Reading
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2015/03/microsoft-drops-patent-hammer-on-kyocera
The patents looks obvious, but in particular
http://www.google.com/patents/US7137117
looks like something the XO already did.
Someone can present prior art?
--
Gonzalo Odiard
SugarLabs - Software
Jun 2, 2000 is the date of the invention.
On Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 1:39 PM, Gonzalo Odiard godi...@sugarlabs.org wrote:
Reading
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2015/03/microsoft-drops-patent-hammer-on-kyocera
The patents looks obvious, but in particular
http://www.google.com/patents
On Fri, Oct 3, 2008 at 9:46 AM, Pia Waugh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That'd be cool. It'd be great to have the latest post of community news and
this regular update on the front page with a link to the subscriptions. Why
don't you blog the updates so people can subscribe to the rss feed (and it
Hi SJ,
quote who=Samuel Klein
We don't have to frame it as us vs. them. We can just announce the
state of current deployments, and discuss plans for future deployments
and G1G1, including whatever can be said in public about the Microsoft
trials. Everybody wants to know what's up
in this
Microsoft case since, from an OLPC perspective, nothing happened. Microsoft
made an announcement about the next stage in their deployment of machines
they're purchasing. They don't need to tell us when that's happening -
they're not our machines (i.e. we don't own or control them - they're XOs of
course
Folks -
There have been a number of questions about press coverage late last week
from Peru concerning the introduction of XO laptops running XP and Office.
Microsoft has previously ordered a number of XO laptops for XP testing and
pilot deployment. The usage and distribution of these machines
it as us vs. them. We can just announce the
state of current deployments, and discuss plans for future deployments
and G1G1, including whatever can be said in public about the Microsoft
trials. Everybody wants to know what's up with the Amazon deal, too.
2008/9/16 Ed McNierney [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Folks
to frame it as us vs. them. We can just announce the
state of current deployments, and discuss plans for future deployments
and G1G1, including whatever can be said in public about the Microsoft
trials. Everybody wants to know what's up with the Amazon deal, too.
I just want to support what
talked with
say they would like to hear from OLPC.
We don't have to frame it as us vs. them. We can just announce the
state of current deployments, and discuss plans for future deployments
and G1G1, including whatever can be said in public about the Microsoft
trials. Everybody wants to know
talked with
say they would like to hear from OLPC.
We don't have to frame it as us vs. them. We can just announce the
state of current deployments, and discuss plans for future deployments
and G1G1, including whatever can be said in public about the Microsoft
trials. Everybody wants to know what's
talked with
say they would like to hear from OLPC.
We don't have to frame it as us vs. them. We can just announce the
state of current deployments, and discuss plans for future deployments
and G1G1, including whatever can be said in public about the Microsoft
trials. Everybody wants to know
talked with
say they would like to hear from OLPC.
We don't have to frame it as us vs. them. We can just announce the
state of current deployments, and discuss plans for future deployments
and G1G1, including whatever can be said in public about the Microsoft
trials. Everybody wants to know
talked with
say they would like to hear from OLPC.
We don't have to frame it as us vs. them. We can just announce the
state of current deployments, and discuss plans for future deployments
and G1G1, including whatever can be said in public about the Microsoft
trials. Everybody wants
Although Microsoft charges $3 for the software Michail was under the impression
they charge $2 on top for their fancy sticker.
Then add Richards estimate for the SD card: $7
Total per XO: $12 + shipping
Josh
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED
Negroponte has said :
Open Firmware V2, the free and open source BIOS, is now capable of
running Linux, Microsoft Windows XP and other operating systems, and was
developed by Firmworks with support from OLPC. This will enable dual
boot of OLPC XO laptops with Microsoft Windows XP in addition
the latest OpenFirmware update. That
firmware will include the capability to boot Windows, and have various
other improvements.
The capability to boot Windows does not include a copy of Windows
itself. To find out about how and when that will be available, you'd
have to talk to Microsoft. I hear
that will be available, you'd
have to talk to Microsoft. I hear each copy is $3 in some countries,
and requires an SD card for more storage, that'll cost a few dollars
also. So if Peru wanted it on every laptop, figure it'll cost US$1.4
million or so (200K x ($3 + $4)).
Most of that cost
Walter Bender wrote:
The price often quoted has been $7 for the SD card. Not sure where
that number comes from. I recall that a $19 high-speed card was used
in the original testing; at the time it was asserted that a
standard-speed card was necessary.
I don't know that this is still the
Windows, and have various
other improvements.
The capability to boot Windows does not include a copy of Windows
itself. To find out about how and when that will be available, you'd
have to talk to Microsoft. I hear each copy is $3 in some countries,
and requires an SD card for more
cost.
According to the recent nytimes.com article:
NYT: Windows will add a bit to the price of the machines,
NYT: about $3, the licensing fee Microsoft charges to some
NYT: developing nations under a program called Unlimited Potential.
NYT: For those nations that want models that can run both
: Windows will add a bit to the price of the machines,
NYT: about $3, the licensing fee Microsoft charges to some
NYT: developing nations under a program called Unlimited Potential.
NYT: For those nations that want models that can run both Windows
NYT: and Linux, the extra hardware required
On Fri, 2008-05-16 at 22:19 -0400, Albert Cahalan wrote:
Windows-only is $3 extra.
No, you can't fit Windows in 1 Gig of NAND.
You get to pay the $7 for an SD card no matter what, to run Windows, for
$10 total.
- Jim
--
Jim Gettys [EMAIL PROTECTED]
One Laptop
[NN] then claimed no OLPC resources would
be devoted to the project. I'm left wondering how many of those
resources went into this firmware mod.
The firmware mod required weeks of a skilled engineer's time. This
engineer put in the time, partly or fully paid by OLPC,
On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 6:15 PM, Albert Cahalan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Seth Woodworth writes:
So as a fair practice I think it's clear that no special actions can
ethically be made to prevent Windows or any other OS from running on
the machine. So a Windows port for the XO isn't something
On Friday 16 May 2008 6:31:51 am Jim Gettys wrote:
Ah, Windows needs more than 1GB to be useful; so to run Windows you need
to pay extra for a SD card big enough to hold it.
Mmm Windows doesn't need to do anything useful. It just needs to rake in
$3. Once sold, you are free to load software
On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 8:57 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Kurt H Maier wrote:
How is this relevant? When Microsoft sits down and throws its vast
resources at making Windows just work on the XO-1, it's going to
blow our current FOSS distributions out of the water
On Fri, May 16, 2008 at 11:28 AM, Edward Cherlin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It would have been a lot simpler to have left OFW as it was, unable to
support a Windows boot. But the point is now moot.
No, actually that would have forced the Windows scenario to require a
BIOS to be flashed in place
At 07:27 PM 5/15/2008, Asheesh Laroia wrote:
My copy of this mail does not have the attachment of the mission
statement.
Mission statement.doc
Description: MS-Word document
___
Devel mailing list
Devel@lists.laptop.org
2008/5/16 Nicholas Negroponte [EMAIL PROTECTED]: (word document attached)
For those who can't or won't open the word document, it contains simply this:
Mission statement of OLPC
To eliminate poverty and create world peace by providing education to
the poorest and most remote children on the
We could still boot Linux on a conventional BIOS, like on every other
machine in the world.
But then we give up fast suspend/resume, and distribution channel
security.
It seems to me that having Linux able to work better than Windows in
fundamental ways is wise ;-).
- Jim
On
Morgan Collett wrote:
2008/5/16 Nicholas Negroponte [EMAIL PROTECTED]: (word document attached)
For those who can't or won't open the word document, it contains simply this:
Mission statement of OLPC
To eliminate poverty and create world peace by providing education to
the poorest and most
On Fri, May 16, 2008 at 1:12 PM, Sameer Verma [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Morgan Collett wrote:
2008/5/16 Nicholas Negroponte [EMAIL PROTECTED]: (word document attached)
For those who can't or won't open the word document, it contains simply this:
Mission statement of OLPC
To eliminate
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Nick Negroponte has said :
Open Firmware V2, the free and open source BIOS, is now capable of
running Linux, Microsoft Windows XP and other operating systems, and was
developed by Firmworks with support from OLPC. This will enable dual
boot of OLPC XO laptops
, the licensing fee Microsoft charges to some
NYT: developing nations under a program called Unlimited Potential.
NYT: For those nations that want models that can run both Windows
NYT: and Linux, the extra hardware required will add another $7 or
NYT: so to the cost of the machines, Mr. Negroponte said.
I
One Laptop per Child is announcing an agreement with Microsoft
to make a dual boot, Linux/Windows, version of the XO laptop. In
addition, our intention is to engage one or more third parties to port
Sugar to
run on Windows in order to reach a wider installed base of laptops. In
the
meanwhile
On Thu, 15 May 2008, Nicholas Negroponte wrote:
One Laptop per Child is announcing an agreement with Microsoft
to make a dual boot, Linux/Windows, version of the XO laptop. In
addition, our intention is to engage one or more third parties to port Sugar
to
run on Windows in order to reach
Nick Negroponte has said :
Open Firmware V2, the free and open source BIOS, is now capable of
running Linux, Microsoft Windows XP and other operating systems, and was
developed by Firmworks with support from OLPC. This will enable dual
boot of OLPC XO laptops with Microsoft Windows XP in addition
Dear Nicholas,
You made very strong points in your keynotes about the XO outlining exactly
(and correctly) WHY you were staying away from Microsoft.? Also, if you think
Microsoft has any long-term interest in dual boot systems, you don't know them
very well.
I'm saddened by your
Let's look at this with a slightly different lens before we blow up on NN
and Microsoft.
What does this agreement equate to? And what are the alternatives to
Microsoft?
If the XO was running a completely closed source stack with no documentation
on hardware, how would the Linux community feel
On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 8:03 PM, Seth Woodworth [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Let's look at this with a slightly different lens before we blow up on NN
and Microsoft.
What does this agreement equate to? And what are the alternatives to
Microsoft?
If the XO was running a completely closed
preventative.
He's not declaring a policy of ethical inaction. He made an
announcement called Microsoft wherein he describes an OLPC-supported
firmware modification that will allow Windows to boot on the XO-1. He
p it to an OLPC mailing list. He then claimed no OLPC resources would
be devoted
On Thu, 15 May 2008, Steve Holton wrote:
On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 8:03 PM, Seth Woodworth [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Let's look at this with a slightly different lens before we blow up on NN
and Microsoft.
What does this agreement equate to? And what are the alternatives to
Microsoft
On Thu, 2008-05-15 at 17:56 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It's doubtful the free software community would do what Microsoft is
demanding: asking the manufacturer to add 5-10% to the cost of the hardware
to facilitate their efforts, nor would the free software community charge a
$3.00
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 15 May 2008, Steve Holton wrote:
On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 8:03 PM, Seth Woodworth [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Let's look at this with a slightly different lens before we blow up
on NN
and Microsoft.
What does this agreement equate to? And what
:
from:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/16/technology/16laptop.html?_r=2oref=sloginoref=slogin
Windows will add a bit to the price of the machines, about $3, the
licensing
fee Microsoft charges to some developing nations under a program
called
Unlimited Potential. For those nations that want
on NN
and Microsoft.
What does this agreement equate to? And what are the alternatives to
Microsoft?
If the XO was running a completely closed source stack with no
documentation on hardware, how would the Linux community feel? They
would
feel that they were being shut out
He's not declaring a policy of ethical inaction. He made an
announcement called Microsoft wherein he describes an OLPC-supported
firmware modification that will allow Windows to boot on the XO-1. He
p it to an OLPC mailing list. He then claimed no OLPC resources would
be devoted
Seth Woodworth writes:
So as a fair practice I think it's clear that no special actions can
ethically be made to prevent Windows or any other OS from running on
the machine. So a Windows port for the XO isn't something that
could have been preventative.
Wrong. It's called tit-for-tat,
2008/5/16 Steve Holton [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 8:03 PM, Seth Woodworth [EMAIL PROTECTED]
With Walter Bender on his own and dedicated to bringing Sugar to every
machine on a FOSS stack, and all OLPC produced software being safely GPL'ed,
I feel confident that Sugar can beat
...and to which the free software (linux) community would respond with a
reverse engineering effort, at it's own (collective) expense, and rather
quickly have a solution. If turnabout is fair play, let Microsoft adopt the
free software community response as well.
The golden rule doesn't
Wrong. It's called tit-for-tat, otherwise known as fair-is-fair.
It's perfectly ethical to defend oneself against an adversary
who has no qualms about anything.
An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind.
- Ghandi
___
Devel mailing list
seth wrote:
Of course. Sugar is not dead, just OLPC. That's why the fork occurred.
Sugarlabs isn't a fork. The code bases are still the same and
aren't going to change. It's more like upstream sources now.
Or a forking of management, not code.
devil's advocate: how would
Kurt H Maier wrote:
How is this relevant? When Microsoft sits down and throws its vast
resources at making Windows just work on the XO-1, it's going to
blow our current FOSS distributions out of the water. *That's* what
worries me. We don't have suspend and resume working without breaking
devil's advocate: how would someone on the outside (of either
OLPC, or sugarlabs) know that that is the case? all that has
happened (from the public view of things) is that this new wiki
has sprung up, claiming essentially that this is where sugar
lives. there's been no announcement
in Peru, Uruguay,
Mexico and elsewhere.
No OLPC resources are going to porting Sugar to Microsoft Windows,
although as a free software project, we encourage others to do so. The
Sugar user interface is already available for Fedora, Debian and
Ubuntu Linux distributions, greatly broadening Sugar's
There has been some mention of a new community initiative to carry on
the development of Sugar. A number of community members have set up
SugarLabs.org in order to further extend Sugar. Sugar Labs will focus
on providing a software ecosystem that enhances learning on the XO
laptop as well as other
On 5/16/08, Nicholas Negroponte [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Open Firmware V2, the free and open source BIOS, is now capable of
running Linux, Microsoft Windows XP and other operating systems, and was
developed by Firmworks with support from OLPC. This will enable dual
boot of OLPC XO laptops
On May 15, 2008, at 10:39 PM, Korakurider wrote:
On 5/16/08, Nicholas Negroponte [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Open Firmware V2, the free and open source BIOS, is now capable of
running Linux, Microsoft Windows XP and other operating systems,
and was
developed by Firmworks with support from
record of illicitly stamping out anything that even almost threatened
it.
What is being proposed is that if you want it to run Microsoft apps then
countries can pay an extra $10. This gives *them* a handycap in the game
and makes it that much easier for us.
A handicap which microsoft can spin
Hi All,
On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 8:34 PM, Seth Woodworth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The golden rule doesn't say: Treat others as you have been treated, It
says to treat others as you would like to be treated.
The golden rule also has absolutely nothing to do with reality when
you're
On a final note:
Additionally, the Fedora, Debian and Ubuntu software environments run
on the XO-1, adding support for tens of thousands of free software
applications.
I am terrified at the thought that the rest of this press release
might be anywhere near as disingenuous as this
Hi List,
Just spotted this pcworld.com article, I don't know if it's accurate,
but it may give some hints as to some of what might be going on out
there with the big M and its ULPC/Linux manoeuvring.
More worrying is this bit from the article in the link
OLPC will hand more of the development and support of its XO laptop and its
core software to technology companies, (...), and Microsoft (MSFT), which is
just now putting the finishing touches on a version of Windows for the XO
machine.
I
I'm waiting to hear about this one also. On the one hand the OLPC can't be
shipped with the Flash plug-in but the whole project is going to go to
Microsoft? Talk about moving between extremes. I'm not sure why a more
balanced approach couldn't work but then again, I'm more of a supporter
(bought
Is there *any* suggestion that the entire Microsoft on OLPC story is
anything other than:
1. A small group of experimenters at Microsoft playing around in the
slack time.
2. FUD stories to downplay OLPC.
The OLPC corporate needs to respond with a one liner that we have no
plans to now
On Tue, Mar 11, 2008 at 3:59 PM, Charles Merriam [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Is there *any* suggestion that the entire Microsoft on OLPC story is
anything other than:
1. A small group of experimenters at Microsoft playing around in the
slack time.
2. FUD stories to downplay OLPC.
You forgot
. Microsoft and OLPC are in
discussion on how to release it, as well as how to announce, he said.
Negroponte added that the Windows operating system should be available
on the XO in less than 60 days.
http://www.olpcnews.com/software/windows/xp_on_the_xo_in_60_days.html
So, who knows?
Charles
On Mar 11, 2008, at 10:26 PM, victor wrote:
I didn't know Microsoft and Windows were going to be there. So why
all the
effort if in the end a closed OS is going to be used?
There is no change in strategy. For background (and comment furor) on
the XP situation, see:
http
68 matches
Mail list logo
