Re: XO-3 super-o-fficial
Actually, I would argue that an operating system that doesn't natively host its development tools is not appropriate for OLPC's target audience. Self hosting is not an absolute requirement. You just have traded an existing, usable developer environment (like Eclipse) for the possibility of children to modify all the code. BTW the children cannot even modify all the code because they cannot compile the Linux kernel or Python itself for example. So you effectively just defined the code modification treeshold a little bit lower than is possible in Android. The price you pay for the resulting scripting language choice is excessive memory consumption, slow execution and painful developer experience. Here is a cost-benefit analysis from an outsider (me): 1. Because all of Etoys, Turtle Art, Scratch and JavaScript/HTML codes are modifiable by children, there is not too much to win by having a modifiable shell. Simply I do not get why would it be so good to let children mess with the Journal or the Shell (Frame) code. For looking into the inner workings of some code there are a lot of other possibilities. 2. What you do not seem to understand (probably because you are all experienced Python/GTK programmers) is that programming in Python/PyGTK is just painful. Especially in Develop. With one eye looking to the code and with the other looking at the documentation of Python, the documentation of PyGTK, the third reads the documentation of GTK (for the missing parts), the fourth looks at the Log Viewer since there is no other debuggers... Contrast this with the simple fact that when I type a dot in Eclipse then magically it shows me all the possible members and methods with parameters and documentation. Now that is what I call discoverability, sorry but Python does not cut it. Since I did not see any documentation shipped on the XO machines I cannot even imagine how will those children understand code without an internet connection... What is sure that I have not seen any activities made by children yet. 3. You could invest an enormous amount of work into making Sugar a less painful development environment (especially on a native host) but what is the point? When you will have a working IDE with a working debugger and a working profiler the world will have already moved farther ahead of you. Just to give you a little perspective: the last time I used Java was more than 10 years ago and I have never used Eclipse. However when I have downloaded Eclipse and the Android SDK I could run, debug and modify my first application in 10 minutes. All this is maintained by paid OHA member employees and you know OLPC Sugarlabs do not have the same resources combined to catch up with that. So from my viewpoint native hosting is not an absolute requirement but just a tradeoff does not worth making. ps: Note that I am not telling you to drop everything and start rewrite Sugar in Java (because it would be kinda stupid) but dismissing a convergence plan with a simple O RLY? seems a little bit short sighted to me. ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: XO-3 super-o-fficial
What makes you think that this will be a proprietary version of Android? Android is licensed Apache 2.0 with kernel patches as GPLv2[1], although there have been some proprietary apps and customizations on top. I hadn't looked closely enough to see the detailed licensing. But I'd seen the news stories about Google cease-and-desists to the guys making improved free versions. Is a useful fully-free version readily available, as a practical option? (This is mostly off-topic for OLPC, unless there's a plan to try Android on XO hardware, which might be amusing. 20,000 apps and an active developer base might be an attraction, versus the hundred or two Sugar apps.) John ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: XO-3 super-o-fficial
I hadn't looked closely enough to see the detailed licensing. But I'd seen the news stories about Google cease-and-desists to the guys making improved free versions. Is a useful fully-free version readily available, as a practical option? The guy bundled the not free Google applications in the improved Android OS version. The c-a-d was about those applications. Once those were removed it was OK (those apps can be copied over from the unimproved OS though). (This is mostly off-topic for OLPC, unless there's a plan to try Android on XO hardware, which might be amusing. 20,000 apps and an active developer base might be an attraction, versus the hundred or two Sugar apps.) I have already done this but unfortunately I got stuck when I could not make the wireless working neither could I connect my XO to the PC to debug. You know, Android OS solves exactly the same problems Sugar has been created to solve just it is faster, uses less memory, much prettier, has an usable developer environment and has the backing of several hundred millions of dollars and of course several order of magnitude more developers. I have to admit that I do not see any more reasons other than these why OLPC should switch on the long term. (When I mentioned it on the Sugar list of course this idea has not met with much support... :) ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: XO-3 super-o-fficial
On 24.12.2009, at 12:59, NoiseEHC wrote: You know, Android OS solves exactly the same problems Sugar has been created to solve O RLY? inline: orly_owl.jpeg - Bert - ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: XO-3 super-o-fficial
I'm with Bert. What problems has Android solved that Sugar was created to solve, in your opinion? On Thu, Dec 24, 2009 at 6:04 AM, Bert Freudenberg b...@freudenbergs.dewrote: On 24.12.2009, at 12:59, NoiseEHC wrote: You know, Android OS solves exactly the same problems Sugar has been created to solve O RLY? - Bert - ___ 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: XO-3 super-o-fficial
On Dec 24, 2009, at 6:59 AM, NoiseEHC wrote: ... debug. You know, Android OS solves exactly the same problems Sugar has been created to solve just it is faster, uses less memory, much prettier, has an usable developer environment... Actually, I would argue that an operating system that doesn't natively host its development tools is not appropriate for OLPC's target audience. Cheers, wad ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: XO-3 super-o-fficial
What: Sugar / Android What is the same: Application complexity: Simple (Activities) / Simple (Activities) Data storage: Ditch filesystem (central Journal) / Ditch filesystem (app specific SQLite storage) UI: Simple (ugly) / Simple (cool) Computer experience of target audience: Low (children) / Even lower (stupid adults included) Application install: .xo bundle / .apk bundle Application isolation: Bitfrost / total app isolation Security: protects users from activities (because they are children) / protects users from applications (because it can cost money to call numbers, and users are ignorant) Programing language: High level (Python) / High level (Java) What Android does not solve: Collaboration: mostly works / Android only collaborates through the web, probably some local Wave server should be included Write: there is / there is only Google Docs Read: there is / everything should be converted to html Open platform: Everything modifiable inplace (just no children do that) / Only scripting on Android Integration with XS: in process / none (that is a BIG problem) What Sugar does not solve: There is no usable development environment, no documentation, few developers. The programming environment is not discoverable by people who are not already pro programmers in Python and Linux. Ugly, slow, eats a ton of memory. Cannot be used by keyboard. Activities cannot work together. See, I did not lost my mind. Merry Christmas! Stanley Sokolow wrote: I'm with Bert. What problems has Android solved that Sugar was created to solve, in your opinion? On Thu, Dec 24, 2009 at 6:04 AM, Bert Freudenberg b...@freudenbergs.de mailto:b...@freudenbergs.de wrote: On 24.12.2009, at 12:59, NoiseEHC wrote: You know, Android OS solves exactly the same problems Sugar has been created to solve O RLY? - Bert - ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org mailto:Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: XO-3 super-o-fficial
We don't necessarily need to build it, Negroponte told Forbes. We just need to threaten to build it. Looks like Notion Ink has already done so, sort of: http://www.slashgear.com/notion-ink-tegra-android-smartpad-uses-pixel-qi-display-1866308/ The OS is proprietary (android), it would probably fail it you dropped it in a puddle and it has too many radios (GSM, UMTS, GPS, and Bluetoot, besides WiFi) -- but at least it has connectors! Remote villages shouldn't waste power with inductive charging, and can you imaging debugging a cranky XO-3 via multitouch? See also: $99 NVIDIA Tegra MIDs in development http://www.slashgear.com/99-nvidia-tegra-mids-in-development-android-ported-to-tegra-1734880/ John ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: XO-3 super-o-fficial
On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 6:14 PM, John Gilmore g...@toad.com wrote: The OS is proprietary (android), it would probably fail it you dropped it in a puddle and it has too many radios... What makes you think that this will be a proprietary version of Android? Android is licensed Apache 2.0 with kernel patches as GPLv2[1], although there have been some proprietary apps and customizations on top. [1] http://source.android.com/license ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
