Fwd: Flash + AIR on OLPC

2010-04-12 Thread Stanley Sokolow
-- Forwarded message --
From: Stanley Sokolow overb...@earthlink.net
Date: Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 12:02 PM
Subject: Re: Flash + AIR on OLPC
To: Paul Fox p...@laptop.org


Sorry, Paul,  I just can't accept the idea that the target audience of the
OLPC projects must necessarily include kids who are capable and interested
in re-programming the software activities they're using.Moreover, would
you want to modify and re-compile your application software (for example,
Firefox) just to change the way it behaves with respect to which home page,
web site filters, cookies, etc. etc.?   That's what configuration options
are for.   Even if you want more versatility, the application can implement
rules in xml or an application-specific mini-language or whatever.
Rebuilding an application in Python should be a last resort and not even for
the 99.% of target users of the system.

How do you define constructionism in this context?

Stan


On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 11:31 AM, Paul Fox p...@laptop.org wrote:

 stanley wrote:
   I guess I don't understand constructionism.

 i think that's right.

  
   Is it reasonable to require that the development system run on the
 target
   machine?

 yes.  it's one of the reasons most activities, and many of the
 system, is coded in python.

   If Apple had this requirement, all of the iPhone/iPod/iPad
   applications would be gone.   We wouldn't have any of the millions of
   devices (mp3 players, routers, modems, fax machines, cell phones, etc.)
 that

 of course.  but i don't think any of those would be considered
 educational tools, let alone embodiments of constructionism.  (and
 nor would you, i'd guess.)

   have embedded processors not capable of running their development tools.
   The XO is the target machine.   It's unreasonable to restrict
 development to
   tools that run on the XO.

 it's not that unreasonable.  kids learn by doing, and exploring.
 that's kind of the whole point of constructionism.  if you give
 someone a game written using python and pygame, they can (in
 principle) modify that game to change the playing rules.  if you
 give them that same game written in flash, they can't.  it's
 really as simple as that.

 whether one agrees with the notion that this is important will vary,
 of course.

 paul
 =-
  paul fox, p...@laptop.org
 ___
 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: Flash + AIR on OLPC

2010-04-12 Thread Paul Fox
stanley wrote:
  
  Sorry, Paul,  I just can't accept the idea that the target audience of the
  OLPC projects must necessarily include kids who are capable and interested
  in re-programming the software activities they're using.Moreover, would
  you want to modify and re-compile your application software (for example,
  Firefox) just to change the way it behaves with respect to which home page,
  web site filters, cookies, etc. etc.?   That's what configuration options
  are for.   Even if you want more versatility, the application can implement
  rules in xml or an application-specific mini-language or whatever.
  Rebuilding an application in Python should be a last resort and not even for
  the 99.% of target users of the system.

these are all strawmen, and i won't bother arguing them
seriously.  in fact, one of the reasons i wouldn't modify
firefox as you suggest is _precisely_ because i probably don't
have the source and tools at hand, and it will be difficult (yes,
even though it's open source) to obtain them and configure all of
the prerequesites.  (ironically, the barrier to entry for
modifying my own kernel is far lower than for modifying my
browser, though the stakes are higher, of course.  ;-)  the
barrier to entry for modifying applications written in a
scripting language are lower still, and i'm more likely to do so,
or, at least, to examine the code to see why something works the
way it does.

paul
=-
 paul fox, p...@laptop.org
___
Devel mailing list
Devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel


Fwd: Flash + AIR on OLPC

2010-04-12 Thread Stanley Sokolow
Sorry, I keep forgetting to put the list manager in my addresses.   Here's
my latest message:

-- Forwarded message --
From: Stanley Sokolow overb...@earthlink.net
Date: Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 4:05 PM
Subject: Re: Flash + AIR on OLPC
To: mi...@bga.com


I forgot to answer your statement below about Linux on the XO:

On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 1:13 PM, Mikus Grinbergs mi...@bga.com wrote:

 ...

 p.s.  People keep showing various Linux platforms (e.g., Ubuntu, Debian,
 etc) running on the XO.  As far as I am concerned, if these people
 *want* to run Ubuntu, Debian, etc., then buying a modern netbook for
 that purpose will give them better performance than using the XO.


When I started helping my wife develop an interactive math tutoring
capability for the XO we bought from the 2008 G1G1 campaign, I looked at and
tried the Sugar activities.None of them were capable of her necessary
features:  2-way interactive whiteboard and 2-way interactive video and
audio communications.Sure, some activities were in development trying to
achieve these capabilities, but they weren't real yet.   We tried a web
services approach -- looked at various things like Go to Meeting.When
we found www.Vyew.com, we saw what we needed.   It worked on our PCs.
Turning to the XO, the Browse activity with Gnash just couldn't run Vyew.
When I installed the version of FlashPlayer that the laptop.org wiki
recommended, it didn't work the XOs camera and microphone and didn't even
operate the Flash settings dialog properly.Doing more searching, I found
a version of Ubuntu that had been adapted to the XO by a user who called
himself Teapot on the forum.   It's a stripped down, lightweight version
that uses Xfce as the window manager (hence it's called a Xubuntu
distribution) and incorporates the same kernel that olpc used in the version
of Fedora that came on our XO beneath Sugar, so it knows about the XO's
unique hardware.After some work, I got it running from an SD card so I
didn't have to trash the native operating system.I didn't do this
because I wanted to run Linux -- I have other Linux machines -- but rather
because it would let me get the job done, the system built with the features
necessary for the tutoring project.   If the XO comes up to that capability
with Browse and Gnash, I'd run the native system.But it's not there,
yet.  We also tried to use Skype on the native Sugar/Fedora OS, but at that
time, you had to do so many hokey work-arounds to fool the software into
running Skype, it just wasn't feasible for a deployment with low entry
threshold.

The 6 to 12 year-old kids that are the prime target of the olpc mission
don't care what platform is behind the screen.   Just as in the Wizard of
Oz, Don't pay any attention to that man behind the curtain.   As the
laptop.org mission statement says, It’s not a laptop project. It’s an
education project.   To me that says that the mission is not to empower
kids to write programs or tinker inside the system, but rather to use the XO
as an educational tool to learn about the world and life and such, to
collaborate with each other across the room and around the globe, to explore
the depth of knowledge on the Internet, etc.

Stan
___
Devel mailing list
Devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel