Re: [IAEP] Sugar Labs Vision Discussion in 6 hours

2016-06-15 Thread Dave Crossland 
Hi

On 15 June 2016 at 12:51, Sebastian Silva  wrote:

>
>
> On 15/06/16 08:40, Dave Crossland wrote:
> > However, http://www.one-education.org has just announced their new
> > unit, which is US$260 including tax (but plus shipping from Australia)
> >
> > Perhaps that should be the reference unit?
>


Just saw this closer and it looks like a really nice laptop. It's a
> shame that there is no Sugar image tailored for it.


When I spoke to Rangan a couple months ago, he said that there is no demand
from the schools that One Education serves for such an image.


> Perhaps Sugar Labs should try to get a donation for distributing to
> developers.


Sadly https://github.com/oneeducation is not updated much, as they are
working in private repos; he wasn't sure if they will become public repos
after their launch ramps up.


> It looks like a classmate-class laptop
>

What do you see the differences as between a classmate and a chromebook?


> we really need a good OS proposal for those.


Can you point to any proposals that are similar to what you have in mind
(but perhaps not 'good,' as you define it...)?

(Operating System or Open Source? :)

I'd be happy deploying 10 of them in a community center near
> Puerto Maldonado and sharing results.
>

I guess you are touch with Rangan already, but perhaps we could schedule a
call with the 3 of us if you are not :)

On 15 June 2016 at 10:50, Sean DALY  wrote:

> On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 3:40 PM, Dave Crossland  wrote:
>
>> However, http://www.one-education.org has just announced their new unit,
>> which is US$260 including tax (but plus shipping from Australia)
>>
>> Perhaps that should be the reference unit?
>>
>
> Interesting but
> - Running Windows 10?
>

MS is supporting them.


> - Assembled in AU or elsewhere?
>

Taiwan

On 15 June 2016 at 03:17, Tony Anderson  wrote:

>
> I believe the discussion overlooks a fundamental point. The XOs (and
> particularly the XO-1s) are primarily deployed in
> the developing world (Latin America and Africa). The schools have these
> laptops as donations or as purchases by their
> government. Schools, in general, do not have funds to replace computers.
> They will just do without.
>

A good point :)


> We must continue to provide an XO solution (including XO-1 which
> represents a plurality of the machines shipped). It really doesn't matter
> in choosing a computer supports the latest gtk or webkit2 when the
> alternative is no computer at all.
>

I think this is a reasonable position.

However, the XO-1s that shipped is not a good metrics; we need to know
which XO-1s are still in active use today, and we need to know they have
upgraded to our latest release.

If there are users who are active but have not upgraded, how can we reach
them and assist them upgrading?


> If we abandon support for the XO, we present the user with static software
> which will continue to work as long as the hardware survives. However, it
> will not be able to take advantage of any new capability that Sugar Labs
> develops.
>

Right. My question is, should Sugar Labs develop new capabilities for
XO-1s? You seem to say yes. However, who is interested in doing that?

It seems GSOC/GCI students are, but really they aren't - they are
interested in doing anything we ask them to do, because they are interested
in Google's stipend and status, or they wouldn't look at open slots, and
then in the Sugar Labs mission, which is why they apply for our slots.

Eli and I are too; we love our XO-1s and would like to be able to develop
meaningful software for them.


> I think we should recognize our obligation to support users of the XO as
> long as they are in use.
>

What do you propose to do in 2020 when support for the x86 chipset is
dropped?


> This will probably mean that we need to split ASLO to identify Sugar
> activities that won't work on the XO (and try to make as many new
> capabilities available for the XO even if that means two versions).
>

I agree, but I heard there is version detection in the toolkit, so we
should use that to avoid two versions of activities.


> Also, while I agree that supporting Chromebooks or other computers
> generally available in the marketplace is a valuable direction, we need to
> be cautious. Currently, computer manufacturers have a two-year product
> life from announcement to end of production. They assume that
> computers will be replaced after five years. Their interest is in
> shortening these cycles. The smartphone folks seem to want this cycle to be
> one
> year and to take back the previous year's computer to get it off the
> market.
>
> In this context, I think adopting a reference design or assuming that
> older computers can be recycled will just repeat the issues with the XO.
>

I think we should embrace the short cycles, not fight them, and have a
fresh "new" reference design for the 1st release of each calendar year in
addition

[IAEP] Fwd: [UKids] Unleash Kids / KOC trip to rescue laptops - April

2016-06-15 Thread Dave Crossland 
XD

-- Forwarded message --
From: Alex Perez 
Date: 15 June 2016 at 12:59
Subject: Re: [UKids] Unleash Kids / KOC trip to rescue laptops - April
To: Samuel Greenfeld 
Cc: Jerry Vonau , nathanr...@charter.net, Unleash Kids! <
unleashk...@googlegroups.com>


Folks,

I would be happy to secure these. I submitted an offer, we’ll see if they
accept.

On Jun 15, 2016, at 9:46 AM, Samuel Greenfeld  wrote:

This set was discussed on the IAEP list with some people wanting to
purchase it for Sugar Labs to resell (unclear if that would ever happen).

Personally I think if multiple groups got together and asked the recycler
to donate them to one or more valid 501(c)3 charities as a tax write off
that might be another possibility.
On Jun 15, 2016 12:18 PM, "Jerry Vonau"  wrote:

> I'd be interested at that price, just my capital is tied up at the moment.
>
> Jerry
>
> On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 10:54 AM,  wrote:
>
>> Noticed lot of 150+  XO-1's sets up for auction (ebay) for about $20
>> each.  Includes 10 charging carts (Atlanta, GA).  Any group with funds want
>> to rescue and deploy ?
>>
>> -
>> From: "Dave Crossland"
>> To: "Avni Khatri"
>> Cc: "Unleash Kids"
>> Sent: Tue, 14 Jun 2016 18:50:30 -0400
>> Subject: Re: [UKids] Unleash Kids / KOC trip to rescue laptops - April
>>
>>
>> Did the refurb-fest happen already?
>>
>> --
>> Unsung Heroes of OLPC, interviewed live @ 
>> http://unleashkids.org !
>> ---
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "Unleash Kids" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
>> email to unleashkids+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
>> For more options, visit 
>> https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>
>> --
>> Unsung Heroes of OLPC, interviewed live @ http://unleashkids.org !
>> ---
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "Unleash Kids" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
>> email to unleashkids+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>
>
>
> --
> Unsung Heroes of OLPC, interviewed live @ http://unleashkids.org !
> ---
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Unleash Kids" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to unleashkids+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>

-- 
Unsung Heroes of OLPC, interviewed live @ http://unleashkids.org !
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Unleash Kids" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to unleashkids+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


-- 
Unsung Heroes of OLPC, interviewed live @ http://unleashkids.org !
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Unleash Kids" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to unleashkids+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.



-- 
Cheers
Dave


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep

Re: [IAEP] Sugar Labs Vision Discussion in 6 hours

2016-06-15 Thread Sean DALY 
On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 7:17 PM, Dave Crossland  wrote:

> Are they subscribed to this list?



Quite.
___
IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep

Re: [IAEP] Sugar Labs Vision Discussion in 6 hours

2016-06-15 Thread Dave Crossland 
On 15 June 2016 at 11:02, Caryl Bigenho  wrote:

> We're "on the road" for a few days so I'm missing all the "fun." I hope
> some of the key people like Adam, Tony, Sameer, and Lionel are being
> included. They all have great global perspectives and a realistic maturity
> that should be a welcome asset in these discussions.


Are they subscribed to this list?
___
IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep

Re: [IAEP] Sugar Labs Vision Discussion in 6 hours

2016-06-15 Thread Sebastian Silva 


On 15/06/16 08:40, Dave Crossland wrote:
> However, http://www.one-education.org has just announced their new
> unit, which is US$260 including tax (but plus shipping from Australia)
>
> Perhaps that should be the reference unit?
Just saw this closer and it looks like a really nice laptop. It's a
shame that there is no Sugar image tailored for it. Perhaps Sugar Labs
should try to get a donation for distributing to developers. It looks
like a classmate-class laptop - we really need a good OS proposal for those.

I'd be happy deploying 10 of them in a community center near Puerto
Maldonado and sharing results.

Regards,
Sebastian
___
IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep

Re: [IAEP] Sugar Labs Vision Discussion in 6 hours

2016-06-15 Thread Caryl Bigenho 

We're "on the road" for a few days so I'm missing all the "fun." I hope some of 
the key people like Adam, Tony, Sameer, and Lionel are being included. They all 
have great global perspectives and a realistic maturity that should be a 
welcome asset in these discussions.

Caryl
Sent from my iPhone

> On Jun 14, 2016, at 7:52 AM, Dave Crossland  wrote:
> 
> Hi
> 
> There will be a  Sugar Labs Vision Discussion in about 6 hours via
> Google Hangouts:
> 
> https://plus.google.com/u/0/events/c3qn7hksl71offj7jitkjb81aa4
> 
> -- 
> Cheers
> Dave
> ___
> IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
> IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org
> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
___
IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep

Re: [IAEP] Sugar Labs Vision Discussion in 6 hours

2016-06-15 Thread Sean DALY 
On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 3:40 PM, Dave Crossland  wrote:

> However, http://www.one-education.org has just announced their new unit,
> which is US$260 including tax (but plus shipping from Australia)
>
> Perhaps that should be the reference unit?
>

Interesting but
- Running Windows 10?
- Assembled in AU or elsewhere?

Sean
___
IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep

Re: [IAEP] Sugar Labs Vision Discussion in 6 hours

2016-06-15 Thread Dave Crossland 
On 14 June 2016 at 21:57, Dave Crossland  wrote:

> Should we support the XO-1?
>
> No:
>
> The Browse activity is fundementally broken: We can't use old browsers
> (webkit v1) on modern websites, and that hardware isn't powerful enough for
> new browsers and modern websites either; the latest v8 JavaScript JIT
> compiler doesn't work well with the exotic x86 chip on the XO-1.
>

I actually think this is not that big a deal; there's a lot of good stuff
on the web (obvious example, wikipedia) which is still fine.


> All the XOs require specially crafted Linux kernels, and OLPC doesn't have
> up to date versions so OLPC OS is stuck with Fedora 18. New versions of GTK
> are blocked on the kernel - it seems - and this turns away developers. Its
> not fine! ;)
>


As Fedora gets newer, it will work less well on the XO-1, assuming more
> resources than the XO-1 has, even if the kernel is updated. Would Puppy
> work better than Fedora going forwards, as it is something intended for
> ultra low power computers?
>

It seems Jerry Vonau worked on a Fedora 22 version in January -
https://github.com/jvonau/olpc-os-builder-1/commits/F22-host - and I just
spoke to him offline and he said he thinks Fedora 24 could be made to work
with a Fedora 18 kernel.

However, http://www.one-education.org has just announced their new unit,
which is US$260 including tax (but plus shipping from Australia)

Perhaps that should be the reference unit?
___
IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep

Re: [IAEP] IAEP Digest, Vol 99, Issue 60

2016-06-15 Thread Tony Anderson 

I had a chance to skim through the log of this meeting.

I believe the discussion overlooks a fundamental point. The XOs (and 
particularly the XO-1s) are primarily deployed in
the developing world (Latin America and Africa). The schools have these 
laptops as donations or as purchases by their
government. Schools, in general, do not have funds to replace computers. 
They will just do without.


We must continue to provide an XO solution (including XO-1 which 
represents a plurality of the machines shipped). It really doesn't
matter in choosing a computer supports the latest gtk or webkit2 when 
the alternative is no computer at all. If we abandon support
for the XO, we present the user with static software which will continue 
to work as long as the hardware survives. However, it will
not be able to take advantage of any new capability that Sugar Labs 
develops.


I think we should recognize our obligation to support users of the XO as 
long as they are in use. This will probably mean that we
need to split ASLO to identify Sugar activities that won't work on the 
XO (and try to make as many new capabilities available for the

XO even if that means two versions).

Also, while I agree that supporting Chromebooks or other computers 
generally available in the marketplace is a valuable direction, we need to
be cautious. Currently, computer manufacturers have a two-year product 
life from announcement to end of production. They assume that
computers will be replaced after five years. Their interest is in 
shortening these cycles. The smartphone folks seem to want this cycle to 
be one

year and to take back the previous year's computer to get it off the market.

In this context, I think adopting a reference design or assuming that 
older computers can be recycled will just repeat the issues with the XO.


Sugar has an interesting structure. There is Sugar (now being referred 
to as a desktop which is ironic since the Sugar HIG were intended to
replace the desktop metaphor) and the Sugar activities. The real value 
of Sugar is the library of activities (and the capabilities they offer
through Sugar features such as the Journal, Collaboration, and HIG). 
Perhaps we could fork Sugar with a 0.106 baseline for the XO and a 0.110
baseline for other platforms. Then we could have ASLO represent which 
activities work with each of the two versions.


Perhaps, we could call one version Sugar XO and the other Sugar desktop.

I am also struck by the reaction to the offer of 172 XO-1s on ebay. My 
curiosity is to know the provenance of these XOs. They are clearly from a
deployment (charging racks). Where were they deployed? Why did the 
deployment render them surplus? What has that deployment done instead?


If we can finance the purchase, we should certainly do it. Out of 172 
units we could probably get 50% working. The spare parts can be very 
helpful
to deployments still trying to keep an inventory of XO-1s working 
(replace screens, keyboards, batteries, and so on).


Tony



On 06/14/2016 06:00 PM, iaep-requ...@lists.sugarlabs.org wrote:

Send IAEP mailing list submissions to
iaep@lists.sugarlabs.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
iaep-requ...@lists.sugarlabs.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
iaep-ow...@lists.sugarlabs.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of IAEP digest..."


Today's Topics:

1. Re: 172 XO-1s for $24 each (+ freight) $4,000 total
   (Dave Crossland)
2. Sugar Labs Vision Discussion in 6 hours (Dave Crossland)
3. Re: 172 XO-1s for $24 each (+ freight) $4,000 total (Sean DALY)
4. Re: 172 XO-1s for $24 each (+ freight) $4,000 total
   (Dave Crossland)


--

Message: 1
Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2016 09:38:25 -0400
From: Dave Crossland 
To: Sean DALY 
Cc: A Holt , Sugar Labs Marketing
, iaep ,
Samuel Greenfeld 
Subject: Re: [IAEP] 172 XO-1s for $24 each (+ freight) $4,000 total
Message-ID:

Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

On 14 June 2016 at 09:16, Sean DALY  wrote:

On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 2:03 PM, Dave Crossland  wrote:

That color combination has been very widely copied, even today.

I think the amount of copying ought to be seen as a metrics of success
for a brand.

Sure, except it dilutes the brand.

I am asserting that this dilution is a positive outcome - in the age
of cheap social media and memes, brands don't have control as they did
in the age of expensive mass media; and per the medium is the message
and all that,