Slashdot Mirror
OLPC to Run Windows, Come to the US
An anonymous reader writes "'Yesterday Nicholas Negroponte, former director of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology Media Lab and current head of the nonprofit One Laptop Per Child project, gave analysts and journalists an update on the OLPC project. Two big changes were announced — the $100 OLPC is now the $175 OLPC, and it will be able to run Windows. Even in a market where there are alternatives to using Windows and Office, there's a huge demand for Microsoft software. The OLPC was seen as a way for open source Linux distributions to achieve massive exposure in developing countries, but now Negroponte says that the OLPC machine will be able to run Windows as well as Linux. Details are sketchy but Negroponte did confirm that the XO's developers have been working with Microsoft to get the OLPC up to spec for Windows.' We also find out that the OLPC gets a price hike and will officially come to the US. Could this be tied into Microsoft's new $3 Windows XP Starter and Office 2007 bundle? Now that the OLPC and Intel's Classmate PC can both run Windows, is Linux in the developing world in trouble?"
I guess Bill Gates is going to stop criticizing the project now that it supports Windows...
I'll probably be modded down for this...
Now the system has 256MB of Ram and a slightly better processor, so yes it could now run Windows in theory. However as they always say, this is an educational project not a laptop project, and they are of course going to go with the stunning Sugar interface.
The dollar has fallen in value quite a lot, next month we'll no doubt see $250 OLPC if it keeps slipping.
My little Linux and tech blog
You know what's next ... the XO's in the real field [e.g. 3rd world nations] will start shipping with Windows instead of their OSS tools.
Yeah, MSFT won again!
I wonder how much it cost MSFT to buy them off....
Tom
Someday, I'll have a real sig.
I get the feeling sometimes that the heads at M$ have a robber baron complex. They stole ideas and software so much that they feel bad and try to give back somehow as well as force their crap on unsuspecting indiginous peoples. I just don't think that this is necessarily a good venue for them. First I think that it'll actually degrade the performance of the machine and what happens when all these machines get out in the world and they mesh network a virus? (if this doesn't make much sense please break out a decoder ring, I'm 11 1/2 hours into my shift at 5:30 in the morning) It seems to me that it would create a lot more problems than it's worth, not to mention that for kids in the developing world the XO interface looks like it's more language/culture neutral than a windows style interface. Oh and last I checked every dollar counts in this thing, most developing countries don't have a ton of money to throw at these so the cheaper the better, so an extra few dollars per machine may not seem like a lot to us but for where they're going and the numbers that are estimated it adds up pretty quickly.
"Some books contain the machinery required to create and sustain universes."-Tycho
I know I just posted a second ago but I also had a thought. Is M$ maybe trying to get all these people using and programming with Windows so that they can set up Developer sweatshops similar to clothing lines? I do remember some exec saying at one time something about developers developers developers........ *stares stupidly at chair flying towards head*
"Some books contain the machinery required to create and sustain universes."-Tycho
just because it *can* run Windows? As in, just the possibility upsets you? Folks, get some perspective will ya'?
Unless they can offer those 256Mb of RAM at a lower price than a smaller memory, it's a waste of resources. Better make an effort to lower that price than try to make it run windows. What next, the $999 OLPC to run a $300 Vista Starter Edition?
---
If a picture is worth a thousand words my dissertation is going to be a dodle
---
Even worse, windows is almost designed to preserve user's computer illiteracy - you don't learn how to use a computer, you rote-learn how to do some tasks using a computer running windows. The OLPC linux OS was designed to encourage exploration of what was underneath, all deliberately written in a simple programming language. The *reason* we have programmers today is because the early 8- and 16- bit platforms they grew up on encouraged exploration. My first computers came with complete schematics and a programming manual.
>[e.g. 3rd world nations] will start shipping with Windows instead of their OSS tools.
Well since the laptop is built with a custom OpenFirmware and a LinuxBios (kernel on the firmware), how are they going to boot Windows exactly?
My little Linux and tech blog
> is Linux in the developing world in trouble?"
Twelve hundred children an hour die, largely in said world, and mostly preventable deaths. (Source: UNICEF). That's things like malnutrition, lack of access to clean water, etc...
No offense meant, but can you imagine how much we shouldn't care what kind of operating system these countries are using? There are bigger problems to worry about.
Thank you Microsoft.
Due to your intervention, the same village will now receive 40% less laptops for the same budget, and experience viruses, BSOD's and Windows bit-rot.
They will become educated in the three R's (Reboot, Reinstall, Reformat and these devices don't come with CD drives).
Of course, you are going to ensure that the 'productivity' software is fully 'compatible' with the Linux software, aren't you.
But at least you won't get any competition from any emerging 3rd world IT industries, eh? Because developing on these platforms will be *so* cheap and easy. Who knows, you may force them to become amoral and pirate all your software in order to get anything done, instead of sharing GPL'd code and helping each other totally legally and morally.
And of course you are well known for writing secure, resource efficient software that doesn't have memory leaks, and Linux is not.
(For instance, my house firewall is definitely not a Pentium 75 with 64Mb of memory with an uptime of years).
After all, you have to use the right tool for the job, and they exist for you, not vice versa. Their needs are your needs.
Don't worry, if you're feeling guilty just get the Gates Foundation charity to cut their country a check. All better!
By the way, aren't you canning XP soon? I hope they have their upgrade path sorted.
You use Windows simply because the majority of other people do. You have never evaluated it against the alternatives. Indeed, I'll wager that you cannot identify any essential features that Windows XP has that other OSes don't have. If MS produced a version of Office for Linux would you make the same statement? I suspect not.
Are you really trying to defend Windows portability by saying a defunct OS was once ported to a dead chip?
The death of Linux on OLPC is greatly exaggerated
I think you missed the bigger implication here...
None of us care if Billy G sells a crippled, OLPC-specific version of XP dirt-cheap, in a desperate bid to promote Windows adoption in the 3rd world. Exposing people to "Starter Edition" would most likely do more to promote Linux use than compete with it.
Given the price and specs change, and Microsoft's announcement of "embracing" the OLPC, some of us can't help but but 2 and 2 together and get 4. A decent Linux system doesn't need 256MB, while XP can barely run its own Explorer interface, much less any additional programs (and I wouldn't even want to try any of the Office apps such as Word) on anything less.
As the biggest issue here, you need to look at this from two perspectives - Ours, as (most likely) middle-class geeks posting from a Western nation viewing this as a really cool (and still exceedingly cheap) compromise between a palmheld and a laptop and cheap enough to consider nearly disposeable; And a third-world school looking at a total budget of $150 per year, trying to decide if they should buy an OLPC or rebuild the school that washed away in the annual spring mudslide.
Cheap toys vs still-expensive tools.
And lest you take that as baseless speculation, "However, Negroponte disclosed that XO's developers have been working with Microsoft Corp. so a version of Windows can run on the machines as well". No, not a "side effect". Boost the specs and boost the price just so Microsoft can play along.
I wonder how much Nick Negroponte's soul cost Mr. Gates...
The brilliance of the OLPC project is the almost crash proof simplicity of the product. A fresh start. For anyone who has used a (now defunct) Psion Organiser, one of the easiest to use and reliable (albiet unconnected) PDAs ever launched anywhere in the world, a user friendly stable GUI is what empowers people to focus on the task at hand, not the device. Think Toaster, Microwave or iPod. As a Mac user who has just spent two weeks playing with Vista, I wish to state as a software designer that MS products are a hindrance, not a tool for productivity. The majority of the world's greatest structures (Pyramids, Empire State Building, every (old) cathedral and church) ever build were designed and constructed before computers using intuitive tools - paper and pen(cil). Windows, and even OSX is a barrier to true creativity and expression. The unique GUI of the OLPC was a fantastic opportunity to start afresh and empower people who have never touched a computer before. Now all these people will do is send emails and run spreadsheets. How exciting. How original. How inspiring. Not. A sad sad day. I think it's time I got back together with my industrial designer and created an OLPC that meets the original vision of NN at MiT. Watch this space. (www.owonder.com)
O'WONDERWe're working on it.
I spotted a typo in you post:
... designed by the computer illiterate ...
Windows is designed by lawyers, marketing analysts and people who watch other people using Macs.
lower entry barriers
You're joking, right? Microsoft is nothing but barriers to entry. $$$ for this, $$$ for that, $$$ for the other. And then more $$$ to keep it all safe. And then the same again next year.
Slashdot contributers are mostly above average people but this same topic keeps cropping up. No company is a single faceted thing, if someone does something it not for a good or bad purpose soley, such a single sided idea from even an individual is hard to come by. If I want pizza tonight, is it soley a hommage to my love of Italy? Because I like take away food? Because its good value food? Because I feel like oily food? Because I saw Nicole Richie and figured if I can still see my penis when I look down maybe im too thin too? You can argue any number of them and they could all be true, even I wouldnt know the one reason why. Just because Microsoft dominates the market with aggressive tactics doesn't mean its not partially a good will thing. You can hardly say bill gates doesn't give back to the community, I don't know any other billionaire that's so altruistic, how much does jobs donate? If its a move to secure Microsoft's position as the most popular OS world wide, then of course that what they should do, that's what any company would do. Isn't the Linux community looking at the OLPC project as a platform to spread Linux? The one upside to Windows is that it will allow them to run software 90-95% of desktop users can run, having Linux on most the developing worlds computers but not on the developed is almost like a barrier they are trying to remove. But in fairness MS should do more to make a cut down version to run, god knows my VM Ware win2k machine boots so fast it makes me wonder what the hell XP and Vista is loading. Dual booted OLPC would be the best middle ground as choice should be something everyone has. Its what I feel the cornerstone of open source software is.
Negroponte has screwed open source by nearly doubling the OLPC price so it can run Windows. He's just back-stabbed all the people who donated a lot of time and effort into putting together a low cost laptop and the free as in speech software to run it.
The OLPC project is now dead, just like every other venture that capitulates with Microsoft.
3 things about computers: they're alive, they're self-aware, and they hate your guts.
Many people WANT to see the underdog(s) (Linux, Macintosh) gain ground and market share from the distribution of a large number of computers, and begin a movement to displace Microsoft. However, if you look at this project from a pragmatic perspective one would need to remove personal desires from the picture.
The primary goal is to provide acceptable, useful computers to people. If Microsoft is willing to donate their operating system for free, then this should be factored in. However, the additional requirements necessary to run Windows XP would change the computer considerably.
For those who don't know it, Linux comes in many flavors and has far lower requirements than Windows. The people involved in this project know this too.
This does not mean that an actual effort to find out the difference in requirements on **THIS** computer to run Windows should have anyone getting concerned. They are just answering the question:
"With this computer as it is now, exactly what changes (and how much more money) would be required to make it run Windows?"
This is a reasonable question, and one that any smart project manager would want to know the answer to. This is not your run of the mill 'minimum requirements', but rather a realistic and accurate minimum requirements for this computer.
Trust me, someone is going to ask the question. Maybe a government, maybe some ignorant government IT person somewhere, or a politically motivated official. But someone WILL ask the question, and if they don't know the answer, they would need to go back and either fudge it or find it out.
So knowing the answer before someone asks the question shown good planning, and project management.
I am open source, and Linux baby!
whatever it was worth... I am from a "3rd world country" a, but a price RAM to increase specs... for Windows?? the fact that this is at least a rumor is a bad side for what was once a purely open initiative - I guess I still wish them luck, but I won't be cheering for them anymore.
"Thanks for all the money you paid to us. We've used it to buy off ISO among other things" -Microsoft
I run XP.
I get a desktop faster that with Ubuntu. The issue, for me, is that after that, one of the first things I want to do, is connect to google talk.
Usually, the wireless adapter takes a looooooong time to appear in my system tray, and to discover whether I can connect to Google Talk.
For my usage, XP takes FOREVER to boot.
I see that you get a desktop faster, but then, I don't want a desktop to see my wallpaper, I want a desktop I can use, to perform the tasks I need.
I am not saying that Vista is faster, I'm not trying Vista, just pointing out that "getting a desktop" means different things to different people.
Wow. Imagine my surprise to find slashdotters who think the most important part of making a semi-affordable laptop for poor children living in third world countries is that it promotes open source.
I don't really buy the "wow, 128 extra megs of RAM and 512MB more hard disk space--THEY'RE SLEEPING WITH MICROSOFT!" nonsense. I could buy the parts for that RETAIL and not pay an extra $75, with the exception that probably nobody bothers to sell that kind of super-low-end hardware anymore.
More likely, they had a goal of $100 laptop and have realized that manufacturing isn't cheap. Costs run up all the time in projects of any scope. They've said all along that they expect the price to come down each year; that's an effect of manufacturing, not a magical "Microsoft tax" that apparently would only apply for one year.
OLPC is low-cost only if it can be produced and sold in the tens of millions of units. If open source can't deliver those millions today - when they are needed most - the problem isn't with Negroponte and the problem isn't with Windows.
There is nothing in OLPC tech that can't be replicated by others. There is nothing to stop the deployment of the $100 third-world Windows laptop. Not with academic pricing of XP or Vista SE and Office down to $3 per unit.
Typing in from a country that is stuck amidst 1st world and 3rd world neighbors, and cant decide which category itself falls into, im saying that $175 price tag for OLPC means labeling it as "DEAD" with colorfully lettered stickers.
even in turkey $175 for such a device is way too much that any family wanting to buy one might ask the supplier whether they will let them pay in installments spreading over 12 or better, 24 months.
Needless to say that in countries that fall in southern and southeastern directions from turkey, which encompass most of the 3rd world countries, $175 will just make olpc a no gamer.
evidently someone sold their soul to some bastards. sad to see, as this olpc thing actually had a chance.
this $175 deal thing is apparently something to enable microsoft to push windows crap on them to third (and second) world so that they will create a userbase and a future upgrade market. if this shit goes through like this,i got to say that, as an it world participant and employee, i will consult anyone and any institution in my area against olpc and ensure i have a hand in its failure. despite i want it to happen very much, better not to happen, than to happen foul.
maybe everything is not over yet. If olpc contributors reassess the situation and pressurize the leaders, sold souls might be reclaimed, if it is not too late.
Read radical news here
it was already publicly stated that the SD slot was added at Microsofts request. And "no formal partnership" does not mean that they haven't started falling for Microsofts tricks. It appears their scheme of bloating the OLPC project into extinction is well on its way. Get a clue folks, Microsoft wants OLPC gone if it's not running Windows. Period. IMO
LoB
"Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
There's a couple of decades of evidence as to how Microsoft "works" and this person seems to be aware of this. He/she knows that what is said publicly by Microsoft or associates is NOT related to reality since it is ALL PR and marketing-speak. BTW, the OLPC people have already said that they have increased the cost of the OLPC device by adding the SD lot AT MICROSOFTS REQUEST. Therefore, there is already evidence that they are adapting the system for Microsoft without an official partnership with them. The latest moves stating that they've increased the CPU performance, doubled both system memory and storage ALONG WITH stating support for Microsoft Windows makes it easy to put together the picture of what is going on and to fear the end of the OLPC project.
BTW, I agree 100% with the comments stated. Microsoft must see OLPC fail if it is not running Microsoft Windows. Microsoft is not out to save the world or educate the world and their only purpose on this earth is to sell Microsoft software. Negroponte and group are fools if they think Microsoft has ANY OTHER MOTIVE. Like I said, there are a couple of decades of evidence which shows how Microsoft 'works'.
LoB
"Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
I'd like to see what RedHat thinks about this. They invest so much in the new interface, and overall OS, with the hope to create something new, and more appropriate for kids, with very innovative features nowhere to be found in conventional PCs (mesh networking, real collaborative activities). Now the OLPC leadership is basically saying: "Sugar is nice, but let's put the old Windows as an alternative, regardless its feasibility in the use in a school environment, after all nobody was ever fired when buying MS products". To me that seems a slap in the faces to RedHat, and ultimately to the kids. This was supposed to be an educational project. As time goes by, it looks more as a business effort to sell dumb computers in developing countries. Nobody talks about content, how to use these things in schools.
Maybe I'm dense, but I can't see the connection between the quotes and your response. Negroponte insists that the platform is open, and that all software included will be open. This means third-party developers cannot be prohibited from developing non-open software for it -- Microsoft (and Apple) are apparently doing so. The fact that the project turned down Apple has nothing to do with expense but with licensing, which is exactly the same reason they would turn down a similar offer from Microsoft. Nothing in the OLPC project so far contradicts this policy. Where is the co-opting? Where is the evidence that the 75% cost increase has anything to do with Windows? $100 was always considered a very optimistic price target; $175 is still pretty damn cheap, and possibly still unrealistic.