Since Sugar never was the OS, and since the OS had to deal with power management, etc., the entirety of the thread is somewhat nonsensical.
-walter On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 2:20 PM, Thomas C Gilliard<[email protected]> wrote: > Sean: > > I thought the quote on the link > > http://www.zdnetasia.com/insight/hardware/0,39043471,62056166,00.htm > > said that: > > Sugar as OS was 'mistake' > SINGAPORE--Putting a crank-shaft on the XO laptop was a mistake, but the > biggest mistake was not having Sugar run as an application "on a vanilla > Linux laptop", said OLPC founder and chairman Nicholas Negroponte. > "Sugar should have been an application [residing] on a normal operating > system," he told ZDNet Asia in an interview. "But what we did…was we had > Sugar do the power management, we had Sugar do the wireless management--it > became sort of an omelet. The Bios talked directly with Sugar, so Sugar > became a bit of a mess." > Negroponte added: "It should have been much cleaner, like the way they offer > [it] on a stick now." > The availability of the Sugar interface via a USB could possibly herald a > "naked" XO laptop in future, said Negroponte, currently on leave from the > Massachusetts Institute of Technology. > > NOT that sugar was a mistake.... > > Tom Gilliard > > > _______________________________________________ > Marketing mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/marketing > > -- Walter Bender Sugar Labs http://www.sugarlabs.org _______________________________________________ Marketing mailing list [email protected] http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/marketing
