandbox.

    1. Re:Virtual Machine by Darundal · · Score: 1

      There already is a release of an OLPC VM image...

    2. Re:Virtual Machine by mcroydon · · Score: 5, Informative

      Go ahead and play. Grab a sugar image and fire up QEMU.

      --
      6.02x10^23, baby!
    3. Re:Virtual Machine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Where?

    4. Re:Virtual Machine by ditoa · · Score: 1

      http://tuttlesvc.teacherhosting.com/wordpress/?p=2 51

      It's a VMware image and works just fine in VMware Player.

    5. Re:Virtual Machine by ctennenh · · Score: 1

      You're a winner. Thanks.

  8. It doesn't matter by DavidR1991 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    It doesn't matter what interface or OS-type is given to these children. Everything changes constantly anyway - even if you gave them an Apple or MS, 5 years from now, the next MS/Apple release will probably be completely different, and possibly unrecognisable. As long as the OLPC teaches the concepts of basic computer usage, above the actual manipulation of the UI, this PC will be valuable no matter what OS or UI is preloaded onto it. My two pence

    1. Re:It doesn't matter by petermgreen · · Score: 1

      the last really radical change to the windows gui was windows 95, sure there have been fairly large tweaks since (the biggest being "windows desktop update" from IE4 and the changes windows XP). but by and large i'd expect a user who learnt on windows 95 to have little trouble dealing with the user interface of XP.

      we still have drive letters for different drives/partitions, we still can edit the start menu by right clicking and selecting open on the start button, we still have windows selection through the taskbar (though now by default they are put in those horrible group), we still have 3 icons in the top right hand corner of windows in the same order and with the same symbols as on 95.

      --
      note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
  9. OLPC will flop because of 'Sugar' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I would really like to see something like the OLPC succeed. When I downloaded the OLPC vmware/qemu image and tried it, I was terrably disappointed. I think that if 'Sugar' is not replaced the whole project will fail.

    1. Re:OLPC will flop because of 'Sugar' by tepples · · Score: 1

      When I downloaded the OLPC vmware/qemu image and tried it, I was terrably disappointed. Disappointed in what way? If responsiveness, then current emulators are too slow to run Sugar in real time.
  10. The OLPC is NOT for programming by A+nonymous+Coward · · Score: 1

    You certainly haven't absorbed much of what you have supposedly heard about this project. The economics of it come into play by paying for this instead of buying obsolete textbooks in foreign languages. Now they will be able to have up to date textbooks, in their own language, and carry ALL of them around with them.

    The secondary goal is learning about the big wide world around them. Communication, it's called. Now the kids will be able to meet people who might not live within an hour's walk away.

    All this applies to the kids' families too. The parents and older siblings and neighbors and friends will all get similar benefits. Parents can get medical information, advice about better farming, learn what the regional markets want to buy so they can make better decisions about what to make or grow ... the possibilities are endless.

    To think of the OLPC as a mere computer is hopelessly incredibly narrow minded.

  11. Is Wikipedia really that bad? by tepples · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Networking the OLPC will open a child's mind into a world of impeccable and unimpeachable sources of knowledge such as Slashdot, Wikipedia, and Democratunderground. I detect a hint of sarcasm, as if the $100 traditional textbooks were significantly more accurate, more comprehensive, and less biased on average than Wikipedia.
    1. Re:Is Wikipedia really that bad? by WilliamSChips · · Score: 2, Interesting

      He sounds like an arch-conservative lamenting that his biased textbooks won't be the cornerstone of people learning history anymore.

      --
      Please, for the good of Humanity, vote Obama.
    2. Re:Is Wikipedia really that bad? by stonecypher · · Score: 1

      They're significantly better edited. This leads to less ambiguous prose, which in turn affects the readers' ability to write coherently. Furthermore, Wikipedia is dramatically more biased in my admittedly limited experience than are textbooks. I know, it's quite trendy to suggest that for arbitrary rules governing community, that these articles will suddenly magically be clean-cut and impartial, and then to hand-wave half-remembered studies between experts on Brittanica and Wikipedia articles where Brittanica made three or four times more something than something else and they're sure it works out to mean what they want for it to mean.

      The problem is, those studies didn't have anything to do with partiality, they had to do with factuality, and they focussed on the sciences, where factuality is (usually) not under dispute. Sure, the average Wikipedia article has fewer errors; it's had more eyes. That doesn't mean that the text is of as high quality; most articles in Wikipedia are rife with errors in grammar, syntax, spelling and usage, and frequently the text is of such poor quality that what's being said simply isn't clear, or is written in a dangerously counterintuitive fashion.

      I mean, we've all had to edit a wikipedia page because some text was just disgusting, or because someone misunderstood how to put facts together, haven't we?

      Impeccable covers a lot more ground than does bias, but I don't buy that Wikipedia is less biassed than an encyclopedia for a flat second. Wikipedia has trolls that go unnoticed for years at a time. Wikipedia cites opinion as fact so often that the editors have created a macro to identify areas which need to be rewritten. Indeed, there are actually a dozen odd such macros, because it's actually so common that it's useful to differentiate between the various kinds of deceitful textual tactics in appallingly common use (consider weasel words and peacock terms,) and indeed has several FAQs and guidelines explaining rules governing the quality of text.

      The masses are great for volume and thorough explanation. For quality, get a professional, or show statistics. By the by, you'll note on reading weasel words that indeed they are to what I'm replying. It's more common than you'd think, and most people do it accidentally or by habit. There's a reason for editors, and it's not because most people write with skill. Hell, a professional writer can't get something published without being edited; why should the masses do better work?

      Next time you want to pretend there's a quality difference, show evidence. Notice how you implied a quality difference without actually citing facts? That kind of writing is what makes Wikipedia, and that kind of writing is of unacceptable quality.

      Or, didn't you know that textbook authors get paid on a sliding scale governed by how many errors or irresponsible positions other experts can find in their work, and that the other experts make bonuses for finding lots of errors? Did you think the textbook companies don't care about quality? Did you forget that before the internet came into play as a significant documentary force (arguably) five-ish years ago, that they also competed with each other on grounds of quality? Did you think maybe that they just wrote whatever the hell they wanted and that it was largely one guy making shit up? This is Harcourt Brace we're talking about, not the New York Times. They're carefully edited and they care a lot about quality. Did you know textbook companies get sued for serious errors by universities, professors, public action groups and individuals?

      Did you think nobody cared?

      So look, instead of writing like Wikipedia, start writing like a real encyclopedia. Intimations are poison. Insinuations get people fired. Hinting at statistics gets your article pulled. Not citing numbers when numbers are

      --
      StoneCypher is Full of BS
    3. Re:Is Wikipedia really that bad? by ClassMyAss · · Score: 2, Insightful
      But look, would you have taken Wikipedia over Brittanica five years ago? Neither would I. I just think it's not time yet. There are several fundamental problems that haven't yet been solved, and which must be solved before it can be considered to have won in my opinion.

      I'll agree with you that Wikipedia has some problems that haven't yet been ironed out, mostly the ones that you outlined above. However, I have to disagree with you on the issue of bias - while I certainly would agree that many articles involve edit wars and significant amounts of bias, nobody in their right mind sees (or expects to see) Wikipedia as free of such things. Rather, you must evaluate everything that appears there with a skeptical set of eyes. In truth, everything should always be viewed this way, including textbooks and encyclopedias, but the physical heft of those types of books tends to fool the reader into attributing undue authority to the authors. I personally like the fact that Wikipedia is a pretty good source with a healthy dose of crap - what better way to keep a reader on his toes than to have the occasional article edited so that every other "the" reads "penis!" In order to think critically you need to occasionally see a good reason to do so, and twelve years of schooling by textbook does not prepare students for the real world, where everything hasn't been evaluated extensively for accuracy and pre-approved for your safe consumption before you read it.

      Until you can show me data that demonstrates that the mob is less partial than formally edited text, I'm not biting. I'm playing the FUD card and waiting for data.

      We'll never get there. But the overall utility of a gargantuan amount of free and somewhat biased text far surpasses that of the tiny but expensive amount of carefully sanitized summarizing that you would find in an encyclopedia. Wikipedia can actually serve as a springboard for further investigation; an encyclopedia is nothing more than a glorified dictionary.

    4. Re:Is Wikipedia really that bad? by dhasenan · · Score: 1

      $100 buys what, ten textbooks that are falling apart, two in decent condition, or one new.

      A laptop with Internet access has thousands of textbooks available for free. Even without using BitTorrent. And there are decent libre textbooks available online.

      So even if you take a quality hit (despite the available peer review) by using online textbooks, the greater availability will lead to a better, more thorough education for the students.

      That assumes, of course, that each child has sufficient access to the laptop, and that each child accesses at least ten textbooks.

  12. Re:OLPC sucks by marcosdumay · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Here at Brazil it is on the major press, but they call it the US$100 laptop, instead of OLPC. Maybe you didn't listen about it because it is not aimed to your area.

  13. thanks for replying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Lucky guy! How good is the self powered feature, and how does it work? List a few of the really cool points!

  14. I don't know by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Can't answer your question on getting to an x term. They have a news group listed off the wiki though, ask there maybe. I would assume it is possible, a keyboard command or something. I haven't played with it yet, but I do know it is loosely derived from fedora. I would be surprised if it isn't really, possibly just slightly hid compared to normal distros.
    Frankly speaking, I am more interested in the hardware aspect to the machine, looks to be possible for a cheap entry level solid state laptop there, that is self powered, which to me is just the spiffiest of features. I would be interested in getting one and just trying to boot something like damn small on it to use, rather than sugar and whatever their OS morphs into. A bit more RAM and up the flashdrive to a couple gigs and I could replace what I do every day with that thing and retire this energy hog desktop. I don't really want to get any more conventional laptops, too expensive, hard to upgrade, and not-self powered. I don't do video games nor much cpu intensive stuff, so the specs would be fine for me, a litle surfin, etc is more than adequate for my purposes. Can't wait until the clones hit, I bet we see some interesting variants.

  15. Re:OLPC sucks by soft_guy · · Score: 1

    Gay slashdot hype. Only slashdot even knows about "OLPC." Stupid idea. Right. People who design laptops have never heard of OLPC.
    --
    Avoid Missing Ball for High Score