As Steve says, for the laptop crew (of which I'm definitely one) Sugar isn't too important. I do think that's a fun OS and like having it as a boot option, but it needlessly complicates my life when I have work to do or writing that needs to be sent to people working in Win/Mac/*nix.
The XO's strength is enabling people to do more than they could have before, and one of those things is cooperative, fun learning. It's been said before, but it needs to be said often: the XO has already changed the world by goading the industry into noticing a whole new market. The XO will see the widest use and create the most change if people can use it however they need to, and that makes me think that enabling as many boot options as possible is a good idea. If Windows is part of the mix, there's no harm done. When (not if...) it doesn't really do the job, people can try other things. What's a bit worrisome to me -- at least on the level of sound and fury -- is that Windows is rapidly becoming the whole mix instead of just one choice among many. I *really* hope the XO doesn't let anyone, government or otherwise, go down that dead end. As for Windows being requested by governments, the decision makers in many governments strike me as the type to have their secretaries type up their emails. I'd bet they wouldn't know Windows from walls until the Microsoft rep talked to them, and probably pointed out the personal yacht visible through the Windows. I think that's nothing but more evidence that the XO model of distribution is as flawed as its technical execution is brilliant. _______________________________________________ Olpc-open mailing list [email protected] http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/olpc-open
