Peru To Be First To Put Windows On OLPC Laptop

Da Massive writes "The government of Peru will run the first ever trial of the One Laptop Per Child association's XO laptop running Windows XP. This puts the nation at the heart of a software controversy that has been raging for years between those who advocate making software and its source code free, such as Linux OS developers, and those who charge for software and keep the development recipes secret, such as Microsoft."

Comments

Negroponte

[DrSkwid]

He's always got my goat, I wish he'd give it back. I used to read his breathless commentary in Wired in the 90s, visionary - pah, up his own arse.

Re:Negroponte

[Anonymous Coward]

Me llega que haya pasado esto. Todo iba tan bien pero esos idiotas de la microsoft siempre tienen que meter la cola donde nadie les manda. En resumen: se jodio el projecto. Viva el Peru!

Re:Negroponte

[RiotingPacifist]

I found out that this had happened. Everything was going so well but these idiots of Microsoft always have to put the noses where no one wants them. In short: the entire project got fucked up. Long live peru!

Re:Negroponte

[Anonymous Coward]

Peru is a shithole because the people living there are completely useless. Get over it.

Shining Path?

[WillKemp]

Is this Microsoft's shining path into South America?

The Goal?

[KGIII]

At least there is technology getting into the hands of children who can use it to further their education. Before we whine about it running on proprietary software let's also keep in mind that it gives them access greater than what they had, interoperability they may never have had, and there are plenty of open source projects that they can use if they want to.

Re:The Goal?

[seeker_1us]

Access greater than what they had? To what? Access to Microsoft Software? How does that help learning?

Interoperability greater than what they had? Interoperability to what? MS Office and other MS software which is notorious for not being interoperable?

This computer was supposed to be a learning tool for children. To teach critical thinking. Not to be a platform for Office.

How does turning it into an XP box help? XP is just essentially a vending machine.

Re:The Goal?

[PinkyDead]

That is about as close as you could get to a modern equivalent to the justifications for imperialism and colonialism of the 18th and 19th centuries. Unfortunately, it's the same poor suckers that are getting victimised again.

Re:The Goal?

[noundi]

Let's also keep in mind that fewer children get these laptops now due to license fees, and who will make profit out of this? Peru? The children of Peru? The guys behind OLPC?

No--but this guy will.

Re:The Goal?

[eulernet]

Interoperability to what ? Office ?

Frankly, do you believe that people will start programming on Windows platform, where there are plenty of tools ?
This will just introduce them to the culture of piracy, since they won't have the money to buy software.

Oh yes, they'll be mono-cultured with Microsoft, and not Linux, so Microsoft wins.

At best, you can expect that they'll be formed to allow cheap outsourcing.

Re:The Goal?

[KGIII]

I will respond because I didn't make my initial statement without thinking. Greater than what they had - meaning more than. Before this they had nothing available probably. This is not less than nothing.

Interoperability - as much as it pains you to acknowledge it, most of the world still runs Windows. In some places it still requires Windows. Until that changes my statement remains true.

This computer can still be a learning tool for children. This tool can still teach critical thinking. One does NOT need to be using an open source platform to engage in critical thinking. Not to mention that Office most surely won't run on something of this nature but that only belies your unwillingness to accept anything other than a purist mentality or agreement of your opinions regardless of the reality.

How does it help? It helps in that the tools are being put into the hands of children. It helps in that these kids are able to do the important things like search for more information on a subject that interests them, to reach informed choices about the topics that matter to them, and to better enable them to prepare for a future that might actually get them out of the slums and into an acceptable level of living.

You do NOT need F/OSS for that. You don't NEED the best of breed to drive a car. You can do just fine in getting from Point A to Point B in a beat to shit old Honda.

What about CHOICE? These people OPTED to use Windows. We can argue that their children didn't opt to but do you really think that they care? No. I don't. The few that will care, later on down the road, will make those choices as well. Until then they have email, browsers that go to wikipedia, search engines to learn more about the world around them, and so much more. For that I am happy, for that I am grateful, and to be honest I don't give a shit if it runs Windows, Linux, RiscOS, or garbledygook! So long as the job is done and that job is getting this coming generation into the information age. The ends justify the means.

Re:The Goal?

[KGIII]

And that is about the most retarded analogy ever. Please see my other response before typing further. I'm willing to listen to rebuttal but don't think I made the statements I made without thinking about them. The goal is to give these kids a chance. That chance doesn't NEED to be open source. I'd agree, entirely, that is SHOULD be open source but to state that it needs it is just foolhardy and showing a willingness to remain ignorant of the problems that these computers can actually solve.

Re:The Goal?

[ozphx]

Excellent point. Any kid that is at all interested in hacking it is going to dual boot. Its not like every kid in Peru would otherwise suddenly going to pick up the code and start hacking it.

Re:The Goal?

[KGIII]

Office sure as hell won't run on it effectively. Sites will work effectively though as will the vast amounts of software that only runs on Windows.

There are piles of dev tools that run on Windows, chances are that if it is available for Linux it is also ported to Windows so there are piles of free software applications that they can use. This isn't their be-all-end-all tool but a tool to get them started.

I agree this is a mono-cultured environment. That is better than nothing in my opinion. Those who are inclined will surely learn to change things.

As for cheap outsourcing? Well... It hasn't had all the greatness that some people think it has had but it has certainly raised the standard of living for many people in a variety of locations across the globe. India did this without even needing the OLPC. While all of India hasn't been able to increase their standard of living enough of them have so that it has made a difference.

I didn't make an off the cuff response in support of Microsoft nor the OLPC program. I thought it out and have been thinking about it since it was announced. I am GLAD that the laptops are going to the hands of the children and, honestly, I don't care what they're running so long as they have access to a search engine, email, and educational software. The platform is nothing to me in this case. I'll take the karma hits to say it too.

Hell, I'll even repeat it... I don't care what the platform is - I just care that this is going to benefit people who might not have been granted these chances otherwise. I don't care if it is running DogShitOS or PinkFluffyBunny. I don't care if it is closed source or open source. I care that the next generation of people are going to be offered a better standard of living than that which they would have faced otherwise.

Sorry if you don't get it but, well, that's a you thing and not a me thing. I have looked at it from every angle I can think of for quite some time now. Hell, a karma hit for a troll mod would just help me post more often then once every five or six minutes but the truth must be said. This is the truth as I see it. I'm not a closed source or open source zealot. I'm an advocate for the advancement of society and, no, that doesn't require open source.

Re:The Goal?

[KGIII]

We all probably started out on a closed source operating system... Why can't they? Why do we expect the results to be different? *sighs* People just flipped and modded my first post without actually thinking and maybe now I can post more often. ;)

Get the tools out there into the hands of the children via whatever means nessesary. Let them work on it and learn. If they want to hack the code, trust me (look at us for example), they will.

Re:The Goal?

[KGIII]

Sorry to respond to your post last but your post was the only one with a valid point. I conceed your point and I ask, "Is some better than none?" This is not ideal, few situations in life truly are ever ideal. Your post is my only real concern. The whole, "How much does that added cost actually cost in terms of fewer units making it into the hands of the children?" At initial math is looks like it is 1:10 which adds up to quite a lot. Someone with an eco/biz major can likely shine the light on it but it is *probably* more like 1:40 (numbers drawn completely out of my ass) but that is still one human being less.

It is not perfection. It is still better than what it was. It is all good to be an idealist but then the real world sometimes smashes the shit out of that idea. The world is not idyllic and I don't think it ever will be. Your response, someone should mod you up even higher, is about the only thing close to remotely justifying the anger that people have over this. I am just glad that *some* are to be enabled. To me some is better than none.

To those who complain about it, well... They should put up or shut up. Get off their asses and do something different if they want instead of sitting here complaining. I did the early on BOGO twice and gave them both to my children. They don't like them. They use a laptop instead. I should probably go take one of them from them so that I can play with it actually but that is a topic for another day.

Re:The Goal?

[WillKemp]

That's true, to a certain extent. But OLPCs running Linux would achieve the same end for less money. And chances are that Windows won't run as well as the version of Linux that this machine was designed to run.

And can poor people really afford to be sucked into the expensive world of Microsoft?

Re:The Goal?

[node 3]

I agree this is a mono-cultured environment. That is better than nothing in my opinion.

"Windows: It's better than nothing!"

Where did you get the idea it was a choice of Windows or nothing? The choice is Windows, Linux, or nothing.

I didn't make an off the cuff response in support of Microsoft nor the OLPC program. I thought it out and have been thinking about it since it was announced. I am GLAD that the laptops are going to the hands of the children and, honestly, I don't care what they're running so long as they have access to a search engine, email, and educational software.

Gee, too bad Linux can't access search engines, email, or run educational software...

It's somewhat strange that you are making so many posts defending Windows on the OLPC when your position seems to be you don't give a shit.

Re:The Goal?

[Anonymous Coward]

What about CHOICE? These people OPTED to use Windows. We can argue that their children didn't opt to but do you really think that they care? No. I don't. The few that will care, later on down the road, will make those choices as well.

No their GOVERNMENT opted for Windows. Given the history of corruption in many S-American countries I don't think that the question of whether Linux, RiscOS or Garbledygook OS would have done as good a job as Windows OS ever was ever even asked and if it was the question was quickly forgotten as soon as MS got through greasing the 'right people'.

Re:The Goal?

[noundi]

Well your point makes sense. Something is better than nothing. However this decision was not even close to necessary. I won't settle just because "at least someone got one". The case is crystal clear, a piece of hardware was created along with a piece of software, integrating them both. Then came a third party claiming that their expensive software, that from the start wasn't even remotely designed for this machine, was the natural choice only because it is used by the majority. The decision to adopt XP cannot have been for any other reason than just this, I mean flamebaiting aside but seriously, was it cheaper? was it faster? was it easier? No but it was bigger. Fine it was bigger, now what difference does that make? Does it teach the kids anything extra? Of course not, it's simply the f**king platform they use. Another argument is that it will "help" them in the when they need to use a computer other than the OLPC--they will have an easier transition that is. What kind of a f**king argument is that? Are these kids lobotomized? Are they absolutely brain dead? 7-year-old kids know 3 languages and are rendered normal, yet they're such idiots that can't realise the connection between the Start-button and the X-button? Come on, if anything their world will become just as retarded as my world is, packed with real life lobotomized idiots whom shit their pants when all their installed software are gone, just to realise that they are hidden under the [worthless] personalized menu--this after bothering me about it for hours first of course.

Re:The Goal?

[jeremyp]

When was the last time you touched Windows? I only ask because you seem to be labouring under a misapprehension. There is no mechanism in Windows that stops you running software that was not written by Microsoft. Just because I have Windows, does not mean I have to run MS Office. I could choose any one of a number of Office packages including Open Source ones.

Windows as a desktop platform is just as interoperable as any other desktop operating system, in fact more so because it will interoperate with Microsoft's proprietary stuff as well as all of the open standards.

You're keen on teaching children critical thinking, but you're happy to tell lies about an operating system you don't like. That's not setting them a good example is it?

Re:The Goal?

[Anonymous Coward]

STFU you dumb ass shill... look at your last 5 comments in this threat alone, your obviously extremely pro MS, and most likely either payed by MS, or just got your MCSE and are the bested fucking wooptie do around.

Re:The Goal?

[penix1]

How is it solving problems? Exactly how does the purchase of an OS ONLY benefit those that can't afford it? These computers have XP on them and a scaled down version at that. You aren't honestly suggesting they will be able to run any program made for XP are you? That "educational software" you keep talking about only increases the price. How is having to pay multiple license fees, not to say anything about the now needed resources to track those licenses just to keep the BSA at bay, of a benefit?

No, this move on OLPC was another example of the drug dealer's motto; The first hit is always free...

Re:The Goal?

[KGIII]

Given that this was chosen by Peru for Peruvian children I'm sticking with yeah, it is better than nothing. I honestly don't care what it runs - but I defend Peru's freedom to select their operating system that they want to use for their children. You're talking to someone who makes the vast majority of their living from Linux. (Click my homepage link.) Your talking to someone who's contributed financially and code-wise to OSS for years. You're also talking to someone who actually manages to use Windows in the home because that does what he wants it to do how he wants it to do it.

There is no winning OS. There is no right or wrong when you compare proprietary vs. open source when the chips are down. What matters is that the job is done, done well enough, and that the people are getting what they want done how they want to do it.

My posts are clearly defending getting these tools into the hands of children regardless of what they run. For someone who is boosting the idea of Linux as a choice you seem to neglect the idea that other people make choices other than your own. They selected Windows. For better or worse, that's their choice. For someone who seemingly advocates freedom you don't seem to want to allow others the freedom to make their own choices.

You know what? Linux *does* offer searching, email, and educational software. Guess what? So does Windows. So does Amiga. So does RiscOS. So does FreeBSD. So does Mac. The small percentage of children who would understand and desire to alter their software at the OS level can and will find a means to do so regardless of the OS. That's what enabling them with a search engine, wikipedia, slashdot, and email will give them REGARDLESS of the operating system.

I know, for a fact, that if you drive an automobile and are not a mechanic you don't even begin to comprehend everything that goes on to get your automobile in motion. You probably understand the physics of a combustion engine but you sure as hell can't adjust the timing, change out the O2 sensors or calibrate them, and surely don't know what the OBDCII is doing to get the readings. Joe Six Pack Peruvian Style hasn't got to know those things to drive from one place to another to learn more and advance their knowledge. To think that they do is asinine, ignorant, and counter productive. If he wants to be a mechanic he can take his learn and to think that if he chooses he can't out a different OS on their instead of XP is just plain ignorant beyond all compare.

And yes, yes I did donate to OLPC - twice. If they put a GPS locater in there I'd buy one for myself in a heartbeat just to have one that didn't go to my children so that daddy had a new toy. STFU or put up. Start your own project if you want but to belittle the people putting technology in the hands of those who need it most because of your misguided sense of right and wrong shows how much of a cretin you are. You're probably the type of person who would tell a starving child* that they can't eat at McDonalds because you don't agree with their capitalistic ideals or because you feel that you have a moral right to tell them that they can't eat meat. There is such a thing as morals and ethics but when those actually hinder people instead of enabling them (however slight) you should stop imposing them.

*By starving I mean really starving to the point of exhaustion and near death not your likely misinterpretation of being hungry 'cause you haven't had a fucking pastry in the past 3 hours.

Re:The Goal?

[PinkyDead]

The goal is to give these kids a chance.

Who's goal? Because it certainly isn't Microsoft's. They want as much lock-in as they can get and they don't care how they get it. All large corporations want the same thing because they are driven by the demands of their shareholders for profit - and rightly so.

But the OLPC project wasn't started to enhance the balance sheet of Microsoft - yet it affects its credibility and its effectiveness for Microsoft to use it as a marketing tool and at the same time harms the chances of other projects that will find it harder to garner non-profit support when it is clear that at the point of success some profit-junky will just rush in to exploit it. That is the main reason why open source should be used - because it shares the vision that created the OLPC in the first place.

Re:The Goal?

[KGIII]

That is the only arguement that makes sense. Rather than the closed source vs. open source that one makes sense. In this case I have to say that there's enough freeware to make this work and given the publicity this is bound to be something that Microsoft does at little or no cost. (They do that you know... They do it to encourage adopting their platform of course but a business choice is not always a choice without ethics.)

As I responded to another poster... This is not ideal. Ideal is not something we often get in the real world. It is better than nothing in my opinion but that's just my opinion. I'd be more worried about the initial impact - how many children do not get a laptop because of the added cost? A small percentage will have a desire to get into the OS code but, to me, that's acceptable. The matter of initial cost is probably not as high as we're thinking at this scope.

Re:The Goal?

[KGIII]

I don't understand the why people automatically assume that there is bribery involved especially in a matter that is as open as this one. Could that have happened? Sure. Did it? Not to the best of my knowledge and I'm guessing you don't have any evidence to support your views either other than a perception which is nothing more than a preconceived notion.

Re:The Goal?

[theshowmecanuck]

Before complaining, ask why they asked for the change. Did it have to do with usability or some other reason. Then ask, what changes for the people using it? Do they get to learn technology, become computer literate, when they otherwise would not have? Or are they still behind where the rest of the world is?

If you are helping someone that is what is important. If the country believes a specific direction will help them more, then go with it. If you don't like it, don't help. But don't push your views and ideologies on others in turn for your help (if it were helping prevent genocide or human rights abuses that is one thing, but this is teaching someone what a computer is and what it can do for you). It is like saying to someone, I'll give you first aid if you pray to my God and not yours, even though it doesn't really matter which, as long as you help make them better.

When I hear complaints like this, I think of De gaul's line (paraphrased to be sure): "patriotism is good, nationalism is bad." One is being proud of your country, the other is being fanatical. One leads to healthy competition and raises everyone's standards and levels, and the other to narrow minded confrontation, war, and nothing good comes of it. Don't let your "computer nationalism" cloud over the fact that the end result is that they are still teaching people 21rst century skills and helping improve their lives through education and enabling further education.

Re:The Goal?

[Bazman]

"You do NOT need F/OSS for that. You don't NEED the best of breed to drive a car. You can do just fine in getting from Point A to Point B in a beat to shit old Honda."

  Yeah, but to push an analogy your beat-to-shit old Honda only runs on Gatesoline. And only one person supplies Gatesoline. Whereas my beat-to-shit Ford only runs on Fordol. Imagine a world where every brand of car used its own brand of compatible fuel, because the manufacturers sold the cars cheap and made profit on the fuel. And you couldn't just go to any filling station and expect to find your brand. Eventually everyone would just buy the car with the most filling stations. You buy a minority car and you run the risk of running out of your brand with nowhere to fill up in sight.

That's pretty much the world of proprietary, closed source and closed standards software. Isn't it much nicer that I can pull up to any filling station and expect them to have the right fuel for my car?

Re:The Goal?

[RiotingPacifist]

why not just use classmates then. i have nothing against MS or peru in this case but the original point of the OLPC project was to give them the technology without making them dependent on anybody. Much like giving farmers old trackors which they can fix, is much more useful than some brand new air conditioned JCB.

Yes giving them computers is good, but getting them dependant on us is not so good.
But its the fact that OLPC started out with a much better goal than just selling cheap laptops and now its been reduced to yet another cheap laptop shipper.

Re:The Goal?

[wodelltech]

I tried to send my original G1G1 OLPC to a Kenyan orphanage. The first thing they asked me was if they could use it to manage their financial spreadsheet - they specifically wanted Excel. They also had data access via cell phone, but the WIFI was of no interest. The Windows laptop they had fit the bill just right.

Re:The Goal?

[Yvanhoe]

I would also add that having Windows on these things is a success of the OSS community. Without Linux, this project would not have been possible or even considered. Bill Gates himself told how useless he thought this initiative was.

Without the threat to use Linux, Windows would never have made integration efforts for the OLPC.

Re:The Goal?

[Trelane]

There is no mechanism in Windows that stops you running software that was not written by Microsoft.

Is this where I point out the DR-DOS thing? Yes, I think so.

Re:The Goal?

[KGIII]

I think you're trolling but I'll feed you regardless.

They're not buying an OS only. They're getting a functional computer. Scaled down or not, it functions. It does what they need it to do. They'll be able to run all sorts of programs as I understand it. What makes you think that educational software only comes in the pay-for environment? Have you not seen the freeware (including open source) applications that run just fine in Windows? The price you mention is already paid for, the BSA is only involved if there's a reason to suspect piracy and, frankly, the BSA is pretty much full of evil fucktards regardless of the OS you're using. Your last statement shows your prejudice and without evidence to support it it is just silly. I can't think of a time when Microsoft has ever charged me for an add-on, update, or the likes.

If, by means of zealotry, you want to go take these laptops from the hands of children then you have all the permissions in the world so long as you accept the consequences. Me? I'm just glad they have something more than what they had. If you want to take away the freedom of choice because those choices don't meet your idealogical conceptions then by all means, I suggest you run to Peru and start taking them from the hands of the children. While you are there you might as well hunt for a homeless child who's about to dumpster dive and get themselves a hamburger and take that from them too because you feel that eating meat is morally wrong. Go on, go punch one in the face and explain that eating from McDonald's is unacceptable because you've seen the documentary and you have your opinions on the subject.

Lest you argue and say it isn't so basic as the food or you're not a vegetarian I suggest you scroll up and look at what you have typed. Again, I did not make those statements without thinking long and hard about them and even overcoming some inner turmoil. The ends justify the means if even a small percentage of people are given a higher standard of living or a greater awareness of the world around them that they would not have had otherwise. The operating system, in this case, is unimportant. I don't CARE what brand of drug saves my life. I care if it works. This works.

I made those statements knowing I'd get piles of mods saying I was trolling. I made them with every bit of information I had (I've followed this and carefully thought about the benefits and the negatives for the entire time and, before you ask, I'm a double dipper in the BOGO so that each of my kids could have one) and I stand by them. As much as I love and sometimes even advocate the premise that open is better the reality is that this is better than nothing and that they made the choice to use Windows. I am fine with that, I make the choice to use Windows every day. Click my homepage link and you'll see that I actually make my living from Linux, for example, so don't think that this isn't something I haven't thought about.

Am I defending the use of Microsoft products on the OLPC units? Yes. Yes I am. Not because it is Microsoft but because of the potential benefits for those who receive the units. They can accomplish all that they want to on the laptop regardless of the OS that came initially installed.

The ONLY reason I can see that is justified is the cost. The price does increase I'd assume. (I don't have the numbers and I'm not an econ/biz major/grad.) Those are small enough even at 1:10 that it is still justifiable to me. If only one child got a laptop that would be better than nothing regardless of the OS it ran.

Re:The Goal?

[Bert64]

Only if they are made aware of the possibilities. Windows actively discourages learning about the underlying system, and is designed to convince users that doing so is dangerous and should be avoided...

The purpose is to encourage learning, not to create a dependency on proprietary software.

One will result in increased costs of entry into the market for these countries, as all their potential workers will only know proprietary software and insist on it, making it more expensive to get going and flowing money out of the country.

The other will result in a local industry where software is produced and supported locally, with money remaining in the local economy and jobs being created.

Re:The Goal?

[Bert64]

A small number will desire to see the OS code..
A larger number will be curious if presented with the opportunity to see the code, but will not even consider the possibility on their own simply due to a lack of awareness.
Most of these kids won't realise how computers can be programmed if you don't show them and give them the choice.

Re:The Goal?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah sure..

The children are educated how to use software that will cost them two or more year income, and a OS that will be very expensive too.

All that time they could have learned how to use software (and a OS) they CAN afford! All that time they could have learned how to develop things their selves, in stead of being tied to that expensive software....

What a waste of time. Imagine how they will feel when they realize they have been betrayed by a western money-hungry monopolistic company. Do you really think they will be grateful?

And people are wondering why all those nations are hostile against the western world. Now - who is stupid here?

Re:The Goal?

[tcr]

Personally, I wasn't thinking in terms of getting into the OS code...
 
How about having a huge repository of great software at their disposal for $0?
 
Assuming they want to do something more than MS Office, their choices will often be to rely on warez (hello malware), or download shareware from iffy sources (hello more malware), and ending up with a slower, less efficient machine.
 
Wouldn't it be great if they could just learn from any programming, mathematical, enginnering, astonomy apps that they could grab from a repository and just start using?
 

Re:The Goal?

[KGIII]

You raise some points that I thought about. Microsoft is the de facto standard. We can argue about monopolies and we can argue about right or wrong but that doesn't alter the reality. If it were MY country I probably would also have opted for Microsoft's Windows XP on them because that is the most likely to find compatible software, interact with the infrastructure that is already in place, and is most easily supported with the current generation of technicians.

As near as I can tell those few kids who are actually interested can likely change their OS to another. OLPC is not about anything more than being a cheap provider of technology and never has been unless I mistook something? They are cheap because they want to make little or no profit and put hardware in the hands of children to better enable them to find a better quality of life.

Sorry but a better quality of life doesn't require open source. A better quality of life requires access to information. The technology behind that access is not important enough to matter because, with the wealth of information, those limited percentages who wish to alter their PC can certainly do so.

To be honest, I don't care if their running ShitStainOS or Linux. I am simply glad that the advances are being made as they stated they wanted to. As much as I love Linux and F/OSS there comes a time when we need to step back and enjoy reality for a minute and to accept that not everyone agrees with us nor has any reason to see our views. You, and I, may enjoy reaching deep into the bowels of code to alter something that we see as important. They can too. My first OS had no source code available that I know of. *MOST* F/OSS advocates probably started out on Windows. Statistics would suggest they did. Enable them to access information which I consider a right. Watch what they do. Be it on XP, Vista, RiscOS, Amiga, Linux, Unix, etc... I don't give a damn. Let them access the information that you and I can and let them make their own choices.

Re:The Goal?

[KGIII]

Actually there aren't too many open source projects I can think of that aren't ported to Windows so that pretty much negates your point. Well, and these PCs are sure as hell not going to be powerful enough to run Office.

Re:The Goal?

[Hal_Porter]

Microsoft loves us and wants us to be happy.

Like a Big Brother or something.

Re:The Goal?

[canuck57]

How does turning it into an XP box help? XP is just essentially a vending machine.

You are of course right. But the reason I am sure is purely political. At least it will not be Vista, this we know for sure.

Re:The Goal?

[Bert64]

No, it's not as interoperable by a long shot...
It has it's own APIs which are nothing like any other OS.
Porting software to or from windows is far more difficult than porting it between linux/bsd/solaris/osx/etc...

Out of the box windows comes with very little capability for viewing any non microsoft file formats, they will only support a non microsoft format once it has become too ubiquitous to ignore, eg jpeg/mp3/ascii etc older versions only supported wav audio and bmp images... There's no default support for other common formats like PDF which everything else supports out of the box. There's no support for any non microsoft filesystems except iso9660, again because the had no choice...

It is always microsoft products that are non interoperable... If anyone else released products with such poor interoperability they would fail miserably, it's only because of their size that they can bully and coerce the customers.

Re:The Goal?

[KGIII]

I enjoy the troll modification folks. Really. Call a person on a view that they don't support and it is trolling but if I'd called them on the opinion that they thought Microsoft didn't bribe someone in the ISO I'd be a +9000 Insightful. Is the goal logic and truth or is the goal ideology? Is the goal facts or is the goal presumptions? If it is presumptions instead of factual information then, well, mob rules are certainly verifiable...

Maybe now it won't take so many minutes of waiting in between posts.

Re:The Goal?

[elrous0]

Actually, the paternalism here seems to be coming from the OSS crowd--who want to decide for the Peruvians what OS is best for them rather than respecting their decision to go with Windows.

Re:The Goal?

[Bert64]

As you pointed out, there will be a small percentage of people who want to learn, and giving them the capability to learn as much as possible about the system they use will benefit them greatly. Many of these people will need some encouragement to do so, windows doesn't encourage people to learn much.

But it's not just the benefit for the few who want to learn, it's the benefits conveyed on to others. If you have a handful of people in each community who become highly technical then they can help others in their community, help them to learn how to make better use of the machines they've been given, or these people can write software to benefit their communities. And if these individuals become good enough, they will potentially be able to offer consulting services to other areas - ie people who can afford to pay for them, building up a profitable business from a poor start.

Otherwise, those people with potential will either be stifled by the windows way of discouraging in depth learning, or will only learn to a limited degree... They will likely end up just pirating software, because they can't afford to buy it... They will be stuck with an obsolete version of windows that will increasingly not run newer apps, and before too long their current hardware will become useless. Their only choice will be to buy newer hardware which they may not be able to afford, and probably put a pirated copy of windows and a set of apps on it.

Re:The Goal?

[KGIII]

*sighs* If you're going to mod it troll then at least have the courage to come defend your statement. Of all the views I've expressed tonight on this subject this one has been the most basic and easy to comprehend. If you don't like it then at least come back as AC (I read ALL posts in reply) and defend it with some factual information as well as why you think it was trolling. "I don't like it." Is not justification to moderate something as troll.

I presented a clear, easy to comprehend, vision and understanding that took a great deal of thought as you'll with the other modifications of those posts. I don't come ready to "argue" my point of view, I come ready to explain it. I posted KNOWING that it would potentially be controversial to the /. moderators and crowds. I posted because it needed to be said. If you're constantly wasted it requires a friend to come to you and tell you that you are going too far.

They have hardware and software that works to enable them to accomplish the goals of moving themselves beyond their current environment. The idea that you would take that from them because of an ideology is disgusting to me. Think of the first time you touched a PC. Did you CARE what OS it ran or did you get excited because you saw the potential benefits?

Re:The Goal?

[mjeffers]

A larger number will be curious if presented with the opportunity to see the code, but will not even consider the possibility on their own simply due to a lack of awareness.
Most of these kids won't realise how computers can be programmed if you don't show them and give them the choice.

This is totally true, after all NO ONE who grew up using Windows in the 80s/90s ever became a programmer or got interested in computers.

Careful, your fanboy is showing.

Re:The Goal?

[jedidiah]

> Interoperability - as much as it pains you to acknowledge it,
> most of the world still runs Windows. In some places it still
> requires Windows. Until that changes my statement remains true.

Ok, then start by stating EXACTLY what else this kids can run
now that they weren't able to run before. Don't just make vague
bullshit claims that sound like appeals to religious faith. A
rehash of a 20 year old IBM commercial won't cut it.

What exactly do these kids get out of this box now being proprietary?

Do you even know what a kid down the street would get out of it? ...bet you dont.

Re:The Goal?

[jellomizer]

Yea I bet license fees are a major cost to these systems. Lets put the Open Source Dogma (the abstract long term advantages, having everyone use a computer suddenly become and expert programmer who can read the source, etc....) aside for a few minutes.

I don't have the full deal or know how much they are paying for the license.
However consider the following...

Installing Windows and paying for the license fee may be less for a large scale organization then Linux. That is stupid you say, how can paying for a license be cheaper then using something for free? Granted in a perfect world you would be right. However it is an unfair world. Microsoft is big and has a lot of influence. Lets just say they can get the Harddrive manufacture to Windows XP default on the drives before they ship them to OLPC it probably doesn't cost the manufacture that much extra. But you say if they can put windows on it so easily they can put Linux on it just as easily. You are right they can... However Microsoft having so much clout can make a bargin with the drive manufacture that they can get say 10% of the license cost per drive. So the drive maker makes extra and my pass some of the savings to OLPC say reducing the drive costs 2%. Now OLPC now has these drives at a slight discount. Oh wait OLPC will still need to pay extra for the License fee, so except for paying 100% the fee directly they are only paying 98% (as the 2% was taken off the drives). Yes but now you have 98% license fee and pre-preped drives. By having preprep drives you can same money on the manufacturing process by taking an extra (long for a manufacturing process) out of the way, and actually saving money on the manufacturing process. But you will say why don't we use the money that we pay for 95% of the license cost to get the drive manufacturer to pre-install the Linux Distro? Good point in a perfect world, However there is echonomy of scale, Microsoft with its influence can fairly confidently say to the harddrive manufacture that by using our image you can do the same deal for other clients who use your drives for their models, so they can simplify their process except for having to make dozens of custom images they can just put on. Having a Linux distro and in essence it would be different for each client (because it is still in imperfect world, and there is still a lot of different views on what distibution for where) The HD Manufacture would have to charge a lot more for these custom (perhaps more then the licence cost) for them to have these custom configuration on each drive. It is more then just putting the image on the drives there is a higher inventory and shipping costs. As you just cant take a random pallet scan it and ship it to whatever customer now you will need checks on your shipping to insure the right pallet gets shipped to the right customer, if a customer cancels the order there is some rework and reimaging of the drives to be done, so there is extra risk involved in the process which will add to the price.

In a perfect world where people have a general agreement on what Linux Distribution to run and Linux is a dominate OS that would work. However the world ins't perfect Microsoft is still king. Linux will need to slowly chip away at its dominance we people choosing to pay extra for Linux installs or installing it on top of their systems by them selfs, and having more developers create Linux Apps (Open Sourced and Closed Source). But right now as for costs Microsoft still has a fighting chance. And if you want to give as many computers for child and the Open Source/Linux vs Closed Source/Windows debate doesn't matter or pails in your view to the goal of the cause then it is quite possible that having XP on these laptops could be more useful.

The real world has a lot of counter intuative actions going on. As it is usually more complex then it first appears. Amazingly Free*x can be greater then (Non Free)*x (for large values of x) as Non Free may have extra resources or features that can include the non free portions of your cost.

Re:The Goal?

[KGIII]

Now - who is stupid here?

They are spending MAYBE as much as 1:20, probably less, on the software itself. I don't know where you got your figures but $10 USD is not what the averege Peruvian person makes in 2 years. They, is subjective, as it is a government provided (which is what governments in this situation should do) unit. Please answer your own question.

Re:The Goal?

[ErroneousBee]

Interoperability - as much as it pains you to acknowledge it, most of the world still runs Windows. In some places it still requires Windows. Until that changes my statement remains true.

Actually, most of the world runs the likes of Symbian, VxWorks and Blackberry OS.

Re:The Goal?

[Mateo_LeFou]

Most of these kids won't realise how computers can be programmed if you don't show them ...

This is totally true, after all NO ONE who grew up using Windows in the 80s/90s ever became a programmer...

Careful, your fanboy is showing.

Careful, your strawman is showing

Re:The Goal?

[KGIII]

I'll play. But, I'll play dirty 'cause that's your attempted response.

ActiveX. Outlook Express. Internet Explorer. Flash. Probably Silverlight.

Oh they can also likely run Thunderbird, Firefox, GIMP, FileZilla, and more.

For better or worse, they can do that.

You can cite alternatives but that wasn't your question now was it?

The kid down the street? Heh! My kids actually HAVE one each of the OLPC and they, sadly, don't bother with it to the point where I want to go take it from them and use it myself or just get my own. The kids down the street would get ACCESS to the internet. They would get ACCESS to information. The operating system doesn't even fucking matter in those cases. In the few cases where it does they also have ACCESS to the information to change their OS.

Re:The Goal?

[Anonymous Coward]

A stupid argument at its finest. Linux supports all of these things because various programs are included by default to do it, under an open source license.

If Microsoft packaged Adobe Reader with their OS, guess what would happen?

Maybe you should get an OLPC, it might teach you critical thinking instead of spouting bullshit about Windows.

Re:The Goal?

[Mateo_LeFou]

"I presented a clear, easy to comprehend, vision and understanding that took a great deal of thought"

No, you presented the 100-millionth iteration of the same old "look, guys, all us big boys out here in the real world(TM) use windows so just accept it" argument

Re:The Goal?

[SCHecklerX]

how does one further their education, regarding creativity on the computers themselves, with a closed system?

Re:The Goal?

[KGIII]

Err... Only if you're high or unwilling to see what I typed (all of it). I don't care what OS they use so long as they have hardware and and OS that works for them to get more information about their choices.

Re:The Goal?

[Mateo_LeFou]

"Something is better than nothing"

I also agree with KGill on this point, but in order to stop the merciless modding/beating he's taking, he's going to need to explain it further, viz.:

Who, if anyone, was proposing that the children of Peru get zero laptops?

As I understand it, the OLPC project as originally envisioned was proposing that X laptops would be distributed. This vision was co-opted by Microsoft so that (X-Y) will now be distributed. Oh, and they will be somewhat less functional.

And KGill is saying, "well, them's the breaks, but X-Y is better than nothing... "

Re:The Goal?

[Lyrael]

For God's sake, did *you* actually read his comments? He's neither pro-MS nor anti-MS, he just wants the children to have some damn laptops.

I honestly don't see why this is so hard for everyone here to comprehend. Yes, it would be better if the laptops had Linux on them, but laptops with Windows are still better than no laptops.

Re:The Goal?

[mhall119]

I will respond because I didn't make my initial statement without thinking. Greater than what they had - meaning more than. Before this they had nothing available probably. This is not less than nothing.

No, before this they had an OLPC with Linux available. It's kind of like saying I'll give you a Ferrari, then later on saying I'm actually going to give you a Yugo. Sure, a Yugo is more than nothing, but it is less that what you were initially going to get.

This computer can still be a learning tool for children. This tool can still teach critical thinking.

How? What is shipping with WinXP on this laptop that will teach critical thinking?

One does NOT need to be using an open source platform to engage in critical thinking.

True, they could have chosen something like Solaris, or forked and closed a BSD like Apple did, and still had most of the benefit they got from Linux. But WinXP is a different beast. You get no compiler. The interface is compiled and you don't have the source. The apps are compiled and you don't have the source. Is there a single program (besides BAT files) on the WinXP that will be shipped with the OLPC that can be changed?

You can do just fine in getting from Point A to Point B in a beat to shit old Honda.

Which would be fine, if the goal of OLPC was just to give kids a computer, and if Windows were cheaper than Linux. Neither is true. You're passing up a brand new free Ferrari and instead paying $50 for a beat to shit old Honda.

What about CHOICE? These people OPTED to use Windows. We can argue that their children didn't opt to but do you really think that they care? No. I don't.

The point of OLPC was to give them what they need, not what they want. Peru might prefer money going to it's elected officials instead of laptops for kids, that doesn't mean that's what OLPC should be giving them. Again, OLPC wasn't supposed to be giving away a computer that people requested, they were supposed to be providing a tool that these kids could use to improve their situation. Will WinXP do that? Yes. Would Linux do it better? Yes.

The few that will care, later on down the road, will make those choices as well. Until then they have email, browsers that go to wikipedia, search engines to learn more about the world around them, and so much more.

They have that on the Linux install too. Again, the problem isn't that they're getting an "okay" OS, the problem is that they were supposed to get a great OS and aren't.

Re:The Goal?

[KGIII]

Even on a proprietary operating system there is plenty of open source software to get them started and there are piles of resources to get them to an open source operating system if that is what they want to do. We, both you and I probably, seem to operate under the sense that we are the norm or that we are the future. We probably aren't.

What you forget and, I think, I remember is that no matter the limits those who are interested in delving into the OS level code will find a way to do so. The TYPICAL person doesn't want or need that. Sure that's a freedom. It is a freedom they don't want or need. I'm free to be gay in my society but I don't want to nor am I. Your, not you specifically but from the camp your post seems to come from, are very explicit in deciding that since you are of one mind all must be of one mind and if they are not then the goal can't be accomplished. I whole heartedly disagree. This is AS a contributer and as a human.

Just because... I want you to know that I thought long and hard before coming to the conclusions I have reached. I have concluded that it is better to get hardware and software that works together into the hands of children who might not otherwise have access to the information that they could is better than maintaining wishing for an idyllic universe.

I do not hope to alter your opinions. I don't even want to. In fact, I would like it if you kept hoping for idealistic views even after reading my post. Freedom comes in many forms, let them pick their road to it. Look at the situation with a new pair of eyes. We can focus on the negative or be grateful for the positive.

I want you to continue to fight. I want you to continue to express the need for your ideals. In the mean time, let's enjoy the fruits of our labor and focus on the beautiful things we might have enabled in an situation where they might not have had the chances you and I had.

Re:The Goal?

[not already in use]

Your analogy doesn't hold up. Windows itself might be closed source, but it runs open source software just fine.
Please, tell me which standards Windows doesn't support. Let me guess, you're gonna run off at the mouth about Office not supporting ODF? IE not being standards compliant? What this has to do with Windows itself, I don't know. Last I checked, OOO and Firefox (or chrome, Opera, Safari... the list goes on) run great on Windows.

Re:The Goal?

[Bert64]

There is nothing to stop microsoft implementing their own PDF reader, the format specs are open and easily implemented. That's what Apple have done.
They could also license adobe reader for bundling...
Or they could bundle the same open source apps that come with linux distributions.

The issue is, microsoft can only be bothered to include support for their own formats, except in cases where they had no other choice (a browser that didnt support jpeg or gif images would be laughable for instance)... Earlier versions didn't even do that, 3.11 could only play wave audio and display the bmp format of images, even tho neither of these formats were commonly used under dos or on other platforms available at the time. Supporting the common formats used by dos apps would have been the right thing to do.

It's only sensible to at the very least include viewers for the most common formats of each type, if not including full blown apps to edit and create such files.

Instead they don't, largely because they want to stifle standard formats and push their own... It's only in a few small and largely irrelevant cases that they've been forced to concede defeat.

Re:The Goal?

[pizzach]

Well, and these PCs are sure as hell not going to be powerful enough to run Office.

That's what makes me wonder. Unless the kids are getting a free version of Office, I'm not seeing much point to a Windows preinstall.

Re:The Goal?

[shutdown -p now]

For what's it worth, Squeak - which is a great programming teaching environment on it own, and, as I recall, was the one used for Linux OLPC specifically - runs great under Windows, with all the same features. I fail to see how a WinXP machine set up so that Squeak runs right after boot wouldn't work for OLPC goals.

Re:The Goal?

[hairyfeet]

The problem I have with putting WinXP on it is the fact that it is an SSD,not a HDD. I have used Windows FLP,I have used Windows embedded,and of course have used vanilla XP. There is not a single version that doesn't just LOVE the swap. And since you are talking about a machine running on a medium with a limited number of write cycles to start with,and where there is almost no space to move things around,I'm betting it'll kill the SSD pretty damned quick.

Also there is tons and tons of free educational software out there for Linux. From what I have read all they are getting is a student version of office and XP installed on the thing due to space restraints. That's it. So unless you want a ton of third world kids learning to waste time playing freecell I don't really see the point. The could have put a localized Edubuntu on there and given the kids lots to do and learn. So unless their goal is to make little sweatshops for underaged office workers it really seems like a waste of time and money in its current form. But as always this is my 02c,YMMV

Re:The Goal?

[Bullfish]

You can't say that here!! Go lie down! Bad dog, no biscuit!

Re:The Goal?

[stypica]

Um, business happened and was accomplished in Peru. Bribery was involved. That's how business works down there. It's who you you know, and who you pay under the table.

Not much different than here in the US really, but we hide it because of the anti-bribery laws. They also apply to US companies doing business in other countries, and foreign companies doing business in the US, but it's a lot harder to track in the foreign countries. Companies just need to be sneakier about the accounting, or worry about whistle blowers.

Getting kind of off track here but yeah, bribery happened - if this went through *without* bribes? now *that* would be a story.

Re:The Goal?

[gmuslera]

The OS where it is running dont matter as much as what they are running on it. What childs see of XOs aren't linux, but Sugar, an environment thought for collaborating from the core to up.

The simplistic approach of "ok, lets give them plain windows XP" is as wrong as giving them plain ubuntu or mac os x, is not for that that the machines are meant. Put Sugar in Windows or an equivalent environment (and environment is a strong word here, is not a simple aggregation of isolated educational programs) with at least the same functionality that have under Linux, and we can start to talk about choice.

Of course, putting Windows in those machines have a meaning: the get one give one project. If you want to contribute to the project donating one of those machines to several of the countries that will implement them, you can get one of that machines, and probably you will want to run it with plain windows or ubuntu or whatever, as you are not meant to run it as an educational machine.

Re:The Goal?

[Anonymous Coward]

my car works fine, even thought I don't know how any of the bits under the hood works. Believe it or not, 99.999% of the population don't need to know how a car works, they need to get from A to B. The same is true of computers.
Dont try to enforce your geekiness on others.

Re:The Goal?

[pizzach]

When you're talking about sensitive issues, posts have to be particularly well thought out. This is part of being a good speaker. I think that is what KGill had missed out on and that is why people are having strong (and mostly negative) reactions to him. Particularly his later posts took on a bad tone and worsened things.

Re:The Goal?

[cliffski]

so what you are saying is that windows supports all of the file formats that 99% of people use?
Whats wrong with that?

if they started bundling supprot to view every kind of file format into windows you would scream monopoly at them and complaint hey are putting adobe etc out of business.

Re:The Goal?

[Simon Brooke]

At least there is technology getting into the hands of children who can use it to further their education. Before we whine about it running on proprietary software let's also keep in mind that it gives them access greater than what they had, interoperability they may never have had, and there are plenty of open source projects that they can use if they want to.

This is all true, but it's like saying 'a crumb is better than no bread'. These laptops can run Linux effectively, but they cannot run Windows effectively - they aren't powerful enough. So there's a very fine limit on what they can do with Windows. They certainly can't run office and they almost certainly can't run Internet Explorer 8.

But besides that, Sugar is not just Linux. Sugar is the most thoughtful redesign of the user interface since the Apple Lisa. It would not surprise me in the least to find that Microsoft are much more afraid of Sugar than of Linux

So yes, an OLPC running Windows - if it does run, and can run any applications at all - is better than no access to computing. But compared to the feast that was on offer, it is crumbs.

Re:The Goal?

[Anonymous Coward]

I rarely hear anyone complain about getting technology into the hands of underdeveloped children. What I *DO* hear about is the often promoted supposed idealism of the OLPC project, which was to allow children the opportunity to truly understand the technology they were being given.

Back in the 80's when personal computers first took off, many people (myself included) were kids and learned a hell of a lot about computing by hacking Commodore 64's and Apple II's. Giving a kid an OLPC running Windows gives him or her almost no similar opportunity. Instead they get to learn how to use internet explorer, microsoft word, and continue to be a slave to corporations who don't want them to know how things actually work.

Re:The Goal?

[calmofthestorm]

Agree. the OLPC was a learning tool for general purpose use. The Windows OLPC is indeed a "office platform" with basic productivity tools, too much bloat for any extensibility, and no hackability.

Re:The Goal?

[node 3]

Given that this was chosen by Peru for Peruvian children I'm sticking with yeah, it is better than nothing. I honestly don't care what it runs - but I defend Peru's freedom to select their operating system that they want to use for their children.

No one is saying Peru doesn't have the right to make a choice, but I do see a lot of people saying Peru made the wrong choice. You seem to be saying "hey, they didn't make the worst choice, so STFU!".

For someone who seemingly advocates freedom you don't seem to want to allow others the freedom to make their own choices.

You've got me confused with someone else. I never said Peru couldn't choose what they wanted (and really, I don't see anyone else saying that, either).

You know what? Linux *does* offer searching, email, and educational software. Guess what? So does Windows. So does Amiga. So does RiscOS. So does FreeBSD. So does Mac.

Amiga OS, RiscOS and FreeBSD are not among the choices. The choices are Windows, Linux, or nothing. If Peru makes a choice, what's wrong with criticizing that choice? Are governments beyond criticism? If Peru made the choice of nothing, would you not criticize them?

For someone who has an opinion, and seems to have no problem stating it in public, you sure seem to have a problem with others stating theirs!

STFU or put up. Start your own project if you want but to belittle the people putting technology in the hands of those who need it most because of your misguided sense of right and wrong shows how much of a cretin you are. You're probably the type of person who would tell a starving child* that they can't eat at McDonalds because you don't agree with their capitalistic ideals or because you feel that you have a moral right to tell them that they can't eat meat. There is such a thing as morals and ethics but when those actually hinder people instead of enabling them (however slight) you should stop imposing them.

Wow. Where did I ever belittle Peru? Where did I ever say "if it's not Linux, then they should get nothing!". And even more absurd is the food analogy. Withholding a free PC is not life-and-death.

Re:The Goal?

[westyvw]

We all probably started out on a closed source operating system... Why can't they?

NO NO NO. The point of free software was driven by people who previously had access to code and then had it closed. It was during the locking up of software that the open source movement was born. Therefore what you should be saying is we had to suffer through the closed source years, why should they?

Re:The Goal?

[westyvw]

But there is a mechanism that will keep you using their system calls, development environment, and ultimitly thier software. (Visual studio, .NET, silverlight, etc.) Face it, any windows software keeps you using windows.

Re:The Goal?

[westyvw]

Well I guess they will accomplish teaching children that they need to defrag their file system, how to run antivirus software, and try and figure out if the software they want is malware or not, how to to read (and ignore) Eula's, where the cracks are to the software they cant afford, and how to deal with a system registry. You know, common computer stuff like that.

Re:The Goal?

[Nursie]

There's a bit of a difference between "apt-cache search foo" and "hunt down a foo capable program on the internets".

Having huge software repos at your fingertips, programming tools included, is a huge benefit.

Re:The Goal?

[turtleAJ]

You're keen on teaching children critical thinking, but you're happy to tell lies about an operating system you don't like. That's not setting them a good example is it?

Depends... are you molding them to become politicians?

Re:The Goal?

[bXTr]

Is some better than none? It depends on what you're talking about. Is some education better than none? Yes. Is some bullets better than none? Not if they're coming at my head.

I think everyone would be better off if we just left these people alone. Handing out computers to people in third world countries is like the Pilgrims giving blankets filled with disease-carrying germs, or missionaries giving out bibles, to the natives.

Re:The Goal?

[bryonak]

Sorry for being harsh, but you sir sound like a self-glorious asshat.
I'm all for discussing contrasting opinions, and you make some good points which are well thought out... but then you drag them down by insulting people and charging them with criminal intentions: just because someone says he'd think Linux would increase the benefit for those children this doesn't imply that he's about to travel to Peru and forcibly take away those laptops from every single kid.
Your starving analogies are even worse.

As for "the end justifies the means"... this is an opinion, nothing more (though nothing less either). And, as we all know, other people may have different opinions and act according to them, but I disgress...
I think one should still choose the better method if the result is similar (or if it's 'good enough' aka 'it works', as you would phrase it).

In my opinion, this would _not_ be Windows.

The main reason is performance: these laptops simply weren't designed for WinXP and Office2003, but instead optimized for that Fedora derivate. By that I mean that it will simply run smoother on Linux.
Another reason is less related, but nevertheless important: Microsoft's goals.
This might seem like zealotry, but I think we can safely assume that that Microsoft only has customer lock-in and profit maximization in mind. That's good for them and nobody can blame them for it, since profit is their purpose.
But if you don't care what "kind of drugs saved your life", that's your thing. I do. Especially when I can _choose_ between drugs that just save my life and drugs that have an additional chance of giving me cancer 10 years later.
OK, bad analogy... here's a better one: I wouldn't like to buy the drugs from a company that tries to pull me into some scheme where I cannot buy pills from certain other companies, must unquestioningly buy their new (upgraded) products, cannot see the ingredients list (just maybe a few trimmings they decide to disclose, while the rest is "dangerous to know"), you can continue this list yourself... all that while an easy alternative without this crap is available.
Putting WinXP on the XO laptop? Sure it works, but why not have it working better?

And then there's the thing about freedom and the encouragement to thinker with the underlying system. This certainly doesn't apply to the majority of those children.
This doesn't mean we should prevent those who want to look at it from pursuing their interest.
After all, the goal is to give them a tool for self-education.

The most valid point _for_ putting Windows on these laptops is the world-wide dominance of this OS. It's definitely an advantage if those kids are familiar with most of the other systems they come across.
The counter point is that Linux isn't harder to learn than Windows nowadays and switching is really easy if you just surf the web, write documents and emails.
And having broader usage and interface experience might just benefit those children.
Now this might be a point for a discussion...

Re:The Goal?

[whoever57]

Interoperability - as much as it pains you to acknowledge it, most of the world still runs Windows. In some places it still requires Windows. Until that changes my statement remains true.

That is the language of defeatism, not, as you probably think, pragmatism.

Do these kids really need to exchange powerpoint presentations with customers and have them rendered exactly as the sender expects (something that PP doesn't actually do, anyway)?

The point is that, with a large enough pool of these machines, running Linux/Sugar/OpenOffice, etc., all that matters is interoperability amongst themselves.

Yes, with XP on the machines, they can learn to use XP. Now, think back 15 years. Would it really help that someone learned to run Windows 3.x now that they are running Vista? Kids will be much better prepared if they see computers as a flexible tool that they are comfortable with and are prepared to investigate it themselves than if they are locked into a particular OS. That does not make Linux/Sugar better than XP, but also the reverse is also true: XP is no better than Linux/Sugar fro this purpose. Yet, for the advanced kids, the ability to change the code and understand programming is a fantastic learning opportunity that simply won't be there under XP for these kids.

Re:The Goal?

[Anonymous Coward]

I know, for a fact, that if you drive an automobile and are not a mechanic you don't even begin to comprehend everything that goes on to get your automobile in motion. You probably understand the physics of a combustion engine but you sure as hell can't adjust the timing, change out the O2 sensors or calibrate them, and surely don't know what the OBDCII is doing to get the readings....

You do realise that all O2 sensors perform the same basic function but have proprietary connectors, thread sizes/pitches, dimensions - even on the same model from year to year... meaning that you have to get a replacement that costs 60-100 dollars rather than have a universal generic one? I think that might be one of the reasons people advocate FOSS soultions..

Re:The Goal?

[Locutus]

"XP is just essentially a vending machine."
by seeker_1us(1203072)

Damn that was well said and accurate. Nicely put.

LoB

Re:The Goal?

[Locutus]

When I see the XO running Windows and dropping directly into a custom application/desktop like Sugar instead of the standard MS Explorer desktop THEN I will agree that it is still a good thing for the kids getting these. But I doubt this well happen since the history Microsoft has of preventing OEMs from hiding the fact that Microsoft Windows is on the computer is a long one. I say "hiding Windows" because kids at the age the XO is designed for deserve a tool to teach learning, not a tool to learn how Microsoft decided applications should be started and how data files from those applications should be saved and retrieved. Sugar and the Journal do a pretty good job of getting out of the way so the kids can not only connect to each other over the network but also get back to the course work they have been working in a simple and elegant way.

I really doubt that Windows on the XO is going to be anything more than putting the MS Explorer desktop in front of the kids and the teachers are going to have to spend hours and hours attempting to teach kids just how to start and get to their classwork. Linux was hidden under Sugar, I doubt Windows will be hidden because Microsoft has only the desire to hook people on Windows and nothing more. It was supposed to be a tool for learning the 3 R's and now it has become a tool for learning Microsoft's way of doing a user interface. Talk about hitting a foul ball, this is way out of bounds from the original goal of the project. IMO.

LoB

Re:The Goal?

[dedazo]

Considering how trivial it is to put a full-screen interface on top of the Windows shell and use it to launch other applications (or even replace the Explorer shell completely with a single registry entry), this is patently ridiculous.

Re:The Goal?

[Anonymous Coward]

Sigh!

Do you really think they will get it for $10? You are dreaming huh? This price is only and soley for this project. As soon as they swich to personal use they are in trouble. This is not a welfare project. Microsoft is only interested in hard cash - and a lot of it. Make no mistakes...

Okay - the 2 years was a bit over the top, but there is a price to pay. And this price is a lot higher than the average Peruvian can afford.

Besides that - ANY Peruvian can afford open software, because it will cost them nothing at all. Now - tell me please. What do you think is a better base to build a healthy income. Give most of your money to Microsoft, or use it to build your own company/economy/income?

Just my 2 cents..

Re:The Goal?

[Locutus]

but OEMs are not allowed to do this so it does not matter how easy it is for YOU to do it. Do you expect the kids to be taught to do this once they get their brand new XP-XOs? OLPC, as the OEM, will most likely not be allowed to do this.

And do you think that the $3 per device Microsoft gets is enough for them to allow Windows to be buried under some custom desktop UI? I surely don't because for Microsoft, this is not about making a profit on these devices, it is about promoting and spreading the reliance on Microsoft software.

Also, do you really think that with this being as "patently ridiculous" and simple to do and yet no PC OEM has done this since 1995 it is because Explorer is _the_ best way to do a desktop? If you do, then think again. Have you not heard how companies like HP, Compaq, and Dell had gone to putting special buttons on keyboard to bypass Microsoft's requirements of not changing the first boot desktop layout?

LoB

Re:The Goal?

[dedazo]

You're confusing OEM-branded IE shells with the normal shell.

Re:The Goal?

[Joe Jay Bee]

When your rebuttal to what is actually a correct argument is something that happened 25 years ago, you might just have lost.

Re:The Goal?

[Locutus]

You're confusing OEM-branded IE shells with the normal shell.

no, I'm not talking about Internet Explorer, I'm talking about the desktop which is explorer.exe. The first time the kernel runs explorer.exe it loads the desktop and from then on, it opens up that file browser view. This has been the case as far back as Windows 95 and up through XP SP2 IIRC. As of Windows 95, Microsoft contractually blocked computer vendors from changing what their customers, the OEMs customers, saw for the desktop. It had to be what Microsoft shipped them atleast for the first time the customer booted the computer. The DOJ vs MSFT settlement might have allowed icons to be added and some customization but I don't think they went to the extent to let them totally replace explorer.exe on desktop PCs.

If you purchase an embedded license, you can probably have that capability but then again, Microsoft will not license embedded for desktop use. They insist that desktop users see their user interface and I doubt they will let OLPC replace explorer.exe with sugar.py so the kid does not know Windows is under the hood. Twenty something years of seeing these guys operate says it ain't gonna happen.

LoB

Re:The Goal?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, I mean the fact that DR-DOS is a critical part of Windows XP alone should stop them from..... ...wait.

Re:The Goal?

[Anonymous Coward]

AFAIK windows runs on less than 50% of the worlds computers when one takes a wider view than just desktops/laptops. A mobile phone is typically a more powerful a computer than some of the heaps still running desktops out there.

Re:The Goal?

[KGIII]

In some parts of this world Microsoft can't even package a media player. Do you *really* think MS could get away with prepackaging a PDF reader with their OS and shipping it?

Re:The Goal?

[RiotingPacifist]

OLPC is not about anything more than being a cheap provider of technology and never has been unless I mistook something?

you missed something
from http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Core_principles

The child with an XO is not just a passive consumer of knowledge, but an active participant in a learning community. As the children grow and pursue new ideas, the software, content, resources, and tools should be able to grow with them. The very global nature of OLPC demands that growth be driven locally, in large part by the children themselves. Each child with an XO can leverage the learning of every other child. They teach each other, share ideas, and through the social nature of the interface, support each other's intellectual growth. Children are learners and teachers.

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.

A world of great software and content is necessary to make this project succeed, both open and proprietary. Children need to be able to choose from all of it. In our context of learning where knowledge must be appropriated in order to be used, it is most appropriate for knowledge to be free. Further, every child has something to contribute; we need a free and open framework that supports and encourages the very basic human need to express.

Give me a free and open environment and I will learn and teach with joy.

you may notice the mention of a need for proprietery software, i tried looking back at the page history to see if this was part of the original version, but that only went as far back as some anti-Microsoft FUD in march, but the project was clearly meant as more than a laptop project, from wikipedia:

OLPC's stated ethos that "It's an education project, not a laptop project"

Watch what they do. Be it on XP, Vista, RiscOS, Amiga, Linux, Unix, etc... I don't give a damn. Let them access the information that you and I can and let them make their own choices.

If this were any other project then the choice of ms would be disappointing as it causes a dependence and reliance on the support that linux/bsd would not but as its coming from a project that has been more about open software than others its more frustrating. Don't get me wrong, i agree that they should make their own choices, i just think that its a shame that this the OLPC project has gone from being a great thing about empowering communities with free software to a good thing about giving out some laptops.

Re:The Goal?

[Anonymous Coward]

No, they will be trained in windows.
And they will use pirated copies in their bussiness.

(worked in a peruvian "company" for half a year, the only software not pirated was my ubuntu station)

Re:The Goal?

[Bert64]

And who will train them how to do that and support them when things break?
Costly commercial support, or some helpful "geeky" locals?
If you stifle those geeky locals they won't bother, they will learn how to fix cars or something instead.

Re:The Goal?

[noundi]

In MY perfect world!? What the hell are you talking about? Hard drive manufacturers lowering their cost because Windows is preinstalled on the OLPC? There's a third party involved (four if you count this generous hard drive manufacturer), how the hell do you expect costs to be lowered when additional staff has to be paid!? This is simple maths, stop complicating it.

And yes, MS does have a large wallet... ehem I mean influence, but the influence OLPC has or will have (yes the project is still small but this natural for any new project) will definetly be sufficient in the future.

Re:The Goal?

[ozphx]

Suffering?

The quickest way you are going to turn a 14 year old kid into someone who is interested in programming, is to give them a copy of bloody Windows and XNA Game Studio.

Let them deal with the idealistic crap later, if they feel it. Shit do we really have to be software missionarys jamming religion down their throat?

Makes me imagine a bunch of Christians: "Hey natives, you can have running water and irrigation! But you have to sit in church on sundays and real the true gospel of stallman". Want to help these kids? Keep your damn ideology to yourself.

Re:The Goal?

[jellomizer]

Most drives have data placed on the drives for testing it, the process of mass adding an OS is rather minor during the manufacturing process vs. later on. Espectially if Microsoft is willing to pay them a % of the license fee to cover the additional costs. I am guessing you never studied process management, it actually uses a a lot of Computer Science concepts and you will find that saving a penny here and there really adds up. Most people tend to look at a product as if they had to do it them selfs. However with a different process utilizing many people and different technologies it could be a huge difference in production. Why did Henry Ford succeed while other companies didn't because he created an assembably line process that improved the speed and costs of producing the material. At the time this concept wasn't ovious, It would surly take a worker the same amount of time to build a car himself or with a small team then it will take for an assembably line, they all do the same things. It still take 2 seconds to put a bolt in place. However what Ford realized there is extra time for the team of people where they need to get a new bolt to bolt it in place so it may take them 5 seconds to get a bolt vs 1/2 a second in the assemably line. The math is simple. There are just more steps then you think. Also a lot of variables that cost a lot too. Keeping inventory is not cheap, Not having enough inventory is not cheap. Catering to the employees is expensive. Having the employees disgruntled is expensive. There are hundreds if not thousands of thin lines that a company needs to consider for optimal effencacy.

Re:The Goal?

[dedazo]

For a platform like this, I bet they'll let the OEM replace the shell as long as they include a big Windows logo =)

Re:The Goal?

[Anonymous Coward]

"in a beat to shit old Honda."

The OS of choice for beat to shit Honda's is Slackware.

Re:The Goal?

[noundi]

Let's say that this hypothetical procedure is true. Is there a chance--in this case in particular--that the fee for the OLPC+OS will be lowered? Bear in mind that I'm expecting a "Yes" or a "No".

Re:The Goal?

[mgiuca]

But it's a much higher barrier to entry.

What did you find easier when you started hacking?

a) Reading HTML source code to websites, and making your own HTML, or
b) Downloading Linux/BSD/etc, booting it, setting up partitions so it won't clobber your important Windows partition, installing it, and loading it, then having to still actively go and seek out the source code?

The point about HTML is important because it's just so damn easy to view the source to a web page. On Sugar, they were planning to allow program source viewing in much the same way as a web browser has a "view source" button (and it's fairly easy for more advanced students to get into Python sources at least). Granted, harder than reading HTML, but much easier than getting into it the way we did.

Also note that for people in remote parts of the world, downloading a Linux distro is a lot harder than for us.

So *if* you had the goal of having students able to tinker with their machine, having Windows installed vs Sugar is a major step against that. Even those students actively interested in having a look will have a much harder time of it now.

Re:The Goal?

[ozphx]

What I found easier was a crappy guide to C I found in the library. There was no damn way I could understand even the most trivial of applications. Its not like I was going to be pulling my kernel apart...

I was on DOS, with a copy of DJGPP. I had no interest in the source to the compiler, or the OS. I had enough trouble with basic pointers when I was starting off.

TBH, its probably better that they tinker with coding on Windows, and they install a more tinkerable OS when they skill up a bit. Otherwise we're just going to end up with a bunch of bricks. Seriously, back when I had the time to be playing with other OS's I was forced to reinstall plenty of times, due to messing up some bloody config file.

Re:The Goal?

[mgiuca]

Okay so maybe they shouldn't be tinkering with the operating system itself, but writing their own small programs. No arguments there.

Sugar+Linux would give them instant access to a Python shell where they can start playing around with programming right away. Having taught C and Python for several years, I can tell you it's much easier for students to grasp Python, and much easier to tinker.

On Windows you will have the same issue as above - you'll have to download Python to use it, and that is a high barrier to entry.

There is not a good case for using Windows vs Linux just because they might tinker with Linux too much. Access control is what prevents accidental tinkering, NOT proprietary software, and Linux has far better access controls than Windows XP.

Re:The Goal?

[ozphx]

Sounds like you are advocating DRM on the laptop ;) TBH what is needed is a decent recovery partition with either OS.

I honestly dont think that having to download a package to program is an unnecessary hurdle. *shrug*

Its not a big deal to me - I see this as an idealistic argument, not a practical one. At the moment MS has enough money to spend giving out laptops... call it marketing. If its MS's "marketing" budget that gets disadvantaged kids learning tools then I don't really care.

People in Africa need pencils and paper. I have no problem with Coca-Cola dumping a whole lot of branded crap over there.

I'd be calling superior access controls on XP personally. Especially things like the registry tree having ACLs on every node - thats like being able to permission up every section of a file in /etc individually.

Re:The Goal?

[mgiuca]

Sounds like you are advocating DRM on the laptop ;)

I swear on the name of Slashdot itself I am not advocating DRM on anything!!!

I was referring to root access. Basically anyone adept enough to figure out root should be able to figure "ok anything I do with sudo is dangerous. Anything I do without sudo is (supposedly) not".

TBH what is needed is a decent recovery partition with either OS.

Also a good idea, but remember these are extremely tiny devices. They don't even hold Windows XP*.

* Note that the Windows versions of the machine are running Windows off an SD card - yet another puke-filled reason to not put Windows on them "just because it's what the rest of the world uses".

I honestly dont think that having to download a package to program is an unnecessary hurdle. *shrug*

Once again, you're used to a far better standard of Internet than these children.

Re:The Goal?

[ozphx]

Oddly enough the AU$250 eeeeepc manages to fit XP on its flash. I have NFI why the OLPC people can't fit it to be honest - back when I had XP installed I remember upgrading to a staggering 6gb drive and being amazed that I didn't have to juggle game installs any more ;)

Once again, you're used to a far better standard of Internet than these children.

Hah. I'm from Australia. Our internet speeds are as low as our population density. :(

Re:The Goal?

[mgiuca]

I'm from Australia too :)

Re:The Goal?

[ozphx]

Gday ;)

I bet you are one of those bastards that gets more than the 4mbit I get out of my dsl2 :P

Re:The Goal?

[Trelane]

. <-----  point, at high velocity

   o
  \|/
  / \   <----  you

Re:The Goal?

[Trelane]

See my reply to the other dude, O Anonymous Coward

Be careful in your advocacy

[rtfa-troll]

This trial will be a great success. Everything will work great. If need be there will be one MS support person per child. The problems will come two years down the line when it turns out that vista's successor is needed to do any work with windows and doesn't run on the existing hardware. Remember the London stock exchange. Everybody knew how "Windows" increased it's stability. Now, it's two years later and nobody remembers that Windows was involved at the point when the whole thing crashes and can't be recovered.

Don't say that this trial will be bad or won't succeed. MS will throw everything they have to make it work. Do remember that Peru is building up problems for the future. Do try to explain how that will happen. Do remind people that the first trial has nothing to do with the reality. Do remind them that it's what happens two years or more down the line which you have to look at. Do remind them that the London Stock Exchange will never be credible again.

Re:Be careful in your advocacy

[jimdread]

It's okay for kids to learn how to use Microsoft software. Microsoft knows that they have to provide educational software for that to happen. They couldn't sit back and allow Linux to dominate that market. The Egyptian and Peruvian governments believe that their children must learn how to use Microsoft software, since it's dominant.

It's easy to imagine that it will all go wrong in the future, and maybe it will. One good thing is that if XP on the XO fails, it'll be easy to install Linux on those machines. So Microsoft can't afford to boost the project at the start, and then let it die. If they do that, Linux will take over. Microsoft will have to commit to this project for years to come.

This will also allow direct comparisons between countries which give their children XP XOs and countries which issue Linux XOs. If the Linux ones are working well and the Windows ones are breaking too easily, it'll look very bad for Microsoft. Conversely, if the Windows ones are working well and the Linux ones turn out not to be doing the job, then future countries might like to choose Windows for their XOs.

The XO project has forced Microsoft to directly compete with Linux on the desktop. This is a battle that Microsoft must win. But can they do it?

Re:Be careful in your advocacy

[marc.andrysco]

Yes, Microsoft will have to directly compete against Linux, but the bigger question is will Microsoft play fair. From Microsoft's history, I have to doubt that Linux and Windows will be given equal opportunity. What's going to stop these countries from purchasing Windows solely because the OS appears to work rather than which system provides better overall capabilities.

Also, weren't the specs of the OLPC laptop already bumped up in order to theoretically support Windows as they're now doing? If so, that would mean that the goal of the laptop to be super-dirt cheap was already subverted by being able to put MS on the thing anyway. Don't get me wrong, the whole project isn't an abysmal failure, but I have to believe that attempting to get MS to function on the laptop has already derailed a lot of the original project's intent. You know, that whole learning thing. Instead, I feel that Windows will simply teach the user to become accustomed to the status quo.

Re:Be careful in your advocacy

[DogDude]

This is a battle that Microsoft must win. But can they do it?

I really doubt this. You're talking about the poorest of poor customers. People who probably would never buy a (legal) Ms license in their lives, anyway. This isn't going to effect them at all, even in the long run. The kids who are getting these machines, by and large, are not going to end up being MS power users in the first world.

Expensive

[Anonymous Coward]

TCO will be so much higher on winXP OLPC

OLPC interface may have been too far 'out there'

I would have gone down a more eeepc style desktop

Ofcourse MS$ help OLPC as a profit seeking company but let's not kid ourselves that this is not at the expense of poorer regions.

Re:Expensive

[Anonymous Coward]

TCO? What the fuck are you talking about. There's no monthly fee you know.

Re:Expensive

[Bert64]

And what use are the machines without any additional apps, not to mention fixing those that break, and showing people how to use them because not all kids are inquisitive enough to work things out for themselves.

And what happens when the supplied version of windows ceases to be supported, and no new third party apps are being developed? They will have to upgrade, but will they be able to? Will there be a new version that supports the hardware?

Controversy? What controversy?

[Richard_at_work]

Seriously, there is nothing controversial about someone else not agreeing with you or your beliefs.

Re:Controversy? What controversy?

[oodaloop]

The controversy is that the OLPC program started off with the goal of delivering an entirely open source machine, and ended up delivering Windows XP. I don't expect everyone to agree with each other, but at least agree with yourself.

Re:Controversy? What controversy?

[rtfa-troll]

controversy (plural controversies):
1. A debate, discussion of opposing opinions;

I wish

[jsse]

they'd make haste, as it'd be very awkward if the trial went passed Windows XP's life cycle.

Otherwise they might have to do another trial on Vista; and by the time the trial ends, Vista's life cycle...

Re:I wish

[Hal_Porter]

XP is still being shipped on netbooks and they will provide fixes for it until 2014. That means that XP will have been supported for 13 years, since it was released in 2001.

Good luck on getting fixes for a 13 year old Linux distribution.

Re:I wish

[Alex Belits]

Good luck on getting fixes for a 13 year old Linux distribution.

All Linux distributions that existed 13 years ago can be upgraded to the current versions (along with all software and users' settings).

Of course, being one of many Microsoft marketing people in this thread you can't know this.

Re:I wish

[Hal_Porter]

All Linux distributions that existed 13 years ago can be upgraded to the current versions (along with all software and users' settings).

Right because upgrading Linux installations always works every time.

http://www.dadhacker.com/blog/?p=1007
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=322418

Also good luck downloading a new installation over the sort of internet connection these machines will have in the third world. And good luck trying to get tech support when it fails on some percentage of the machines when you can't afford an international call. These people pay an absolutely higher price per bit transferred or per minute of transatlantic call than people in the first world pay but earn 10x less. It was literally cheaper to call from Sweden to Thailand than to call from Thailand to Sweden. Their internet access is far worse too. On the other hand commercial software is 'free' because piracy is rampant.

The fact is for the sort of people these machines are aimed at, no updates means that security holes will stay unpatched.

And realistically would any software support upgrading on a 13 year old machine? Over that time filesystems will have changed. Linux is about progress, not back compatibility and no one is willing to do the work to maintain old ABIs or filesystem formats. In fact they often deride Microsoft for caring about it.

Even worse, over 13 years instruction sets change. And support for old ones are dropped in new software.

There's loads of scope for breaking Linux updates.

I actually think that given that these machines are going to be passed to technically unsophisticated people with poor communications access, Linux doesn't seem such a good idea.

Of course, being one of many Microsoft marketing people in this thread you can't know this.

Hmm, doesn't that seem a bit of an ad hominem attack to you? Even if it were true how does it affect what I'm saying. Hell, I spend my time working on embedded systems at work, but Linux was too much trouble to maintain at home.

Re:I wish

[Alex Belits]

Right because upgrading Linux installations always works every time.

Not every time. You may have broken hardware, or you may erase half of distribution after installing it. Then it won't work.

Otherwise either the standard upgrade process will work, or you can use some trivial procedure to wipe the system and install the same configuration while preserving users' files.

Windows, on the other hand, ends up in an unrecoverable state after updates all the time.

Also good luck downloading a new installation over the sort of internet connection these machines will have in the third world.

Those laptops are used as a part of classroom configuration with either wireless school server or automated updates on USB drives. Update procedure is among the best parts of XO-specific version of Fedora/Sugar.

And realistically would any software support upgrading on a 13 year old machine? Over that time filesystems will have changed.

All filesystems that were used in Linux 13 years ago are supported now.

Linux is about progress, not back compatibility and no one is willing to do the work to maintain old ABIs or filesystem formats. In fact they often deride Microsoft for caring about it.

In fact, you know absolutely nothing about Linux. ABI changes very slowly, and older versions will work with modern kernel, and may require old libraries that usually are provided in "compatibility" package for this very purpose.

What Microsoft does is different -- it has SHITTY OLD INTERFACE, and it continues throwing shit into the newer and newer versions of its OS supposedly to provide compatibility with old shit, but really to avoid making any progress toward anything better. Instead of deprecating obviously bad systems such as most of Win32, everything new is either added or built on top of it. The reason for it is very simple -- it's very difficult to provide a compatibility layer on another platform that will imitate extremely bad, poorly designed, bug-ridden subsystem in a way that will support all "creative uses" and workarounds that accumulated over decades of evolution of such a massive engineering failure. If Windows wasn't that bad, Wine (or Windows interface under OS/2 before it, or Wabi,...) would be orders of magnitude more simple, and it would become "better Windows than Windows". With Windows being full of unmaintainable finicky crap every imitation of it necessarily has to be full of unmaintainable finicky crap.

Hmm, doesn't that seem a bit of an ad hominem attack to you? Even if it were true how does it affect what I'm saying.

You and other Microsoft defenders have literally flooded this discussion with your comments. Obviously you are trying to create an impression of validity by posting large number of comments with unsupported claims instead of participating in a discussion.

Hell, I spend my time working on embedded systems at work, but Linux was too much trouble to maintain at home.

If this is true, please tell me what embedded systems are. Then I will know what to avoid like plague because it's made by a person so hopelessly stupid, he is indistinguishable from a Microsoft astroturfer.

Re:I wish

[Alex Belits]

what embedded systems are.

Obviously I meant "what those embedded systems are". I happen to work on embedded systems development myself, and I can't imagine another embedded systems developer that can't press "Update" button in Ubuntu. Unless his "embedded" system is actually Windows-based computer -- I have seen those, and they often reach some truly subhuman levels of stupidity.

Re:I wish

[Hal_Porter]

Right because upgrading Linux installations always works every time.

Not every time. You may have broken hardware, or you may erase half of distribution after installing it. Then it won't work.

Umm, you mean you try it and it fails and Linux apologists tell you you have broken or hardare or RTFM. And then you waste ages trying to find someone who actually knows what they are talking about.

Linux is about progress, not back compatibility and no one is willing to do the work to maintain old ABIs or filesystem formats. In fact they often deride Microsoft for caring about it.

In fact, you know absolutely nothing about Linux. ABI changes very slowly, and older versions will work with modern kernel, and may require old libraries that usually are provided in "compatibility" package for this very purpose.

Hmm, that's ok if someone bothers to do it. Otherwise you need to do it yourself. And my point is how many people are going to get it right for a 13 year old disti.

E.g. Firefox 3 won't work on Fedora Core 4 which is a lot newer than 13 years.
http://www.scienceforums.net/forum/showthread.php?p=417678

What Microsoft does is different -- it has SHITTY OLD INTERFACE, and it continues throwing shit into the newer and newer versions of its OS supposedly to provide compatibility with old shit, but really to avoid making any progress toward anything better. Instead of deprecating obviously bad systems such as most of Win32, everything new is either added or built on top of it. The reason for it is very simple -- it's very difficult to provide a compatibility layer on another platform that will imitate extremely bad, poorly designed, bug-ridden subsystem in a way that will support all "creative uses" and workarounds that accumulated over decades of evolution of such a massive engineering failure. If Windows wasn't that bad, Wine (or Windows interface under OS/2 before it, or Wabi,...) would be orders of magnitude more simple, and it would become "better Windows than Windows". With Windows being full of unmaintainable finicky crap every imitation of it necessarily has to be full of unmaintainable finicky crap.

You say shit a lot. But it's sort of interesting that I can run Firefox 3 on Windows 2000, which is a lot older than FC4.

And that's because of all the work people like Raymond Chen do on making sure that software works after an upgrade. Because Microsoft want to sell you that upgrade. In the FOSS world no one gives a shit because there's no money in it. If some developer does some refactoring that inconveniences a user, the user goes to the community which is full of people like you yelling that they are idiots and the sort of work Raymond does is shit. That's why Linux has negligable market share

http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=10

Hmm, doesn't that seem a bit of an ad hominem attack to you? Even if it were true how does it affect what I'm saying.

You and other Microsoft defenders have literally flooded this discussion with your comments. Obviously you are trying to create an impression of validity by posting large number of comments with unsupported claims instead of participating in a discussion.

I just like trolling people like you who will defend Linux without knowing anything about how much work good commercial companies put into migration plans and ABI stability. No one cares about that shit on Linux. If you want it to work you need to reinstall a new OS every few months.

If this is true, please tell me what embedded systems are. Then I will know what to avoid like plague because it's made by a person so hopelessly

Re:I wish

[Alex Belits]

Umm, you mean you try it and it fails and Linux apologists tell you you have broken or hardare or RTFM. And then you waste ages trying to find someone who actually knows what they are talking about.

And it ends up that you actually have broken hardware, have to RTFM or both.

I have Linux boxes that in some form existed for 10-14 years -- upgraded, migrated between distributions, had their hardware replaced piece by piece, etc. I can't even imagine a situation when someone actually familiar with Linux can not do that -- in the worst-case scenario it's always possible to selectively copy user's dot files, or extract a list of installed packages and feed it to the installer. Windows, on the other hand, still can't provide a usable way to safely store and copy user and system settings -- registry mixes together things that can and can't be transferred between users, hosts, sets of packages and installations. As I said before, this is a result of a massive engineering failure that Windows is.

Hmm, that's ok if someone bothers to do it. Otherwise you need to do it yourself. And my point is how many people are going to get it right for a 13 year old disti.

Usually people just upgrade the distribution. As opposed to Windows, it actually works and does not break packages because they are upgraded with the system.

E.g. Firefox 3 won't work on Fedora Core 4 which is a lot newer than 13 years.

Oh, wow, you have found something on Google.

Too bad, you didn't bother to read it. They are looking for FIREFOX 3.0 PACKAGED SPECIFICALLY FOR THE DISTRO THAT WENT OUT OF SUPPORT BEFORE FIREFOX 3 WAS WRITTEN. So they have to download Firefox from mozilla.com and ACTUALLY RUN THE INSTALLER. You know, do the same thing you do when installing it on Windows. What the person seems to be unfamiliar with because everything else installs nicely through a package manager, a thing that is light years ahead of anything ever created for Windows.

Of course, anyone who used Fedora Core 4 was supposed to run auto-upgrade a long time ago. In Windows world that would be an equivalent of installing SP2 on Windows XP -- most of recently released software would not work on XP as it originally shipped.

You say shit a lot. But it's sort of interesting that I can run Firefox 3 on Windows 2000, which is a lot older than FC4.

What means absolutely nothing, see above. Firefox 3.0 works just fine on earlier versions of Linux, even though it makes absolutely no sense not to upgrade them -- as opposed to Windows.

And that's because of all the work people like Raymond Chen do on making sure that software works after an upgrade. Because Microsoft want to sell you that upgrade.

If Microsoft wanted to sell it, no one in the world would run Windows 2000 by now, and you would never know if Firefox 3.0 runs on it or not. The problem is, Windows is such a massive piece of shit, it's not even possible to keep an old code as a deprecated library for old software, and move on to better new version. Because all interfaces are intermingled, libraries are not versioned, and there is no way to separate environment for different packages or executables. So all the effort goes into supporting old, crappy interfaces with all their bugs on newer foundation, crippling underlying OS and newly developed software alike.

In the FOSS world no one gives a shit because there's no money in it. If some developer does some refactoring that inconveniences a user, the user goes to the community which is full of people like you yelling that they are idiots and the sort of work Raymond does is shit.

Except, of course, what you have said is false. Distributions have maintained packages of things decades old, source-level compatibility goes well into 1970's (!), and binaries at very worst need a set of old libraries (conveniently available on old systems be

Re:I wish

[petermgreen]

I call bullshit

A 13 year old linux install would mean something released before debian 1.1 (due to a release fuckup there was never a debian 1.0) and probablly before the elf transition. Have fun upgrading that though the many releases to get to something reaonablly current. I can be pretty sure that at least some of those upgrades (plural because afaict linux distributions tend not to support upgrading more than one release at a time) will involve the loss of some software and/or some manual intervention.

So... the OLPC...

[pieterh]

* Microsoft used every trick they could, including subsidies from the Melinda & Bill Gates Foundation, to destroy OLPC/Linux projects.
* The OLPC was never distributed en-masse to developers who could have turned it into a living ecosystem.
* Running Windows on the OLPC is just stupid.
* Cheap netbooks will make the OLPC redundant.
* While Microsoft was attacking the OLPC, it lost sight of the fact that Linux is the obvious choice for Chinese netbooks. ... in ten years time every schoolkid in Latin America, Asia, and Africa will be using netbook-style computers that cost $20 and they will be running Linux, and they will have everything the OLPC wanted to have, and more.

Free software will, eventually, set us free. ("us" = "everyone on the planet except the rich who can afford toys that lock them in and rob them blind").

Re:So... the OLPC...

[djfake]

Let's not forget Peru's involvement. They were led to believe that a child would/could/should only learn one operating system, and since Windows is most pervasive in the world, it's the "right" choice. Convinced, Peru insisted on XP.

Re:So... the OLPC...

[pieterh]

To some extent, every successful community needs a bad guy. So pushing XP in Peru will probably promote interest in free software and stimulate FOSS activists to work on educating government about the importance of free software.

Any responsible politician should be encouraging a home grown FOSS industry because it creates the basis for future jobs. Learning Windows is like learning to eat every meal at McDonalds.

Re:So... the OLPC...

[value_added]

Any responsible politician should be encouraging a home grown FOSS industry because it creates the basis for future jobs. Learning Windows is like learning to eat every meal at McDonalds.

An insightful comment if ever I read one.

I wonder, though, if we can extend the metaphor and conclude that the future IT professionals of Peru can now aspire to becoming the equivalent of drive-through-window order takers or, for the more highly skilled or experienced among them, certified fry cooks.

Or would that be too unfair? ;-)

Re:So... the OLPC...

[renoX]

>* Cheap netbooks will make the OLPC redundant.

I agree with your previous points, but not this one: netbooks have a fan (so are more fragile), consume as much power as regular laptops (which they are with a smaller screen), their screen cannot be read easily in daylight on a sunny day, they don't have mesh networking, etc: there are many reasons why the OLPC XO-1 is better suited for the third world schools than netbooks (even running Linux).

>* While Microsoft was attacking the OLPC, it lost sight of the fact that Linux is the obvious choice for Chinese netbooks.

Not really, hence their push for Windows-XP for netbooks. Chinese users have always pirated Windows, why wouldn't they pirate Windows XP for their netbooks. I wouldn't be surprised if Microsoft make a Vista-light or keep making an XP version for those netbooks to ensure that Linux's usage stay marginal.

>in ten years time every schoolkid in Latin America, Asia, and Africa will be using netbook-style computers that cost $20 and they will be running Linux, and they will have everything the OLPC wanted to have, and more.

Maybe, have you noticed that the price of netbooks since the first EEE 701 have only gone up?
Hardware makers don't like too cheap hardware because they're afraid of loosing sells of higher priced laptops..

Re:So... the OLPC...

[jeremyp]

Any responsible politician should be encouraging a home grown FOSS industry because it creates the basis for future jobs. Learning Windows is like learning to eat every meal at McDonalds.

Absolute nonsense. Jobs are created when people are prepared to pay money for something. If it was only about creating jobs, politicians should be encouraging a home grown proprietary software industry because only with that model can you get money for actually writing the software (as opposed to providing support or professional services for it). Fortunately, it's not about creating jobs.

Re:So... the OLPC...

[wren337]

The OLPC paved the way for cheap netbooks no question. But if you've ever had an OLPC in your hands, it has a great feel that you're not going to match with any of the netbooks out there. The form factor and construction are pretty great. I'd like to see more hardware platforms with that kind of durable feel designed into them - this is a laptop you could leave on the floorboard of your car, or hand to young children and let them use it in the yard unsupervised.

Re:So... the OLPC...

[Anonymous Coward]

Whereas learning like Linux is like learning to eat every meal by foraging in the forest.

Re:So... the OLPC...

[Anonymous Coward]

And in the original quote, I found the comparison interesting:

"between those who advocate making software and its source code free, such as Linux OS developers, and those who charge for software and keep the development recipes secret, such as Microsoft."

That's not the full picture. IF that was the only difference, more people might like Microsoft. It's not just about keeping their development recipes secret, it's about suing the ass off anyone who uses anything that they somehow managed to get a patent on, and about developing software that intentionally will cause software from a variety for profit companies and of free software groups, to not work. That's nasty.

Re:So... the OLPC...

[jedidiah]

This reminds me of an episode of "bizzarre foods" I
recently watched where the star commented that factory
farming has taken all of the taste out of chickens and
they don't really "taste like chicken" anymore.

He was complimenting the taste of the local chickens
that aren't factory farmed Con Agra style.

Re:So... the OLPC...

[Bert64]

A home grown proprietary market would have a lot of trouble succeeding against free software and large proprietary players from other countries...

By being small, your costs would be higher and your market smaller... A large player like microsoft on the other hand has already recouped their development costs a thousand times over and can afford to give their software away for free if necessary, at least until the local competition has been eliminated.
It would also take you considerable time and money to develop your proprietary software to a marketable state during which time you will not be generating any revenue, whereas your competitors will already have products on sale.

By concentrating on open source you can get to market almost immediately with virtually no up front costs, you cannot be undercut on the cost of the software because you too can afford to give it away free, and you can provide better support services because you are local and your labour costs are the same or lower than your competitors.

It is virtually impossible to compete with the large established players in a market they already control, even if the software is both superior and free.
In a new market where your customers aren't already locked in to a competitors it's considerably easier, but the large player still has a massive advantage, and you won't be able to afford to develop, test, market and support software on your own while still undercutting the large competitors. Selling support services for open source is about the only strategy that stands a chance.

Re:So... the OLPC...

[Bert64]

I agree with your previous points, but not this one: netbooks have a fan (so are more fragile), consume as much power as regular laptops (which they are with a smaller screen), their screen cannot be read easily in daylight on a sunny day, they don't have mesh networking, etc: there are many reasons why the OLPC XO-1 is better suited for the third world schools than netbooks (even running Linux).

Isn't mesh networking simply a software function? or does it require explicit hardware support?
The fan and screen are relatively easy things that could be changed... Most netbooks are considerably more powerful than the OLPC, and would happily run fanless if clocked down to similar performance levels.

Not really, hence their push for Windows-XP for netbooks. Chinese users have always pirated Windows, why wouldn't they pirate Windows XP for their netbooks. I wouldn't be surprised if Microsoft make a Vista-light or keep making an XP version for those netbooks to ensure that Linux's usage stay marginal.

Because in order to further reduce cost, some of these manufacturers forego the more expensive x86 compatible processors that can run windows, in favor of cheaper and lower power chinese produced ARM or MIPS based cores, which cannot run windows, but will run linux perfectly well while being cheaper and more power efficient. ARM processors pretty much dominate the cellphone market, are manufactured by the millions, and are cheap and low power while being more than powerful enough to run linux.

Maybe, have you noticed that the price of netbooks since the first EEE 701 have only gone up?
Hardware makers don't like too cheap hardware because they're afraid of loosing sells of higher priced laptops..

Yes, hardware makers like HP, Dell, Asus etc who have existing product lines of laptops to protect...
But what about chinese companies who don't already produce laptops, and thus have no existing market to protect?

Re:So... the OLPC...

[rdieter]

> * Cheap netbooks will make the OLPC redundant.

I see and hear this comment a lot. The perception may be there, but it's just plain false. There's no existing (or soon-to-exist, afaik) hw that comes even close to an XO... in particular (among others), its screen, battery-life, and mesh networking capabilities.

Re:So... the OLPC...

[Anonymous Coward]

You say that like he contradicted himself. If you give me a steak that's cooked to shoe leather and I say it's overcooked, then bring me a raw piece of beef and I say it's undercooked, am I contradicting myself? The world is a lot more complex than black and white, especially when it comes to food. Just because modern factory framed chicken is bland and tasteless, doesn't mean that all local free-range chickens are going to taste good. They have more much more flavor, but if that flavor is bad, then of course it will takes bad. It seems so obvious, I wonder why it would need explaining.

Re:So... the OLPC...

[Creepy Crawler]

The mesh-network is a complete binary blob pile of shit.

Because we dont know how it works, we cant make it better, fix it if it has problems, or most likely even disseminate it.

We'd be better off buying hardware that we knows work with mesh right now, rather than having some obfuscation layer.

Re:So... the OLPC...

[Alex Belits]

Another Microsoft employee found.

Re:So... the OLPC...

[Alex Belits]

Not anymore. There is a "thin" version of firmware "blob of shit" that allows mesh networking to be implemented in a regular Linux driver, and there is already a drivers that implements it.

Meanwhile....

[tgoodmannz]

In Other news, South America suddenly has reported a massive jump in instance of BotNet initiated spam......

Drivers

[JohnFluxx]

What about drivers? Windows has very few drivers compared to Linux, so won't this have only minimal support for extra USB devices? I don't think 3rd party drivers will work on the OLPC.

Re:Drivers

[JohnFluxx]

Well you're wrong. The linux kernel comes with far more drivers than Windows comes with natively. The majority of drivers that people use in Windows are 3rd party and Microsoft does not have the source code for them. Microsoft cannot recompile 3rd party drivers for the OLPC.

Re:Drivers

[Nursie]

Not all of them, and even then there's a hell of a lot more stuff that "just works" in linux these days, without having to find a cd, or go hunting on the internets.

Re:Drivers

[timmarhy]

name me one device that could be used on one of these laptops that doesn't have drivers for windows, but has them for linux?

Re:Drivers

[brucmack]

Is there any reason to believe that normal Windows drivers won't work on the OLPC? It's not like they had to port Windows to a totally new architecture - it's using an AMD x86 processor.

I agree that Windows on OLPC is a silly idea, but driver support is not an argument to use here.

Re:Drivers

[Nursie]

A USB to serial converter i bought the other week. Just works on linux, windows XP and Vista don't recognise it and can't find a driver even when they go online to search.

Re:Drivers

[Curtman]

I can't see this being a problem with the OLPC having all the same hardware, but you never know with Microsoft.

If you've ever had the experience of trying to install XP on a laptop when XP knows nothing about the network device, and you can't find your disk then you would know what GP was talking about. Boot up a Linux Live CD and download the driver is about the only solution unless you have another PC around to retrieve the stupid driver.

It's rare to find hardware that doesn't work in Linux, and also rare to find hardware that works out of the box with XP these days.

Re:Drivers

[Anonymous Coward]

that's what the parent said "Windows has very few drivers compared to Linux". so you are wrong.

Re:Drivers

[Peeteriz]

My wife got a HP laptop that came with Vista, which I promptly threw XP wasn't supported, and the onboard wifi and soundcard did not work in XP. And after quite a lot of searching I found out that it won't be supported, and no known similar drivers work for Windows XP - but Ubuntu seems to work fine..

Re:Drivers

[Peeteriz]

(gah, mispost above - mod it down please)
My wife got a HP laptop that came with Vista, which I promptly threw out, since it didn't work well with it's 1 GB of RAM. On Windows XP the onboard wifi and soundcard did not work. And after quite a lot of searching I found out that Windows XP won't be supported, and no known similar drivers work on it - but Ubuntu seems to work fine..

Re:Drivers

[Bert64]

New (ie newer than the os your trying to install) hardware generally won't work regardless of what OS you want to put on it...
New hardware will typically have drivers for the current versions of windows, but you have to install them manually, which depending on the nature of the hardware can be rather difficult.
Some very new hardware can lack linux drivers at all.
On the other hand, new linux distributions come out far more frequently than windows so if your hardware has been on sale more than a couple of months chances are it will be supported out of the box by current linux distros.

Re:Drivers

[timmarhy]

"A USB to serial converter i bought the other week."

how about a model and brand so it doesn't look like you are just making it up.

Re:Drivers

[timmarhy]

i said devices OLPC will be using, not some clunky piece of crap built into another laptop which was designed to only be used with the preloaded vista.

Re:Drivers

[Nursie]

I don't have it here with me right now. It's at home. If you're not willing to take my word for it, I can't say I care that much, I've no reason to lie though.

As another example, the Neo Freerunner, in early boot presents a USB ACM interface. This is something else that "just works" on linux (as of modern kernels) but windows requires an extra driver for, which may or may not exist at this point.

I also find Linux supports legacy hardware better, which may well be of interest in Peru.

Something else I just thought of. My HP all-in-one printer, scanner, copier I have on the network (Photosmart 2575). Windows requires you download at the very least a 40MB installer, and that's if you're savvy enough to download the business version from HP's site, and not the 200+MB "consumer" version that installs god-knows-what.

On Ubuntu Linux I just went to Printers->Add Printer and clicked on Network printer. It found it and configured it straight off. Linux hardware support is really geting good, quick, comprehensive and easy.

To be honest I was more anticipating the "Who cares about a USB to Serial converter (or freerunner)? Nobody but you linux geeks" response.

Re:Drivers

[JohnFluxx]

Ah, okay, they do use an x86 compatible processor. It doesn't support SSE it seems, but I guess that there aren't many drivers compiled requiring SSE.

I wonder why went for an x86 compatible chip for the OLPC. Since it was all based around Linux it would have been fine to just use an ARM chip.

Re:Drivers

[Curtman]

On the other hand, new linux distributions come out far more frequently than windows so if your hardware has been on sale more than a couple of months chances are it will be supported out of the box by current linux distros.

There you go. That and in Linux you don't need a driver from a manufacturer, one driver (that comes with the kernel) will operate a device with the same chipset from any number of vendors. In the Windows world you can't usually use a "realtek" network driver on a card from a different manufacturer even if it uses the same realtek chipset. I find that most frustrating of all.

Re:Controversy? What controversy?

[rtfa-troll]

To be a bit more specific; OLPC took donations from people who believed they were helping to increase educational freedom in basic computing in the third world and used that money to further the aims of a company specifically trying to reduce that freedom. I'm not totally sure that Sugar is a good idea; I really don't know if OLPC with Linux could be perfect. However, I do know that the organisation was built up on money from people donating their second laptops and that those donations are being channeled into things many of those people don't belive in or wish to support.

pilot project of Microsoft, not Peru

[teazen]

Ed McNierney, Vice President of Software Development of OLPC sent a message to the OLPC-devel mailing list today, stating that "Microsoft has previously ordered a number of XO laptops for XP testing and pilot deployment. The usage and distribution of these machines for that effort is up to Microsoft, and that's what they're doing in Peru."

So Microsoft does a tiny-weeny implementation with one pilot school in Peru all by itself, while the main deployment in Peru with about 260.000 laptops will run Sugar on Linux. But no reporter seems to take the time to fud-check Microsoft's press statements. Surprise!

Re:pilot project of Microsoft, not Peru

[MikeUW]

Well thanks for clarifying that...my first thought was wtf are they doing this for when Peru already passed a law favouring open source three years ago.

Re:pilot project of Microsoft, not Peru

[teazen]

What also needs clarifying perhaps is that it's not OLPC that's abandoning Linux for Windows. OLPC is basically becoming more and more a hardware vendor. It's not OLPC that does the deployments and it's not OLPC that decides what software will be shipped with the cute green thingies. That would be the governments and grassroots organizations that buy said laptops.

Here in Nepal, where our grassroots organization has started a pilot project, there's as of yet not all to much help from OLPC, except from IRC and mailing-list traffic. Also Sugar for example is now handled by an independent organization called Sugarlabs, even though the developers of OLPC and Sugarlabs still work together.

So there's at least three parties, but usually the playing field is quite a bit more complicated in a deployment zone (rivalling hardware vendors, the relationship between grassroots organizations and governments, elections, etc...), and all players can mix and match with others. We for example can run our educational software on a classmate if we want or need to. And Sugar is on the way to be ported to other platforms. Windows can run on the XO...

Also the headlines about the XO lately make it seem like Windows has already won the race. But the reality atm is that there are 55k Linux/Sugar XO's are being shipped every month and a stable, workable Windows on the XO is still a few months away. Also the new round of Give One Get One will contain Linux, not Windows. And I have yet to hear of a confirmed large scale XO deployment with Windows on in stead of Linux.

Re:pilot project of Microsoft, not Peru

[Anonymous Coward]

Also the new round of Give One Get One will contain Linux, not Windows.

Is this stated somewhere officially? Last time around I gave two got two and I would do so again this year: if I had absolute assurance that my donation would not be wasted on proprietary software.

Re:pilot project of Microsoft, not Peru

[Hatta]

OLPC is basically becoming more and more a hardware vendor.

That's kind of the problem isn't it? For these things to be effective educational tools, they need an entire ecosystem of educational software, syllabi, and educational professionals. The hardware is actually the least important piece of the puzzle.

Re:pilot project of Microsoft, not Peru

[teazen]

Agreed.

And I won't try to defend the direction OLPC has taken or anything. Actually not. The OLPC philosophy is 'throw them a computer, and they will learn by themselves'. This will work for some area's for some children, but not always is my humble opinion. But I think that that creating content is best left to [local | national] organisations that know the local requirements. The content has to tie into the local educational system because governments sets up certain educational goals to be met.

And believe it or not, the XO has actually helped spur such organizations. I'm sorry that I have to go a bit personal here but without OLPC, our organisation, OLE Nepal wouldn't have existed. We're a rapidly expanding non-profit organisation of about 20 people, 11 of which are working fulltime (compared to about four last year around this time) making content. We've now got over 100 activities ready, 90 of which (you can try them out for yourself) are in use at our pilot schools. We alse developed the groundworks for a digital library called E-Pustakalaya, we provide teacher training and we set up wireless infrastructure.

Those activities are a good thing. In Nepal about the only method of consolidating information atm is through rote-learning. This becomes very apparent in mathematics for example, where students can't calculate the opposite side of a triangle when in a test the indicators for the sides a, b and c are replaced with r, s and t.

If some organisation in Boston would just throw Nepal funky looking laptops with a random collection of software building blocks, teachers wouldn't have a use for them and well-willing people would have a hard time explaining what would justify the government or well-willing NGO's to fork out 200 a pop for these babies.

quickly, bash microsoft

[timmarhy]

it couldn't possibly be the fact the linux distro on OLPC was a piece of shit that lead to XP being chosen, could it.

Re:quickly, bash microsoft

[noundi]

And in what way was it a "piece of shit"? It was designed to support basic hardware with basic software for basic users, at a low cost. It would eventually do exactly what it was meant to do, and by eventually I mean when all software was optimized and stabilized enough.

Re:quickly, bash microsoft

[Anonymous Coward]

XP on the OLPC is considerably more of a piece of shit and the end result in all of this is advocating people to pirate more software and nothing else. Microsoft "wins" and no one else.

Re:quickly, bash microsoft

[timmarhy]

"and by eventually I mean when all software was optimized and stabilized enough."

i think you answered your own question there

Re:quickly, bash microsoft

[Anonymous Coward]

As opposed to XP getting leaner so it does not consume all of the memory and very small amount of storage just for the OS and nothing else? lol.

Re:quickly, bash microsoft

[noundi]

Yeah I answered my own question alright. Appearantly in your world you push a button and a flawless piece of code is written. How can you not recognise testing, optimizing and stabilizing as an ongoing process of any software?

Indeed

[GFree678]

Microsoft doesn't like to lose, and they will do ANYTHING to win. That doesn't necessarily translate to better products of course.

Just because they've been caught with their pants down regarding the emergence of netbooks/sub-notebooks, doesn't mean they won't find a way to dominate there as well.

Peru & Microsoft??

[mcvos]

Let's not forget Peru's involvement. They were led to believe that a child would/could/should only learn one operating system, and since Windows is most pervasive in the world, it's the "right" choice. Convinced, Peru insisted on XP.

But wasn't Peru firmly in the anti-Microsoft camp a few years ago, when they passed a law that all government computers should run open source software?

Re:Peru & Microsoft??

[MPAB]

Never happened. OTOH, Peru has a HUGE piracy market, known locally as "Wilson Galleries" or "Wilson st." in the case of software, "Mesa Redonda" and "El Hueco" for music and video. And let's not forget "Polvos Azules" for bootlegging, "Tacora" and "La Victoria" (a whole district) for stolen car parts and "Malvinas Ave." for pretty much everything ele that's been stolen.

The availability of cheap (stolen/counterfeit/pirated) computers and software has pushed MS deep into the peruvian psyche as the one and only option.

Re:Peru & Microsoft??

[pieterh]

No, that would be Ecuador, which also voted against Microsoft's arrogant pushing of OOXML through ISO, and appealed the bogus approval that format got.

Peru has been a MSFT client state since before the current presidency. There is a lot of work to do there. Luckily MSFT insist on playing the bad guy, which makes such work a lot easier.

Re:Peru & Microsoft??

[mcvos]

Never happened.

A quick google shows that the bill does indeed not prohibit MS software entirely, but it sounds like it does prohibit a pro-MS preference:

http://www.theinquirer.net/en/inquirer/news/2005/09/29/peru-rejects-microsoft-windows
http://www.smh.com.au/news/breaking/perus-green-light-to-opensource-software/2005/09/28/1127804508352.html
http://news.cnet.com/Perus-president-approves-open-source-bill/2110-7344_3-5907226.html

And some older articles that sound a bit more extreme (like I remembered it):
http://www.wired.com/techbiz/media/news/2002/07/54141
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2002/05/19/ms_in_peruvian_opensource_nightmare/

Re:Peru & Microsoft??

[pieterh]

So, I've been told by one of the guys that is leading the group of the adoption of OLPCs at LatAm (a community guy) that Peru is purchasing 200,000 Linux OLPCs for Peru and just making a smaller test with Windows with a much smaller quantity of units.

Microsoft is over-stating the importance of the smaller test, it's marketing, not reality.

BTW it seems that Microsoft's main attack point against Linux on the OLPC is the lack of Flash support. The Adobe Flash viewer doesn't work in the OLPC because it needs too much CPU power, while the Flash viewer for Windows is more efficient.

Gnash would probably help here.

Re:Peru & Microsoft??

[rizox]

The law that you refer was pure bullshit. Just a tiny PR stating almost nothing legally about libre software.

Re:Peru & Microsoft??

[Anonymous Coward]

But wasn't Peru firmly in the anti-Microsoft camp a few years ago, when they passed a law that all government computers should run open source software?

Reminds me of this correspondence between a Peruvian congressman and M$ http://www.gnu.org.pe/resmseng.html regarding Bill Number 1609, Free Software in Public Administration

Re:Peru & Microsoft??

[mcvos]

Reminds me of this correspondence between a Peruvian congressman and M$ http://www.gnu.org.pe/resmseng.html regarding Bill Number 1609, Free Software in Public Administration

That's exactly the one I was talking about.

Re:Peru & Microsoft??

[Alex Belits]

Flash installs on XO just fine. It just has to be installed by the user due to licensing crap from Adobe.

However Flash does not work fast enough on XO on Linux or Windows, to be useful for one of its main purposes, viewing video.

This is why months ago I made a package that provides Youtube/Google Video viewer on XO running Ubuntu (that, BTW, I am maintaining). Viewer uses mplayer configured to for reduced CPU performance, and AFAIK, this is the only configuration that plays all Youtube videos properly on XO. It can be adapted for Sugar, too.

Ubuntu also does everything that "bare" Windows will do on XO. OpenOffice.org, Inkscape and Gimp install and work fine, too. Nothing 3D is going to work on XO on any platform due to 2D-only graphics hardware, so 3D games and CAD are out.

User experience

[rev_deaconballs]

The issue is not which operating system is better but which is easier. The concept is that OLPC computers are going to children that do not have access to computers. As much as you don't like Microsoft it is easier to use for people who are not already familiar with computers.

Re:User experience

[nawcom]

The issue is not which operating system is better but which is easier. The concept is that OLPC computers are going to children that do not have access to computers. As much as you don't like Microsoft it is easier to use for people who are not already familiar with computers.

"It's an education project, not a laptop project."
â" Nicholas Negroponte

Mission Statement: To create educational opportunities for the world's poorest children by providing each child with a rugged, low-cost, low-power, connected laptop with content and software designed for collaborative, joyful, self-empowered learning.

You are so wrong there. Microsoft is trying hard to make the ClassMate look like an educational tool, but the truth is it's the same uneducational closed-up Windows we all know.

Re:User experience

[Bert64]

But it's not...

For someone who has no familiarity with computers, the dumbed down linux installs that come with netbooks these days are a lot easier than windows. You get a simple menu system, and a full suite of applications ready to be used, and a simple tool giving you a list of additional applications you can install with a single click. No confusing "start menu" to navigate, no hassle to download and install apps manually etc..

Windows is only perceived as being easier because people are already familiar with it.

Re:Controversy? What controversy?

[rtfa-troll]

those donations are being channeled into things many of those people don't belive in or wish to support.

Whilst I don't know if Microsoft paid the "donate one get one" price that everyone else had to pay; I note that I seem to have been taken in by MS FUD and at least MS has had to pay something towards the cost of these laptops. Apologies to anyone at OLPC who I offended. I'll be more careful about trusting MS in future :-) :-(

Quit the FUD

[Anonymous Coward]

Remember the London stock exchange. Everybody knew how "Windows" increased it's stability. Now, it's two years later and nobody remembers that Windows was involved at the point when the whole thing crashes and can't be recovered.

So knowing the massive complexity of how a stock exchange system works you're certain it was Windows that caused the crash? Wow, you truly are worthy of those mod points.

Unfortunately, the Software was Poor

[segedunum]

While I don't doubt that Microsoft has went to strenuous efforts to make sure that XP gets on these devices (cheap, small form factor devices are a huge, gaping hole in Microsoft's OEM channel) these projects always manage to shoot themselves in the foot, and the problem here is the software. Sugar is just complete shit, quite frankly. A self-righteous piece of software, full of its own self-importance, that didn't really solve or offer anything.

Now, maybe if somebody had got a clue, looked around the free software landscape and pre-installed some of the great educational software we have (KDE's EDU suite of apps, for example) that Microsoft couldn't pre-install by default on XP, that would have been worth something to a lot of people. If Negropante had any vision, he would have really put effort into the software, and even if Windows XP was pushed people would have used the free software anyway - because it was so good. Alas, another opportunity has been missed.

If I was paranoid...

[Anonymous Coward]

I would say this is an effort by MS to make the OLPC project look unattractive to the eyes of FOSS developers, thus starving the OLPC of developer effort. I've been to two XO developer days and on both days the OLPC people were questioned and were very explicit in their replies: that Windows is not part of the OLPC project and that the Windows port is an independent privateer effort by Microsoft. Despite the clear denials someone keeps spreading rumours the OLPC has replaced or partially replaced Linux with Windows.

Re:If I was paranoid...

[srussia]

Embrace and extend my friend. First Cray now OLPC. Think about it.

Re:If I was paranoid...

[pieterh]

Actually, it's quite interesting. I remember when Windows NT used to run on several platforms (Intel, Alpha) and then gradually Microsoft dropped support for everything except the latest and greatest Intel boxes.

Linux, meanwhile, colonized the supercomputer and the embedded markets, and moved towards the desktop from both ends. This is still happening today: most servers run Linux and most smaller devices run Linux.

So both the Cray and the OLPC represent Microsofts attempts to push against this tide, and in some ways a reversal of previous policy. XP was going to be dropped, but now it's too valuable as a lightweight Windows for smaller notebooks.

To be honest, it reminds me a lot of parts of Holland which are 6 meters (that's about 18 feet) under sea level but which are protected by dykes and walls. The sea is rising, the land is sinking, but it's "so far, so good".

Re:If I was paranoid...

[Alex Belits]

Despite the clear denials someone keeps spreading rumours the OLPC has replaced or partially replaced Linux with Windows.

And this was mean very little if that "someone" was not Nicholas Negroponte himself.

At various occasions he claimed:

1. OLPC is "working with Microsoft" (true).
2. SD card was added to XO to allow booting Windows (lie, denied by hardware developers themselves).

He also called Open Source developers "fundamentalists" and implied that their participation in OLPC project is counterproductive.

MS were on both systems

[Anonymous Coward]

The systems went down and hard.

They never came up again until the end of the day. For a half hour. Then they closed early.

Since

a) the old system didn't do that AT ALL (they were proud of that)
b) there was an update to the MS software that was being rolled out

this seems to be a decent supposition to make. Absent any other information, the position that it was MS software that caused the problem is the primary resolution.

Unless you have information to prove something else at fault, your response is FUD busting with "lalala! Can't hear you!".

Re:MS were on both systems

[Stooshie]

You made the claim. It's up to you to prove the link between the crash and the MS update! Everything you have said so far is supposition.

Re:MS were on both systems

[dvice_null]

I suppose you are right.

Re:MS were on both systems

[rtfa-troll]

We don't have to prove that at all. All we have to prove is that Microsoft claimed a link between the change to Windows and improved stability. To prove that just look at the MS press releases about the project. Because of their previous claims, Microsoft has to prove that not only was the fault not linked to Windows, but that they could have done nothing reasonable to prevent it.

XP On School Computers

[Mista2]

With Windows installed, the students will be able to learn how to use Office to create documents and pay their MS tax. With Sugar, thy might have a chance to learn how Operating Systems work, can change and compile their own if they want to, and a locked down OS miht have helped keep many common pieces of malware away. I thought the OLPC was supposed to be a learning tool, not just another $100 netbook.

Re:XP On School Computers

[jeremyp]

And in the workplace, which skill is required the more: writing documents or building operating systems? Which do you think is going to be more relevant to the average child when he or she grows up?

Personally, I think the money spent on OLPC would be better employed in teaching the 12% of people who are illiterate how to read and write.

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/print/pe.html

Re:XP On School Computers

[Alex Belits]

And in the workplace, which skill is required the more: writing documents or building operating systems? Which do you think is going to be more relevant to the average child when he or she grows up?

If they will move to US? Yes.

Do you really want to teach millions of kids abroad the highly specialized set of skills they only can use to get a secretary job in US? I don't think so.

Listen, you dumbass.

Most countries do not feed massive armies of office drones stuffed into countless office buildings thrown all over the country. They do not have people trying to sell tiny houses built in clumps on 100 in the middle of a fucking desert, for $600000 each to each other until their two "special" mortgage companies go belly up. They do not shut down its industry and get all kinds of crap from China and Korea for free, just racking up trade deficit or "re-selling" its national debt without any intention to pay it back. They do not have farmers who employ exclusively illegal immigrants, farming on the best soil in the world, paying less than minimal wages and no taxes on those workers. They do not pay tens of millions per year to celebrities to hawk brands of consumer products on TV -- products that are produced "for free" and money that got "for free" from an endless loan machine (see above).

They have large -- huge -- numbers of people who DO ACTUAL WORK, MAKING ACTUAL THINGS THEY AND OTHER PEOPLE USE. And they need computers TO ORGANIZE THIS PRODUCTION, TO DESIGN THOSE PRODUCTS, AND TO CONTROL THE TOOLS AND TO BE EMBEDDED INTO PRODUCTS. Microsoft Office DOESN'T DO SHIT for those purposes.

Re:XP On School Computers

[Anonymous Coward]

if you want to build an industry then wordprocessing and spreadsheets can be dome on any OS.

Education?

[noundi]

How can anyone expect an uneducated government (IT wise) to set up a sound education plan based solely on IT? How about we begin with OLPM (One Laptop Per Minister), and then move to phase 2?

This is something new

[hey!]

Putting a pig on lipstick.

Re:This is something new

[ciaohound]

Putting a pig on lipstick

That'll never fly.

Speak for yourself

[Anonymous Coward]

The machine code in the Spectrum ROM was open. That was its "OS".

The source code for UNIX was always available (you needed to bootstrap compile to get it to run).

"Growing up under CSS" is only true for a very small part of the ecosystem and almost all of them are not the people who made the system *you* learnt under.

Re:Speak for yourself

[KGIII]

You're fricken old! My first was a Vic-20 but I didn't have access to the OS code at all. Then again, I was like five and learning to program in BASIC with it because there was fuck all else to do on it. Until about five years ago I maintained SkiDownHillFaster for my own amusement. After that it was Amiga or Atari (I don't recall which) then a DEC that a buddy's mom brought me, and then Unix.

Re:Speak for yourself

[Sique]

You're fricken old! My first was a Vic-20 but I didn't have access to the OS code at all.

You could get a commented ROM listing directly from Commodore. I had one for the C= 64.

Re:Speak for yourself

[KGIII]

I am not entirely sure but I should have been more clear. With the PET that was an option (it came with it) because I was like six (it was actually older than the Vic-20) my dad and I built one together. I don't know of one for the Vic-20. *sighs* It wasn't a very EFFECTIVE machine but I enjoy the memories of building it with him. It sat in a wooden box, no moving parts other than the keyboard as I recall. I remember clearly the smell of his aftershave, the oil from his rifle (he was a Marine), and the smell from the polish on his boots. We're talking 1979 so the memories are fuzzier than most.

So, well, to cite the above... It really doesn't matter the OS nor the "freedom of the code." What matters is that they have access and those who have the desire can do what they want with their technology. These kids who want to can and will put Linux on there. People seem to think I'm defending Microsoft (I do at some points but this is not a time where I feel I need to) but I am not. I am standing up for freedom, the freedom to choose, and I can understand why people will be unhappy that they didn't choose what they wanted them to pick but that's typical in any two sided debate. All I really care about is that they get computers. Don't you remember the excitement the first time you touched one? Did it REALLY matter what it ran as an OS at that point? Not to me it didn't.

10 Print "Hello World";
20 goto 10
30 End

Re:Speak for yourself

[Bert64]

The difference is...
The C64, VIC20, PET etc all dropped you into a BASIC interpreter and encouraged you to learn how do do more than just play prewritten games.
Windows actively discourages you from doing this, even trying to view a list of system files is greeted with a "this is dangerous, dont do this" warning.

Commodore were very good in that respect, even the later Amiga systems came with simply instructions to copy the workbench disks, and then declared you can do anything you like to the copy and encouraged you to do so, worst case you simply go back to the start and make a new copy of the originals.

Re:Speak for yourself

[Sique]

Hm... It's a little different with the Commodore Home Computers. You were practically forced to frickle around in the operating system. Even the booklet you got with the C= 64 had programming examples with lots of PEEK and POKE, where you were copying things from ROM, modifying them (most notably the character set) and switching parts of the ROMs off and on again to allow for bitwise graphics or to get the box to produce sounds.

There was a little bit of hardware abstraction in the I/O routines, which you could either use or also switch off. But then you had the bare metal to code on, and either you wrote your own I/O routines, or you were mirroring the ones you needed from I/O ROM into the RAM and modifying them.

In fact the computers hadn't a real OS in the original sense. There was no initial program whose task was to adminstrate all computer ressources and provide services to application programs running on top of them. There were said I/O routines, there was a boot loader that started the BASIC interpreter from ROM, and there were other ROMs with the character- and the graphic symbol set. You could use them directly, you could use them partly and add your own routines, or you could just ignore them and write your own routines.

That's completely different from a computer running Win XP. Win XP is a fullfledged OS. Either you have XP adminstrating all ressources on your computer, or you have to install another OS. There is no tinkering around with only parts from XP (lets say: Having only the drivers running, but calling them from your programs directly without the XP access mechanisms), there is a big abstraction layer above the XP core which you aren't able to look through.

Re:Speak for yourself

[KGIII]

Perhaps you can then see something different.

Do you recall the first time the screen lit up? The first time you made it do SOMETHING it wasn't meant to do?

You are probably an exception to the rule.

Those kids who are excited by that magic will continue to be so, regardless of the OS. They will then use that OS to go get the information and, if they want, they'll alter it to suit their needs. I'm just happy that they have the initial hardware there to learn on and that those who opt to not go that far (probably the majority) will have something that suits their needs.

Could those needs have been met with another OS? Of course. Just like those needs could have been met regardless of it being open or closed source. I really spent MANY hours thinking about this, sometimes I think it added up to days. I was unhappy when OLPC went with Windows but then I stopped and thought about what the real goals were and who exactly was the target user of said hardware. OLPC is a hardware response, it should not ever be a software response. That, to me, is freedom. Let them pick as they wish.

Re:Speak for yourself

[Mateo_LeFou]

"They will then use that OS to go get the information and, if they want, they'll alter it to suit their needs"

If they do this, they are generally going to be in violation of the EULA, which last I checked frowned upon modification and workarounds.

Re:Speak for yourself

[Kjella]

The C64, VIC20, PET etc all dropped you into a BASIC interpreter and encouraged you to learn how do do more than just play prewritten games.
Windows actively discourages you from doing this, even trying to view a list of system files is greeted with a "this is dangerous, dont do this" warning.

Any more than say a default Ubuntu installation and in general what newbies are told is "don't touch that, let the package manager handle it"? At any rate, learning to trash your machine isn't anywhere near the first thing you should learn. The biggest issue today is the distance between what you're doing and what professionals are doing. I built games on the C64 that came very close to professional, nobody's going to build a GTA clone at home. After a book like "Teach yourself [language] in 21 days" you know all the basics to write a boring business application but you can do very little that's "cool".

I'd start people off on something like say a scriptable game, no need to create all the tedious artwork and something you can immidiately show to other people. From there probably to something like some cartoony flash games, and only after that would I start suggesting a full programming language. It's not the language itself, it's that you have to create everything else around it. It's much more useful once you get to the point where you want to make useful utilities but that's usually quite a few steps down the road.

Re:Speak for yourself

[beaviz]

Amiga systems came with simply instructions to copy the workbench disks, and then declared you can do anything you like to the copy

No wonder the Commodore went bankrupt, if only they had used some kind of copy protection. Why didn't they think of something like AGA (Amiga Genuine Advantage), then they could force their loyal users to buy the software again and again?

We latino americans like it that way.

[Ateocinico]

First of all I am latin american so stop the racist and pseudo-leftist patronizing now. The reasons why peruvian authorities choose Windows over Linux are obvious to me: first, because Windows (whichever version) is the stuff used by characters in tv series from the USA like "Grey' Anatomy", "the Sarah Connors chronicles" etc. Remember when John Connor enters a computer shop? What was the computer running? Vista! And this is the source of information for our decision makers, which are usually the least qualified but best connected people.
The second reason is what I call the "click mentality". All what the people wants is to make a click with the mouse and instantly have their pirated music and games automatically downloaded, and open a messaging session for sharing gossips and trivialities. And in Windows, all the applications that allow this download instantly without asking. Most people, including university students, would not mind a laptop if their cellphone had a bigger screen! Many engineering students make sacrifices for buying a Hp49 or Hp50 scientific calculator and they don't learn how to program it or use the embedded symbolic solver either. What matters is to rub it on others faces. I am cooler than you!
This is my experience after installing and writing software, and managing computer systems and networks in latin america since the 80's and that includes DOS, every version of Windows, Netware, SCO and Linux. People don't mind technology. The mind "coolness" and instant gratification.

Re:We latino americans like it that way.

[Anonymous Coward]

So you're saying latin americans are really dumb..

Re:We latino americans like it that way.

[Creepy Crawler]

---First of all I am latin american so stop the racist and pseudo-leftist patronizing now. The reasons why peruvian authorities choose Windows over Linux are obvious to me: first, because Windows (whichever version) is the stuff used by characters in tv series from the USA like "Grey' Anatomy", "the Sarah Connors chronicles" etc. Remember when John Connor enters a computer shop? What was the computer running? Vista! And this is the source of information for our decision makers, which are usually the least qualified but best connected people.

And that's why Vista is shown on there. Vista is failing hook, line and sinker. Vista is a turd that Microsoft has to shove on people. And the worst part: you're falling for it.

---The second reason is what I call the "click mentality". All what the people wants is to make a click with the mouse and instantly have their pirated music and games automatically downloaded, and open a messaging session for sharing gossips and trivialities. And in Windows, all the applications that allow this download instantly without asking. Most people, including university students, would not mind a laptop if their cellphone had a bigger screen! Many engineering students make sacrifices for buying a Hp49 or Hp50 scientific calculator and they don't learn how to program it or use the embedded symbolic solver either. What matters is to rub it on others faces. I am cooler than you!
This is my experience after installing and writing software, and managing computer systems and networks in latin america since the 80's and that includes DOS, every version of Windows, Netware, SCO and Linux. People don't mind technology. The mind "coolness" and instant gratification.

Try using Ubuntu. It has "click mentality" but no strings attached.

Re:We latino americans like it that way.

[baka_toroi]

How is the Latinamerican mentality any different from the American one? You mean every person in the US of A is a Linux kernel hacker? Come on. It's not about the "click mentality." It's about what makes things run faster an easily. KDE has Ktorrent, so the torrent part you mention is even easier in Linux! (Not to mention a lot of other clients). BTW, I'm Latinamerican too :3

Re:We latino americans like it that way.

[pandrijeczko]

I hate to say this but your comments are doing nothing to further everyone else's perceptions of the intelligence of the AC crowd on here either.

Re:We latino americans like it that way.

[Mark Programmer]

So when can we expect Ubuntu on the XO laptops? I'd support that.

I own an XO with Sugar installed. I like the system's UI metaphor, but it is exceedingly different from the common Windows / Mac / X11-with-the-popular-WM metaphors. For that reason alone, I could see educators wanting children to learn a more mainstream system; teaching them something as avant-garde as Sugar risks sending them out into the real world without sufficient practical knowledge.

Keep in mind that the "learn the underlying concepts, the rest is just detail" concept of computer education only works for a subset of students. The rest really do need to be shown explicitly what button to push, and going from Sugar's desktop to the Windows desktop when they leave school could put them at a severe market disadvantage against students who learned Windows, Ubuntu, Mac OS X, or another traditional desktop metaphor and suite of applications.

It's not that it's a Windows world so much as that it's a windowed world. Sugar is pretty far out there.

Re:We latino americans like it that way.

[Alex Belits]

It's called a troll.

I find troll in this discussion to be among the BETTER participants because the most prominent group -- Microsoft astroturfers -- stinks to high heavens.

Re:We latino americans like it that way.

[Alex Belits]

I (teapot) happen to be the maintainer of Ubuntu on XO.

At least people on OLPC News forum recognize my self-proclaimed status as such.

No one from OLPC project, Peru, or any organization involved in "Give One Get One" program ever contacted me about Ubuntu customization for XO in general, G1G1 donors or any deployment. Crappy adaptation of XP for XO that barely works, has no educational value, and seem to be nothing but Microsoft's own initiative, gets all the coverage. Far superior system that provides the same "general-purpose" functionality, far superior performance, reliability and security is completely ignored. Slashdot users make comments assuming Ubuntu for XO to be some kind of hypothetical possibility despite the fact that it existed since the beginning of this year, and my adaptation remains the current version since May (when it was built based on then-released Hardy).

Re:We latino americans like it that way.

[Mark Programmer]

Oh, excellent! Good work; someone should get the word out.

I won't make use of it myself (my XO runs Sugar because I'm not a student and I bought the laptop partially because of its default OS installation). But if I hear anyone expressing frustration about Sugar's "out-there"-ness, I'll point them in the direction of the Ubuntu distro.

Development recipes

[illuminum]

Microsoft's development recipe: 0. Sign NDA with developer staff 1. Open open-source 2. Copy 3. Paste 4. Customize 5. Compile 6. Put sourcecode under lock

What controversy?

[Fleeced]

"This puts the nation at the heart of a software controversy..."

Not going open source is a controversy now? When did that happen?

Re:Controversy? What controversy?

[dreamchaser]

I thought the main goal was to bring affordable laptops to children around the world, and that OSS was just a means to an end.

I'm not sure it's all that complicated

[HangingChad]

This puts the nation at the heart of a software controversy...

I'm not really certain it's so much an OSS v proprietary story as much as government officials being influenced by big corporate money.

Only a trial

[The New Andy]

Open Source On The Air has an interview with Pia Waugh which talks about this. The vast majority of the laptops will be Linux, there is a small trial of Windows (and as you'd expect, it doesn't run so well).

Months old information ...

[yvesdandoy]

already discussed (too) many times

Unified

[Anonymous Coward]

At least they'll have a unified platform, not a miriad of standards. I don't really care if it's Windows XP I find Windows XP a good OS, the only point one could make about XP is that it's paied because no end user cares if the source code is open, closed or whetever because they'll never touch it.

The geeks will always do their stuff with their PCs.

Re:Controversy? What controversy?

[halcyon1234]

The controversy is that the OLPC program started off

Nah, man. That isn't the "controversy" at all. It's all about this massive secret the reporter uncovered from the seedy underbelly of The Internet, and chose to enlighten us with:

This puts the nation at the heart of a software controversy that has been raging for years between those who advocate making software and its source code free, such as Linux OS developers, and those who charge for software and keep the development recipes secret, such as Microsoft."

See? See? A raging controversy! And it must be that no one's ever heard of it, because the author felt it necessary to describe it in detail-- so much so that half the summary is just this revelation alone! Whoa!

Like it or Not

[mfh]

The bulk of society has already adopted Windows. And the bulk of society is lazy -- far too lazy (or afraid) to change the OS that you buy the computer with to even a better OS.

The way to get people to adopt open source is to make it the easiest option to access. Currently, Open Source is always taking second place in terms of being the easiest to access because Microsoft cuts the line and puts their OS on every retail computer.

Most of Peru's computer users likely use Windows, so I can't see a problem with this.

Why?

[Anonymous Coward]

If you want to, have a look at very old devices. Drivers no longer available by the original manufacturer and the kit is damn near free on eBay et al.

Doesn't run under XP.

Will run under Linux if it ever did.

Ended up delivering FUD

[Anonymous Coward]

...the OLPC program started off with the goal of delivering an entirely open source machine, and ended up delivering FUD.

There. Fixed that for you. Nobody has delivered Windows XP on the OLPC. As near as I can tell, it is a lab curiosity (I hope Microsoft actually has it running in a lab). Note that TFA uses the future tense ("Peru to be") and it is a trial, not large scale deployment.

Search OLPC in Google

[Lucid 3ntr0py]

Funny, a sponsored ad for the Dell mini came up.

Though many companies originally turned down OLPC, OLPC setup the low cost laptop at one of the main laptop manufacturing facilities in the world.

When the buy one give one comes around, support OLPC and then if you aren't going to use yours, give it to an inner city school.

Flash Support.

[Benanov]

Flash Support?

Now that's low.

So Microsoft is using the fact that the Linux/Sugar combination doesn't support a competitor's product (which they're trying to kill with their own product) to convince governments to use Windows machines?

That's some crazy marketing sauce, but whatever works I guess.

Personally my XO will be running gNewSense shortly.

Re:Flash Support.

[Anonymous Coward]

Microsoft
How Low do
You Want to
Go Today?

Villanueva and Bill 1609

[wtcorrea]

What happened to Congressman Villanueva and Peruvian Bill Number 1609 (Free Software in Public Administration)?
http://www.linuxtoday.com/news_story.php3?ltsn=2002-05-20-006-26-IN-LF-PB

Proprietary today - what else tomorrow?

[dablD]

Most of all, it's not a consistent decision: The original goal is bringing technological literacy to those who did not grow into it naturally. But you don't learn how to understand a computer if each step beyond launching MS-[fill in] is discouraged. I mean, if children grow up reading "this and that is dangerous" or "thou shalt not copy" constantly, they believe it. And once adults, their values will be set.

Meanwhile in Ecuador

[Anonymous Coward]

Debate rages on over whether to go with the red or blue LED fan..

Re:Controversy? What controversy?

[mjeffers]

Mission Statement: To create educational opportunities for the world's poorest children by providing each child with a rugged, low-cost, low-power, connected laptop with content and software designed for collaborative, joyful, self-empowered learning.

OLPC is not, at heart, a technology program, nor is the XO a product in any conventional sense of the word. OLPC is a non-profit organization providing a means to an end--an end that sees children in even the most remote regions of the globe being given the opportunity to tap into their own potential, to be exposed to a whole world of ideas, and to contribute to a more productive and saner world community.

both quotes from the OLPC mission page.

If you want to be accurate, a bunch of open source zealots donated to a program who used open source software as a tactic towards their larger strategic goals of educating the world's children. When the organization shifted tactics in order to accomplish their larger goal these zealots got butt-hurt because they never really understood or supported the main point to begin with.

If you can't see the difference between goals and the means used to accomplish them, its not the fault of the OLPC group.

Bingo

[Mateo_LeFou]

OLPC has gone from an educational endeavor to just another plain old business-hegemony endeavor.

Re:It's a shame, really

[mhall119]

What learning tools are being shipped with WinXP on these laptops?

learning

[IkeD]

no son, i'm sorry, but you can't learn to ride this bicycle until you completely understand gear differentials, and can calculate velocity and acceleration - possibly even jerk - because these things are absolutely required before you learn to ride a bicycle.

Re:Controversy? What controversy?

[lordofthechia]

The goal was to deliver an educational platform.

Same as if we decided a program to teach kids in country x to improve their mechanical knowledge and allow them to explore new fuels. We come up with an easy to understand vehicle design and engine that is efficient and runs on fuels of tomorrow. More importantly they can look under the hood and easily experiment with / modify parts at will.

Here comes big oil and subverts the platform by swapping out the (hydrogen/electric/whatever) engines with gas burning engines, welding shut the hood. Governement X praises it because "The rest of the world burns oil, why shouldn't we".

People pop out of the woodworks to state how these cars are better at getting people around, they "conform". The argument now moves from "Let's deliver educational tools" to "let's deliver transportation". The kids/adolescents no longer learn about the inner workings of engines, instead they learn to conform.

Big oil gets a few 100,000 more customers.

The problem : Depending on an outside solution

[DrYak]

People tend to prefer using later in life the tools they learnt using when younger.
(As an exemple see the boom of pascal-written shareware once that language got popular in school systems).

By subjecting these kids to Microsoft's product, you grow a new generation that will prefer using these tools. They grow up, they start jobs, and there they ask for what they have known best their whole life.
Congratulation, you've successfully a whole country's IT sector to depend on an foreign product. Peru's IT in 20 years will regularly send wads of cash out of the country toward the US-based Microsoft (well if they are still around), to obtain in exchange software they will *never* have any control on.
At least if they are a significantly big market by then, Mirosoft might try to listen to their needs and take them into account when building next versions of their product.

But you didn't empower local geniuses. You just taught them to be dependent on a foreign product.

Contrast this with any copylefted technology (Linux / BSD or whatever is you preferred thing).
Kids grow up (in a culture of tweaking hacking and exploring which itself has its own adventage but that's not the point of my demonstration).
They start to work in IT, and they will prefer to continue using the same tools they are used too.
Some will have to use Microsoft tools. Meh. (That won't pose any problem if the kids have learned to *use* a *computer*. If the kids have only monkey-learned where to click on a specific interface, they will be lost anyway, given the trends to completely change the UI every so many years - see introduction of ribbons in Office 2007)
The rest will use the copylefted tools. Which happen to be open, freely available and can be modified. The IT sector can turn this tools into their very own business. They don't depend on buying a foreign product, they can control the product themselves (as long as they play OK by the corresponding license). They don't need to hope that they'll be a significant enough market so the maker will pay attention to their needs, they can freely adapt the product to their needs.
You have grown an IT sector which is self sufficient, because it is built on technology it has the legal right to control itself.

One solution is hooking the kids on a foreign product, the other is teaching them to be self-reliant.
One solution is helping them, the other is not.
Its a question of empowering vs. building compatible drool-drones.
Microsoft isn't the optimal solution.

And that's only about the advantage of copyleft vs. corporate software. Now there's the whole cultural difference story, with open source OS being much better geared at stimulating development and the unix philosophy - small separate single-task components - is much easier to improve, hack around etc.. than the huge honking suits found traditionally on Windows.

Re:It's a shame, really

[hairyfeet]

Umm......The whole point around the OLPC was that not only could kids learn things like the three R's from them,but as they got older they could tinker around inside the OS and get it to do new things and learn about tech at the same time. Now all you have is a REALLY slow Windows laptop.And let us not forget that while there are ways to cut down on a Linux install from using the HDD,Windows just LOVES to swap. And with these being underpowered and RAM straved anyway I'm betting that XP thrashes the poor SSD to death pretty damned quick. Which of course leaves nothing but a dead Windows laptop.

That said,Negroponte seems to be determined to torpedo the thing anyway. If he would have sold them to the first world as well(and the give one/get one is NOT selling to the first world) he could have gotten the economies of scale on his side and lowered the price enough that every kid could afford one. Between his refusing to sell to the first world and then slowing it to a crawl with Windows(does he really think that MSFT won't pull the plug on his license deal if Intel says so? I mean they shot themselves in the foot with Vista just so Intel could sell some lousy integrated chips) he really seems to be slowly but surely killing the thing. Maybe whoever buys the designs when he goes under will sell the thing to the masses and we'll truly have "one laptop per child" but until then I'm predicting they are on a slow death march to oblivion. But as always this is my 02c,YMMV

Re:It's a shame, really

[InfiniteLoopCounter]

What learning tools are being shipped with WinXP on these laptops?

FTA:

Kids and their teachers in the country will use the laptops as part of efforts to introduce more technology into classrooms in Peru, including Microsoft's Student Innovation Suite of software, which includes Microsoft Office 2003 as well as Learning Essentials 1.0 for Microsoft Office.

Plus, there's also Clippy. It would indeed be a real shame if kids weren't exposed to this guy.

Re:It's a shame, really

[fwarren]

There are more problems with OLPC than Linux / Windows Holy wars.

Yes on one side there is Microsoft, who uses cash and influence to make sure that the OLPC can not become the "killer Linux appliance". While on the other side there are folks who love free software. Those who are caught up in the vision of giving kids a learning tool. Those who just plain HATE microsoft and saw it as a way of striking at the heart of the beast.

Beyond that, OLPC has no clue how to distribute laptops. Pretty much they are dropped off by the pallet full with a "here you go". They don't know where they are going. When a country buys them that is fine. The ones that are "donated"...that is another story. Do they end up on ebay or as netbooks for the warehouse persons family? Or do they actually get out to the villiages? There are not really going to be any sort of decent record keeping or accounting to tell us.

The kids and teachers are not properly trained. The goals of the program are scattered and unfocused. Is it a book reader? Where are the free books coming from? Is it a tool to teach programming and logical thinking? Where is the software for that on an XP system? Is it a tool to enable these kids to discover the Internet? Who has provided a net connection out in the villages for them?

I think the problem is that the way this project is turning out and is being administered it is a turd. It does not matter if you put ketchup (Linux) or mustard (Windows) on the turd. It is still a turd

Hopefully in 5 or 10 years someone will be able to dissect this mess and learn something from it. How to get laptops into the hands children in 3rd world nations and make them real learning tools.

Kenyan kids have financial spreadsheets?

[Kludge]

Those kids are way ahead of my son. He just likes to make games using blender and python.

Exactly -- what *is* the goal here?

[zooblethorpe]

And KGill is saying, "well, them's the breaks, but X-Y is better than nothing... "

Indeed. KGill appears to be (hopefully unwittingly?) setting up a strawman argument here. The choice is *not* XP+OLPC (expensive) or nothing (cheapest), it's at least XP+OLPC (expensive) or Linux+OLPC (cheaper) or nothing (cheapest), with more possibilities conceivable. And if we're going by the Think Of The Children (TM) argument, it sure looks like Door #2 here with Linux on the machines would have allowed for more OLPCs going to more kids.

I'm not about evangelizing. I'm a pragmatist -- I'm interested in getting things done. And if the end goal is to get OLPCs into the hands of more kids, then Linux (or some other FOSS OS) is the way to go, simply in terms of cost.

Cheers,

Re:It's a shame, really

[Anonymous Coward]

Excellent point. Microsoft has two big selling points for their XO implementation:

1. Kids will learn skills they can use in the real world: how to use Windows and Office.
2. There are "thousands" of educational software titles available for Windows.

What they quietly ignore is that:

• No one using Windows and Office in the workplace today learned those skills in elementary school.
• Windows XP and Office 2000 skills will be about as useful when these kids graduate as Windows 3.1-era skills are today.
• Most of the "thousands" of educational software titles that were capable of running on XO-equivalent hardware are long out-of-print.
• Educational software publishers will expect significant licensing fees to bring old software up-to-date, make new software XO-compatible, translate software for foreign markets, or provide support. The fees will be more than Microsoft's fee for Windows because the publishers do not have as much incentive to dominate the third-world computer market.

Of course, Microsoft hasn't shipped anything yet (and won't for months), so we have no idea what learning tools will be on the laptops. We can expect at least a paint program, a word processor, a calculator, a web browser, and video/sound editing software -- which is not all that different from what OLPC is providing on Linux.

I wouldn't be surprised if Microsoft also scores a few token deals with software publishers for old, well-known titles... Getting something like Carmen Sandiego or Mavis Beacon shipped on the laptops would be great publicity for them, much like SimCity was for OLPC. (And MS could ship a port of OLPC's Micropolis version of SimCity, if they wanted, since it's now open source -- although they probably won't, because of their apparent aversion to touching anything GPLed.)

The most significant educational advantage of the XP distributions may end up being a working version of Flash, which OLPC has apparently left to the individual countries to install on Linux, due to licensing concerns.

Not true

[PinkyDead]

You seem to be labouring under the misapprehension that Microsoft's mechanism is software based.

Microsoft is not the market leader in the desktop because of that silly little IE bundling nonsense nor are they the leader because the have the best O/S.

Microsoft is the market leader, because for nearly 20 years every single PC that came out of the factory had a Windows sticker on it (I'll knock Bill Gates for a lot of things - but respect for one of the greatest business strategies since Jesus). Most people do not know the difference between a PC (or a computer full stop for that matter) and Microsoft Windows. In fact, a large proportion think that 'PC' and 'Word' are synonyms.

Getting Schools to teach children that 'Microsoft = Computer' is the cheapest and most effective marketing tool they have. And once that mindset is in place, Microsoft has a much more powerful mechanism to stop you running non-Microsoft software on your PC.

What a stupid argument.

[Anonymous Coward]

The software is free. The kids aren't going to be sophisticated enough to deal with source code for years. And if they're thrown into the disorganized mess that is "free software" source code, all the worse.

Getting them the capability to download information from the internet and communicate and express themselves is far more significant than your misplaced messiannic code-monkey delusions.

Re:Controversy? What controversy?

[wazoox]

I've personnally paid for an OLPC. I've paid to give a child somewhere a computer with free software, not microsoft crap. I've been ROBBED.

GUI

[ISoldat53]

The main problem I have noticed on the one I got is the front end. It is nearly useless. Any OS that puts a more user friendly front end on the OLPC will be more successful than Sugar.

Re:It's a shame, really

[calmofthestorm]

Do some research, the OLPC foundation has put a huge amount of work into preventing misappropriation, hence the laptops are shipped bricked and must be activated at the final end to prevent theft by the palletful.

The record keeping is necessary as the activation is done directly by teachers.

Lack of training is a fair point, I agree, but there is progress being made here as well.

Of course windows will kill the project, but I wouldn't believe too much of the fud on the OLPC foundation, it is definitely an academic project (read: rough around the edges) but their ways of dealing with problems they are accused of being vulnerable to in the mass media are surprisingly effective and innovative. I don't know why the media hates them so much, probably because it doesn't have an apple on the back.

Re:It's a shame, really

[WillKemp]

[......] OLPC has no clue how to distribute laptops. Pretty much they are dropped off by the pallet full with a "here you go". They don't know where they are going. When a country buys them that is fine. The ones that are "donated"...that is another story. Do they end up on ebay or as netbooks for the warehouse persons family? Or do they actually get out to the villiages? There are not really going to be any sort of decent record keeping or accounting to tell us.

The kids and teachers are not properly trained. The goals of the program are scattered and unfocused.[......]

With a few small changes, that could be applied to pretty much every aspect of the work of "Development Inc"! It's all like that, all over the world. Billions of dollars are wasted every year on this sort of nonsense.

The pay can be good for those of us who get sucked into working in it though! ;-)

it's the worst possible outcome

[Kz]

As a peruvian, i have to say this is a real disgrace.

It's not about Linux vs. Microsoft, it's about spreading ignorance.

Here most (educated) people think that when you can't open a PowerPoint document, it's because one machine was a Pentium 4 and the other was a Core Duo.

Why? how could a rational being reach that conclusion? that's because when you buy a computer, you don't even ask for windows. it's an invisible part of the computer, so when they see different icons and menus (win2000 vs. XP, vs Vista), they think it's because one is newer, and the specs said "Pentium 4" or Core2, or wathever.

the ubiquity, monoculture of windows makes it totally invisible, because people think it's part of the computer, just as critical as the hard driver, or those other part they don't know what they do.

exposing people to a different system, opens minds in a way that no course can. suddenly they find that a 'start' menu isn't the only way, and e-mail doesn't mean hotmail. and internet isn't the blue 'e', and.... that crashes, viruses and spyware aren't intrinsic parts of computing experience

Re:it's the worst possible outcome

[locobox]

Amen brother! Peruvian too.

Re:It's a shame, really

[jc42]

Is it a book reader? Where are the free books coming from?

It's not hard to find the beginnings of this. Look at wikibooks' WikiJunior for example. There are a number of other online sites with downloadable childrens' books. There seems to be more in Spanish than English, but that may just be a result of where I looked.

One mistake is in thinking that the OLPC project has to supply the books. It's primary design is a network access tool, not as a standalone package. They do supply things like packaged subsets of wikipedia in several languages, with content aimed at younger readers. I recently saw a reference to a 300-MB (compressed) Spanish subset, designed to be loaded into an OLPC central server for use by all the children within range. But again, OLPC doesn't build these; it just works with the local educators to select and package the subsets (and the wikipedia crowd builds all the content).

The OLPC also comes with a browser that brings up the main google page in the local language by default. This is part of the design. The OLPC was designed to primarily provide network access, and the important tools are the ones that help the children find information on the network. Building the content in various languages is Someone Else's Job. Presumably this is mostly the educators, but with network access, anyone (who knows the language) can provide material for the kids.

(And right now they're looking for people who can translate to languages like Quechua and Aymara. So if that's you, get in touch with them. ;-)

One thing I'd worry about would be whether Microsoft will follow such precedents, or whether their UI will try hard to steer the kids in the direction of commercial sites. It wouldn't be very difficult to build in knowledge of the freely-accessible sites, and intercede with suggestions that the kids might want to look at other sites first. Remember that Microsoft is a for-profit corporation, and their software will be much like children's TV shows, primarily a marketing tool and only incidentally educational.

It'll also be interesting to see how Microsoft's DRM software works on the OLPC. That could be a good tool for preventing access to public-domain or other free reading material.

Re:It's a shame, really

[mhall119]

The article says that software is for the "classroom", not the OLPC. I'm nearly positive that MS Office 2003 won't be usable on the laptop, and I'd bet money that the "Student Innovation Suite" won't either.

Re:It's a shame, really

[Nursie]

Project Gutenberg :)

Re:It's a shame, really

[Locutus]

Negroponte and his type will never learn that you can not put anything out which can be interpreted as a threat to Microsoft AND tell them who you are selling or giving the products to.

They don't even know that this Windows-on-the-XO is all a plan to terminate the project. To run them out of funds and essentially render them insignificant. Do you really think Microsoft wanted to help the project and spread Windows while at the same time taking them over a year to get Windows XP running on the XO? It reminds me of how the developer and business community kept asking Microsoft for JDBC drivers for MS SQL Server. 3rd party options were available but you know how adverse many businesses are non-Microsoft software. Well Microsoft finally conceeded and said they'd provide a JDBC driver but it was going to take them 18 months to fully test it and release it. That's right, a JDBC driver taking 1.5 years for Microsoft to ship. This is what Microsoft is doing to the OLPC. Playing their game of killing them in slow motion.

Can you imagine if the Speak-N-Spell had Linux running on it how that product would end up once Microsoft used their influence to get the impression Windows was required for it to be acceptable? The OLPC was originally designed as a special purpose teaching tool with custom software to make it as easy to use as an appliance for these tasks. Now, it has turned into a tool to teach the way Microsoft experts decided Microsoft software should be launched and found on a computer over 15 years ago. And a very slow one at that.

Microsoft gets a point for fooling some highly educated people. The OLPC gets -1 point for being suckered into this track of putting Windows on the XO. Bender and others get 5 points for seeing this and trying to save what real work can be saved(Sugar) and 10 points go to anyone who takes the hardware design of the XO, ports it to ARM and comes out with what I would consider a better product.

LoB

Re:It's a shame, really

[A_Non_Moose]

What learning tools are being shipped with WinXP on these laptops?

Haven't RT'd the F'n Article yet, but several smarmy answers come to mind:

A pdf of a "Windows Troubleshooting decision Tree?". (hey, offshoring isn't confined to just one shore, now, is it?)

Ubuntu cd's/iso's that should have been there?

Asus disks with cracked/pirated learning software?

The real Carol Woijtila

[Anonymous Coward]

Peru is a 3rd world country and (almost) full of corrupt law/decision-makers. When it comes to decisions, only one thing counts = Money. Microsoft only needs to invest a tiny mini-fraction of their money in the country (or somebody's pockets) and have this decision pass through the powers that be in Peru.

Doesn't this defeat the purpose of the OLPC? Is this going to be cost-effective? What about those Microsoft ULAs and Licensing fees? What about interoperability with (real cost effective) linux/open-source solutions? - This decision raises more questions than what it tries to (...and probably will fail) to solve.

CW (Peruvian Ninja)

hear hear

[schwaang]

If the kids get Sugar it doesn't matter nearly as much which OS is running. That's where most of the learning happens.

IMHO, the XO has at least two things relevant to education in developing countries that previous devices did not:
- a learning-oriented environment (Sugar), and
- physical usability by children in the poorest areas of the planet -- through extreme power saving, and child-friendly yet "child-proof" design

Right now both of those features depend pretty heavily on Linux. I'm not sure if XP will ever be updated to get all the powersaving potential of the XO (which isn't needed in many use cases). But I'd like to see Sugar ported to run on any OS.

Re:It's a shame, really

[Anonymous Coward]

Agreed on the first world part. There are 100s if not 1000s of US schools who would love this sort of thing. I should know as I have been setting up LTSP machines in school districts all over the US. XO for the kids that interfaced with LTSP would be an awsome combination.

Re:It's a shame, really

[Anonymous Coward]

Umm......The whole point around the OLPC was that not only could kids learn things like the three R's from them,but as they got older they could tinker around inside the OS and get it to do new things and learn about tech at the same time.

Um no, that was never the "whole point around the OLPC". That was ostensibly slashdotters/OSS-pushers whole point (I say "ostensibly", because the real agenda of slashdotters/OSS-pushers was to eliminate Microsoft from developing countries, which would gradually cause the elimination of Microsoft from developed countries; that agenda was posted over and over on slashdot, and anyone that denies that is as big a liar as John McCain).

Sure there is...

[Anonymous Coward]

There is no mechanism in Windows that stops you running software that was not written by Microsoft.

Double-click on an application from a free software "vendor" (I love how that proprietary-only software phrase is the standard in Windows) in Vista. Do you see that popup that says "This application comes from an untrusted vendor?"

Ok, now pretend you're like 90% of the computer using public and you don't know that's Microsoft bullshit for "this author didn't pay us $1000". Now talk to me about Windows not blocking you from running free software.

You're keen on teaching children critical thinking, but you're happy to tell lies about an operating system you don't like. That's not setting them a good example is it?

Do you realize how much of a douche that makes you sound like?

Re:It's a shame, really

[jc42]

Yeah; I was hoping someone would mention them. There are a few others around, too.

Small XP trial, large Linux rollout in Peru

[Anonymous Coward]

Peru are doing a small XP trial as part of a ~260,000 XO rollout, of which the overwhelming majority are the default Linux/Sugar based system. It is really quite silly how this has spun into a big story. I'm sure many sountries would do a small XP trial as due diligence, and when they do, they'll find that it runs extremely slowly and is a waste of time.

I spoke about this in a recent interview here http://osota.fosscasts.org/show_blag/OSOTA_2008-09-16

The default interface is so awesome, so compelling and I've seen people's reaction to it. It is innovative, exciting and completely appropriate for primary school children. I don't know why people are so threatened by XP running on a few laptops, particularly when there is only a trial happening when XP simply doesn't compare and is so irrelevant to the project and what it is achieving. Chill out everyone :)

Whose goal?

[Anonymous Coward]

It also gives them something else....

The ability to be owned by a monolithic pseudomonopoly for the sake of servicing corporate greed, not to mention every cracker and script kiddie on the planet. Those kids'll definitely get an education....

Where did that tag go?

[Anonymous Coward]

I swear there was a tag that said, "sellout" Can the person who put it up there take it down or are the moderators the only ones that can do that? If so, why would they censor it?