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.

67 of 530 comments (clear)

  1. Give it to them for free by idiotwithastick · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

    1. Re:Give it to them for free by PPH · · Score: 5, Insightful

      They have to get kids in the third world used to cutting Microsoft in on every transaction in their lives.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    2. Re:Give it to them for free by NotBornYesterday · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Without trolling for MS fans, and without faulting any of the philanthropic gifts from the Gates Foundation, I can honestly say that I don't think that Microsoft as a company is concerned about these kids' education. I think they are more concerned about training new users to use MS rather than linux, and with keeping 90%+ of desktop OS market.

      What really pisses me off is that including XP on these things will increase the cost directly and indirectly ($3+$7) a total of 10% of the target $100 price of the laptop. It's taken a lot of hard work to put something together that is workable and to get the price down to the $200 it is at now. If they license at $3/copy, and are successful enough to get it on a million laptops, they've grossed $3 million ... which is nothing to them. So why bother?

      You're right. Their corporate image would look a lot better if they just said 'Okay, here, install it all you want, this is on us.'

      --
      I prefer rogues to imbeciles because they sometimes take a rest.
    3. Re:Give it to them for free by PaintyThePirate · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That's essentially what Negroponte has boiled the project down to by letting Sugar dev's out of the loop. Many, Walter Bender included, have gone to start Sugar Labs to ensure that Sugar remains available regardless of what OLPC does.

      It destroys the "It's an education project, not a laptop project." to not ship with an operating system and educational software.

    4. Re:Give it to them for free by kernowyon · · Score: 5, Interesting
      NotBornYesterday said -

      I can honestly say that I don't think that Microsoft as a company is concerned about these kids' education
      If you read the blog by Ivan Krstic in the submission, it would seem that Nicholas Negroponte isn't too bothered about education when compared to shifting the OLPCs -

      Nicholas told me -- and not just me -- that learning was never part of the mission. The mission was, in his mind, always getting as many laptops as possible out there
      It is a huge shame that the OLPC project has deteriorated in this way. When first announced,I was really keen on getting hold of one of these machines to see what I could do to help. I downloaded the .iso of the Sugar GUI and ran it in a VM - very clunky in the VM, but you could see the potential. Others I demonstrated it to were equally impressed. Now it seems to be floundering desperately and the Microsoft sharks are closing in for the kill.
      --
      Awful UID - but I have been here ages...
    5. Re:Give it to them for free by EvilRyry · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The project really has deteriorated with this news. An organization that sets out to change the world and abandons one of main principals will get no support from me.

    6. Re:Give it to them for free by zappepcs · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Honestly, I wish I had the time and sharper skills to take a distro of GNU/Linux and carve it just right to work on the OLPC. I'd gladly give it to them, not to spite MS, but to help ensure that there are tons of people free of the shackles of forced upgrades, NSA backdoors, and a number of other things that can be hidden from them by closed source software. I had hoped that this is what would happen... natch. Money still rules the roost. One day this will not be so, and I think that it won't take long to turn it around if some group of gifted individuals with time to spare would put their efforts on the task of putting Linux on the OLPC system.

      I'm not bashing MS per se' but I dislike the idea that so many people who can ill afford it would be placed into that cycle of upgrades and buy to play software. RMS was right in some respects, and the OLPC situation illustrates the foundation of his early frustrations. It should be free. I'm not saying that you can't roll your own and try to make some money. Good on Bill for doing so, but using money and clout to force that on others is rather despicable... and I'm being nice here.

      Why doesn't MS just send the disks free of charge with a label on it that says 'fuck you kid' and be done with it?

    7. Re:Give it to them for free by griffjon · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Oh I wouldn't worry about software upgrades -- it's running XP, which MS will EOL as soon as they can, so you'll have millions of unsupported Windows boxes without security updates.

      --
      Returned Peace Corps IT Volunteer
    8. Re:Give it to them for free by Hal_Porter · · Score: 5, Funny

      I say we put Bonzi buddy on the OLPCs going to Nigeria and have the gorilla thing mess up their email settings.

      --
      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;
    9. Re:Give it to them for free by 1u3hr · · Score: 4, Insightful
      I don't understand what it is Microsoft think they are going to get out of this. There's no point in applying ven-duh lock-in to people who literally can't afford to buy your products...

      There are many excellent reasons. Some of the students will grow up and start businesses, requiring computers. They will choose what is familiar to them. That's why MS virtually gives away software to universities. In the bigger picture, MS is trying to keep a lid on the development of alternative OSs anywhere. If a few million PCs in one country are running Linux, it creates a big enough user population (even if mostly using free software) that people will develop all kinds of solutions using it as a base. And when road tested and reliable, there is no reason these could not be sold into the first world.

      That's why Ballmer will fly all over the world and pay any government or other large organisations that start making noises about shifting to Linux. It takes a strong government to reject fistfuls of money. They may honestly feel they are serving their people better by taking MS's money, as Negroponte obviously does. In the short and medium term they may be right.

    10. Re:Give it to them for free by cgenman · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It also abandons the innovative software that thousands of volunteers have poured their time into advancing. Instead of getting a super-simple windowing system adapted to the needs of the users and the hardware, they get a bloated OS that doesn't work with the laptop and is customized to keep IT workers rolling in money for years to come.

      But most importantly, they just told all of their software developers to shove off. Well done Negroponte. Well done.

    11. Re:Give it to them for free by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful
      The project really has deteriorated with this news.


      That was Microsoft's goal.


      They've won.

    12. Re:Give it to them for free by Opportunist · · Score: 5, Insightful

      And even that works in favor of MS.

      Devs disillusioned about OLPC, so they leave the project. OLPC project without devs, so it will bomb. One problem less for MS where they might have lost some market share, and the last thing MS needs is hardware in wide use that struggles to run their bloatware. It might tell people they're better off with a system that needs fewer flashy gimmicks to do what they want to do.

      Sure, the people in "underprivileged countries", who were the alleged original beneficiaries of the whole project are losing out. But ... oh why should we care, their spending capacity is abysmal.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    13. Re:Give it to them for free by ozmanjusri · · Score: 4, Insightful
      anything that helps accelerate empowerment to those that couldn't previously get it is a plus in my book

      They're not being empowered.

      They're being subjugated.

      --
      "I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
    14. Re:Give it to them for free by ozmanjusri · · Score: 5, Insightful
      There you go with the hyperbolic language.

      This is OLPC's vision;

      The core principal that's repeated often about the project is that it's an education project not a laptop project. Part of delivering on that idea is the open source platform. Microsoft's vision is to lock the developing world into their expensive platform. Why else would they be doing this?
      --
      "I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
    15. Re:Give it to them for free by Daengbo · · Score: 5, Informative

      OK. I'm going to repeat a story I've been telling here for almost four years. If you've heard it, just move along.

      When I lived in Thailand (2000-2004), FLOSS was really picking up steam there. The government had a program to promote it and move all its servers and desktops over to Linux within five years (IIRC). NECTEC was even developing a "national OS" called LinuxTLE. It was in every tiny bookstore and in every hypermarket's computer section.

      Then MS came in -- I'm assuming after a BSA-style audit -- and told the Thai government that MS would pardon all the gov't piracy and give them blanket licenses for all existing computers for free. I'm also assuming there was an "or else."

      In the end, the Thai government reversed its stance and killed the FLOSS movement there with strategic comments meant to cover their asses -- things like "Linux is not ready for real-world use" and "the OSS development method can't produce quality software."

      The clincher? The licenses were all for Win98, which MS EOLed less than a year later.

    16. Re:Give it to them for free by ozmanjusri · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Because if they start giving out free licensed copies, other users might get even more annoyed with MS's stance on software piracy and DRM.

      That's the trap MS is building for themselves here.

      All the OEMS paying $50/copy for their versions will be looking very closely at OLPC's costs now.

      What OLPC should do is lock MS into the $3.00/license, then sell as many XOs in the commercial sphere as they can. Can you imagine the outcry from all the OEMs who are trying to compete in the cheap mini-notebook market, but are paying ten times the license fees?

      --
      "I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
    17. Re:Give it to them for free by ozmanjusri · · Score: 5, Interesting
      Microsoft is doing this because people actually want their software.

      That's why they had to bribe the Libyan Ministry of Man Power with a huge training contract to get them to switch from OLPC to Classmates.

      --
      "I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
    18. Re:Give it to them for free by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yep, this is pretty much it. I was considering getting one last time around, but the price was too steep. If they do another give one-get one deal, they've lost me on it. Paying for Windows is ridiculous; the whole point was to get it as cheap as possible. $3 for Windows times 34 computers would buy a 35th if they got it down to $100 as originally planned.

      Such a shame to see the project, which originally had a goal of "everything on the system will be open source and we're going to have a 'show source' button for every program" ruined like this.

    19. Re:Give it to them for free by johannesg · · Score: 4, Informative

      But let us be very clear about this: they have won because the OLPC project caved, NOT because the developers leave. There is no blaming the volunteers who were writing the software.

    20. Re:Give it to them for free by TeknoHog · · Score: 4, Funny

      An organization that sets out to change the world and abandons one of main principals

      I can see that's a problem, since this is an education project after all. What are the teachers going to do without principals?

      --
      Escher was the first MC and Giger invented the HR department.
    21. Re:Give it to them for free by ajs318 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yes, that's what I've been saying all along.

      When someone who makes a living selling expensive, proprietary tackle and bait wants to get involved with a project teaching people to fish, you should suspect an ulterior motive. Closed Source software is toxic stuff.

      Two of the Four Freedoms -- freedom to run and freedom to share -- can be taken by force if necessary, but the other two -- freedom to inspect and freedom to improve -- can't, because they depend on access to the Source Code.

      What is worse is, 25 years or so ago, when attitudes were being formed, you didn't need the Source Code so desperately; because most software was written in straight machine code, and physical limitations on memory and storage space meant that programs were smaller. So analysing a binary wasn't anything like as intractable as it is today. You didn't even need any special software tools: it was possible to disassemble the code by hand and brain alone. The entire instruction set of an 8-bit processor will fit onto one side of A4. Changing a machine code game to get a more readable charset, different control keys (there were two major camps in BBC-land; the Snapper faithful with Z and X for left and right, : and / for up and down, and the Contrarians preferring A and Z for up and down and _ and cursor down for left and right), not to mention the usual infinite lives / energy, or even altered graphics (giving the protagonist an enormous todger was always a firm favourite) wasn't difficult. Of course, there were also magazines with type-in listings, and you were more or less encouraged to tinker with them -- many BASIC programs could be hacked, if they didn't depend too heavily on machine-specific features, to suit another machine's dialect.

      Since then, everything has gone compiled; and binaries that came from a compiler aren't meant to be understood by humans. None of this is obvious to non-experts.

      OLPC was supposed to have introduced the rest of the world to computers as a blank slate. With Closed Source software on board, it's going to end up stamped indelibly with one particular vendor's vision of what computers should be like.

      I'm beginning to think that using an 80x86-class (and therefore Windows-capable) processor was a seriously bad choice in the first place. They should just have waited for the last of the first-generation ARM patents to expire, or even bought them outright and PD'ed them (which would have been cheaper than designing a processor from scratch) -- hell, since they were dealing directly with education ministries, maybe even persuaded governments in the target countries to annul them there. It would have sent out more clearly the message that Microsoft were not welcome.

      --
      Je fume. Tu fumes. Nous fûmes!
    22. Re:Give it to them for free by hey! · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What really pisses me off is that including XP on these things will increase the cost directly and indirectly ($3+$7) a total of 10% of the target $100 price of the laptop.


      Well, that's beside the point, since the target is not reachable yet. It's more like a 5% increase. And maybe not that. If they sell waaay more laptops, it may end up being a wash, or even cheaper, because of larger volume purchases of components.

      The shelf life of the original vision was always limited; it was based on the idea that there was no hardware appropriate for, and affordable to, developing countries. While the appropriate is still up for grabs, affordable is just a matter of time. A hundred dollar laptop in a thousand dollar laptop world is dramatic. A two hundred dollar laptop in a world with four hundred dollar laptops is less so. Granted the Eepc doesn't have the battery life needed, but the hardware dimension of the digital divide continues to narrow every year.

      Ivan Krstic's rant is actually quite insightful. He's pissed at Negroponte, as well as the other people who are pissed at Negroponte, because they're having the wrong argument.

      The vision that got everyone excited was to put education and collaboration tools into the hands of students who didn't have them before. Worrying about adding $7 to the cost of the hardware is silly, when you don't have any means to actually track the distribution of that hardware. If you ship a thousand units, and only a hundred make it into the hands of the intended users, you've just paid $200,000 to deploy 100 laptops, or $2000/laptop.

      It's not an either/or question, but it's a little like one. The project is engulfed in this huge controversy of $7-$10, while it is not yet dealing with the $1800 question. The problem is that we've lost focus on the educational mission.

      The Windows issue is a total side show. The real problem is about "resources", which is a polite way to say "money". Worrying about $10 per unit is the kind of thing that in business I call a "problem we'd like to have". The real question is whether you've really enabled your focus customers to have that problem.

      The XO would make a fine Xubuntu or DSL workstation. So why develop Sugar at all? That's a bigger question than whether Sugar should run on Windows. It's obviously a nice idea to reinvent the GUI, but is that the best use of project resources? Why not develop all the collaboration and educational tools as open source, and let anybody who wants run it on Linux or port it to Windows or MacOS?

      Well, the short answer is that a new, education centric user interface is a nice thing to have. But is it really the biggest obstacle to the vision that could be removed with the "resources" that have been devoted to it? Charities frequently run on ego as much as idealism; when you look at them closely, it's often hard to assemble the big pictures from the pixels.

      OLPC has done the world a great service, by forcing manufacturers to get into the low end game. The existence of this game is good for impoverished users. It's also good for Linux. OLPC has changed the landscape, and it would probably be a good thing if it reoriented itself to accomplish its mission in that landscape.

      When it comes to doing it "for real", things look a lot different than people imagined up front.
      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    23. Re:Give it to them for free by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Did you and the parent posters even read the article? Microsoft didn't approach OLPC, OLPC approached Microsoft. The reason OLPC approached Microsoft is because it turned out there was very little interest in a laptop running Linux; most buyers (governments) wanted Windows.

      At least from this article, Microsoft don't appear to have made any claims that they're offering Windows for the XO for any reason other than customer demand for it. Why give it away? Do you think the other components used in the OLPC are being sold to OLPC at a loss? If not, why should the OS be sold at a loss?

      In the context of a $200 price (which, according to the article, is the actual price -- $100 is an eventual target), $3 isn't much at all, especially if it turns the $200 machine from something so useless that buyers aren't even interested into something that actually meets a need.

      The focus on open source would make sense if the goal was only to teach children how to develop software, but most people who use computers in day to day life aren't writing software. Most XO users won't become software developers, and what's more important than being able to read source code is being able to develop IT skills that will help their economies develop. In blunt terms, that basically means learning to use the Windows platform.

  2. "extra hardware"? by v1 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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

    Why does dual boot require extra hardware??

    --
    I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
    1. Re:"extra hardware"? by NotBornYesterday · · Score: 5, Funny

      They have to install a special blue screen to run MS products.

      --
      I prefer rogues to imbeciles because they sometimes take a rest.
    2. Re:"extra hardware"? by frank_adrian314159 · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Why does dual boot require extra hardware??

      To make sure the one with Linux costs more...

      --
      That is all.
    3. Re:"extra hardware"? by PaintyThePirate · · Score: 4, Informative

      It's a 2gb SD card. Linux would be on the 1gb NAND flash and Windows would boot off of SD.

    4. Re:"extra hardware"? by flyingsquid · · Score: 4, Funny
      Windows without crap is nothing.

      Wow, that's deep. It's like a zen riddle or something. "What is the nature of the Buddha? What is the sound of one hand clapping? What is the functionality of Windows with all the crap removed?"

    5. Re:"extra hardware"? by ozmanjusri · · Score: 5, Informative
      Bigger SD card

      Not just the bigger card.

      Nicholas Negroponte, OLPC chairman, told vnunet.com at the NetEvents conference in Hong Kong on Saturday: "I have known [Microsoft chairman] Bill Gates his entire adult life. We talk, we meet one-on-one, we discuss this project.

      "We put in an SD slot in the machine just for Bill. We didn't need it but the OLPC machines are at Microsoft right now, getting Windows put on them."
      http://www.vnunet.com/vnunet/news/2170267/update-green-party-labels

      So that additional cost was mandated by Microsoft from the start.
      --
      "I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
  3. So $10 gets you what by peragrin · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.
    1. Re:So $10 gets you what by jav1231 · · Score: 5, Funny

      "The people who buy the machines are not the children who use them, but government officials in most cases," said Nicholas Negroponte, founder of the nonprofit group. "And those people are much more comfortable with Windows."

      Somewhere Balmer strokes his horns and drinks a toast to another soul!

  4. One Blue Screen Per Child? by johngault33 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Now, even poor kids can learn to hate M$

  5. It's just as well by presidenteloco · · Score: 4, Funny

    I for one was not looking forward to welcoming a new generation of young, creative, inquisitive, independent minded developing country overlords.

    --

    Where are we going and why are we in a handbasket?
    1. Re:It's just as well by pizzach · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Wow, you're not just a little presumptuous. So using Linux is the only way to be "creative, inquisitive and independent minded"? I would give the original poster the benefit of the doubt. The man probably meant using ANYTHING but windows means you're "creative, inquisitive and independent minded." (He didn't mention Linux anywhere in his post...though he could have been hinting at it the sneaky bastard.)
      --
      Once you start despising the jerks, you become one.
    2. Re:It's just as well by FLEB · · Score: 5, Funny

      Everyone's so negative around here. It's a great teaching tool.

      STOP: 0x00000FE1 (0x029FBE01 0x0000007B 0x0001029A 0x0000003E)

      DRIVER_IRQ_NOT_LESS_OR_EQUAL_TO


      First, you're learning about hexidecimal numbers. Enough unsigned drivers and hitting things on the ground, and you've got a great "flash card" teaching tool. Plus, the general math aspect, "Okay, class, if the IRQ is 'not less or equal to', then what is it?" "Okay, since nobody knows what this means, let's say that first number is the driver IRQ, which of the other numbers are not less than or equal to it?"

      Not to mention learning about colors (blue)... and... um... death.

      --
      Information wants to be free.
      Entertainment wants to be paid.
      You just want to be cheap.
  6. Pure? by the_brobdingnagian · · Score: 5, Interesting

    'We've stayed very pure,' Mr. Negroponte said. Yet from their core principles:

    There is no inherent external dependency in being able to localize software into their language, fix the software to remove bugs, and repurpose the software to fit their needs. Nor is there any restriction in regard to redistribution; OLPC cannot know and should not control how the tools we create will be re-purposed in the future. And they seem to have adapted their "core principles" to be more positive towards closed source. A real shame is you ask me. source: Core Principles (Renamed to "Five principles" instead of "Core principles" as the seem to value their principles less and less).
  7. Purity is in the eye of the beholder? by conlaw · · Score: 4, Funny

    'We've stayed very pure,' Mr. Negroponte said.

    Yep, as pure as the bride wearing a white dress for her wedding when she's six months pregnant.

  8. Phew by Opportunist · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.
  9. what is windows going to provide? by nawcom · · Score: 5, Insightful
    IE 7? Office 2007? (in someone's dreams) .NET? (.NET's virtual machine is probably too much to run on OLPCs) If anyone knows what the features are in running windows on these laptops, let me know.

    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.

  10. A total loss of focus at OLPC by Morgaine · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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. ... [cut] ... The project's agreement with Microsoft involves no payment by the software giant.

    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
  11. How about applications? by whoever57 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    to run an OS MSFT will stop supporting in 45 days?
    Under Linux, I assume all the necessary applications are included, whereas under XP, they have...... notepad?
    --
    The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
    1. Re:How about applications? by FoolsGold · · Score: 5, Funny

      whereas under XP, they have...... notepad?

      Don't be ridiculous.

      It's got MS Paint too.
  12. Re:Send them a message! by Phroggy · · Score: 4, Funny

    You should send an impolite message too.

    --
    $x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
    $x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
  13. Sad news by chord.wav · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

  14. So much for that. by Dragonfire00 · · Score: 5, Informative

    Off the OLPC website:
    "XO is built from free and open-source software. Our commitment to software freedom gives children the opportunity to use their laptops on their own terms. While we do not expect every child to become a programmer, we do not want any ceiling imposed on those children who choose to modify their machines. We are using open-document formats for much the same reason: transparency is empowering. The children--and their teachers--will have the freedom to reshape, reinvent, and reapply their software, hardware, and content."

  15. That's the last nail by QuantumG · · Score: 5, Insightful

    congratulations, it's dead. Can OLPC be saved from Negroponte?

    --
    How we know is more important than what we know.
  16. i find it hard to believe... by hurfy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.

    1. Re:i find it hard to believe... by Methuselah2 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Well, what would be the first program you'd load on an XP XO?
      Firewall.
      Second?
      Antivirus.
      Third?
      Spyware/malware scanner/protection.
      Fourth?
      "Error xpxo, Out of Disk Space. Contact your system administrator."

  17. Re:Maybe by ozmanjusri · · Score: 5, Insightful
    this could extend XP's life a little longer until a non-shitty version of Windows comes out?

    I believe MS has finally set an appropriate value on their OS. $3.00 is a fair price.

    Now governments of the world should mandate a price cap for all versions of XP, based on that value. Otherwise Microsoft is using price dumping to drive out competitors, an illegal tactic for a monopoly.

    --
    "I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
  18. The OLPC should now die. by mlwmohawk · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.

  19. Re:Maybe by Tikkun · · Score: 5, Funny

    I prefer the command line to pc games. Beside being more rewarding intellectually, all my friends think I'm in the Matrix. And by friends I mean my collectible action figures.

  20. OBNPC by gmuslera · · Score: 5, Funny

    One Botnet Node Per Child

  21. exactly correct by r00t · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

  22. Meanwhile, Intel makes Atom Nettops with Linux by Glasswire · · Score: 4, Informative

    using the Moblin stack that will ultimately surpass the XO no matter what's running on it.

  23. If I worked on this I would be pissed off by spitzak · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

  24. This is truly a feat for Negroponte by commodoresloat · · Score: 5, Funny

    This is the last nail, but you have to give him credit for hammering it in from inside the coffin.

  25. Re:A couple of thoughts by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Do I think the world needs to use Linux more? Absolutely. Do I think that the OLPC is the best way to do it? No.

    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.

  26. fighting economics from the beginning by snooo53 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.
  27. That sinking feeling we all got by spun · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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
    1. Re:That sinking feeling we all got by l0b0 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Last time I checked board members of nonprofits don't draw a salary.

      "Non profit" just means they'll have a zero budget balance, i.e., no money to share after the year is up. It's not the same as a charity. Your point is still valid, and personally I've gone from eagerly awaiting the give-one-get-one program in Europe to no interest at all.

    2. Re:That sinking feeling we all got by hey! · · Score: 5, Informative

      "Non profit" just means they'll have a zero budget balance, i.e., no money to share after the year is up.


      That's not correct. You can no more run a non-profit without a surplus (in other words a "profit") than you can any other enterprise. It'd be too financially risky to give yourself no slack, and too financially irresponsible to spend your slack wildly at the end of the year.

      If you've ever looked at a non-profit financial statement, the difference from a for-profit is that "Owner's Equity" on the balance sheet is called "Retained Earnings". And that indicates the fundamental difference, which is not so much a matter of how the organization budgets (although that is somewhat different), or the kinds of revenue raising activities it undertakes (which is less different than you might think), as it is purpose. For-profit enterprises exist to generate value for, then distribute that value to, the owners. Non-profit enterprises exist to perform a mission, although that can be to create value for some target beneficiaries.

      Just as for-profit enterprises feel they need a mission to generate profit efficiently, non-profit enterprise need profit to pursue their mission effectively. If you run out of cash, or if the creditors are beating down the door, you can't change the world.

      The mission of a non-profit is usually charitable or educational, but not necessarily. A non-profit can be formed for the private benefit of the people creating it, for example some types of cooperatives. The "Best Western" hotel organization in the United States is a non-profit cooperative. The REI outdoor sporting goods stores are a non-profit cooperative that is nearly indistinguishable from a for-profit; the difference is that the dividends paid to members are based on the members' purchases. It is not a reward for investment, it is a repayment for spending more than the minimum than could be charged sustainably.

      And, in the end, it is all about sustainability. A "mission", for a for-profit business, is a necessary evil. You could generate revenue in a completely opportunistic way, and it often pays to be somewhat opportunistic, but ultimately no organization can be good at everything, nor can it court everyone as customers.

      Profit, for the non-profit enterprise, is likewise a necessary evil. OLPC could charge less for each PC, and get more into the hands of students as long as their cash held out which would not be for long.

      So, in many ways, you run a charity (which is what we are talking about here) just the same as business. Oh, you have people who just give you money, but most of that money is what is called "encumbered"; it's no different from being a consultancy that gets an up-front payment for some service they are going to provide. You don't book it as income until the work is done.

      This means you consider exactly the same factors a business does when you make a strategic decision. The difference is this: in a push-comes-to-shove scenario, you choose maximizing mission over maximizing profit. For you, the profit is there to support the mission; for a business it is the other way around.
      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    3. Re:That sinking feeling we all got by SL+Baur · · Score: 5, Informative

      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. US$3 is *not* a trivial amount in the 3rd world, but I expect the Microsoft Fanboys to mod me down as usual. I live in the 3rd world and you don't. so have at me.

      I think this is a *huge* sellout and I don't have any respect for it. None, whatever the explanation.
    4. Re:That sinking feeling we all got by hey! · · Score: 4, Informative

      What's confusing to you is that you're mixing up three different classes of things: non-profit organizations; non-profit organizations with a charitable purpose; and non-profit organizations with a charitable purpose that qualify for Federal tax exemption under section 501(c) 3 of the tax code. Each of these succeeding classes is smaller than the previous one.

      Even under 501(c), there are twenty seven other sections under which a non-profit can qualify for some degree of tax exemption. Veterans organizations qualify under 501(c)19, for example. Not all non-profits are charitable (e.g. private clubs); not all charitable organizations are tax exempt; not all tax exempt organizations are exempt under 501(c)3.

      But even for 501(c)3s, the analysis stands: you must make a profit. The profit goes into next year's budget, or into the endowment. You can't distribute the profit for the private benefit of a set of "owners", say the board or people who control the board.

      Of course, it's not hard to get around this limitation. I could tell you stories that would would shock you, and they're not even the worst things that happen out there. Charity attracts the best and worst of humanity's character, and there is plenty of room for the worst to flourish. No politician is going to go after bad charities, because the rogues and cheaters in charity are well connected and quite expert at taking care of themselves. And no politician wants to be known as the scourge of charities, even though culling the bad ones would be a great service to the good ones.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
  28. Re:Purity by Miseph · · Score: 5, Informative

    From your own link:

    "OLPC should be philosophically pure about its own machines. Being a non-profit that leverages goodwill from a tremendous number of community volunteers for its success and whose core mission is one of social betterment, it has a great deal of social responsibility. It should not become a vehicle for creating economic incentives for a particular vendor. It should not believe the nonsense about Windows being a requirement for business after the children grow up. Windows is a requirement because enough people grew up with it, not the other way around. If OLPC made a billion people grow up with Linux, Linux would be just dandy for business. And OLPC shouldn't make its sole OS one that cripples the very hardware that supposedly set the project's laptops apart: released versions of Windows can neither make good use of the XO power management, nor its full mesh or advanced display capabilities."

    (bold added by me)

    I hope MS pays you by the quantity of your shilling rather than the quality.

    --
    Try not to take me more seriously than I take myself.
  29. I don't see why... by Belial6 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.

  30. Quality of education versus dominance by jesterzog · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...I don't think that Microsoft as a company is concerned about these kids' education. I think they are more concerned about training new users to use MS rather than linux, and with keeping 90%+ of desktop OS market.

    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.