Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft and OLPC Agree To Put XP On the XO Laptop
Apro+im points out a NYTimes report which states that Microsoft and the OLPC project have officially agreed to put Windows XP on the XO laptop. While Microsoft has been working toward this for some time, analysts began to think a deal was more likely after Walter Bender resigned from the project and was replaced by Charles Kane. Former OLPC security developer Ivan Krstic had a lot to say about Windows on the XO as well. From the Times:
"Windows will add a bit to the price of the machines, about $3, the licensing fee Microsoft charges to some developing nations under a program called Unlimited Potential. For those nations that want dual-boot models, running both Windows and Linux, the extra hardware required will add another $7 or so to the cost of the machines, Mr. Negroponte said. The project's agreement with Microsoft involves no payment by the software giant, and Microsoft will not join One Laptop Per Child's board. 'We've stayed very pure,' Mr. Negroponte said.
If Microsoft really cared about education so much, why wouldn't they just give Windows to the OLPC project for free? $3 may be a lot when you multiply it by the numbers of copies that will be sold, but that's still less than 1/30 the price of a retail copy of Windows, and their brand image would probably improve as a result.
to run an OS MSFT will stop supporting in 45 days? the OS will run horribly as the hardware isn't fast enough to support XP, and the Interface isn't up to running on a small screen. Not to mention if you ever have any problems and re install you run into WGA activation which requires internet access which may or may not be available to the region in which the system has been deployed.
Can someone tell me why this makes sense again? or is it more of MSFT buying customers as they can't earn them through capitalistic competition.
i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
Well, so much for a really cool idea. Microsoft will go to any length to have it's shitty OS on anything.
"I bow to no man" - Riddick
That was a close call. For a while there was a threat that emerging countries could grow into the computer world with a fast, reliable and stable platform to develop on.
Now we drag them down to our level!
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
I used to be a Negroponte fan, but since he allowed the MS move in this project he designed, I am no longer. No, it's not because I'm anti-MS, it's because I thought that this project wasn't a place for competition with commercial software. If MS wants to help out, the should do what Steve Jobs did with OS X: Offer it for Free. No deals, no licensing BS.
Why does dual boot require extra hardware??
More storage probably.
If so, that means shorter battery life - even when the memory isn't being used. (Even if you turn off the clocking, leakage current is a honking big fraction of power consumption with the recent generations of semiconductors.)
So by changing the machine to handle Windows (and raising its price) they've also reduced one aspect of its functionality under a free OS.
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
this could extend XP's life a little longer until a non-shitty version of Windows comes out? (insert joke here) I realize we could be waiting awhile. I use Linux for most things but I just can't get away from my PC gaming!
We figured out a long time ago that it's easier to elect seven judges than to elect 132 legislators.
What? That's totally ridiculous. It means that the XO becomes nothing more than a vehicle for transfer of money from 3rd world children to Microsoft.
Whoever thought that idea up at OLPC has shit for brains.
Microsoft should be *PAYING* for the privilege of getting its O/S installed on a machine to which it contributed absolutely nothing during development, and which will become an instrument of propaganda for Microsoft among the children of the world.
OLPC guys, you've really dropped the ball on this one, and forgotten that the XO was not intended as a normal western product for exploitation of consumers.
"The question of whether machines can think is no more interesting than [] whether submarines can swim" - Dijkstra
To make sure the one with Linux costs more...
That is all.
The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
Wow, you're not just a little presumptuous. So using Linux is the only way to be "creative, inquisitive and independent minded"?
Bigger SD card
XO has 1 Gig and needs a 1 Gig SD card to run XP. I assume to add another OS you would need a 2 Gig card instead as XP has sucked up all your storage.
No idea what you could actually RUN on it or where you store apps to try and run on it but.....
closing gates and not opening them. There is nothing philanthropic about enslaving people with money.
Do it yourself, because no one else will do it yourself. [beta blockade 10-17 Feb]
I Can't believe people, even inside Microsoft, can see this as a good thing. This is like McDonalds bullying and lobbying to make the BigMac the preferred choice for UN's world food programme, and succeeding. And having people like Negroponte not mad about it just makes me think there's little to no hope.
congratulations, it's dead. Can OLPC be saved from Negroponte?
How we know is more important than what we know.
Seems odd that getting people indoctrinated into MS culture is so much more valuable than the hit to your reputation from a shitty user experience. Face it, while it might run XP, trying to run a program and XP must totally suck on that little thing.
They are quite confident of their monopoly it would seem.
There will be (hopefully) a million kids growing up thinking 'Windows is sooooo sloooow'
If i was in charge i don't think i would let windows only versions ship as then they think the same about you.
Essentially, this can win/win Microsoft. If few adopt the project then so what? They will have shit-canned a rival to the Classmate. If it takes off, then a host of new addicts will come back to Microsoft and pay some day. In the end Negroponte's dream is sufficiently squashed. With so much of the world embracing OSS and many of those involved in the project pushing it too the OLPC has become less desirable. Who's laughing? Microsoft and Intel.
I'm pretty sure the cocksucker who wrote the article doesn't really get free software. I think the point is that many individuals, such as myself for example, want for themselves a platform including development tools that are entirely open and free as in both freedom and beer. I want to learn by looking at other people's code and I want to create without paying fees everywhere for every tool I need with someone else deciding the parameters or tools with which I am allowed to create. That's why I choose, for myself, to participate in the world of free software.
As for kids around the world they may or may not decide they want that for themselves. However, the freedom of free software certainly empowers them to create and learn in any way they choose to without the cost and limitations set by a greedy foreign entity who has a fundamental conflict of interest with the freedom of individuals. It would be arguably unethical to subjugate these students, as so many negligent IT professionals have done for their companies, to the closed blood sucking world of Microsoft. A single potent example is Microsoft's persistence to keep standards closed, even when they're faking making them open, so that THEY can control how much you pay to see your data and documents. They have abundant engineering talent to fix that problem but choose not to in order to control their customers.
The self-serving asshole who wrote the article tried to set up Stallman as having some abstract political agenda that Stallman puts first. The author misses the point entirely. The empowerment of free software enables especially people with limited resources to explore their own potential, if they choose to do so.
Sorry, Negroponte you've sold your soul. You've sold out your once inspiring dream.
Sorry, this is the pure outrage: You fucking suck.
We believed, we helped, YOU SUCK.
As the parent mentions, this isn't OLPC 'dumping' Linux. They are just giving the countries who will be buying these things another option for Windows. Probably a waste on that hardware, but, really, I do believe some countries probably *want* Windows on the laptops. They probably feel that if they are going to educate kids about computers, the kids should get some exposure to Windows. I don't think that's entirely unreasonable.
I don't want people to take away from this that I am a MS fanboi - I very much am not. But, why shouldn't the purchasing countries have the option to get Windows if they want it? I hope people don't totally abandon OLPC in terms of quitting the development of software for the Linux-based SugarOS, in protest against this. This just makes it that much more important that the Open Source/Free Software communities continue to work with OLPC and make the Free Software available for it the best they can. In fact, I have a bit of a prediction. I think this whole thing will fall apart of it's own accord when Microsoft can't actually get Windows XP to run decently on the XO, so as long as the Free Software developers don't walk away in protest, I bet they will end up using the Linux based software in the end.
There is only, mainly, one question I walk away from this with, however - from what I've seen of SugarOS so far, I don't really think it matter much, from a user's perspective, what is running underneath it (what I mean by that is, while the laptops might be slower and more prone to crash with Windows [or maybe not], the *user interface experience* will be the same - that is to say, all the kids will see is Sugar, right?). So, I guess I wonder, from OLPC's standpoint, *why* they would bother putting the Windows XP kernel underneath of it, if the kids are just basically going to be using the same SugarOS and the applications developed for it. Why not use the Linux kernel which is better to begin with than the XP kernel, and has already, and continues to be, tuned just for the OLPC hardware?
How depressing....
expandfairuse.org
The best way to beat something is to let them have the choice. They can choose to use Linux or not choose to. Either way, all of the negative energy because people have been given a choice seems strange to me. First, you claim you want Linux to be an option to buy, now that its Windows thats an option (rather than the default for once), you complain. Choice is a dual-edged sword. Not everyone wants to be a part of the "free as in speech" camp, just like not everyone wants to pay for software.
Besides, I know people would claimed foul if MS gave it away for free, so Linux DOES have an advantage here.
Regards,
MBC1977,
Folks, this guy is +42 Extra Super Insightful.
Dual-boot will be developed to pacify some OLPC supporters. It will never ship.
Likewise, Sugar will be ported to Windows. It too will never ship. Nobody wants it: not the we-want-Windows government officials, not the free software fans, and certainly not Microsoft. Look at Java and JavaScript if you want to know how Microsoft feels about somebody slapping a portable API or ABI over top of the Microsoft-controlled ones.
I see the Russian mob happily contributing $3 per laptop to the project now,
A lot of people have just wasted a vast amount of time contributing software to this device. They could have said this was the plan from the start and maybe those people could have concentrated on hardware drivers or interesting Windows software for it. Instead an awful lot of man years of contributed effort is wasted by this moronic decision (no, not the decision to switch to XP. The decision to, for years, lie about what direction they were going, apparently to garner publicity).
I really am sickened by this.
FOSS represents a major part of OLPC's purpose: give kids a system they can tinker with at every level. One of them may well become the next creative genius. If they can't tinker with the system, part of that creativity goes away; they can only create in the ways the software authors envision.
This doesn't mean they have to become a creative software genius. It means that they can become a creative genius in some other area, and knowing how to work with software gave them the tools to get there.
Imagine a society where *everybody* knew how to program as a matter of course.
Once you start despising the jerks, you become one.
Did anybody here actually try Sugar? I'd have replaced it with ms dos in a heart beat. And XP is clearly superior. If only they'd have been smart and initially went with some type of xubuntu derivative, or something that made some kind of rational sense, we'd have not lost yet another battle to the corporate monopoly.
It's not that Windows is better. It's just that Microsoft is smarter than the passionate FOSS community who is apparently stubborn and arrogant, and completely unaware of what is usable or not, Sugar being an AMAZING example.
I hold very few opinions. I hold information based on observation and fact. If you wish to disagree, please use facts.
I think the point whizzed above your head at orbital altitude and velocity.
Linux has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with this, it is the openness which Linux simply represents.
The whole point of the project was supposed to be enabling kids to learn to use/program computers and so the whole environment was supposed to provide them with a complete set of tools for such tasks. Putting XP on this thing adds nothing whatsoever to the value of such a laptop as XP not only takes away a degree of openness but it offers none of the other elements which are part of pretty much every Linux distribution: educational tools, text and graphics editing applications, development tools etc etc etc all in the storage space in which XP can barely fit itself.
So by essentially totally selling out, Negroponte has in effect killed the project and turned it into a glorified advertising campaign for Microsoft while at the same time dropping all the core objectives the project was supposed to stand for. The winners are: Microsoft, the corrupt, retarded governmental official in the developed countries who are taking kickbacks from Microsoft to push for Windows, regardless of what it actually means for the project and the losers are: the kids.
Also note that by doing this the OLPC now has become simply yet another low cost low power laptop vendor and as ongoing commoditization of hardware progresses apace, they will soon find themselves competing with the likes of ASUS who will be able to deliver more features for less money. The only thing of course ASUS and other low-cost brands won't do is to offer all the other aspects of the project, which Negroponte himself no longer gives a fuck about, and which were what made OLPC different.
Microsoft wins, some crooks get richer, all the kids in the developing world (and probably some in the Western world) lose. Simple as that.
I thought one of the major goals of the OLPC project was to promote usage of free software. As for now, I would say the best choice is a Linux-derived operating system (kernel has the best hardware support as far I know). If Microsoft is a choice, fine, but I seriously think the Windows market share is shrinking every day. It seems like everyone and their relative wants a Mac lately after Vista has come out.
.NET claiming it is the way of the future, mainly because C# is easier to learn than C or C++ (in my experience).
Regardless, I really think OLPC has lost its focus and I have so much less respect for allowing a totally closed operating system to be a choice for the computers. If they allow FreeBSD, Syllable, and other free open source operating systems, that is fine. They may not have necessarily have everything they need for children to learn from, but they are free and open source.
Linux and whatever distro is the best choice. How many 'edutainment' applications are on Windows by default? 0! Everyone knows Windows is hardly useful on a default install: a file manager, calculator, Soliatire (a few other card games), a really horrible browser, and a really horrible media player. Does Microsoft promote open source development? No! They have 'Express' editions of Visual Studio, but that is exactly it. They are 'Express' editions. They are begging for people to stick with Windows when they do things like this. And now they have
This is not the way to go for OLPC. It is terrible that governments have these choices: promote free software, development, learning, and social contribution; or spend a little more money for an OS that is nearly useless by default, and the people who use it will be locked in once they are settled with whatever software they find to use. Most likely the software they choose to use on Windows will have spyware, and they will use IE (do you think Microsoft will promote another browser?!) and get adware/spyware/crappy toolbars. I cannot wait to have even more infested Windows computers connected on-line, which could do damage (this is precisely the reason why IE7 got non-WGA'd by Microsoft: security). Luckily I'm on Linux 90% of the time.
Windows whitout crap is nothing.
I stopped being a Negroponte fan a while back. The OLPC is an amazing program that has been destroyed by his bad business decisions. He has fought from the very beginning against providing the OLPC to 1st world countries. So instead of simply selling them to anyone for $200 and letting the economies of scale drive the price down, he has doomed the project from ever reaching the goal of a $100 laptop. By forcing 1st world customers (who actually have money) to pay $400 in the give one get one, he has eliminated the vast majority of potential buyers. So what if he allows Windows on the system? It will never be successful until they stop fighting market forces.
The sending of this message pretty much inconveniences everyone involved.
You know that feeling you got when Walter Bender left the project over a disagreement with Nicholas? That "Wozniak has left the building" feeling? Turns out we were right.
I think we can safely say that this has nothing to education of the third world or software idealism or even free market economics but is simply a nasty little case of cronyism and under the table deals. Nicholas is a board member and OLPC is a nonprofit. Last time I checked board members of nonprofits don't draw a salary.
This is the thing I hate about our current system. See, it would be one thing if they just flat out stated what they were doing, "It's in our corporate best interests to make sure that everyone learns to use our software, so we're going to make this cheap laptop and put Windows on it and sell it to third world kids." I would actually have a little grudging respect for that.
But no, once again the system has eaten up idealism and spat out lies and manipulation. Most people involved in this project were idealists who thought they were bringing something good and pure into the world. Many of them were devoted to open source. And they just got fucked, and the motherfuckers who did it to them are laughing all the way to the bank.
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
Well, of course. It's easier to stay pure and true to one's principles when those principles are subject to revision.
Funny how your favourite OS, o3zone uses the same VMS inspired IRQL idea too.
echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
I don't see why anyone should be surprised. The OLPC was clearly designed as a free R&D project from the beginning. Not free as in speech, but free as in, "hey, lets CALL it a charity. That way we don't have to fork out money for our R&D". When the OLPC was listed out at $100 I said it was way too expensive. I went on line and found all of the components to build a hand powered computer for $89. Single Unit Pricing. No, this wouldn't get you an x86 processor, or an 800x600 screen, but is that REALLY Necessary? The OLPC was billed as being for education. Do you really need a late 90's to early 2000's x86 to accomplish that goal? Definitely not. Do you really need WiFi? Definitely not. Do you need cameras? No. The whole design was clearly built around the idea of trying out new low power devices for later sale in the 1st world.
Honestly the OLPC isn't any better for it's stated goal than a $130 Nintendo DS would be if it came with a dev cart. If they really wanted to make a $200 computer, they would have been better off having Nintendo make a new flavor of DS that was not quite compatible, had an Black and White screen, and had an SD slot instead of a cartridge slot. It wouldn't have broken Nintendos 1st world market, yet it would have been just as useful, and less expensive than the OLPC.
I'm not sure if this is a disagreement with what you said or a clarification, but personally I don't think Microsoft cares about training these users at all. Microsoft wouldn't have given it a second thought if OLPC didn't take the initiative. Even if these kids are trained on Windows, it's unlikely they'll ever be a huge source of income for Microsoft or any other proprietary businesses, compared with the money made in developed places.
I think what frightens Microsoft, given that the children will get trained with or without Microsoft, is the possibility of any other platform ending up with some kind of dominance through popularity in third world countries. Microsoft's dominance comes through its monopolistic control and lock-in practices, and if non-Microsoft platforms become too dominant in third world countries, it'll almost certainly propagate to more developed countries in one form or another, reducing the control that Microsoft has. (ie. Customers will be demanding the ability to use open protocols, file formats, etc, so they can properly interact with those in third world countries.) Such a prospect has caused Microsoft's rather ruthless marketing and management machine to jump up and do whatever's necessary to stop that from happening, even though it might mean using subversive tactics to undermine the OLPC programme.
Actually I have no doubt that many people in Microsoft, probably including most at ground level, have nothing but the best intentions and fully believe that Windows is a good thing for OLPC, since that's what you tend to do when you're embedded in such a corporate atmosphere. I also have no doubt that there are subversive tactics and strategic decisions going on around this at a marketing and management level.
But replace the following words:
...and you're back to the reason why they are developing countries in the first place.
Microsoft with British Empire
Windows sold below cost with textiles sold below cost (with an effective business model behind it that liquidates the indigenous economy and local resources)
2008+ with 1608+
You've also got a very cheap future workforce available to you (and this time you don't have to chain them).
Genesis 1:32 And God typed
Now the kids will have to get used to patch Tuesday and Blue Screen of Death and DLL hell. Yep, great way to introduce the youngsters of the world to computing.
Take a giant step back, this is like holding a charity telathon to fight hunger, then taking the donations and using them to build a few hundred McDonalds in the inner city, and handing out 'half off' coupons to the poor neighborhood kids to help them with their empty stomachs..
I think Negroponte and the rest of the board could be personally liable for conversion and fraud. They raised enormous support from the community in the form of programming efforts, money, and time under the guise of FOSS only to turn the whole thing over to directly support Microsoft's strategy for commercial success in the third-world. One is left wondering how long ago Negroponte planned this and what his personal gain is from the deal.
Remember, when you're on the board of an organization -even a nonprofit, you can't just act on your own whim. Save The Dolphins can't just go open up a gill-netting operation and cackle merrily all the way to the bank, the board has a fiduciary duty to stakeholders that binds their actions. I, for one, would love to see them all thrown in jail.
How about it? Go go gadget EFF!
Comment removed based on user account deletion