On 2 November 2011 09:50, Sridhar Dhanapalan <[email protected]> wrote: > On 2 November 2011 09:16, James Cameron <[email protected]> wrote: >> I'm not aware of any comprehensive performance assessments. >> >> Have you got an XO-1.75 yet? >> >> Performance is a design goal of OLPC, but it isn't first in the list. >> The full list is: >> >> 1. Safe -- no children should be harmed >> >> 2. Stylish and Usable -- something children want to own >> >> 3. Lowest Power -- low power means longer run-time >> >> 4. Lowest Cost -- a lower cost means more children can have one >> >> 5. Robust and Maintainable -- children drop things >> >> 6. Performance (speed) >> >> If we find we are sacrificing, say, "Lowest Power" for "Performance" >> reasons, we would be obliged to think again. > > It is good that this is being considered in perspective, and I agree > with this prioritisation. Most other devices do not place as much > emphasis on all of these points, so I acknowledge that they may be > faster as a result. > > What I am trying to do is get a general idea of the capabilities of > the XO-1.75, relative to something that is already available and > known. This is more for communications purposes than > engineering/technical ones.
Oh, and yes we do have some XO-1.75s :) Sridhar _______________________________________________ Devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
