>> Look at these older tests of sugar on the RPi: >> http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Testing/Reports/ARM_RPi >> >> This part of the Advanced topics wiki page on the sugarlabs wiki: >> http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Sugar_Creation_Kit/sck/Advanced_Topics#ARM >> >> Tom Gilliard > > I could not find any evidence of user experience testing, or > performance evaluation, in the two links you gave. Did you give the > right ones?
The links I see above provide a lot of random links and information but it seems to be a confusing mish-mash of stuff. Useful for someone who is extremely technical but not to a school which wants an off the shelf experience that just works. > I agree with Peter, I don't think it will perform well, but I don't > know in what way it won't perform well, so I can't guess where effort > would have to be spent to fix it. Somethings are HW or closed source drivers so I don't believe it would be possible to get a reasonable, reproducible QAed experience that would be of decent performance on a reproducible platform. If we want to look at a platform where we can produce a consistent nice platform I would suggest the Beagle Bone black where we can produce and image to fix on the onboard eMMC or something like the bottom end Cubox-i where each could cost less than $50 and be a consistent controllable experience. > (especially in comparison to an XO-1) Well it would be likely similar performance to an XO-1.... which is TERRIBLE! Peter _______________________________________________ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep