It became popular and available when the time was right, nothing more.
That's partly true.
I have a Compaq Concerto, one of the first touch-screen notebooks. I bought mine in 1994, but they were available for a couple of years before that.
The touch-sensing hardware is good enough, but the cpu (486/25) struggles under the load and the computer feels unresponsive.
The big problem though is software. MS introduced Windows for Pen Computing for this computer, and it sucks badly. It was never really updated either. Unfortunately, that was also when the Windows monopoly started to bite, so there was no other player to pick up the touch computing slack, and the concept withered until now.
open source advocates should also be careful not turn this education project into a battleground.
Open source advocates?
Are you blind? Microsoft and Intel have been attacking this project since it started. If it's a battleground, it's because FOSS people are trying to keep it alive.
Nicholas Negroponte, OLPC chairman, told vnunet.com at the NetEvents conference in Hong Kong on Saturday: "I have known [Microsoft chairman] Bill Gates his entire adult life. We talk, we meet one-on-one, we discuss this project.
Because if they start giving out free licensed copies, other users might get even more annoyed with MS's stance on software piracy and DRM.
That's the trap MS is building for themselves here.
All the OEMS paying $50/copy for their versions will be looking very closely at OLPC's costs now.
What OLPC should do is lock MS into the $3.00/license, then sell as many XOs in the commercial sphere as they can. Can you imagine the outcry from all the OEMs who are trying to compete in the cheap mini-notebook market, but are paying ten times the license fees?
The core principal that's repeated often about the project is that it's an education project not a laptop project. Part of delivering on that idea is the open source platform. Microsoft's vision is to lock the developing world into their expensive platform. Why else would they be doing this?
this could extend XP's life a little longer until a non-shitty version of Windows comes out?
I believe MS has finally set an appropriate value on their OS. $3.00 is a fair price.
Now governments of the world should mandate a price cap for all versions of XP, based on that value. Otherwise Microsoft is using price dumping to drive out competitors, an illegal tactic for a monopoly.
"Intelligent design" is a sly relabeling of creationism. Einstein was above all a scientist. He would certainly not want to be associated with such intentionally deceptive pseudoscience.
Slashdot Mirror
The bread would have been made with HFCS because it slows staling. Likewise the cake, and the chickens would have been fed cornmeal.
That's partly true.
I have a Compaq Concerto, one of the first touch-screen notebooks. I bought mine in 1994, but they were available for a couple of years before that.
The touch-sensing hardware is good enough, but the cpu (486/25) struggles under the load and the computer feels unresponsive.
The big problem though is software. MS introduced Windows for Pen Computing for this computer, and it sucks badly. It was never really updated either. Unfortunately, that was also when the Windows monopoly started to bite, so there was no other player to pick up the touch computing slack, and the concept withered until now.
I'd say the monopoly was the biggest problem.
You don't need Sugar for that.
We know it's nasty, that's why we want to remove it.
What do they taste like?
Even better, install Puppy Linux and a countdown screensaver, boot it up in an airport or other public place, then walk away.
Not only will you get the laptop demolished for free, you might even make it to the real news!
Meh. I've just been playing with a Liebherr 996.
I'll tap you on the roof as you go past.
Xwoaf. http://modest-proposals.com/Hacklin.htm
Open source advocates?
Are you blind? Microsoft and Intel have been attacking this project since it started. If it's a battleground, it's because FOSS people are trying to keep it alive.
No.
Linux exists for the sake of the community.
XP exists for the sake of Microsoft.
Not just the bigger card.
Nicholas Negroponte, OLPC chairman, told vnunet.com at the NetEvents conference in Hong Kong on Saturday: "I have known [Microsoft chairman] Bill Gates his entire adult life. We talk, we meet one-on-one, we discuss this project."We put in an SD slot in the machine just for Bill. We didn't need it but the OLPC machines are at Microsoft right now, getting Windows put on them."
So that additional cost was mandated by Microsoft from the start.http://www.vnunet.com/vnunet/news/2170267/update-green-party-labels
That's why they had to bribe the Libyan Ministry of Man Power with a huge training contract to get them to switch from OLPC to Classmates.
The funny thing is, this cheap mini-notebook market is the only one where their OS actually has had to compete in decades.
And it's scaring the shit out of them...
That's the trap MS is building for themselves here.
All the OEMS paying $50/copy for their versions will be looking very closely at OLPC's costs now.
What OLPC should do is lock MS into the $3.00/license, then sell as many XOs in the commercial sphere as they can. Can you imagine the outcry from all the OEMs who are trying to compete in the cheap mini-notebook market, but are paying ten times the license fees?
Microsoft evangelists keep spinning it that way, but it's a lie.
Repeat after me: OLPC is an education project, not a technology project.
This is OLPC's vision;
The core principal that's repeated often about the project is that it's an education project not a laptop project. Part of delivering on that idea is the open source platform. Microsoft's vision is to lock the developing world into their expensive platform. Why else would they be doing this?MS Works, not MS Word.
Also shows the lie that it's worth teaching them the "industry standard" apps.
They're not being empowered.
They're being subjugated.
I believe MS has finally set an appropriate value on their OS. $3.00 is a fair price.
Now governments of the world should mandate a price cap for all versions of XP, based on that value. Otherwise Microsoft is using price dumping to drive out competitors, an illegal tactic for a monopoly.
You may mock, but I wrote my first program with the pointy part of a compass.
Science may be, but language isn't.
By choosing to adopt the deceptive language of creationists, you've aligned yourself with them.
Perhaps after reading too many Heinlein novels.
This "philosophy" is a facile version of solipsism. In one form or another, it's been around since the pre-Socratic era.
You need to read more Karl Popper, or you won't make it through that degree.
What a disgraceful slander.
"Intelligent design" is a sly relabeling of creationism. Einstein was above all a scientist. He would certainly not want to be associated with such intentionally deceptive pseudoscience.