RE: Microsoft
Although Microsoft charges $3 for the software Michail was under the impression they charge $2 on top for their fancy sticker. Then add Richards estimate for the SD card: $7 Total per XO: $12 + shipping Josh -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jim Gettys Sent: 19 May 2008 15:50 To: Walter Bender Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; OLPC Devel Subject: Re: Microsoft On Mon, 2008-05-19 at 07:55 -0400, Walter Bender wrote: The price often quoted has been $7 for the SD card. Not sure where that number comes from. I recall that a $19 high-speed card was used in the original testing; at the time it was asserted that a standard-speed card was necessary. Prices keep falling for flash Seems plausible, given the difference of when; or people could be low-balling the price by looking at close-out prices on obsolete cards. If you don't have a high speed SD card, then the performance will suffer significantly; when running a high speed card, the (optimum) SD bandwidth performance approaches that of the internal NAND, but still with higher latency, and the details of file system layout make a huge difference on write performance. Some conventional file systems will crawl during write due to bad interactions with file system block sizes and the block size of the flash. - Jim I don't know that this is still the case. -walter On Mon, May 19, 2008 at 4:20 AM, John Gilmore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So... all the new 200,000 XOs that will come to Peru will come with this new V2 Bios. and the first 45,000 will be updated? Or we have to deal with a mixed enviroment? (no problem... just asking...) Since the V2 firmware is only recently demo-able, not yet product quality, it's too early to tell when it will roll into the Quanta production line. Here's what I expect (which may be total fantasy). When each child's XO gets a new software update (probably the scheduled August update, suitably augmented by the in-country team), then along with the OS and Activities, they'll also get the latest OpenFirmware update. That firmware will include the capability to boot Windows, and have various other improvements. The capability to boot Windows does not include a copy of Windows itself. To find out about how and when that will be available, you'd have to talk to Microsoft. I hear each copy is $3 in some countries, and requires an SD card for more storage, that'll cost a few dollars also. So if Peru wanted it on every laptop, figure it'll cost US$1.4 million or so (200K x ($3 + $4)). Most of that cost is unavoidable hardware cost, unless MS slims down Windows to not need 1GB. It'd cost US$800K even if MS let everyone in the country pirate the OS. Doing so might well suit their purposes even better than charging $3 per copy, since they wouldn't be expected to provide any support for a stolen product, yet they would still be weaning kids away from Linux. John Gilmore (not an OLPC employee!) ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel -- Jim Gettys [EMAIL PROTECTED] One Laptop Per Child ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Microsoft
We already have the technology in place to automatically update the firmware as part of updating the laptop. We certainly don't what the support headaches of having to support multiple versions. - Jim On Thu, 2008-05-15 at 18:34 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Nick Negroponte has said : Open Firmware V2, the free and open source BIOS, is now capable of running Linux, Microsoft Windows XP and other operating systems, and was developed by Firmworks with support from OLPC. This will enable dual boot of OLPC XO laptops with Microsoft Windows XP in addition to the existing Fedora-based system and will become the standard BIOS/bootloader for all XO systems when completed. With this free BIOS, the XO-1 continues to be the most open laptop hardware currently available. This is totally different that we have been informed, the V2 version of the BIOS is able to run a double boot. Huge difference!!! Good or bad? Everyone has its own answer. Now the XOs are a more general tool, a broader range of happenings we will see. So... all the new 200,000 XOs that will come to Peru will come with this new V2 Bios. and the first 45,000 will be updated? Or we have to deal with a mixed enviroment? (no problem... just asking...) Best regards, Javier Rodriguez Lima, Peru ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel -- Jim Gettys [EMAIL PROTECTED] One Laptop Per Child ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Microsoft
So... all the new 200,000 XOs that will come to Peru will come with this new V2 Bios. and the first 45,000 will be updated? Or we have to deal with a mixed enviroment? (no problem... just asking...) Since the V2 firmware is only recently demo-able, not yet product quality, it's too early to tell when it will roll into the Quanta production line. Here's what I expect (which may be total fantasy). When each child's XO gets a new software update (probably the scheduled August update, suitably augmented by the in-country team), then along with the OS and Activities, they'll also get the latest OpenFirmware update. That firmware will include the capability to boot Windows, and have various other improvements. The capability to boot Windows does not include a copy of Windows itself. To find out about how and when that will be available, you'd have to talk to Microsoft. I hear each copy is $3 in some countries, and requires an SD card for more storage, that'll cost a few dollars also. So if Peru wanted it on every laptop, figure it'll cost US$1.4 million or so (200K x ($3 + $4)). Most of that cost is unavoidable hardware cost, unless MS slims down Windows to not need 1GB. It'd cost US$800K even if MS let everyone in the country pirate the OS. Doing so might well suit their purposes even better than charging $3 per copy, since they wouldn't be expected to provide any support for a stolen product, yet they would still be weaning kids away from Linux. John Gilmore (not an OLPC employee!) ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Microsoft
The price often quoted has been $7 for the SD card. Not sure where that number comes from. I recall that a $19 high-speed card was used in the original testing; at the time it was asserted that a standard-speed card was necessary. I don't know that this is still the case. -walter On Mon, May 19, 2008 at 4:20 AM, John Gilmore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So... all the new 200,000 XOs that will come to Peru will come with this new V2 Bios. and the first 45,000 will be updated? Or we have to deal with a mixed enviroment? (no problem... just asking...) Since the V2 firmware is only recently demo-able, not yet product quality, it's too early to tell when it will roll into the Quanta production line. Here's what I expect (which may be total fantasy). When each child's XO gets a new software update (probably the scheduled August update, suitably augmented by the in-country team), then along with the OS and Activities, they'll also get the latest OpenFirmware update. That firmware will include the capability to boot Windows, and have various other improvements. The capability to boot Windows does not include a copy of Windows itself. To find out about how and when that will be available, you'd have to talk to Microsoft. I hear each copy is $3 in some countries, and requires an SD card for more storage, that'll cost a few dollars also. So if Peru wanted it on every laptop, figure it'll cost US$1.4 million or so (200K x ($3 + $4)). Most of that cost is unavoidable hardware cost, unless MS slims down Windows to not need 1GB. It'd cost US$800K even if MS let everyone in the country pirate the OS. Doing so might well suit their purposes even better than charging $3 per copy, since they wouldn't be expected to provide any support for a stolen product, yet they would still be weaning kids away from Linux. John Gilmore (not an OLPC employee!) ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Microsoft
Walter Bender wrote: The price often quoted has been $7 for the SD card. Not sure where that number comes from. I recall that a $19 high-speed card was used in the original testing; at the time it was asserted that a standard-speed card was necessary. I don't know that this is still the case. Right now its a high speed class 6 card which retails for about $20. Figure 100% markup on retail, $10. Figure in Quanta's buying power and the cheap version of that card and I'd say $7 isn't too far off. At the rate SDHC cards are dropping though it could even be less. OTOH, A new round of consumer HD video recorders are starting to come out that use Class 6 SDHC media as the recording medium. So short term this might cause the price to spike before volumes catch up. -- Richard Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] One Laptop Per Child ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Microsoft
On Mon, 2008-05-19 at 07:55 -0400, Walter Bender wrote: The price often quoted has been $7 for the SD card. Not sure where that number comes from. I recall that a $19 high-speed card was used in the original testing; at the time it was asserted that a standard-speed card was necessary. Prices keep falling for flash Seems plausible, given the difference of when; or people could be low-balling the price by looking at close-out prices on obsolete cards. If you don't have a high speed SD card, then the performance will suffer significantly; when running a high speed card, the (optimum) SD bandwidth performance approaches that of the internal NAND, but still with higher latency, and the details of file system layout make a huge difference on write performance. Some conventional file systems will crawl during write due to bad interactions with file system block sizes and the block size of the flash. - Jim I don't know that this is still the case. -walter On Mon, May 19, 2008 at 4:20 AM, John Gilmore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So... all the new 200,000 XOs that will come to Peru will come with this new V2 Bios. and the first 45,000 will be updated? Or we have to deal with a mixed enviroment? (no problem... just asking...) Since the V2 firmware is only recently demo-able, not yet product quality, it's too early to tell when it will roll into the Quanta production line. Here's what I expect (which may be total fantasy). When each child's XO gets a new software update (probably the scheduled August update, suitably augmented by the in-country team), then along with the OS and Activities, they'll also get the latest OpenFirmware update. That firmware will include the capability to boot Windows, and have various other improvements. The capability to boot Windows does not include a copy of Windows itself. To find out about how and when that will be available, you'd have to talk to Microsoft. I hear each copy is $3 in some countries, and requires an SD card for more storage, that'll cost a few dollars also. So if Peru wanted it on every laptop, figure it'll cost US$1.4 million or so (200K x ($3 + $4)). Most of that cost is unavoidable hardware cost, unless MS slims down Windows to not need 1GB. It'd cost US$800K even if MS let everyone in the country pirate the OS. Doing so might well suit their purposes even better than charging $3 per copy, since they wouldn't be expected to provide any support for a stolen product, yet they would still be weaning kids away from Linux. John Gilmore (not an OLPC employee!) ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel -- Jim Gettys [EMAIL PROTECTED] One Laptop Per Child ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Microsoft / new firmware
[NN] then claimed no OLPC resources would be devoted to the project. I'm left wondering how many of those resources went into this firmware mod. The firmware mod required weeks of a skilled engineer's time. This engineer put in the time, partly or fully paid by OLPC, because the alternative would have been that countries whose machines run Windows would be *unable* to run OLPC's Linux release, even to try it out. I believe that having freely licensed boot firmware that not only supports Linux and great power management, but also supports running Windows, will help open up the PC BIOS market to free software. Motherboard vendors need boot firmware that will boot and run many operating systems, since their customers want to run many operating systems. Free BIOS software that's merely free is only partway there; it also has to solve the customer or user's problem. Just as they reject lower quality proprietary products, the average customer will reject inferior free products, until the early adopter community improves them. Adding a major OS that Open Firmware can now boot is such an improvement. The new firmware mostly implements a set of ancient DOS-era INT calls: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BIOS_interrupt_call The Windows XP port for the OLPC needs a small number of these to work. Those particular needed calls have been implemented. Future improvements, by anyone, can implement other calls needed by different OS's that others may want to boot; support other motherboards besides OLPC's; etc. John ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Microsoft
On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 8:57 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Kurt H Maier wrote: How is this relevant? When Microsoft sits down and throws its vast resources at making Windows just work on the XO-1, it's going to blow our current FOSS distributions out of the water. *That's* what worries me. We don't have suspend and resume working without breaking SD cards. We're retooling Sugar's datastore. OLPC3 is being born. A couple million dollars from Microsoft could turn out a Windows install that *works*, and then no country on the planet would bother even looking at a feature-incomplete FOSS alternative I think the way to protect Sugar and to take a step further in the whole project is giving one step back: Sugar must be able to run on any Linux distro. I know that it is hard... but IF we are able to take this step back then Sugar (and many other things) will be in better competitive position. Trying to out-compete an organization which has a history of illegal anti-competitive behavior is unwise at best. Cheers. -- Steve Holton [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Microsoft
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Nick Negroponte has said : Open Firmware V2, the free and open source BIOS, is now capable of running Linux, Microsoft Windows XP and other operating systems, and was developed by Firmworks with support from OLPC. This will enable dual boot of OLPC XO laptops with Microsoft Windows XP in addition to the existing Fedora-based system and will become the standard BIOS/bootloader for all XO systems when completed. With this free BIOS, the XO-1 continues to be the most open laptop hardware currently available. This is totally different that we have been informed, the V2 version of the BIOS is able to run a double boot. Huge difference!!! Good or bad? Everyone has its own answer. Now the XOs are a more general tool, a broader range of happenings we will see. So... all the new 200,000 XOs that will come to Peru will come with this new V2 Bios. and the first 45,000 will be updated? Or we have to deal with a mixed enviroment? (no problem... just asking...) Best regards, Javier Rodriguez Lima, Peru ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel Instead of saying what solution is good or bad, how about just asking these questions? Does this vendor have a history of integrating with other platforms and solutions or do they force vendor lock in like the mafia or a drug dealer? Does this vendor end of life products that require upgrades to continue to receive security and bug fixes? (please don't debate whether this is reasonable, that is not the issue) Does this vendor have a history of using open standards and ensuring that their own protocols or extensions are open and well documented? Does this vendor show through its action that it respects its user base or abuses them? So basically, can we expect Microsoft to open source their software allowing for the community to continue to enhance and fix it after Microsoft sunsets it? Can we expect Microsoft to force single Windows only boots whether by outright elimination of other choices or providing a hostile environment for those other choices? Will software run on both or just Windows or require Windows? Will we require any outside resources (like servers or other hosts) that are MS Software only? For that matter, will we be restricted to x86 hardware only? What does the history of Microsoft show? Character counts. ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Microsoft
Seth Woodworth writes: So as a fair practice I think it's clear that no special actions can ethically be made to prevent Windows or any other OS from running on the machine. So a Windows port for the XO isn't something that could have been preventative. Wrong. It's called tit-for-tat, otherwise known as fair-is-fair. It's perfectly ethical to defend oneself against an adversary who has no qualms about anything. Just look at the deal. Dual-boot costs $7 extra. Governments will not pay the extra $7 to allow dual-boot. I do believe in fairness. The XO should run Windows about as well as the Xbox 360 runs Linux. Note that the Xbox 360 has numerous hardware features which were purposely designed to impede Linux. Fairness mandates that we have hardware to lock out Windows. Hardware is costly of course. A slightly weaker solution would be to have the firmware use SMM/SMI tricks to regularly get a bit of CPU time to scan for Windows in memory. If the firmware finds that Windows is running, then it silently corrupts RAM. The ideal would be to make Windows survive about an hour before crashing. (keep the feature secret of course, to make debugging painful) ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Microsoft
Wrong. It's called tit-for-tat, otherwise known as fair-is-fair. It's perfectly ethical to defend oneself against an adversary who has no qualms about anything. An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind. - Ghandi ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Microsoft
Nicholas Negroponte wrote: OLPC is substantially increasing its engineering resources and all software development continues entirely on GNU/Linux. We will continue to work to make Sugar on Linux the best possible platform for education and to invest in our expanding Linux deployments in Peru, Uruguay, Mexico and elsewhere. No OLPC resources are going to porting Sugar to Microsoft Windows, although as a free software project, we encourage others to do so. The Sugar user interface is already available for Fedora, Debian and Ubuntu Linux distributions, greatly broadening Sugar's reach to the millions of existing Linux systems. We continue to solicit help from the free software community in these efforts. Additionally, the Fedora, Debian and Ubuntu software environments run on the XO-1, adding support for tens of thousands of free software applications. Nicholas, we are relieved to hear that this. As you may know, the core Sugar team and the FOSS community is broadening Sugar's base through the Sugarlabs initiative. Would you be willing to make a statement in support of our efforts towards what seems to be our common goal? -- \___/ _| X | Bernie Innocenti - http://www.codewiz.org/ \|_O_| It's an education project, not a laptop project! ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Firmware change (Re: Microsoft)
On 5/16/08, Nicholas Negroponte [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Open Firmware V2, the free and open source BIOS, is now capable of running Linux, Microsoft Windows XP and other operating systems, and was developed by Firmworks with support from OLPC. This will enable dual boot of OLPC XO laptops with Microsoft Windows XP in addition to the existing Fedora-based system and will become the standard BIOS/bootloader for all XO systems when completed. With this free BIOS, the XO-1 continues to be the most open laptop hardware currently available. I am not firmware-savvy but: what prevent windows from booting with V1 Firmware and how do they resolved it? (that is Ivan mentioned in his blog article?) What I would like to understand is security risk the change will give users of our linux stack. Don't we really need to be worry about that? /Korakurider ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Firmware change (Re: Microsoft)
On May 15, 2008, at 10:39 PM, Korakurider wrote: On 5/16/08, Nicholas Negroponte [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Open Firmware V2, the free and open source BIOS, is now capable of running Linux, Microsoft Windows XP and other operating systems, and was developed by Firmworks with support from OLPC. This will enable dual boot of OLPC XO laptops with Microsoft Windows XP in addition to the existing Fedora-based system and will become the standard BIOS/bootloader for all XO systems when completed. With this free BIOS, the XO-1 continues to be the most open laptop hardware currently available. I am not firmware-savvy but: what prevent windows from booting with V1 Firmware and how do they resolved it? (that is Ivan mentioned in his blog article?) Unlike Linux, Windows requires a BIOS to perform certain operations for it (ACPI, for example). OFW v1 didn't support those operations. What I would like to understand is security risk the change will give users of our linux stack. Don't we really need to be worry about that? We want to run on top of OFW v2 (or v1) because it supports our security model, whereas a plain BIOS doesn't. wad ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Microsoft? (was Re: OLPC seeks a CEO -- who was your favorite CEO elsewhere?)
I'm waiting to hear about this one also. On the one hand the OLPC can't be shipped with the Flash plug-in but the whole project is going to go to Microsoft? Talk about moving between extremes. I'm not sure why a more balanced approach couldn't work but then again, I'm more of a supporter (bought unit through the G1G1 program) and advocate. I'm not a coder, etc. but have been really encouraged by the dramatic grassroots support for the unit to take up the need for support, etc. I have to say that I'm a little surprised that the actual shipping OS, Sugar interface, activities etc. are still very much a work in progress (some bugs, keys not enabled, no reveal code key, networking problems, etc.), but that's not necessarily bad as long as there is healthy support for refinement. It's this titanic shift that is catching me off-guard. Let's face it, the OLPC has been both enhanced by, and perhaps held back by, a hard line support of just OS and a strict constructivist educational approach. Then again, fervent adherence to a philosophy and cause has pushed the world to see what could be possible through this little green machine. Todd On Tue, Mar 11, 2008 at 2:26 PM, victor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: More worrying is this bit from the article in the link OLPC will hand more of the development and support of its XO laptop and its core software to technology companies, (...), and Microsoft (MSFT), which is just now putting the finishing touches on a version of Windows for the XO machine. I didn't know Microsoft and Windows were going to be there. So why all the effort if in the end a closed OS is going to be used? Is this true? Victor - Original Message - From: John Gilmore [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2008 8:47 PM Subject: OLPC seeks a CEO -- who was your favorite CEO elsewhere? http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/mar2008/tc2008035_429837.htm OLPC is looking for a CEO. Nicholas is more of an idea man, and he plans to continue as Chairman and cheerleader. But he appears to have realized that with its current management, the organization can't outgrow its early chaos. (For this I give him every credit; most founders who aren't suited to manage a larger, more structured organization resist installing a steady hand at the wheel.) There are probably a few people on the devel list who are actually qualified to be CEO of a nonprofit tech company like OLPC. I encourage them to apply (it's not clear how, which shows you how far things have degenerated). But I'm more interested in asking the software developers on the list: == Who's the best manager or CEO you ever worked for? Suggest to that person that they consider the job. OLPC has plenty of resources, and also plenty of challenges. We on the outside have only seen a fraction of them (like schedules sliding out of control; botched distribution; support handled only by the skin of the teeth; key people dragged around to fill big holes, leaving other big holes behind them; diminished expectations in both sales and technical achievement). OLPC has already changed the world in a small way, by teaching us that there's a vibrant world market for low cost, high function portable computers, and reminding us how much leverage there is in third world educational improvement. OLPC still has a chance to change the world in a big way, by satisfying that market, rather than leaving it to commercial companies to half-assedly pick up the pieces. Steering OLPC back on to the rails before it crashes and burns will be a job your favorite CEO or manager will never forget. Give 'em a call... John ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Microsoft? (was Re: OLPC seeks a CEO -- who was your favorite CEO elsewhere?)
Is there *any* suggestion that the entire Microsoft on OLPC story is anything other than: 1. A small group of experimenters at Microsoft playing around in the slack time. 2. FUD stories to downplay OLPC. The OLPC corporate needs to respond with a one liner that we have no plans to now or in the future. The story could change, but the current stance does need to be known. FUD works kind of like nuisance law-suits: failure to say anything is an automatic loss. Nothing mean, cruel, or chilling. Just OLPC does not help and support this effort. MS is on their own. Charles 2008/3/11 Todd Cranston-Cuebas [EMAIL PROTECTED]: I'm waiting to hear about this one also. On the one hand the OLPC can't be shipped with the Flash plug-in but the whole project is going to go to Microsoft? Talk about moving between extremes. I'm not sure why a more balanced approach couldn't work but then again, I'm more of a supporter (bought unit through the G1G1 program) and advocate. I'm not a coder, etc. but have been really encouraged by the dramatic grassroots support for the unit to take up the need for support, etc. I have to say that I'm a little surprised that the actual shipping OS, Sugar interface, activities etc. are still very much a work in progress (some bugs, keys not enabled, no reveal code key, networking problems, etc.), but that's not necessarily bad as long as there is healthy support for refinement. It's this titanic shift that is catching me off-guard. Let's face it, the OLPC has been both enhanced by, and perhaps held back by, a hard line support of just OS and a strict constructivist educational approach. Then again, fervent adherence to a philosophy and cause has pushed the world to see what could be possible through this little green machine. Todd On Tue, Mar 11, 2008 at 2:26 PM, victor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: More worrying is this bit from the article in the link OLPC will hand more of the development and support of its XO laptop and its core software to technology companies, (...), and Microsoft (MSFT), which is just now putting the finishing touches on a version of Windows for the XO machine. I didn't know Microsoft and Windows were going to be there. So why all the effort if in the end a closed OS is going to be used? Is this true? Victor - Original Message - From: John Gilmore [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2008 8:47 PM Subject: OLPC seeks a CEO -- who was your favorite CEO elsewhere? http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/mar2008/tc2008035_429837.htm OLPC is looking for a CEO. Nicholas is more of an idea man, and he plans to continue as Chairman and cheerleader. But he appears to have realized that with its current management, the organization can't outgrow its early chaos. (For this I give him every credit; most founders who aren't suited to manage a larger, more structured organization resist installing a steady hand at the wheel.) There are probably a few people on the devel list who are actually qualified to be CEO of a nonprofit tech company like OLPC. I encourage them to apply (it's not clear how, which shows you how far things have degenerated). But I'm more interested in asking the software developers on the list: == Who's the best manager or CEO you ever worked for? Suggest to that person that they consider the job. OLPC has plenty of resources, and also plenty of challenges. We on the outside have only seen a fraction of them (like schedules sliding out of control; botched distribution; support handled only by the skin of the teeth; key people dragged around to fill big holes, leaving other big holes behind them; diminished expectations in both sales and technical achievement). OLPC has already changed the world in a small way, by teaching us that there's a vibrant world market for low cost, high function portable computers, and reminding us how much leverage there is in third world educational improvement. OLPC still has a chance to change the world in a big way, by satisfying that market, rather than leaving it to commercial companies to half-assedly pick up the pieces. Steering OLPC back on to the rails before it crashes and burns will be a job your favorite CEO or manager will never forget. Give 'em a call... John ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org
Re: Microsoft? (was Re: OLPC seeks a CEO -- who was your favorite CEO elsewhere?)
On Tue, Mar 11, 2008 at 3:59 PM, Charles Merriam [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Is there *any* suggestion that the entire Microsoft on OLPC story is anything other than: 1. A small group of experimenters at Microsoft playing around in the slack time. 2. FUD stories to downplay OLPC. You forgot 3. Name dropping by lazy journalists to provide an appearance of understanding and context. ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Microsoft? (was Re: OLPC seeks a CEO -- who was your favorite CEO elsewhere?)
Um, you guys do know how to use the search function on the Wiki, don't you? Please be civil. Yeah, Nicholas said pretty much the first half of that months ago. The issue is the conflicting Negroponte quotes: Windows on XO has not only been happening with our consent, but (also our) collaboration. Some of the first engineering models from any given build go to them, Negroponte said. http://www.news.com/Negroponte-Windows-key-to-OLPC-philosophy/2100-1016_3-6215837.html Negroponte says that a Windows operating system is in the process of being fine-tuned on the XO as we speak. Microsoft and OLPC are in discussion on how to release it, as well as how to announce, he said. Negroponte added that the Windows operating system should be available on the XO in less than 60 days. http://www.olpcnews.com/software/windows/xp_on_the_xo_in_60_days.html So, who knows? Charles ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Microsoft? (was Re: OLPC seeks a CEO -- who was your favorite CEO elsewhere?)
On Mar 11, 2008, at 10:26 PM, victor wrote: I didn't know Microsoft and Windows were going to be there. So why all the effort if in the end a closed OS is going to be used? There is no change in strategy. For background (and comment furor) on the XP situation, see: http://radian.org/notebook/paradox-of-choice This thread is already stretching propriety by taking place on the devel list, but I feel uncomfortable asking for it be moved to olpc- open since the kind of people who might have good responses to John's question are much more likely to be on this list than that one. That said, let's please keep Microsoft out of it and have replies be maximally focused. -- Ivan Krstić [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://radian.org ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
