The hardware upgrades weren't done because of MS. The CPU upgrade was done because the newer Geode offers a bigger cash, that helps speeding up the Python interpreter. AMD provided the new chip for the same price of the old. The Memory upgrade was a specific request of the involved countries. They were requesting it because with a bigger flash the machine would be have remained usable for an extended number of years. The SD card was an addition that MS appreciated, but was unrelated. The chip controller had built in SD capabilities, so the cost of implementation of the SD slot consisted only in the actual case. For the same reason the camera is there because the controller has the capabilities built in and the CCD sensor is cheap enough to be part of the XO.
So no, no conspiracy theories. MS may benefit from all this, but it is nowhere to be related to these changes.
This deals can be really a turning point in the OEM-Linux relation. Although we are all cheering about it, we must keep in mind the importance of such deal. It must work. If it won't (not enough sales, major support problems, etc) that would be the end of the "linux on the desktop" agenda. If it does work, however, that could mean that more OEM would probably follow, and that could change the market significantly. In any case, I am more concerned the negative outcome, and I am keeping my finger crossed.
I totally agree. However my point was another. RedHat is trying something which may potentially be good, "educationally" speaking, something that could really be a great educational instrument, something that cannot be said for Windws (that is everything but a good educational tool). I am all over opening to any platform, but I feel that the RedHat should be given a sort of more visibility, for at least the attempt of trying something new. Instead everything smells as a profit opportunity.
I'd like to see what RedHat thinks about this. They invest so much in the new interface, and overall OS, with the hope to create something new, and more appropriate for kids, with very innovative features nowhere to be found in conventional PCs (mesh networking, real collaborative activities). Now the OLPC leadership is basically saying: "Sugar is nice, but let's put the old Windows as an alternative, regardless its feasibility in the use in a school environment, after all nobody was ever fired when buying MS products". To me that seems a slap in the faces to RedHat, and ultimately to the kids.
This was supposed to be an educational project. As time goes by, it looks more as a business effort to sell dumb computers in developing countries. Nobody talks about content, how to use these things in schools.
Let's
make one thing really clear. Each and every OLPC XO machine is going to
be owned by a kid. The government is paying for it, but it has no
ownership. In the MS new offering, the government pays for the hardware
and the computers. Given that they actually have to buy PCs that may
cost significantly more than the XO, they have no requirement to
actually give ownership away. In other words they own the computer. So
this is the scenario: kids borrow PCs from the government, and
they are most likely required to give it back at some point. I assume
this from the fact that the license agreement MS is offering, is not
with the actual kid but with the government. So the idea is that once
the kids graduate or moves on in life, will buy a PCs with a regular
license.
One other interesting consideration: The
hardware cost may vary a lot. To save a bit, the government may go for
desktops instead of laptops. Unless something like the Intel
Classmate is deployed, I see desktops prevailing. This means
tha tthe computers will stay in the schools. Again, a very different
approach than the OLPC.
I see this as a control vs
freedom issue. I hope the involved governments are smart enough to
judge the best option in the long run
Sure, let's be objective. According to your reasoning it's perfectly normal to give access to guns to a delusional psychopath, because after all it's his problem and we can easily defend ourself. The fact we have such individuals has nothing to do with the presence of guns.
Well, that is where you are VERY wrong, in my honest opinion. To get a driver license, you need to pass an exam. Why not doing the same for guns (or get mental certification at least?) What's wrong about controlling who's carrying guns? In every civilized country you can have guns, and all owners agree that regulations are actually good for them, because they protect them and everybody else. Why are you insisting that you need them to defend yourself?
Freedom for me is valid until it doesn't step on someone else freedom. In this specific case, I see freedom of getting such weapons with such ease to be a strong limitation in my freedom (to move, to study, to work). Why should I give up my right for your right to defend yourself from an unknown enemy?
Just to prove my point: http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/04/17/vtech.shooting/in dex.html
"The student who killed 32 people and himself Monday at Virginia Tech paid $571 for a 9 mm Glock 19 pistol just over a month ago, the owner of Roanoke Firearms told CNN Tuesday. John Markell said Cho Seung-Hui was very low-key when he purchased the gun and 50 rounds of ammunition with a credit card in an "unremarkable" purchase. Cho presented three forms of identification and state police conducted an instant background check that probably took about a minute, the store owner said."
In other countries, you have to prove that you have moral standards to own a gun. Go ahead, mod me down.
Your answer is very accurate, and it reflects the thoughts of many people. For this reason I won't say (as you did with my post), that you are an insane psychopath, who don't trust anybody. No, in fact you have all the rights to defend yourself, as it is in mine to protest against the uncontrolled use of weapons.
My thoughts were simple really. Explain the families that lost dear members yesterday, that a green card holder got easy access to guns and ammunitions and he did what he did. Sure the gun industry is very regulated, NRA meetings are a family event. So it's the oil and tobacco industries.
I am thinking practical here: For 100 people who responsibly own a gun, there are some who misuse it. Your take is that your rights shouldn't be limited by the behavior of those individuals. Mine is the opposite, it's not that I trust the government (I don't really) but I don't trust people that needs to be protected at all cost (even at the cost of other human lives).
So I will fight with all my power, that is why I decided to become an American citizen. I fight all the sick regulations in place today (including the Patrot Act), just with different tool, that you have no right or authority to question.
This is why gun control is BADLY needed. Or better a new amendment to the constitution, to basically remove the second amendment. Since that won't happen, let's expect something like this happing all over again on the next (hopefully not very near) future.
Palm OS 5 is the de facto latest version of the Palm OS. OS 6 (aka Cobalt) is dead, actually it was never alive, since it never made it to any real device. PalmSource (now ACCESS) dropped the development of OS6 as soon as they started working on ALP (PalmSource version of PalmLinux).
They bought the right to use the name PalmOS from ACCESS, as well as the source of the current Palm OS 5. As far as they are concerned, they can use Palm OS 5 all they want.
Yes, but that is not the point. You expect the percentages of PowerPC-based Macs to fall, but percentage of new Intel-based should increase of at least the same amount, which does not seem to be the case, according to the article.
Interesting post, it shows quite well the difference between the attitude of two different communities. In the Windows community, if you can't get something to work you are stupid. In the LInux community, you'll get plenty of suggestions and help, and most of the time you will get a solution of your problem. In other words, it's a "I am smart, you are stupid" vs "Have you tried this?" that honestly doesn't make me wish to use ant MS product (not that I would wish per se anyway...).
What the poster forgot to mention is that Mandriva is one of the possible option available for the Classmate, the other being Windows XP. I wonder given the choice how many kids would opt for Mandriva...
So true. Unfortunately lots of people are complaining based on their ignorance. They think everybody in a developing country is a starving dry country. Bad education, not there but in the developed countries. It'd be about time schools in developed countries should start making distinctions as you did. Otherwise we will keep hearing these folks denigrating a potentially great project based on their total ignorance (and proud of it).
You have really no clue of what are the modern education requirements. Oral lecturing is good, but per se it's definitively not enough. You need literature (in the broader sense), material teachers can use to make their case. An example: you are teaching about malaria. How are you going to describe the processes of infection to the kids without books, and any resource? Yes, because libraries and books in developing countries are very expensive to maintain, and to keep updated.
That's where the OLPC comes in, as an easy access to a universal encyclopedia which is the Internet, always updated and ready to go. Lower level problems need to be handled, but education is among them. Think the AIDS epidemic in Africa, education is the key to lower the infection rates. OLPC is trying to fill partly the gap.
Nobody forced the goverments of such countries to join the program. So unless you have a better plan to reduce those lower level needs, shut up.
The current common header for the license says: "This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or (at your option) any later version."
This means that the program you write is also covered by GPL3, as soon as it's out. I guess that is what retroactive means in this contest
Slashdot Mirror
Ohps, good catch! I obviously meant "cache"....
The hardware upgrades weren't done because of MS. The CPU upgrade was done because the newer Geode offers a bigger cash, that helps speeding up the Python interpreter. AMD provided the new chip for the same price of the old. The Memory upgrade was a specific request of the involved countries. They were requesting it because with a bigger flash the machine would be have remained usable for an extended number of years. The SD card was an addition that MS appreciated, but was unrelated. The chip controller had built in SD capabilities, so the cost of implementation of the SD slot consisted only in the actual case. For the same reason the camera is there because the controller has the capabilities built in and the CCD sensor is cheap enough to be part of the XO. So no, no conspiracy theories. MS may benefit from all this, but it is nowhere to be related to these changes.
This deals can be really a turning point in the OEM-Linux relation. Although we are all cheering about it, we must keep in mind the importance of such deal. It must work. If it won't (not enough sales, major support problems, etc) that would be the end of the "linux on the desktop" agenda. If it does work, however, that could mean that more OEM would probably follow, and that could change the market significantly. In any case, I am more concerned the negative outcome, and I am keeping my finger crossed.
I totally agree. However my point was another. RedHat is trying something which may potentially be good, "educationally" speaking, something that could really be a great educational instrument, something that cannot be said for Windws (that is everything but a good educational tool). I am all over opening to any platform, but I feel that the RedHat should be given a sort of more visibility, for at least the attempt of trying something new. Instead everything smells as a profit opportunity.
I'd like to see what RedHat thinks about this. They invest so much in the new interface, and overall OS, with the hope to create something new, and more appropriate for kids, with very innovative features nowhere to be found in conventional PCs (mesh networking, real collaborative activities). Now the OLPC leadership is basically saying: "Sugar is nice, but let's put the old Windows as an alternative, regardless its feasibility in the use in a school environment, after all nobody was ever fired when buying MS products". To me that seems a slap in the faces to RedHat, and ultimately to the kids. This was supposed to be an educational project. As time goes by, it looks more as a business effort to sell dumb computers in developing countries. Nobody talks about content, how to use these things in schools.
What does Firefox have to do with it? I hope you are not saying that IE AND Firefox are equally responsible for the security problems under Windows...
Let's make one thing really clear. Each and every OLPC XO machine is going to be owned by a kid. The government is paying for it, but it has no ownership. In the MS new offering, the government pays for the hardware and the computers. Given that they actually have to buy PCs that may cost significantly more than the XO, they have no requirement to actually give ownership away. In other words they own the computer. So this is the scenario: kids borrow PCs from the government, and they are most likely required to give it back at some point. I assume this from the fact that the license agreement MS is offering, is not with the actual kid but with the government. So the idea is that once the kids graduate or moves on in life, will buy a PCs with a regular license.
One other interesting consideration: The hardware cost may vary a lot. To save a bit, the government may go for desktops instead of laptops. Unless something like the Intel Classmate is deployed, I see desktops prevailing. This means tha tthe computers will stay in the schools. Again, a very different approach than the OLPC.
I see this as a control vs freedom issue. I hope the involved governments are smart enough to judge the best option in the long run
Sure, let's be objective. According to your reasoning it's perfectly normal to give access to guns to a delusional psychopath, because after all it's his problem and we can easily defend ourself. The fact we have such individuals has nothing to do with the presence of guns. Well, that is where you are VERY wrong, in my honest opinion. To get a driver license, you need to pass an exam. Why not doing the same for guns (or get mental certification at least?) What's wrong about controlling who's carrying guns? In every civilized country you can have guns, and all owners agree that regulations are actually good for them, because they protect them and everybody else. Why are you insisting that you need them to defend yourself? Freedom for me is valid until it doesn't step on someone else freedom. In this specific case, I see freedom of getting such weapons with such ease to be a strong limitation in my freedom (to move, to study, to work). Why should I give up my right for your right to defend yourself from an unknown enemy?
Just to prove my point: http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/04/17/vtech.shooting/in dex.html
"The student who killed 32 people and himself Monday at Virginia Tech paid $571 for a 9 mm Glock 19 pistol just over a month ago, the owner of Roanoke Firearms told CNN Tuesday. John Markell said Cho Seung-Hui was very low-key when he purchased the gun and 50 rounds of ammunition with a credit card in an "unremarkable" purchase. Cho presented three forms of identification and state police conducted an instant background check that probably took about a minute, the store owner said."
In other countries, you have to prove that you have moral standards to own a gun. Go ahead, mod me down.
Your answer is very accurate, and it reflects the thoughts of many people. For this reason I won't say (as you did with my post), that you are an insane psychopath, who don't trust anybody. No, in fact you have all the rights to defend yourself, as it is in mine to protest against the uncontrolled use of weapons. My thoughts were simple really. Explain the families that lost dear members yesterday, that a green card holder got easy access to guns and ammunitions and he did what he did. Sure the gun industry is very regulated, NRA meetings are a family event. So it's the oil and tobacco industries. I am thinking practical here: For 100 people who responsibly own a gun, there are some who misuse it. Your take is that your rights shouldn't be limited by the behavior of those individuals. Mine is the opposite, it's not that I trust the government (I don't really) but I don't trust people that needs to be protected at all cost (even at the cost of other human lives). So I will fight with all my power, that is why I decided to become an American citizen. I fight all the sick regulations in place today (including the Patrot Act), just with different tool, that you have no right or authority to question.
First Linux is the kernel. Second: that is not the point. Great things are developed anywhere.
If you didn't notice...
This is why gun control is BADLY needed. Or better a new amendment to the constitution, to basically remove the second amendment. Since that won't happen, let's expect something like this happing all over again on the next (hopefully not very near) future.
Palm OS 5 is the de facto latest version of the Palm OS. OS 6 (aka Cobalt) is dead, actually it was never alive, since it never made it to any real device. PalmSource (now ACCESS) dropped the development of OS6 as soon as they started working on ALP (PalmSource version of PalmLinux).
They bought the right to use the name PalmOS from ACCESS, as well as the source of the current Palm OS 5. As far as they are concerned, they can use Palm OS 5 all they want.
Does it mean that we are going to have a new Linux distribution, based on Shuttleworth's Ubuntu, maybe?
Yes, but that is not the point. You expect the percentages of PowerPC-based Macs to fall, but percentage of new Intel-based should increase of at least the same amount, which does not seem to be the case, according to the article.
"Apple fell to the bottom of the list with only a 2.7."
Don't tell that to Apple's famous, eco-conscious, board member.
No, didn't need to. Online forums are all I need. Google is my friend. My experience is limited to that.
Interesting post, it shows quite well the difference between the attitude of two different communities. In the Windows community, if you can't get something to work you are stupid. In the LInux community, you'll get plenty of suggestions and help, and most of the time you will get a solution of your problem. In other words, it's a "I am smart, you are stupid" vs "Have you tried this?" that honestly doesn't make me wish to use ant MS product (not that I would wish per se anyway...).
What the poster forgot to mention is that Mandriva is one of the possible option available for the Classmate, the other being Windows XP. I wonder given the choice how many kids would opt for Mandriva...
So true. Unfortunately lots of people are complaining based on their ignorance. They think everybody in a developing country is a starving dry country. Bad education, not there but in the developed countries. It'd be about time schools in developed countries should start making distinctions as you did. Otherwise we will keep hearing these folks denigrating a potentially great project based on their total ignorance (and proud of it).
You have really no clue of what are the modern education requirements. Oral lecturing is good, but per se it's definitively not enough. You need literature (in the broader sense), material teachers can use to make their case. An example: you are teaching about malaria. How are you going to describe the processes of infection to the kids without books, and any resource? Yes, because libraries and books in developing countries are very expensive to maintain, and to keep updated. That's where the OLPC comes in, as an easy access to a universal encyclopedia which is the Internet, always updated and ready to go. Lower level problems need to be handled, but education is among them. Think the AIDS epidemic in Africa, education is the key to lower the infection rates. OLPC is trying to fill partly the gap. Nobody forced the goverments of such countries to join the program. So unless you have a better plan to reduce those lower level needs, shut up.
OLPC offers a smaller packaging (it's a laptop!) and a superb screen, for 100 less. Are you sure your budget computer still stands the comparison?
The current common header for the license says: "This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or
modify it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or (at your option) any later version."
This means that the program you write is also covered by GPL3, as soon as it's out. I guess that is what retroactive means in this contest