Re: Walter leaving and shift to XP.
On Apr 23, 2008, at 1:25 AM, Joshua N Pritikin wrote: By my judgment, I'm glad Richard Stallman isn't running OLPC. He would have delayed the launch until we have a GPL'd replacement for the mesh firmware. As it is now, we have a laptop which is more pure license- wise than any other laptop available at about half the cost of the competition. And we have had mesh networking in production for about six months. Who else has mesh networking? Nobody. That's not an ideal not true ;-) there are plenty of open source solutions out there which just need to be installed. see www.olsr.org for one example. --- there's no place like 127.0.0.1 ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Walter leaving and shift to XP.
Edward Cherlin wrote: On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 6:09 PM, Tom Hoffman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 5:40 PM, Edward Cherlin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 1:27 AM, Torello Querci [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If is possible to use normal windows application on top Sugar+Windows the educational project is broken because the developers what need to write a program (program not activity) write it on windows because in this manner one PC with windows can run it, and XO XPzed too so why write code for sugar? In this scenario Sugar is dead and OLPC became a Laptop organization If Sugar cannot offer any advantages to developers writing applications for children beyond those already offered by Windows XP, it will fail regardless. It does, though, so it won't. Here are just a few examples. * We are now working on integrating the formerly separate activities. Among other things, we will be able to feed sound and other program output to Measure, and text-to-speech with karaoke-style text coloring will be available to all activities. * Sugar provides a standard suite of software functions that can be built into interactive textbooks. * Sugar is far easier to localize than other software, and a language community can do it themselves. the way they were talking most of those things would just be made into top level apis. Things like sharing would be available to all applications. If these functions are being made into apis then there is no benefit in developing for sugar. Why would any of us spend time developing a sugar specific app at that point? we can write a normal desktop app that uses sugar apis. We would get the same functionality with more portability. Sugar as a window manager would be marginalized and fail. ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Walter leaving and shift to XP.
On 22 Apr 2008, at 22:52, Aaron Konstam wrote: How may developers want to shift to developing for an XP based, rather than a sugar based , platform? stirs How many developers want to shift to developing for a constructivist language, rather than having to make an agonizing choice between a wide range of commodity operating systems ? http://wiki.squeak.org/squeak/1762 /stirs - a ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Walter leaving and shift to XP.
Mitch Bradley wrote: But in the steady state, the web is the high-order bit, sufficient to qualify as education in and of itself. Well ... it *was* at one time -- a university library made up of electrons. But in my mind, that was long ago in a galaxy far away. Oh, sure, you can still spend time on the web in the university library. But now there's a red light district, shopping malls, gambling casinos, stalkers, bullying, con games, electronic gangs and thugs. I've got my two G1G1 units and there are presumably two children somewhere who have the two Give One units. Don't get me wrong -- I think the *XO* is a positive force in the world. And I think it's *more* positive than what the WWW has become. ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Walter leaving and shift to XP.
Walter Bender wrote: First of all, just to clear, Flash does run on the laptop: there is a choice of both the Adobe Flash player and the FOSS Flash player, Gnash. We opted to install the Gnash player by default. Many of the problems people have with Flash are actually related to codecs rather than the player itself. We don't load proprietary codecs onto the machine by default, but they are available for download and some of our deployments in fact do opt to load some proprietary codecs--after of course obtaining the proper licenses. I see this approach as a reasonable compromise given the goals of the project. Apparently others see this as fundamentalism? Second, regarding Microsoft, I agree that if it is to be an open platform, it should be open to everyone, including Microsoft. That said, it is somewhat revisionist to suggest that the SD card was added on behalf of Microsoft: it was added at the same time as the camera because we had the opportunity while adding an ASIC necessary to improve NAND Flash performance. The fact that it facilitates the running of Windows was not the consideration at the time. I am not aware of any current effort to port Sugar to Windows; I don't know enough about Windows to know how much effort that would entail or even if it is possible. Third, in regard to the performance, feature sets, etc., the OLPC software stack is immature--quite naturally, as it is a relatively new product and project. The software development roadmap for the project had included a phased approach where we first get a core feature set built; do some initial triage of bugs and bring some stability to the deployments; and then work to fine-tune performance. While have heard a lot of noise about performance in the media and from some members of the development community, it has not, in my experience been a major road-block in the school trials and deployments. There are lots of bugs and lots of things that could be improved upon, and these should certainly be addressed, but the characterizations being made in this thread do not reflect the realities of the OLPC deployments--the children and teachers are using the laptops and are learning. Fourth and final point for the moment: it is important to make a distinction between the system software--drivers, power management, memory management, etc. and the Sugar user experience. It is not yet easy to always draw a clear line between them, but many of the performance problems* are not related to the choices we made regarding the UI, although, since the UI is how one experiences the laptop, they are felt there. I am not suggesting that there isn't room for improvement, but the call for dropping Sugar is not going to make as dramatic a difference in performance as is being suggested. And at what cost? Is the goal is simply to get laptops into the hands of as many children as possible? If that is the case, why have we been bothering to develop any software at all? And if others are making low cost laptops that run Windows, why don't those efforts fulfill that goal? If we look at the problem as one of supply and demand, then the perceived demand is for a certain mode of education (constructionism, learning learning, etc.) and the (XO laptop + Mesh Network + Sugar + Linux) is a vehicle to support that demand, the ultimate supply side being the utility of this entire system as a whole. One of the major components of the supply side is the horde of contributors on this project. These aren't only the coders and patchers, but also the documenters, advocates, and enthusiasts. Majority of the contribution (in my understanding) is voluntary. It is this contributory goodwill that I'm afraid will shrivel away. If one of the significant components of this project strays away from the FOSS principles (http://wiki.laptop.org/go/OLPC_on_free/open_source_software) there will most probably be a significant shift in mindshare. Perhaps there are those who will contribute to the project despite of its newfound proprietary underpinnings, but that group and its thinking will be quite different. I was a part of such a group many years ago (I have felt the pain of developing on a blackbox) and would prefer not to revisit such practices. There are those on this list who would rather service the goal of education, even if it comes at a cost of going proprietary. Can there be a goal higher than FOSS? Do such people exist? Yes, of course. I see them in my classes every semester :-) On the other hand, I am sure there are those who wouldn't touch it if it ran any form of Windows. I am also sure that there are those who are indifferent about the educational goal, but like the idea of being able to contribute to a public commons project, where the collective intellectual property will not be held captive by some constantly shifting EULA. It is the proportion of such groups that will either sustain this project
Re: Walter leaving and shift to XP.
On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 11:41 PM, Sameer Verma [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Walter Bender wrote: First of all, just to clear, Flash does run on the laptop: there is a choice of both the Adobe Flash player and the FOSS Flash player, Gnash. We opted to install the Gnash player by default. Many of the problems people have with Flash are actually related to codecs rather than the player itself. We don't load proprietary codecs onto the machine by default, but they are available for download and some of our deployments in fact do opt to load some proprietary codecs--after of course obtaining the proper licenses. I see this approach as a reasonable compromise given the goals of the project. Apparently others see this as fundamentalism? Second, regarding Microsoft, I agree that if it is to be an open platform, it should be open to everyone, including Microsoft. That said, it is somewhat revisionist to suggest that the SD card was added on behalf of Microsoft: it was added at the same time as the camera because we had the opportunity while adding an ASIC necessary to improve NAND Flash performance. The fact that it facilitates the running of Windows was not the consideration at the time. I am not aware of any current effort to port Sugar to Windows; I don't know enough about Windows to know how much effort that would entail or even if it is possible. http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Sugar_on_Windows gives two versions. I don't care. I run coLinux when forced to use Windows for my employment. So the next time that happens, I will merrily install the Sugar packages in Ubuntu Hardy Heron inside coLinux. There is little chance of running Sugar directly on Windows. Your best bet is emulation. For the time being, this is NOT going to be a one-click install process. At the very least you will need to install Python and PyGTK separately. Windows support for GTK is a bit confusing with multiple versions, some with missing libraries which have to be sourced from other sites. And then there is GECKO. And finally, the Sugar environment that is built on all of it. Third, in regard to the performance, feature sets, etc., the OLPC software stack is immature--quite naturally, as it is a relatively new product and project. The software development roadmap for the project had included a phased approach where we first get a core feature set built; do some initial triage of bugs and bring some stability to the deployments; and then work to fine-tune performance. While have heard a lot of noise about performance in the media and from some members of the development community, it has not, in my experience been a major road-block in the school trials and deployments. There are lots of bugs and lots of things that could be improved upon, and these should certainly be addressed, but the characterizations being made in this thread do not reflect the realities of the OLPC deployments--the children and teachers are using the laptops and are learning. Nicholas's call for greater efficiency in development and a crisper architecture is rather silly. You can't architect a system whose proper functioning is largely unknown when you start out. You have to use incremental development with aggressive refactoring. Fourth and final point for the moment: it is important to make a distinction between the system software--drivers, power management, memory management, etc. and the Sugar user experience. It is not yet easy to always draw a clear line between them, but many of the performance problems* are not related to the choices we made regarding the UI, although, since the UI is how one experiences the laptop, they are felt there. I am not suggesting that there isn't room for improvement, but the call for dropping Sugar is not going to make as dramatic a difference in performance as is being suggested. And at what cost? Is the goal is simply to get laptops into the hands of as many children as possible? If that is the case, why have we been bothering to develop any software at all? And if others are making low cost laptops that run Windows, why don't those efforts fulfill that goal? I could respond at length, but this is the choir here. If we look at the problem as one of supply and demand, then the perceived demand is for a certain mode of education (constructionism, learning learning, etc.) and the (XO laptop + Mesh Network + Sugar + Linux) is a vehicle to support that demand, the ultimate supply side being the utility of this entire system as a whole. One of the major components of the supply side is the horde of contributors on this project. These aren't only the coders and patchers, but also the documenters, advocates, and enthusiasts. Majority of the contribution (in my understanding) is voluntary. It is this contributory goodwill that I'm afraid will shrivel away. Hence the fork
Re: Walter leaving and shift to XP.
With a lot of friends we are create a legal association called OLPC Italia to allow the Italian citizens to buy OLPC using G1G1. For us the most important thing is the Educational Project but sell the XO with XP is not an educational project. We accept Sugar as core of the user interface but which are the real benefits to have Sugar on Windows instead to have Sugar on Linux? If is possible to use normal windows application on top Sugar+Windows the educational project is broken because the developers what need to write a program (program not activity) write it on windows because in this manner one PC with windows can run it, and XO XPzed too so why write code for sugar? In this scenario Sugar is dead and OLPC became a Laptop organization (for me of sure). If, otherwise, Sugar XPzed is not able to run normal windows application I not understand why abandoned Linux to Windows but is the only choice to maintaining the original aim (Not a Laptop but an Educational Project). Regard the problem about flash, we need to thing that XO is not thing to be use as normal PC for normal user so we simply need to promote the creation of education website that can be viewed from the XO. Last point is the need of clarity. If OLPC turn to this direction we are not interested to sell a PC and prefer to spend our time in other manner. If OLPC not thing to became a Laptop company we ask to understand how OLPC wants to do this. P.S. Sorry for my awful english Regards, Torello Querci ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Walter leaving and shift to XP.
Walter Bender [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Second, regarding Microsoft, I agree that if it is to be an open platform, it should be open to everyone, including Microsoft. That said, it is somewhat revisionist to suggest that the SD card was added on behalf of Microsoft Such statements certainly are based on reporting like this: Speaking with Wired News editor Kevin Poulsen over e-mail, Negroponte said that an SD card slot was added to the OLPC machine so it could meet Windows' minimum performance requirements. The XO always ran Windows... that is why we added the SD slot, he said. http://blog.wired.com/monkeybites/2007/04/negroponte_olpc_1.html Or this: Microsoft has always been working on Windows for the XO. We put the SD (secure digital) slot into our laptop over one year ago, for them, Negroponte said, explaining that the SD slot allows the XO's memory to be expanded, making it easier for users to run Windows. http://www.news.com/Negroponte-Windows-key-to-OLPC-philosophy/2100-1016_3-6215837.html Or this: Although the machine is preinstaled with Linux ut this doesn't mean that you can't run Windows on the machine, Negroponte said. We put in an SD slot just for Bill, he quipped. http://www.siliconvalleysleuth.com/2006/12/kicking_off_the.html (typos in original) Now the statement that the SD slot was added for Microsoft may be incorrect, but, given all the words that went around last year, it's probably not revisionist either. jon ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Walter leaving and shift to XP.
On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 1:00 PM, Jonathan Corbet [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Walter Bender [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Second, regarding Microsoft, I agree that if it is to be an open platform, it should be open to everyone, including Microsoft. That said, it is somewhat revisionist to suggest that the SD card was added on behalf of Microsoft Such statements certainly are based on reporting like this: Speaking with Wired News editor Kevin Poulsen over e-mail, Negroponte said that an SD card slot was added to the OLPC machine so it could meet Windows' minimum performance requirements. The XO always ran Windows... that is why we added the SD slot, he said. http://blog.wired.com/monkeybites/2007/04/negroponte_olpc_1.html Or this: Microsoft has always been working on Windows for the XO. We put the SD (secure digital) slot into our laptop over one year ago, for them, Negroponte said, explaining that the SD slot allows the XO's memory to be expanded, making it easier for users to run Windows. http://www.news.com/Negroponte-Windows-key-to-OLPC-philosophy/2100-1016_3-6215837.html Or this: Although the machine is preinstaled with Linux ut this doesn't mean that you can't run Windows on the machine, Negroponte said. We put in an SD slot just for Bill, he quipped. http://www.siliconvalleysleuth.com/2006/12/kicking_off_the.html (typos in original) Now the statement that the SD slot was added for Microsoft may be incorrect, but, given all the words that went around last year, it's probably not revisionist either. I'm pretty sure Walter is suggesting that *Nicholas* is being revisionist, not the original poster (was that you, Jon?). --scott -- ( http://cscott.net/ ) ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
[Fwd: Re: Walter leaving and shift to XP.]
I would suggest that you don't really understand the reason for supporting open source. No software running on top of XP, for example, will free of the pressures form MS to do what they want you to do. And what they want you to do may have nothing to do with the desires of teachers and students across the world. Currently, any software problems that occur in the f 7 base for sugar can be dealt with by altering code that developers have access to. That openness will not come from MS. If there is a problem with the underlying operating system fixing the problem will depend on MS largess which up to now has been minimal. Forwarded Message From: Carol Lerche [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: devel-list devel@lists.laptop.org Subject: Re: Walter leaving and shift to XP. Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2008 15:28:46 -0700 The OLPC Association has done amazing things with limited resources and deserves to take great pride in this. However, this Negroponte quotation from the article seems correct to me: He lamented that an overriding insistence on open-source had hampered the XOs, saying Sugar grew amorphously and didn't have a software architect who did it in a crisp way. For instance, the laptops do not support Flash animation, widely used on the Web. There are several examples like that, that we have to address without worrying about the fundamentalism in some of the open-source community, he said. One can be an open-source advocate without being an open-source fundamentalist. You have to prioritize your goals when they conflict. The question to consider -- is it really the case that having a 100% pure open source platform is more important IN THE SHORT TERM than making a type of content available that is ubiquitous as a format for delivering educational content. Gnash is simply not an equivalent product to the Adobe player IN THE SHORT TERM and it would have been a pragmatic choice to work hard to get Adobe to permit their flash player to be shipped with the XO. By making these tradeoffs of upholding purity of open source when teachers and school/ed ministry people obviously prioritize the content ahead of the purity of the implementation, one ends up in a place where time is short and an MS port may be catching up. Of course the target audience will prefer the solution on which they can deliver the content they want. Essentially the attempt at total purity may result in a much worse outcome with respect to the open source goal. Recriminations against Negroponte are less productive than learning from the consequences of trying to achieve an overly ambitious constellation of conflicting goals. Instead reach the goals in priority order through realistic, explicit, predictable and explainable phasing, as now seems to be the plan. Certainly, if Walter manages to get funding for a project to expand sugar for other platforms it will assist in reaching the final target. More resources will be available to attack the problems posed by adopting an entirely new user interface such as sugar, while being asked to deliver applications and content that are the most understandable part of the OLPC package to the adopters.. ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel -- === You can always tell the people that are forging the new frontier. They're the ones with arrows sticking out of their backs. === Aaron Konstam telephone: (210) 656-0355 e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Walter leaving and shift to XP.
Between Walter Bender, who practically lives at 1cc and has been part of the entire development, and NN, who by all accounts is rarely in his office at 1cc, I say that the SD was just an offshoot of the ASIC chip. Besides that's what what I've heard everyone else at OLPC say. NN also said that Windows was running on the XO months ago, which MS denied. On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 10:00 AM, Jonathan Corbet [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Walter Bender [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Second, regarding Microsoft, I agree that if it is to be an open platform, it should be open to everyone, including Microsoft. That said, it is somewhat revisionist to suggest that the SD card was added on behalf of Microsoft Such statements certainly are based on reporting like this: Speaking with Wired News editor Kevin Poulsen over e-mail, Negroponte said that an SD card slot was added to the OLPC machine so it could meet Windows' minimum performance requirements. The XO always ran Windows... that is why we added the SD slot, he said. http://blog.wired.com/monkeybites/2007/04/negroponte_olpc_1.html Or this: Microsoft has always been working on Windows for the XO. We put the SD (secure digital) slot into our laptop over one year ago, for them, Negroponte said, explaining that the SD slot allows the XO's memory to be expanded, making it easier for users to run Windows. http://www.news.com/Negroponte-Windows-key-to-OLPC-philosophy/2100-1016_3-6215837.html Or this: Although the machine is preinstaled with Linux ut this doesn't mean that you can't run Windows on the machine, Negroponte said. We put in an SD slot just for Bill, he quipped. http://www.siliconvalleysleuth.com/2006/12/kicking_off_the.html (typos in original) Now the statement that the SD slot was added for Microsoft may be incorrect, but, given all the words that went around last year, it's probably not revisionist either. jon ___ 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: Walter leaving and shift to XP.
Considering the complete sentence, it is clear to me that this is a case of the reporter being confused by technology. We all know that Sugar could never run on Windows as well it as can run on Linux. The laptop might run Windows or Linux or both, but not Sugar on Windows. Do we all know that, really? Why couldn't Sugar activities run as well on Windows as they might on Linux? Windows is a pretty full OS. Windows has networking, processes, file systems, Python, GNU compilers, etc. I worked on the GNU compilers, and was rather surprised when one guy (DJ Delorie) put in a large amount of work to make them run on DOS and Windows. (He was later hired by Cygnus and his port became Cygwin.) Is there any *technical* reason why, with significant effort, somebody couldn't port Sugar to run on MS-Windows? John PS: I'm no fan of Microsoft, or Windows. For the OLPC or for any other purpose. ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Walter leaving and shift to XP.
I certainly don't know enough about Windows to be able to answer your question from the technical perspective. I do know that to launch an effort to port to Windows will require resources above and beyond what are currently available. Is that the best use of resources? There is an argue to suggest that since so many people are running Windows, that this would be the most efficient way to reach the most people. But there are some negatives as well... many of which have been raised earlier in this thread. Not the least in my mind is one of culture: I fought long and hard to get the principle of free and open added to the core principles of OLPC because I believe that (a) there is power in freedom--it really does make a difference to teachers and learners to know that they can be first-class citizens in the world of ideas [it is a contradiction to advocate expression and collaboration but put up barriers at the same time]; (b) there is efficiency in freedom--despite all of the deficiencies and all the mistakes, we've accomplished a tremendous amount in just two years and the potential to accomplish much much more. -walter On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 5:24 PM, John Gilmore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Considering the complete sentence, it is clear to me that this is a case of the reporter being confused by technology. We all know that Sugar could never run on Windows as well it as can run on Linux. The laptop might run Windows or Linux or both, but not Sugar on Windows. Do we all know that, really? Why couldn't Sugar activities run as well on Windows as they might on Linux? Windows is a pretty full OS. Windows has networking, processes, file systems, Python, GNU compilers, etc. I worked on the GNU compilers, and was rather surprised when one guy (DJ Delorie) put in a large amount of work to make them run on DOS and Windows. (He was later hired by Cygnus and his port became Cygwin.) Is there any *technical* reason why, with significant effort, somebody couldn't port Sugar to run on MS-Windows? John PS: I'm no fan of Microsoft, or Windows. For the OLPC or for any other purpose. ___ 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: [Fwd: Re: Walter leaving and shift to XP.]
On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 9:12 AM, Aaron Konstam [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I would suggest that you don't really understand the reason for supporting open source. No software running on top of XP, for example, will free of the pressures form MS to do what they want you to do. And what they want you to do may have nothing to do with the desires of teachers and students across the world. There is another reason. We *are* delivering computers to people unused to them. They are bound to be considered magic gadgets -- so we *will* spawn a significant cargo-cult around them. There are two options: - ensure that the users can figure out that they are free to tinker with the whole stack - give them a corporate-branded black box How many billions would MS give to a foundation that acts as a facade for a MS-branded cultural colonization? It's not wonder that the makers of The gods must be crazy put a Coca Cola bottle in the middle of it. Are the rations handed out by UN branded with Golden Arches? cheers, m -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- School Server Architect - ask interesting questions - don't get distracted with shiny stuff - working code first - http://wiki.laptop.org/go/User:Martinlanghoff ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Walter leaving and shift to XP.
On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 2:37 PM, Walter Bender [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I certainly don't know enough about Windows to be able to answer your question from the technical perspective. I do know that to launch an effort to port to Windows will require resources above and beyond what are currently available. Is that the best use of resources? There is an argue to suggest that since so many people are running Windows, that this would be the most efficient way to reach the most people. But there are some negatives as well... many of which have been raised earlier in this thread. Not the least in my mind is one of culture: I fought long and hard to get the principle of free and open added to the core principles of OLPC because I believe that (a) there is power in freedom--it really does make a difference to teachers and learners to know that they can be first-class citizens in the world of ideas [it is a contradiction to advocate expression and collaboration but put up barriers at the same time]; (b) there is efficiency in freedom--despite all of the deficiencies and all the mistakes, we've accomplished a tremendous amount in just two years and the potential to accomplish much much more. We all know that this is supposed to be an education program, not a laptop program. But in reality it is an anti-poverty program, not an education program, and indeed an anti-suffering, pro-human rights project, not just an anti-poverty program. Laptops are the infrastructure and education the means to alleviate human suffering on the grand scale. But it is not only material poverty that matters. Poverty of rights, poverty of opportunity, poverty of means, poverty of power, all of these are also essential problems. Software freedom is more important than laptops for children in the long run. Of course Free Software on laptops for all children is better than either alone. All of this comes down to the age-old fight over education as a tool of thought control in the manner of Plato's Republic, and education as a tool of freedom, and freedom as a tool of education. The Prussians are still ahead, but we are gaining, and they can't stop us. Amartya Sen has a good take on the essential nature of the problem in Development as Freedom. So do all the Constructivist and Constructionist educators, and many other pioneers. See Student-Centered Education on the Wiki for a few pointers. -walter -- Edward Cherlin End Poverty at a Profit by teaching children business http://www.EarthTreasury.org/ The best way to predict the future is to invent it.--Alan Kay ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Walter leaving and shift to XP.
On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 05:37:08PM -0400, Walter Bender wrote: I certainly don't know enough about Windows to be able to answer your question from the technical perspective. As a former Windows developer (using both proprietary APIs and Free APIs), I'm very confident that the collaborative user experience named the Sugar UI can be provided on Windows at what constitutes acceptable expense in the Windows world by any of several wholly different means (each with different degrees of freeness and with different technical folks carrying out the work). I do know that to launch an effort to port to Windows will require resources above and beyond what are currently available. True, but there are many skilled Windows developers around (including F/OSS developers) who might assist with the work. Is that the best use of resources? Educating others about how our system works and writing better documentation are, in my opinion, good uses of time because they make it easier to work with us. I don't worry very much whether the people asking questions and writing documentation are doing so because they want to write software for Linux or Windows. Not the least in my mind is one of culture: I fought long and hard to get the principle of free and open added to the core principles of OLPC because I believe that (a) there is power in freedom--it really does make a difference to teachers and learners to know that they can be first-class citizens in the world of ideas [it is a contradiction to advocate expression and collaboration but put up barriers at the same time]; (b) there is efficiency in freedom--despite all of the deficiencies and all the mistakes, we've accomplished a tremendous amount in just two years and the potential to accomplish much much more. Agreed in full, though I caution there may be some important obligations of openness and freedom (contained in their intersection with justice, love, and wisdom among others) which we could be meeting more fully. Michael ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Walter leaving and shift to XP.
On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 5:40 PM, Edward Cherlin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 1:27 AM, Torello Querci [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If is possible to use normal windows application on top Sugar+Windows the educational project is broken because the developers what need to write a program (program not activity) write it on windows because in this manner one PC with windows can run it, and XO XPzed too so why write code for sugar? In this scenario Sugar is dead and OLPC became a Laptop organization If Sugar cannot offer any advantages to developers writing applications for children beyond those already offered by Windows XP, it will fail regardless. Sugar would not die, and will not die. If necessary, the community will walk away from OLPC to start a new organization, and fork all of the software. We would replicate git, Trac, lists, and Pootle, all of which are under Free licenses. This has happened many times in the FOSS development world. People at OLPC have been there and done that, and in several cases gotten the t-shirt. For what it is worth, I think Edward is overstating the likelihood that a fork may be necessary in the future, and understating its potential cost. The process of porting Sugar to Windows would mostly be made up of writing Windows implementations of relatively low level libraries used by Sugar. Many of these ports, like GTK, already exist and are relatively mature. And they're open source. There is even an extant project to port DBus to Windows already. Forks are expensive and inefficient, and undertaken only when all else fails. I've read nothing to indicate that might be necessary in the future. Sugar will always be free software, even if it is sometimes running on unfree software through a compatibility layer. Given that this would make Sugar accessible to millions of children around the world already using Windows, I can't see how this would be a bad thing. On the other hand, I can't see how either OLPC or Microsoft has much motivation to invest in the port at this point. --Tom ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Walter leaving and shift to XP.
On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 09:09:13PM -0400, Tom Hoffman wrote: Given that this would make Sugar accessible to millions of children around the world already using Windows, I can't see how this would be a bad thing. On the other hand, I can't see how either OLPC or Microsoft has much motivation to invest in the port at this point. Really? My sense from reading Negroponte's email is that OLPC _can_ benefit from a Windows port. However, I think the key word is Trojan Horse: I believe the best educational tool is constructionism and the best software development method is Open Source. In some cases those are best achieved like the Trojan Horse, versus direct confrontation or isolating ourselves with perfection. I speculate that there are many decision makers out there who still think that Windows is synonymous with quality. Yes, really! So on one hand, Negroponte wants to appeal to these decision makers by saying, Yes, we have Windows. We are 100% behind Windows. On the other hand, he is trying to explain his sales strategy to software developers and the community by emphasizing OLPC's increased investment in Sugar and allied projects. Here's the history behind the term Trojan Horse: Still seeking to gain entrance into Troy, clever Odysseus (some say with the aid of Athena) ordered a large wooden horse to be built. Its insides were to be hollow so that soldiers could hide within it. Once the statue had been built by the artist Epeius, a number of the Greek warriors, along with Odysseus, climbed inside. The rest of the Greek fleet sailed away, so as to deceive the Trojans. One man, Sinon, was left behind. When the Trojans came to marvel at the huge creation, Sinon pretended to be angry with the Greeks, stating that they had deserted him. He assured the Trojans that the wooden horse was safe and would bring luck to the Trojans. Only two people, Laocoon and Cassandra, spoke out against the horse, but they were ignored. The Trojans celebrated what they thought was their victory, and dragged the wooden horse into Troy. That night, after most of Troy was asleep or in a drunken stupor, Sinon let the Greek warriors out from the horse, and they slaughtered the Trojans. Priam was killed as he huddled by Zeus' altar and Cassandra was pulled from the statue of Athena and raped. http://www.stanford.edu/~plomio/history.html To spell it out, Windows + Sugar is the Trojan Horse. However, we are secretly filling up the Trojan Horse with free software. In other words, the free software community are the Greek warriors. The idea is that slightly indiscriminate decision makers (the Trojans) will buy our Trojan Horse (advertised to them as Sugar + Windows). Once we close the deal, we can deliver Sugar ... and before anybody figures out what is going on, all the teachers and students will fall in love with Sugar + GNU/Linux (Troy was destroyed; clearly, there is a limit to the metaphor). ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Walter leaving and shift to XP.
To spell it out, Windows + Sugar is the Trojan Horse. However, we are secretly filling up the Trojan Horse with free software. In other words, the free software community are the Greek warriors. The idea is that slightly indiscriminate decision makers (the Trojans) will buy our Trojan Horse (advertised to them as Sugar + Windows). Once we close the deal, we can deliver Sugar ... and before anybody figures out what is going on, all the teachers and students will fall in love with Sugar + GNU/Linux (Troy was destroyed; clearly, there is a limit to the metaphor). In other words, embrace, extend and extinguish ;-) Shikhar ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Walter leaving and shift to XP.
I always forget that when I reply the message does not go to the list. On the support-gang list there is quite a bit of discouragement over Walter leaving because Negroponte has decided to go the XP route with the XO. And he is in talks with MS$ to get a version of XP to run on the XO. How may developers want to shift to developing for an XP based, rather than a sugar based , platform? -- === For fools rush in where angels fear to tread. -- Alexander Pope === Aaron Konstam telephone: (210) 656-0355 e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Walter leaving and shift to XP.
On Apr 22, 2008, at 5:25 PM, Edward Cherlin wrote: Who says Negroponte is shifting? Certainly not Walter in any of his public posts. Can't happen. We would all be out of here like a shot to fork Sugar. Nicholas is weird, but not utterly stupid. Eventually, Negroponte added, Windows might be the sole operating system ... Negroponte said he was mainly concerned with putting as many laptops as possible in children's hands. -- via Associated Press http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hXa0O9XLMsWfaqt-sI9FqFy2IewgD9073PPG0 -- Ivan Krstić [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://radian.org ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Walter leaving and shift to XP.
The OLPC Association has done amazing things with limited resources and deserves to take great pride in this. However, this Negroponte quotation from the article seems correct to me: He lamented that an overriding insistence on open-source had hampered the XOs, saying Sugar grew amorphously and didn't have a software architect who did it in a crisp way. For instance, the laptops do not support Flash animation, widely used on the Web. There are several examples like that, that we have to address without worrying about the fundamentalism in some of the open-source community, he said. One can be an open-source advocate without being an open-source fundamentalist. You have to prioritize your goals when they conflict. The question to consider -- is it really the case that having a 100% pure open source platform is more important IN THE SHORT TERM than making a type of content available that is ubiquitous as a format for delivering educational content. Gnash is simply not an equivalent product to the Adobe player IN THE SHORT TERM and it would have been a pragmatic choice to work hard to get Adobe to permit their flash player to be shipped with the XO. By making these tradeoffs of upholding purity of open source when teachers and school/ed ministry people obviously prioritize the content ahead of the purity of the implementation, one ends up in a place where time is short and an MS port may be catching up. Of course the target audience will prefer the solution on which they can deliver the content they want. Essentially the attempt at total purity may result in a much worse outcome with respect to the open source goal. Recriminations against Negroponte are less productive than learning from the consequences of trying to achieve an overly ambitious constellation of conflicting goals. Instead reach the goals in priority order through realistic, explicit, predictable and explainable phasing, as now seems to be the plan. Certainly, if Walter manages to get funding for a project to expand sugar for other platforms it will assist in reaching the final target. More resources will be available to attack the problems posed by adopting an entirely new user interface such as sugar, while being asked to deliver applications and content that are the most understandable part of the OLPC package to the adopters.. ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Walter leaving and shift to XP.
On 22.04.2008 23:25, Edward Cherlin wrote: On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 1:52 PM, Aaron Konstam [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I always forget that when I reply the message does not go to the list. On the support-gang list there is quite a bit of discouragement over Walter leaving because Negroponte has decided to go the XP route with the XO. And he is in talks with MS$ to get a version of XP to run on the XO. I know about XP on the XO. Microsoft was working on it all last year. What's this about Negroponte shifting to XP? I know that there is a rumor about, but where I have seen it, it has just been a misinterpretation of the usual news. Negroponte is quoted, * OLPC chairman says laptop project could not promote openness if it was closed to Microsoft. * Microsoft has always been working on Windows for the XO. We put the SD (secure digital) slot into our laptop over one year ago, for them. Who says Negroponte is shifting? Certainly not Walter in any of his public posts. How may developers want to shift to developing for an XP based, rather than a sugar based , platform? Can't happen. We would all be out of here like a shot to fork Sugar. Nicholas is weird, but not utterly stupid. The big problem is that most people see this as a Linux+Sugar vs. Windows decision. OLPC is simply fighting on too many fronts and new developers generally do not tackle existing problems, but work on shiny new features and reinvent the wheel. I see a choice of at least: - Linux + Sugar - Linux + fast UI - Windows XP lite (or whatever it is called) My hope is that the second choice wins. If the first and the second choice are identical some time in the future, even better! Regards, Carl-Daniel ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Walter leaving and shift to XP.
In brief, As Peruvian collaborator and open source developer, the issue of the departure of Walter and rumors about Windows XP really worry me. In Peru there are those who have worked with politicians and authorities speaks about the freedoms that the OLPC / XO means, may lose that? We need someone to tell us-officially-the position of the foundation and thus be able to make our own decisions, but even if it comes FLISOL in Latin America. Thanks, On 4/22/08, Carol Lerche [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The OLPC Association has done amazing things with limited resources and deserves to take great pride in this. However, this Negroponte quotation from the article seems correct to me: He lamented that an overriding insistence on open-source had hampered the XOs, saying Sugar grew amorphously and didn't have a software architect who did it in a crisp way. For instance, the laptops do not support Flash animation, widely used on the Web. There are several examples like that, that we have to address without worrying about the fundamentalism in some of the open-source community, he said. One can be an open-source advocate without being an open-source fundamentalist. You have to prioritize your goals when they conflict. The question to consider -- is it really the case that having a 100% pure open source platform is more important IN THE SHORT TERM than making a type of content available that is ubiquitous as a format for delivering educational content. Gnash is simply not an equivalent product to the Adobe player IN THE SHORT TERM and it would have been a pragmatic choice to work hard to get Adobe to permit their flash player to be shipped with the XO. By making these tradeoffs of upholding purity of open source when teachers and school/ed ministry people obviously prioritize the content ahead of the purity of the implementation, one ends up in a place where time is short and an MS port may be catching up. Of course the target audience will prefer the solution on which they can deliver the content they want. Essentially the attempt at total purity may result in a much worse outcome with respect to the open source goal. Recriminations against Negroponte are less productive than learning from the consequences of trying to achieve an overly ambitious constellation of conflicting goals. Instead reach the goals in priority order through realistic, explicit, predictable and explainable phasing, as now seems to be the plan. Certainly, if Walter manages to get funding for a project to expand sugar for other platforms it will assist in reaching the final target. More resources will be available to attack the problems posed by adopting an entirely new user interface such as sugar, while being asked to deliver applications and content that are the most understandable part of the OLPC package to the adopters.. ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel -- Alfonso de la Guarda COS www.cos-la.org www.delaguarda.info Telef. 97550914 ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Walter leaving and shift to XP.
On 22.04.2008 23:29, Ivan Krstić wrote: On Apr 22, 2008, at 5:25 PM, Edward Cherlin wrote: Who says Negroponte is shifting? Certainly not Walter in any of his public posts. Can't happen. We would all be out of here like a shot to fork Sugar. Nicholas is weird, but not utterly stupid. Eventually, Negroponte added, Windows might be the sole operating system ... Negroponte said he was mainly concerned with putting as many laptops as possible in children's hands. -- via Associated Press http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hXa0O9XLMsWfaqt-sI9FqFy2IewgD9073PPG0 Thanks for digging up that quote. It confirms that this has become a pure laptop project and not an education project as the official mission states (stated?). Giving laptops to children is not an education project, it's giving laptops to children. Regards, Carl-Daniel ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Walter leaving and shift to XP.
Eventually, Negroponte added, Windows might be the sole operating system ... Negroponte said he was mainly concerned with putting as many laptops as possible in children's hands. ..and credit cards with huge overdrafts for all. so this project IS about the colonization of minds and expanding 'markets' (read slavery). the potential damage of a project with a core philosophy as rotten should not be underestimated. are we not trying to cure a fundamentally sick society by cultivating FREE thinking happy minds with educational resources? ubuntu anyone? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ubuntu_%28philosophy%29 http://www.ubuntu.com/ it is time to get things right and if that means waiting a generation or two for flash animation, it would be a small price to pay compared to the alternative. if Gnash is not capable, xinf.org may soon be. i aplaude people who are leaving and hope the community re-groups soon elsewhere. my 2 cents (..what an expression..) ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Walter leaving and shift to XP.
On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 03:52:35PM -0500, Aaron Konstam wrote: I always forget that when I reply the message does not go to the list. On the support-gang list there is quite a bit of discouragement over Walter leaving because Negroponte has decided to go the XP route with the XO. And he is in talks with MS$ to get a version of XP to run on the XO. How may developers want to shift to developing for an XP based, rather than a sugar based , platform? Isn't the question better XP vs. Linux, or perhaps Windows Explorer/Shell vs. Sugar? XP vs. Sugar is a conflation of the range of possible development areas. Aaron Konstam telephone: (210) 656-0355 e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Martin pgpeOEb2EGuek.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Walter leaving and shift to XP.
On Apr 22, 2008, at 7:00 PM, Carl-Daniel Hailfinger wrote: It confirms that this has become a pure laptop project and not an education project as the official mission states (stated?). Giving laptops to children is not an education project, it's giving laptops to children. Which is why I left. The whole Sugar vs. XP brouhaha is merely misdirection. -- Ivan Krstić [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://radian.org ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Walter leaving and shift to XP.
On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 05:29:58PM -0400, Ivan Krstić wrote: Eventually, Negroponte added, Windows might be the sole operating system ... Negroponte said he was mainly concerned with putting as many laptops as possible in children's hands. -- via Associated Press http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hXa0O9XLMsWfaqt-sI9FqFy2IewgD9073PPG0 Naughty Ivan, you are quoting out of context: Eventually, Negroponte added, Windows might be the sole operating system, and Sugar would be educational software running on top of it. Considering the complete sentence, it is clear to me that this is a case of the reporter being confused by technology. We all know that Sugar could never run on Windows as well it as can run on Linux. The laptop might run Windows or Linux or both, but not Sugar on Windows. The article continues: That might disappoint advocates of open-source software who helped bankroll OLPC and cheered the challenge it represented to Microsoft's dominance. Sure, I would be disappointed. But let's look at that scenario. Suppose OLPC was bought out by Microsoft and all laptops came loaded with Windows. OK, at least we still have Sugar. The game changes thusly: How long will it take to make Sugar better than the proprietary alternatives? But that's basically the same game we are playing, in any case. And we have been playing that game for decades and winning. The article continues: Wayan Vota, whose OLPC News blog reported Bender's departure Monday, said he feared Sugar would get neglected on XOs that run Windows. Whose side is Wayan Vota on anyhow? I am not sure whether he is biased, but his ability to analyze news is nil. He's a rumor mill. He thrives on hyperbole and unconfirmed reports. Get a grip people. At least Ivan quoted this part properly: Negroponte said he was mainly concerned with putting as many laptops as possible in children's hands. I don't know about you, but that makes sense to me. Carol Lerche is right: we need to be pragmatic and get this laptop into the hands of the children who can benefit even if that means our software stack is tainted with a little proprietary software. By my judgment, I'm glad Richard Stallman isn't running OLPC. He would have delayed the launch until we have a GPL'd replacement for the mesh firmware. As it is now, we have a laptop which is more pure license-wise than any other laptop available at about half the cost of the competition. And we have had mesh networking in production for about six months. Who else has mesh networking? Nobody. That's not an ideal position; we should replace the firmware. None the less, it is a pretty good position. To hold that position, we have got to stop wasting time discussing FUD and make the software work. As I noted, we have to do that anyway, even if we didn't have a lovely green laptop as a delivery platform. The race is on for educational software. Even when teachers are smart enough to prefer free software, teachers are going to use whatever software is available. Let's make free software available. ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Walter leaving and shift to XP.
On Apr 22, 2008, at 7:25 PM, Joshua N Pritikin wrote: The laptop might run Windows or Linux or both, but not Sugar on Windows. That's not accurate. -- Ivan Krstić [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://radian.org ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Walter leaving and shift to XP.
On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 07:29:22PM -0400, Ivan Krstić wrote: On Apr 22, 2008, at 7:25 PM, Joshua N Pritikin wrote: The laptop might run Windows or Linux or both, but not Sugar on Windows. That's not accurate. Care to elaborate? Suppose Sugar was running on Windows. What's the benefit? Why is Sugar/Windows better than Sugar/GNU Linux? ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Walter leaving and shift to XP.
First of all, just to clear, Flash does run on the laptop: there is a choice of both the Adobe Flash player and the FOSS Flash player, Gnash. We opted to install the Gnash player by default. Many of the problems people have with Flash are actually related to codecs rather than the player itself. We don't load proprietary codecs onto the machine by default, but they are available for download and some of our deployments in fact do opt to load some proprietary codecs--after of course obtaining the proper licenses. I see this approach as a reasonable compromise given the goals of the project. Apparently others see this as fundamentalism? Second, regarding Microsoft, I agree that if it is to be an open platform, it should be open to everyone, including Microsoft. That said, it is somewhat revisionist to suggest that the SD card was added on behalf of Microsoft: it was added at the same time as the camera because we had the opportunity while adding an ASIC necessary to improve NAND Flash performance. The fact that it facilitates the running of Windows was not the consideration at the time. I am not aware of any current effort to port Sugar to Windows; I don't know enough about Windows to know how much effort that would entail or even if it is possible. Third, in regard to the performance, feature sets, etc., the OLPC software stack is immature--quite naturally, as it is a relatively new product and project. The software development roadmap for the project had included a phased approach where we first get a core feature set built; do some initial triage of bugs and bring some stability to the deployments; and then work to fine-tune performance. While have heard a lot of noise about performance in the media and from some members of the development community, it has not, in my experience been a major road-block in the school trials and deployments. There are lots of bugs and lots of things that could be improved upon, and these should certainly be addressed, but the characterizations being made in this thread do not reflect the realities of the OLPC deployments--the children and teachers are using the laptops and are learning. Fourth and final point for the moment: it is important to make a distinction between the system software--drivers, power management, memory management, etc. and the Sugar user experience. It is not yet easy to always draw a clear line between them, but many of the performance problems* are not related to the choices we made regarding the UI, although, since the UI is how one experiences the laptop, they are felt there. I am not suggesting that there isn't room for improvement, but the call for dropping Sugar is not going to make as dramatic a difference in performance as is being suggested. And at what cost? Is the goal is simply to get laptops into the hands of as many children as possible? If that is the case, why have we been bothering to develop any software at all? And if others are making low cost laptops that run Windows, why don't those efforts fulfill that goal? -walter * Ironically, the majority of the system-level problems we had experienced are directly tied to the two proprietary code bases on the laptop: the wireless firmware and the embedded controller firmware. While there are efforts to replace these, OLPC itself has been diligently working with both Marvell and Quanta to make the best of the situation. To suggest that fundamentalism has impeded progress on those two subsystems is not correct. ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Walter leaving and shift to XP.
On Tue, 22 Apr 2008 16:25:12 -0700 Joshua N Pritikin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 05:29:58PM -0400, Ivan Krstić wrote: Eventually, Negroponte added, Windows might be the sole operating system ... Negroponte said he was mainly concerned with putting as many laptops as possible in children's hands. -- via Associated Press http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hXa0O9XLMsWfaqt-sI9FqFy2IewgD9073PPG0 [...] At least Ivan quoted this part properly: Negroponte said he was mainly concerned with putting as many laptops as possible in children's hands. I don't know about you, but that makes sense to me. Carol Lerche is right: we need to be pragmatic and get this laptop into the hands of the children who can benefit even if that means our software stack is tainted with a little proprietary software. The problem with this claim is the assumption that children *will* benefit with a laptop running a completely proprietary stack. I remain unconvinced. A laptop running a proprietary stack is not a goal that I'm interested in pursuing. There's a pretty massive difference between We'll ship w/ Linux, a proprietary mesh driver, and a few proprietary apps, and We're running XP. ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Walter leaving and shift to XP.
On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 08:00:06PM -0400, Andres Salomon wrote: On Tue, 22 Apr 2008 16:25:12 -0700 Joshua N Pritikin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At least Ivan quoted this part properly: Negroponte said he was mainly concerned with putting as many laptops as possible in children's hands. I don't know about you, but that makes sense to me. Carol Lerche is right: we need to be pragmatic and get this laptop into the hands of the children who can benefit even if that means our software stack is tainted with a little proprietary software. The problem with this claim is the assumption that children *will* benefit with a laptop running a completely proprietary stack. I remain unconvinced. A laptop running a proprietary stack is not a goal that I'm interested in pursuing. I'm with you, but the choice will be made by the teachers or by a Department of Education. Not by us. Now the way to help the decision makers make the right choice (i.e. a free software stack), is to quickly realize the potential of Sugar + GNU/Linux. In some sense, it doesn't matter what we ship on the laptop (although I really want to ship free software). What matters is that we, the free software community, have a credible software solution for education. That's why this whole conservation just seems like fear, uncertainty, and doubt (FUD). In a sense, OLPC as an organzation doesn't matter. What matters is creating a credible software solution for education. We can do that without OLPC. Of course, it will be much easier if OLPC has the same goals, and it appears that they do, at least in the short term. Why should we not give them the benefit of the doubt? What do we have to lose? All the GPL'd software that is written will still be there whether OLPC flourishes or fails. Let's help it flourish. There's a pretty massive difference between We'll ship w/ Linux, a proprietary mesh driver, and a few proprietary apps, and We're running XP. ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Walter leaving and shift to XP.
I know quite a few children in the US who benefit from laptops running a proprietary stack. Web access is the core capability that transforms the computer from a convenience to a near necessity. Before the web, most people in developed countries had computers at work for doing Office stuff, but only a fraction of households had them. activities will hold children's attention for some time, but in the long term, the desire to access all of the world's information will persist long after the activities become boring. Suppose, as a thought experiment, that someone were to propose giving every child in the world a device that could do nothing but access the web. Would you consider that a positive educational step? I would. ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Walter leaving and shift to XP.
I am not sure what you are driving at Mitch: web browsers are available to fundamentalists of both camps. Are you suggesting that a proprietary browser will reach more children more quickly? -walter On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 8:28 PM, Mitch Bradley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I know quite a few children in the US who benefit from laptops running a proprietary stack. Web access is the core capability that transforms the computer from a convenience to a near necessity. Before the web, most people in developed countries had computers at work for doing Office stuff, but only a fraction of households had them. activities will hold children's attention for some time, but in the long term, the desire to access all of the world's information will persist long after the activities become boring. Suppose, as a thought experiment, that someone were to propose giving every child in the world a device that could do nothing but access the web. Would you consider that a positive educational step? I would. ___ 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: Walter leaving and shift to XP.
On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 12:28 PM, Mitch Bradley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Suppose, as a thought experiment, that someone were to propose giving every child in the world a device that could do nothing but access the web. Would you consider that a positive educational step? It would be positive, but limited. Once you are reaching out to them, (a) You can give them that device with extra puzzles and tools (b) You have the certainty that you'll be seeding a degree of cargo-cultism. Should the magic device be branded with corporate logos? Should we use that sense of magic and turn it towards tinkering and discovery that we can promote with a FOSS stack? It is a significant responsibility. I would be uncomfortable with the XO showing _any_ corporative logos, be it MS, Adobe, RH, etc. cheers, m -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- School Server Architect - ask interesting questions - don't get distracted with shiny stuff - working code first - http://wiki.laptop.org/go/User:Martinlanghoff ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Walter leaving and shift to XP.
Mitch Bradley wrote: I know quite a few children in the US who benefit from laptops running a proprietary stack. Web access is the core capability that transforms the computer from a convenience to a near necessity. Before the web, most people in developed countries had computers at work for doing Office stuff, but only a fraction of households had them. activities will hold children's attention for some time, but in the long term, the desire to access all of the world's information will persist long after the activities become boring. Suppose, as a thought experiment, that someone were to propose giving every child in the world a device that could do nothing but access the web. Would you consider that a positive educational step? I would. ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel None of what you have said above has anything to do with a proprietary stack. Why does the web experience have to be beneficial via a proprietary stack? The web is what it is because it conforms to open standards. HTML comes to mind... Speaking of proprietary stack, remember AOL and Compuserve? Sameer -- Dr. Sameer Verma, Ph.D. Associate Professor of Information Systems San Francisco State University San Francisco CA 94132 USA http://verma.sfsu.edu/ http://opensource.sfsu.edu/ ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Walter leaving and shift to XP.
On Tue, 22 Apr 2008 14:28:20 -1000 Mitch Bradley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [...] Suppose, as a thought experiment, that someone were to propose giving every child in the world a device that could do nothing but access the web. Would you consider that a positive educational step? I would. Sure, you can give kids a glorified WebTV, but that's not what *I'm* interested in. Also, we're talking about a proprietary stack that may or may not be locked down. Who knows what they'll _actually_ have access to? I had hoped that at least with Linux, kids would be able to dig into the internals and figure out ways around whatever roadblocks their friendly government might put up; I don't see such a thing happening with a proprietary stack. Maybe it'll make a nice games platform, though: http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/technology/2008/04/intel_classmate_the_rufus_revi.html (The world needs more obesity) If you're talking about giving kids a fast internet connection and a completely unrestricted web browser, I'd agree that they'll benefit. However, I expect OLPC to cave into whatever demands are made by governments in order to further the goal of selling more laptops. ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Walter leaving and shift to XP.
No, I'm saying that giving laptops to all the world's children is a Good Thing, and worthy of being called an education project, even if they don't have the world's friendliest UI or free software. And the reason for that is because the web is so immensely valuable. The laptops are even more wonderful with a child-friendly UI, loads of fun activities, and a non-proprietary software stack. But in the steady state, the web is the high-order bit, sufficient to qualify as education in and of itself. Walter Bender wrote: I am not sure what you are driving at Mitch: web browsers are available to fundamentalists of both camps. Are you suggesting that a proprietary browser will reach more children more quickly? -walter On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 8:28 PM, Mitch Bradley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I know quite a few children in the US who benefit from laptops running a proprietary stack. Web access is the core capability that transforms the computer from a convenience to a near necessity. Before the web, most people in developed countries had computers at work for doing Office stuff, but only a fraction of households had them. activities will hold children's attention for some time, but in the long term, the desire to access all of the world's information will persist long after the activities become boring. Suppose, as a thought experiment, that someone were to propose giving every child in the world a device that could do nothing but access the web. Would you consider that a positive educational step? I would. ___ 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: Walter leaving and shift to XP.
Mitch Bradley wrote: No, I'm saying that giving laptops to all the world's children is a Good Thing, and worthy of being called an education project, even if they don't have the world's friendliest UI or free software. And the reason for that is because the web is so immensely valuable. The laptops are even more wonderful with a child-friendly UI, loads of fun activities, and a non-proprietary software stack. But in the steady state, the web is the high-order bit, sufficient to qualify as education in and of itself. Mitch, I completely disagree with you on this. Browsing the web is useful but doing so without being able to seamlessly communicate with people that are in your proximity is a poor goal to reach. We should be thinking bigger than just giving kids a windows box and ask them to sign up to Facebook so that they can communicate with their friends. Pol -- Polychronis Ypodimatopoulos Graduate student Viral Communications MIT Media Lab Tel: +1 (617) 459-6058 http://www.mit.edu/~ypod/ ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Walter leaving and shift to XP.
On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 8:58 PM, Mitch Bradley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The laptops are even more wonderful with a child-friendly UI, loads of fun activities, and a non-proprietary software stack. But in the steady state, the web is the high-order bit, sufficient to qualify as education in and of itself. But aren't we forgetting the connectivity aspect? A laptop with a web browser and no web to browse doesn't seem to me to be very useful. The XO's promise for rural areas relies on its deployment strategy, mesh networking, and low power consumption. --scott -- ( http://cscott.net/ ) ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Walter leaving and shift to XP.
Polychronis Ypodimatopoulos wrote: Mitch Bradley wrote: No, I'm saying that giving laptops to all the world's children is a Good Thing, and worthy of being called an education project, even if they don't have the world's friendliest UI or free software. And the reason for that is because the web is so immensely valuable. The laptops are even more wonderful with a child-friendly UI, loads of fun activities, and a non-proprietary software stack. But in the steady state, the web is the high-order bit, sufficient to qualify as education in and of itself. Mitch, I completely disagree with you on this. Browsing the web is useful but doing so without being able to seamlessly communicate with people that are in your proximity is a poor goal to reach. We should be thinking bigger than just giving kids a windows box and ask them to sign up to Facebook so that they can communicate with their friends. Uh, yeah, and that is why I have been working days, nights, and weekends for the past 20 months trying to make the XO great. I'm not saying that we should forget about all this other great stuff, I'm just disagreeing with the premise that laptops for children are worthless without all the embellishments. ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Walter leaving and shift to XP.
On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 2:29 PM, Ivan Krstić [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Apr 22, 2008, at 5:25 PM, Edward Cherlin wrote: Who says Negroponte is shifting? Certainly not Walter in any of his public posts. Can't happen. We would all be out of here like a shot to fork Sugar. Nicholas is weird, but not utterly stupid. Eventually, Negroponte added, Windows might be the sole operating system ... Negroponte said he was mainly concerned with putting as many laptops as possible in children's hands. OK, Ivan, I take it all back. Men of one idea, like a hen with one chick, and that a duckling.--Thoreau I noticed before that Nicholas is overoptimizing on one single variable (Number of computers delivered to children soonest) and not looking at any of the other variables that affect how many computers of what kind get to the most children in the long run. I didn't know that it was this bad. Who is organizing the fork? I assume that Red Hat will still be in. Or do people want to wait until it's officially official? -- via Associated Press http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hXa0O9XLMsWfaqt-sI9FqFy2IewgD9073PPG0 -- Ivan Krstić [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://radian.org He lamented that an overriding insistence on open-source had hampered the XOs, saying Sugar grew amorphously and didn't have a software architect who did it in a crisp way. For instance, the laptops do not support Flash animation, widely used on the Web. There are several examples like that, that we have to address without worrying about the fundamentalism in some of the open-source community, he said. One can be an open-source advocate without being an open-source fundamentalist. Besides rethinking the laptop's technology, Negroponte wants to get OLPC moving more efficiently. An executive-search firm has been looking for a chief executive for the group for more than a year. :This is ridiculous in a dozen different ways. For one, the XO hardware and software is the most productive product development project I have ever seen. For another, when you can't find a CEO in more than a year of searching, that should tell you something about yourself. I think the rest of us should go talk to Mark Shuttleworth. And Mary Lou, of course. -- Edward Cherlin End Poverty at a Profit by teaching children business http://www.EarthTreasury.org/ The best way to predict the future is to invent it.--Alan Kay ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Walter leaving and shift to XP.
On 23.04.2008 03:09, C. Scott Ananian wrote: On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 8:58 PM, Mitch Bradley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The laptops are even more wonderful with a child-friendly UI, loads of fun activities, and a non-proprietary software stack. But in the steady state, the web is the high-order bit, sufficient to qualify as education in and of itself. But aren't we forgetting the connectivity aspect? A laptop with a web browser and no web to browse doesn't seem to me to be very useful. The XO's promise for rural areas relies on its deployment strategy, mesh networking, and low power consumption. In theory, mesh networking is a feature of the wireless firmware and should work fine regardless of operating system choice. Regards, Carl-Daniel ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Walter leaving and shift to XP.
On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 9:41 PM, Carl-Daniel Hailfinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 23.04.2008 03:09, C. Scott Ananian wrote: In theory, mesh networking is a feature of the wireless firmware and should work fine regardless of operating system choice. In practice, this is manifestly not the case. --scott -- ( http://cscott.net/ ) ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Walter leaving and shift to XP.
On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 12:44:43AM +0200, Carl-Daniel Hailfinger wrote: The big problem is that most people see this as a Linux+Sugar vs. Windows decision. Presently, I'm not very concerned by the role that Windows plays in OLPC's aims -- there's plenty of stuff to learn from and through Windows systems. We can do much better on top of Linux but there exist people who can make a credible showing on Windows too. The questions that I am actually wrestling with include: Can I continue to work with Nicholas? Can I reasonably promote working with him to my friends? Does he have a credible analysis of the challenges facing us? Does he stand for goals and principles compatible with mine? Can his leadership supply the resources that I believe are necessary to fulfill these goals, to uphold these principles, and to overcome these challenges? (for example, does his leadership help to develop and retain intangibles like platform expertise and willingness to volunteer or does it squander them?) For me, technology is negotiable. Long-term quality education is not. Teamwork and community are not. Effective leadership is not. Nicholas' comments seem to me to curtail these possibilities but we are both fallible -- I may have misunderstood him. Time will bring clarity soon enough for me. Michael ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Walter leaving and shift to XP.
Hi all! This is Spiky, Japanese volunteer. Reading through whole the discussion on Suger v.s. Windows, (or whatever) what I'm so afraid of is there's no discussion from the aspect of the very root principle of OLPC, that is, Learning learning or constructionism theory with which OLPC is fundamentally going to help children to give them considerable opportunities to enforce their own capability of learning and thinking. I believe the all activities are firmly related with this one single point of view and all issues or conflict, if exists, should be carefully examined along with this. With respect to Windows on XO, I think it is clear what is truth and what is rumor, what did Mr.Negroponte meant with his words in any publicity. I believe Sugar was, is, and will be the greatest effort along with OLPC principles, and constructionism point of view, Etoys and other current activities on Sugar play very important roles on it. This idea soon drives the simple conclusion that Windows itself doesn't have to do with our activities. It is just a box without the educational theory. (Even if there could be the chance that some countries buy windows version XO, it is still our victory, because they chose XO platform for children's education, XO itself is also designed with enormous amount of ideas based on OLPC principles., as Wall Street Journal article wrote as the words of Mr. Negroponte last year.) If something odd or weird, OLPC principles should be revisited (especially, Learning learning and constructionism) and then we all can go right on the main track. And we can contribute our enormous power aggregating every each piece of volunteers all over the world. I still believe OLPC's principles are noble, and its main track is consistent in its beginning. Thanks. Spiky ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
