Negroponte Says Windows 'Runs Well' On XO Laptop

Stony Stevenson alerts us to comments from OLPC founder Nicholas Negroponte indicating his approval of Windows' performance on the XO laptop. Negroponte said in an email, "Sugar needs a wider basis, to run on more Linux platforms and to run under Windows." The full email is available at OLPC News. He was also quoted by the Associated Press as saying that Sugar "didn't have a software architect who did it in a crisp way," and cited the lack of Flash as an example. Negroponte continued, "There are several examples like that, that we have to address without worrying about the fundamentalism in some of the open-source community. One can be an open-source advocate without being an open-source fundamentalist."

Comments

Wow

[Rix]

Negroponte decrying fundamentalism. That's rich.

just remember nicholas

[frinky525]

you can't get a little bit pregnant

Poor software design???

[dreamchaser]

Is he trying to make us believe that they couldn't get a decent software architect at MIT??? I really have to wonder how many zeros were in the check that Ballmer wrote him.

Two models

[Enderandrew]

If XP can't run well on the ASUS EePC, then I doubt it runs well on the XO. This letter is all hype.

Frankly, I think the OLPC project did a great job with their first release, but realize it is only a first release. I think they should diverge and release two models next time.

Model A is closer to the $100 price tag, and will sell better in certain countries. Features should be comparable to the current XO model, but flash memory, processors, etc. keep getting cheaper.

Model B is slightly closer to the ASUS in processing power and storage. Shape, chassis, etc. can all stay the same. It won't match the ASUS model, since power usage is a major concern. But if it were slightly more powerful, you might see a KDE build optimized for it, or maybe even a toned-down version of Windows.

Being able to support a more robust Linux distro, AND the possibility of Windows will be a huge selling point. If they can get a Model B at $250 a pop, they'd sell a ton of these as well.

Re:Screw Sugar

[Enderandrew]

The one thing I rather like about Sugar, is that the interface was designed to be accessible in countries lacking proper localization, using symbols heavily in the interface, and by representing data graphically perhaps moreso than via text in some places.

It also allows young children who can't read to interface with the computer in a meaningful way.

Sugar was also designed around mesh-networking, power-consumption, e-reader mode, etc.

Certainly there is room for improvement, but Puppy/Slack/DSL would not have been a perfect implementation either.

Re:And with this...

[Enderandrew]

Apparently the most popular use of the XO model in test-cases I've read is the camera. Apparently kids in Africa see tourists with cameras, but likely never had any access to document or record their lives before.

The camera can record brief bits of video. I wouldn't be shocked if users are peeved they can't upload said videos to sites like YouTube. I think that is a valid reason to ask for Flash support.

Re:Lack of Flash?!?!?!

[cretog8]

The reason they went with Gnash in the first place was because the Adobe Flash player needs more CPU power than the entire damn machine had available. Flash runs fine on my XO. It's easy to install it and use it instead of Gnash.

The lack of Flash is a really stupid argument against OLPC design, though. I don't think there's anything--legal or technical--to keep a school or country from mass-installing Flash for themselves, even if OLPC doesn't.

I couldn't agree more

[MarkusQ]

One can be an open-source advocate without being an open-source fundamentalist.

How true, how true. I couldn't agree more. Open source is like so many things (human rights and the lead free nonsense come to mind) where some people go overboard and just take it way too far. I mean, sure, having your kid chew on a hunk of lead isn't going to be good for them. For one thing, it's not very nutritions. But some people take this way too far, and say that something that is 98% corn syrup with only a trace of lead is just as bad.

Humbug.

I think it is perfectly possible to be an open source advocate without getting all fundamentalist about it, just like you can support human rights but not get too worked up about the occasional state sponsored rape, torture, genocide, or whatever. The important thing is that you advocate the right side on the broader issue, not that you pay any attention to any specific exceptions.

And besides, what's the big deal about open source anyway? Big deal.. It's not like it was free software, or anything.

--MarkusQ

Re:Power Power Power and infrastructure

[Anonymous Coward]

So maybe Microsoft is up to the task.

Are you nuts man? Maybe Microsoft is up to the task of total world domination, you mean. This is totally a farce! They want to train the 3rd world to use the Monopoly software so that they can continue their evil ambitions on into the far future - that's all.

But MS does have the dowry and an incentive. And the OLPC does need the cash.

I am really, really pissed off that Negroponte has sold out to the Monopoly. I mean - sorry to call you nuts, but I don't think you realize what you are saying. It's just monstrous that the Monopoly has the cash to corrupt every person on this planet! All these poor people in the 3rd world - they could start a revolution with Linux! I mean - they could p0wn it! They could do something with their miserable lives, instead of being locked into the Monopoly.

Then why not use ARM?

[EmbeddedJanitor]

ARM would have given them cheaper and lower power (that's why your phone isn't x86) and runs Linux very well. No, they wanted to keep Windows capable.

If they'd want to use WinCE, then they should have used ARM too. Most WinCE devices are ARM.

Microsoft is a special case

[CustomDesigned]

While being open to the judicious use of proprietary software like Flash is a reasonable position for an open source advocate, it is always suicide to acquiesce to any Microsoft offering (other than the rare open and unencumbered M$ spec like SOAP). This is because, like AlQaida doesn't just want schools and bridges, M$ doesn't just want your business. They want you "dead" (figuratively, of course). M$ isn't content to beat competitors (some say that can't). They must destroy them. This has been the case for 15 years, and won't even begin to change until Gates and Balmer are completely gone.

I've seen company after company get burned trying to deal with M$ over the last 15 years, from IBM to DrDOS to ... to Sun to probably Novell. When will they ever learn? The best you can hope for when dealing with M$ is for M$ to buy you out before they destroy the company (at least the founders get some money that way).

Re:Isn't Microsoft out to destory OLPC?

[Locutus]

Intel just wants to sell semiconductors, no matter what software is running on it. True and that is why Intel sales people gave up on a all but guaranteed sale and tried once again to take away the OLPC sale in Peru. OLPC had evidence of this and Intel was caught so they quite the board. They want OLPC dead because it is AMD.

Microsoft just wants to sell software, no matter what semiconductor it is running on. True again and this time it is because it has the ability to show Linux and open source are viable platforms for PC-like products. Microsoft paid Thailand to stop taking Linux laptops and instead take a crippled Windows XP. Yup, Microsoft paid them with millions in 'services' while charging them $5/ea for licensing. Financial trick but it was a payment to keep Linux from growing. Microsoft did the same thing with a Linux based Classmate PC sale and even went far as to pay for a company to wipe Linux and put Windows on after deliver.

All this Microsoft interest in OLPC is to stop Linux and open source software on the devices. Do you really think they are going to let the Sugar interface cover up the Windows Explorer desktop? Hell now they are not and Negroponte was vary vague in what he considered "sugar". I sounded more like he wanted the sugar apps torn from the sugar desktop so they run on Windows Explorer. That is what Microsoft wants as it means the Linux and open source stack( Sugar ) is locked out of this market.

No conspiracy, pure facts from years and years of consistent anti-competitive business methods like this. Not fine when you're a monopoly convicted and charged many times with protectionism.

LoB

Re:Power Power Power and infrastructure

[servognome]

They could do something with their miserable lives, instead of being locked into the Monopoly.

Or they could just use the monopoly OS as a tool to do something else even more valuable with their lives.

it ain't Sugar

[nguy]

I'm sorry, but interesting as Sugar is, it's not what has created all this interest in the OLPC. What has greated the interest is that the OLPC is cheap, has cute hardware, has some really interesting technologies on it, and that its software is fully open and can be modified.

Putting Windows on the OLPC and Sugar on Windows negatively affects many of those issues: it makes the thing more expensive, it eliminates many of the interesting technologies (power management, mesh networking, ...), and it doesn't even let the thing be a decent Windows machine. And the only reason to run Windows over Linux is to run Windows applications, and they won't run well and they sure as hell won't integrate with Sugar.

The only thing that might make a tiny amount of sense is to offer Windows Mobile, because you'd actually have a chance of running Windows Mobile apps on the OLPC. But what Windows Mobile apps would be of any interest to an OLPC user? What relevant Windows Mobile apps don't already have superior Linux equivalents available?

I think Negroponte is losing it. Get the passionate, good people back that left and put the OLPC back on track. Forget about Windows.

Re:Power Power Power and infrastructure

[Bert64]

Windows required the XO hardware to be expanded, Linux ran on the original (cheaper) design.
Linux can be supplied free, Windows costs money, and Microsoft only provide a massively crippled version at low cost, which is still more expensive than linux.
Linux encourages and facilitates the kids to learn about the underlying OS, while not everyone will have an interest in doing this, a percentage will, and they will improve the software for their community, as well as providing local support/training to others. Learning about a microsoft platform is far more limited in scope, and not actively encouraged.
The XO runs a current version of linux, but an outdated version of windows that microsoft are pushing hard to deprecate.
Many windows apps cost money, most linux apps are available at no cost, microsoft won't provide users with a full suite of applications for free, it will just push the price up higher. even if microsoft provide apps cheap/free, they wont be the same ones being used in first world businesses so there's no advantage over linux there.

A lot of software will really need to be adapted to the local markets where the XO is sold, providing the source code will facilitate technically minded kids to assist and/or provide feedback. microsoft wont do much to adapt software to the local markets, they're a "one size fits all" operation.