New OLPC Laptop 1.5 Dual-Boots Sugar, Gnome Desktop

griffjon writes "The new hardware release (you can read about the upgrade here) also comes with a dual-boot option. Start rejoicing now; it's not XP or Sugar (the native, education-centric OS) — it's Sugar or Gnome. And of course there are other homebrew distributions like Xtra Ordinary, built off of Debian."

Comments

Chrome OS

[sopssa]

The boot time on both seem a little slow however. Would be nice if they also build really minimalistic OS that supports just browsing - kind of like Chrome OS. Maybe it gets integrated in the future versions? Would make a good sense with OLPC.

Re:Chrome OS

[oldspewey]

It would be even nicer to see a minimalistic OS that supports basic internet connectivity, and also acts as a virtualbox container so that I can run something more robust inside an image

Re:Chrome OS

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't think you realize how slow this computer is. Having used one (actually, I own one), I think it would choke on any kind of virtualization. It has enough trouble doing normal tasks in Sugar, let alone something "more robust".

How is that a "dual-boot" config?

[Orange Crush]

From TFA, it sounds like you just have a choice between desktop environments. . . like you can do in every other Linux distro . . . Not that dual-booting two separate OSes makes much sense (as a default shipping option, anyway).

Re:How is that a "dual-boot" config?

[WinterSolstice]

Agreed. Also, as per the GP - Why on earth would someone confuse either Sugar or Gnome with an OS?

Really people - get outside the GUI on occasion...

Memory Image boot - why not

[RichMan]

The hardware is fixed. I don't see why boot can't be just load/uncompress an active image.

A backwards step

[hande1]

All the innovation is slowly being peeled back. Look at the OLPC now and you see a stripped back, diluted netbook. The VIA C7-M architecture is about 4-5 years old. To say the core of this hardware is pushing the boundaries is laughable. Once upon a time the OLPC team would take a leap and risk their necks on an interesting HW choice - now they're tied to X86 so they can suckle off MS. I sincerely hope that V2 brings the design back to its low power roots by embracing ARM although the way Negroponte is shacking up with the Windows brigade does not look hopeful. Kids don't need 720p playback (The screen for one isn't suitable). Looking at the OLPC now just makes me sad, and a little angry that this revision is going to be lauded so much. My Dell Mini 10 is more innovative...

Re:A backwards step

[schwaang]

I don't know about "backwards", the XO-1.5 is a just "harware refresh" of the XO-1, giving it more speed, more RAM, and more flash memory, while fixing some of the bugs. Nothing is rolled back, the original innovations (some of which have not yet been matched even by your Mini 10's generation of netbooks) are still there.

Meanwhile, aspects of XO-2's design (two hinged touchscreens) have been widely copied by MS's Courier and others for their next generations of netbooks/tablets.

For those interested in the hardware differences, here's the XO-1 motherboard and the XO-1.5 motherboard.

To summarize the differences from eyeballing the diagrams:
- CPU is upgraded from 400MHz AMD Geode to 1GHz Via C7.
- The corresponding AMD southbridge is replaced w/ Via VX855
- RAM is upgraded from 256MB DDR to 1GB DDR2
- flash is upgraded from 1GB soldered-on to 4GB microSD in a slot (i.e. replaceable, interesting!)
- WLAN is changed from a soldered-on Marvell part to a daughtercard (currently still a Marvell part IIRC).
- the Marvell CaFe chip is apparently gone. This provided NAND FLASH and SD interfaces and some camera functions?
- audio seems to be upgraded

Some stuff that's the same:
- The display controller (Hymax HX8837), that lets the display remain live with the processor suspended.
- The embedded controller (KB3700)
- external SD slot (though not controlled by CaFe anymore)

Not sure:
- battery and charging circuit
- other power supply design

Alternative Viewpoint

[xzvf]

I believe the Negroponte's goal is to get computers into the hands of students in developing countries. Not to promote open source software. Now, I know from experience that open source software is significantly less expensive on a per seat basis, builds local skills and support, and offers flexibility you just can't get from other options. The problem is the customer doesn't. I've seen too many school board members and district technology heads married to Microsoft and Apple and whoever else with a marketing budget that walks through the door. All Negroponte is doing is adjusting to his customers to get the hardware through the door. Now I'd prefer he use his bully pulpit to drive the cost savings and flexibility open source provides, but they've chosen not to. The technology is easy, the politics are hard.

Re:Alternative Viewpoint

[klapaucjusz]

Now, I know from experience that open source software is significantly less expensive on a per seat basis, builds local skills and support, and offers flexibility you just can't get from other options.

That is not the main point.

The main point is that by using Free software, OLPC will get millions of children exposed to the idea that computers are tweakable -- that it is okay to look under the hood of your computer. By using proprietary software, OLPC will get millions of children exposed to the notion that computers are frozen, that you're allowed to look but not to touch.

The choice is political, not economic.

Re:Alternative Viewpoint

[trybywrench]

if i had mod points i'd mod you up solely for your last sentence. In addition to the politics, never underestimate the logistics problems. I bet only 10% of the over all project is actually engineering and software.

Re:Alternative Viewpoint

[Ephemeriis]

I believe the Negroponte's goal is to get computers into the hands of students in developing countries. Not to promote open source software.

One of the original goals/specifications was to have the entire platform be open source. This wasn't to save money. This was to allow those students to use the entire platform as a learning tool. They would be able to tinker with the guts if they wanted to. And they wouldn't be beholden to any particular company to roll out a new update/patch/localization/whatever.

Re:Alternative Viewpoint

[Locutus]

proprietary software on such a learning tool keeps it a mystery and probably will keep them afraid to do even simple things for fear of it locking up or breaking and requiring someone else to reinstall the software. Then, it's poof, magically fixed by a reinstallation and the feeling that you shouldn't do whatever you did to "cause this" again.

LoB

Re:Alternative Viewpoint

[Locutus]

because the idea for the OLPC software was to have the "desktop" get out of the way ASAP and let the application/Activity software be the learning tool. They built it so that instead of a file manager an a dozen ways of finding or saving files they built a queue called a Journal. It's designed as a learning tool not to learn the OS but to learn what the Activities are designed to teach. This also goes along way toward simplifying much of the software too.

When you throw Windows on there you've got a half dozen ways just top find a file to open it and the same goes for ways to create and figure out where to save the files to. And on top of that you've got all the other software Microsoft thinks they should have on there which has nothing to do with learning how to learn. Touch any of those things when you're not supposed to and you've got a kid crying because his/her computer doesn't work the way he/she was shown it was supposed to work.

Back to the OLPC method and you'll also have kids becoming skilled at the simple get-out-of-the-way "desktop" as they've spent 3 or so years using it and the few who take to software development have a good chance of learning how to tweak and fix stuff. Simple things but it's all there for them and it's kept to a very task specific/oriented design.

FYI, Microsoft fears that any kind of success with a computer slightly resembling a regular computer is a threat to Windows and a threat to lose people to being locked into only knowing Windows. After all, when you saw Microsoft's example of XP on the OLPC, they NEVER showed any of the open source OLPC SUGAR Activities or any of the eToys. It was all about getting kids to learn the Windows desktop and all the junk which goes with that even when we are talking about children. Primary grade level school children. They would probably end up spending their entire first year with the device just learning MS Explorer, My Computer, My Documents, 'File-Save', 'Save-As' and all the "Do you really want to do XXXXX?" dialog boxes.

LoB

Re:Alternative Viewpoint

[rtb61]

The OLPC project is proving to be a very successful project but not necessarily in the way envisaged. It launched the netbook concept which in turn is evolving into smartbooks. Those smartbooks running FOSS of which the help of competitive pressure will drive lower prices and basically point them within reach of school children the world over, not just third world countries but first and second world as well.

Why, FOSS, because you are training a future work force and that work force should absolutely be trained on software that doesn't increase their foreign debt. It would be bloody stupid, to stick countries that can't afford it with billions of dollars per year in licence fees for closed source proprietary applications, operating systems and servers, I know corporate greed has absolutely no moral bounds but they doesn't stop us a individuals from imposing those moral bounds on those corporations.

Now coming from a first world country I would be just as critical of my government should they choose a solution that drives foreign debt, there is absolutely no point in establishing a digital education system that inevitably leads to tens of billions of dollars of foreign debt, you are not solving anything you are creating another problem. Ideology, 'NO', pure and simple economics, adopt FOSS in school, train a workforce in FOSS and, not only have you escaped all those pointless licence fees for fiften years but, you create a commercial environment that won't create a drag on the digital GDP you don't force retraining in order to save money and you guarantee free and open access to the stored data over the long term. I won't even touch being held to digital hostage by a single foreign corporation and any profit based decisions they choose to make regardless to the impact upon the consumer or those countries bound to their software.

It's all about the power of 2

[0x4a6f6e43]

The OLPC needs to cost half as much, run twice as fast, with twice the memory. Then it will meet the expectations they made for it two years ago. I know. I own one.

Re:It's all about the power of 2

[Anonymous Coward]

I think it's called the Acer Aspire One D250.

Then again: the acer wouldn't exist if the OLPC hadn't lit a fire under the ass of the industry.

Re:Is there a better option?

[RoboRay]

I've been tinkering with the lightweight XFCE desktop on my XO and it seems to be a pretty good fit for the hardware. I'm still experimenting with various packages (using it as a learning experience, as I knew basically nothing about linux before starting this project) but I've got most things working. The only real snag seems to be unreliable connections to WPA-protected wireless networks. Several methods and WIFI managers are mentioned in the various wikis and blogs covering XFCE on the XO, but there seems to be no really good, reliable solution.

Luckily, I have several neighbors that don't bother to secure their networks and the XO doesn't really need to access my network shares. ;)

Re:WHY NOT WINDOWS 7?

[msimm]

Windows 7 isn't a good educational platform, it's a proprietary platform. It's a fine platform to run other software on, even open software, but it fails when you want to learn more, or change something, or fix something and it's fundamentally inappropriate for specifically that reason.

It's also yet another Microsoft misstep down that long and windy road towards a DRM nirvana which is a sort of magnification of the above mentioned problems but with whole slew of new rights limiting issues which only further marginalizes the end user from both their data and environment. By failing to advocate for the rights of their customers they put their own demise into play. Tick-tock.