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

[Sean DALY]

On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 5:02 AM, Dave Crossland  wrote:

> There is Sugar (now being referred to as a desktop which is ironic since
> the Sugar HIG were intended to
> replace the desktop metaphor) and the Sugar activities
>


I have always vigorously opposed referring to Sugar as a "desktop".
GNU/Linux developers like this term which has a specific meaning for them -
a GUI shell. It's worse than confusing for teachers for us to claim that we
do away with the desktop metaphor with a... "desktop".

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

Re: [IAEP] 172 XO-1s for $24 each (+ freight) $4,000 total

[Dave Crossland]

Do we want these or not? :)

-- Forwarded message --
From: 
Date: 16 June 2016 at 02:09
Subject: Re: [UKids] Unleash Kids / KOC trip to rescue laptops - April
To: Dave Crossland , Alex Perez 
Cc: Unleash Kids! 


Alex,

Yes, I commit to paying freight plus costs for 10 carts to Burton MI
 (Flint suburb).  Estimated freight for three pallets was $458 by ARS
calculator,  so two pallets with carts should be in the neighborhood of
$300.   Payment by PayPal.  Guessing you would split shipment from
Alpharetta.  Will work with any arrangement that happens.Also, would
entertain sharing XO items, if they are more than you have use for.

However,  I would yield to Dave if he has a specific project in mind.   I
 am acting to prevent any discard and, in part, to sweeten an uncertain
local promotion for Adam's XSCE content on XO-1.

As a side note, I did read the IAEP thread about the auction.  In my
opinion, there was little appreciation of the actual market value of
refurbished XO-1's or their parts.   Retail price for quality units  is
closer to $50 than $100.  The real value of these XO-1's is as a group and
perhaps in some way involving an XSCE in a deployment.

Nathan Riddle
Michigan Community Repair Center
___
IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep

Re: [IAEP] 172 XO-1s for $24 each (+ freight) $4,000 total

[Dave Crossland]

On 16 June 2016 at 09:16, Jonas Smedegaard  wrote:

> Quoting Dave Crossland (2016-06-16 14:48:56)
> > I think this is a really important discussion for the wider community,
> > as it relates to the future/vision topic :)
>
> It is very very rarely sensible to cross-post.  Less so follow-ups!
>
> I guess multiple lists were created not for _speakers_ to reach more
> readers, but for readers to allow _readers_ to limit what they receive.
>

I am sad about the fragmentation of the Sugar community across so many
lists.


> I am _very_ close to unsubscribing due to the recent amount of noise on
> the IAEP list: It's an educational project, remember.
>

Which threads specifically do you think do not relate to the educational
aim of the project?
___
IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep

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

[Dave Crossland]

On 16 June 2016 at 08:25, Sean DALY  wrote:

> This was always the case on the old site - it's the new site, which I
> hadn't see before it went up, which brought it back.
>

I'm confused; what do you think should be changed on the current site?
___
IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep

Re: [IAEP] 172 XO-1s for $24 each (+ freight) $4,000 total

[Jonas Smedegaard]

Quoting Dave Crossland (2016-06-16 15:14:32)
> On 16 June 2016 at 09:16, Jonas Smedegaard  wrote:
>> Quoting Dave Crossland (2016-06-16 14:48:56)
>>> I think this is a really important discussion for the wider 
>>> community, as it relates to the future/vision topic :)
>>
>> It is very very rarely sensible to cross-post.  Less so follow-ups!
>>
>> I guess multiple lists were created not for _speakers_ to reach more 
>> readers, but for readers to allow _readers_ to limit what they 
>> receive.
>>
>
> I am sad about the fragmentation of the Sugar community across so many 
> lists.
>
>
>> I am _very_ close to unsubscribing due to the recent amount of noise 
>> on the IAEP list: It's an educational project, remember.
>>
>
> Which threads specifically do you think do not relate to the 
> educational aim of the project?

Why do you respond to each and every post with a question?

[ No, please don't answer that - especially not with a question! ]


  - Jonas

-- 
 * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt
 * Tlf.: +45 40843136  Website: http://dr.jones.dk/

 [x] quote me freely  [ ] ask before reusing  [ ] keep private


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

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

[Dave Crossland]

On 16 June 2016 at 04:34, Sean DALY  wrote:

> On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 5:02 AM, Dave Crossland  wrote:
>
>> There is Sugar (now being referred to as a desktop which is ironic since
>> the Sugar HIG were intended to
>> replace the desktop metaphor) and the Sugar activities
>>
>
>
> I have always vigorously opposed referring to Sugar as a "desktop".
> GNU/Linux developers like this term which has a specific meaning for them -
> a GUI shell. It's worse than confusing for teachers for us to claim that we
> do away with the desktop metaphor with a... "desktop".
>

I think since Sugar launched the rise and now dominance of iOS and Android
- which also do away with the desktop metaphor - means this is no longer as
big a claim as it once was, and I don't think its even worth mentioning any
more.
___
IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep

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

[Dave Crossland]

On 16 June 2016 at 10:09, Sean DALY  wrote:

> On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 2:50 PM, Dave Crossland  wrote:
>
>> I'm confused; what do you think should be changed on the current site?
>
>
>
> The homepage says:
> Sugar is both a desktop and a collection of Activities.
>
> This means something to GNU/Linux developers, but is meaningless to a
> teacher. It directly contradicts what the old site said on the homepage:
> Sugar offers an alternative to traditional “office-desktop” software.
>
> And, on the second page of the site:
> Sugar sets aside the traditional “office-desktop” metaphor and, through
> its Activities, engages even the youngest learners in the use of
> computation as a powerful “thing to think with.”
>

Do you think anything should be changed?
___
IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep

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

[Sean DALY]

On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 4:15 PM, Dave Crossland  wrote:

> Do you think anything should be changed?



Yes, the "desktop" reference should be replaced with the original text.
___
IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep

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

[Sean DALY]

On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 2:50 PM, Dave Crossland  wrote:

> I'm confused; what do you think should be changed on the current site?



The homepage says:
Sugar is both a desktop and a collection of Activities.

This means something to GNU/Linux developers, but is meaningless to a
teacher. It directly contradicts what the old site said on the homepage:
Sugar offers an alternative to traditional “office-desktop” software.

And, on the second page of the site:
Sugar sets aside the traditional “office-desktop” metaphor and, through its
Activities, engages even the youngest learners in the use of computation as
a powerful “thing to think with.”

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

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

[Dave Crossland]

Where is the original text?
___
IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep

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

[Dave Crossland]

On 14 June 2016 at 21:57, Dave Crossland  wrote:

> ACTION ITEM: Dave will talk with Leah at OLPC on Thursday, and ask what
> their goals are for the next few years, when they will end support for
> XO-1s, and what they would advise in the scenario that we break Sugar for
> XOs in the 0.110 release, etc
>

I just spoke with Leah, and she was great to chat with!

- OLPC offered XO-1.75 and XO-4 upgrade kits in the past, to upgrade XO-1s,
but they didn't sell that well; she agreed with Tony's assessment that
users will run the XO-1 until it fails, and OLPC has no EOL date in mind

- OLPC is still offering XO-4s (touch and non-touch) with a minimum order
of 100 units through the end of this year for sure, and has a few units in
stock in Miami if anyone wants to buy just one or two; and Leah said they
could look into updating the laptop.org website to make the offer public

- OLPC is now also offering a newer model, a classmate-spec machine, and
will send me details about this; its rugged and branded but not got the
pixel qi screen.

- OLPC only ships Sugar, and is very happy with it, and wants to support
the developer community although isn't sure how to so;

- OLPC is willing to put me in touch with deployments if I wanted to visit
them to do user testing of the font editor activity and font design
workshops for kids
___
IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep

Re: [IAEP] 172 XO-1s for $24 each (+ freight) $4,000 total

[Sean DALY]

On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 3:16 PM, Jonas Smedegaard  wrote:

> the IAEP list: It's an educational project, remember.



Sorry Jonas, I was thinking of you and others when I moved the discussion
to the Marketing list.
Sean.
___
IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep

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

[Sean DALY]

On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 2:14 PM, Dave Crossland  wrote:

> I think since Sugar launched the rise and now dominance of iOS and Android
> - which also do away with the desktop metaphor - means this is no longer as
> big a claim as it once was, and I don't think its even worth mentioning any
> more.



This was always the case on the old site - it's the new site, which I
hadn't see before it went up, which brought it back.
___
IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep

Re: [IAEP] 172 XO-1s for $24 each (+ freight) $4,000 total

[Dave Crossland]

On 14 June 2016 at 12:09, Sean DALY  wrote:

> >On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 4:56 PM, Dave Crossland  wrote:
> >> On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 3:38 PM, Dave Crossland  wrote:
> >>
> >>> A brand that is not being diluted is stale, rigid, dying.
> >>
> >> I completely disagree, but it doesn't matter.

>

> Please speak up! :) Why do you think brand dilution is not a
> very positive thing?


> Dropping everyone but SL Marketing from a marketing discussion.
>

I think this is a really important discussion for the wider community, as
it relates to the future/vision topic :)


> A strong brand is a differentiator, which practices exclusion.
>

I kindly assert a brand does not need to practice exclusion to
differentiate from other brands in the same space - eg, _many_ companies
use Helvetica as their type identity, but are not confused. Most companies
use 'retail' typefaces that anyone can purchase a license to for a very
modest cost (typically well under $500.) Exclusion _may_ help a brand,
which is why some companies commission custom typefaces that no-one else
has access to. Eg, Google used Catull for over a decade, available to
anyone who could pay, and last year switched to their own custom brand
type, Product Sans.

The premiere NY design museum, the Cooper Hewitt, released its
(expensively) commissioned custom typeface as a libre font -
https://github.com/cooperhewitt/cooperhewitt-typeface - because its brand
designers have the same position I do.


> This might seem contradictory for a free libre open source software
> project, but then again, most such projects have feeble marketing.
>

I assert it is contradictory for _any_ brand who wants to engage with the
vibrant remix culture that epitomises the current decade. If your customers
love your brand, they want to participate in diluting it. I think an
insistence on deterring them is a hold-over from previous decades.


> For anyone to adopt a brand, they have to feel close to it and know what
> it stands for, what it is and what it definitely is not.
>

How can anyone adopt a brand without diluting it?


> Brand dilution means the vision of the brand losing focus, applying its
> values to products, services or ideas outside its core association.
>

I would rephase this as: Brand dilution means the vision of the brand
expanding to new horizons, apply its values to products, services and ideas
beyond its core that still express its values, and thus add value to the
brand.


> Brand owners often try to extend a brand, since the rewards can be
> substantial. However more often than not a diluted brand loses its power
> and is considered has-been, irrelevant or worthless.
>

I kindly assert this is only true for some brands, and not a universal
truth :)

The point is that Sugar's brand is not very strong, but the green $100
laptop brand is strong. So it would be good to continue using green laptops
if we have any reference hardware.

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

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

[Laura Vargas]

2016-06-16 22:12 GMT+08:00 Dave Crossland :

>
> On 14 June 2016 at 21:57, Dave Crossland  wrote:
>
>> ACTION ITEM: Dave will talk with Leah at OLPC on Thursday, and ask what
>> their goals are for the next few years, when they will end support for
>> XO-1s, and what they would advise in the scenario that we break Sugar for
>> XOs in the 0.110 release, etc
>>
>
> I just spoke with Leah, and she was great to chat with!
>
> Great news Dave! hopefully more and more OLPC members will join the
conversation on the IEP list.


> - OLPC offered XO-1.75 and XO-4 upgrade kits in the past, to upgrade
> XO-1s, but they didn't sell that well; she agreed with Tony's assessment
> that users will run the XO-1 until it fails, and OLPC has no EOL date in
> mind
>
> - OLPC is still offering XO-4s (touch and non-touch) with a minimum order
> of 100 units through the end of this year for sure, and has a few units in
> stock in Miami if anyone wants to buy just one or two; and Leah said they
> could look into updating the laptop.org website to make the offer public
>
> I belive SL business is the software We should not pay for any hardware
(besides the servers) that must be provided from PC manufacturers for
development ans testing. We already have experience with Intell locally.


> - OLPC is now also offering a newer model, a classmate-spec machine, and
> will send me details about this; its rugged and branded but not got the
> pixel qi screen.
>
> - OLPC only ships Sugar, and is very happy with it, and wants to support
> the developer community although isn't sure how to so;
>

And we are very happy supporting the OLPCs too. We would like to continue
doing so in a sustainable way for active members. We should let them know,
we are developing a thematic fund structure for OLPC and other "investors"
to be able to directorate the resources into specific projects.

- OLPC is willing to put me in touch with deployments if I wanted to visit
> them to do user testing of the font editor activity and font design
> workshops for kids
>

I believe full transparency for technical contacts, year of intervention,
native language, number of machines, etc should be public information as
long as it is public education.


Regards and blessings,
Laura V
www.somosazucar.org

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



-- 
Laura V.
I SomosAZUCAR.Org

Identi.ca/Skype acaire
IRC kaametza

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

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

[Sebastian Silva]

El 15/06/16 a las 22:02, Dave Crossland escribió:
>
> Hi
>
> On 15 June 2016 at 12:51, Sebastian Silva  > wrote:
>
>
>
> On 15/06/16 08:40, Dave Crossland wrote:
> > However, http://www.one-education.org has just announced their new
> > unit, which is US$260 including tax (but plus shipping from
> Australia)
> >
> > Perhaps that should be the reference unit?
>
>  
>
> Just saw this closer and it looks like a really nice laptop. It's a
> shame that there is no Sugar image tailored for it. 
>
>
> When I spoke to Rangan a couple months ago, he said that there is no
> demand from the schools that One Education serves for such an image.

It all depends on your intervention principles. In education, *we see
Free Software as the only ethical and coherent option because it enables
learners to examine and improve the tools we use to learn*, or do our jobs.
 
>
> Perhaps Sugar Labs should try to get a donation for distributing
> to developers.
>
>
> Sadly https://github.com/oneeducation is not updated much, as they are
> working in private repos; he wasn't sure if they will become public
> repos after their launch ramps up.
>  
>
> It looks like a classmate-class laptop 
>
>
> What do you see the differences as between a classmate and a chromebook?
I expect to be able to install a standard or customized GNU/linux
operating system on classmate-class laptops. At a certain scale I expect
I can have it pre-installed by the supplier and produced with only
free-software supported parts. I don't expect Chromebooks will offer
these possibilities.
>  
>
> we really need a good OS proposal for those.
>
>
> Can you point to any proposals that are similar to what you have in
> mind (but perhaps not 'good,' as you define it...)?
There are many. I can point to:

  * DouDouLinux http://www.doudoulinux.org/web/english/index.html
  * Qimu http://www.qimo4kids.com/what-is-qimo/
  * Trisquel TOAST http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Trisquel_On_A_Sugar_Toast
  * DebianEdu https://wiki.debian.org/DebianEdu/
  * Minino http://minino.galpon.org/
  * Huayra GNU Linux http://huayra.conectarigualdad.gob.ar/
  * Canaima GNU Linux http://www.canaima.softwarelibre.gob.ve/

They either:

  * Don't include / consider Sugar
  * Are 'all or nothing'
  * Are hard to base from
  * Don't run well on classmates [because of drivers]
  * Are dead projects or dormant

We propose development of a common /Sugar Blend /as a base for a
classmate-class laptop operating system:
https://wiki.debian.org/SugarBlend/Huayruro

Such a project would overcome the previous limitations by building on a
common base.

>
> (Operating System or Open Source? :)
I never say Open Source. :-)
>
> I'd be happy deploying 10 of them in a community center near
> Puerto Maldonado and sharing results.
>
>
> I guess you are touch with Rangan already, but perhaps we could
> schedule a call with the 3 of us if you are not :)
I'm not in contact with him but I'd love to work together towards the
goal of producing a credible and fully supported operating system for
laptops such as these (there are many brands). It would be great if we
could gather support from manufacturers and integrators for producing
and releasing a supported distribution/platform tested on specific
models of laptops.

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

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

[Sean DALY]

On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 4:38 PM, Dave Crossland  wrote:

> Where is the original text?



The old site was zapped before I could archive anything, so I just use the
Internet Archive Wayback Machine
___
IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep

Re: [IAEP] A Better Idea...

[Laura Vargas]

2016-06-15 8:38 GMT+08:00 Dave Crossland :

> On 11 June 2016 at 11:12, Sean DALY  wrote:
> > Dave - I don't agree that whomever submits a grant application becomes
> the
> > treasurer for those funds.
>
> Fair enough :) I am merely observing what I see as current practice
> with the Trip Advisor grant :)
>
> > What should happen is a sales cycle: if there is
> > interest, the SLOBs should be in the loop so they can assist with
> > face-to-face meetings, followup documents, and Adam/SFC liaison issues.
>

This is probably the key point to ensure funds actually get to the active
members. It will require 100% transparency of grants documents and SCF
management issues.


> > Document signings involving Walter require prior SFC review. In my view,
> > disbursal of funds from a successful grant should be managed by SFC/SLOBs
> > (perhaps primarily in the role of a Finance Manager or Treasurer), as per
> > Gould or TripAdvisor.
>
> Please could you clarify why Walter (or any other SLOB) would
> specifically need to be signing documents; I understand that that
> Conservancy signs the documents, because legally Conservancy is the
> party to them and neither SLOBs nor Members are agents of Conservancy
> and lack signing authority.


> Conversely, I don't see why SLOBS or Conservancy would be involved in
> the management of a project; they only and merely approve the funding,
> and until a Financial Manager is in place, this is done by regular
> motion.
>
>
What is proposed in the new "by funds structure" is to keep a Project
Leader per Project as the Treasurer of that Project's  fund. For general
purpose expenses SL already have the SLOBs who act as Treasurers of the
General Funds fund.

Project Leaders-Treasurers should be encouraged to present time-cycle
required Budgets to the SL Funding/Grants Committee.

Each Project Leader may approve or not an specific grant or grant
percentage to get into his/her Project Fund for N periods of time. By
approving the incoming of funds into the project, the Project Leader shall
agree to make his/her best effort to deliver the grant's desired results on
each time cycle as well as of course to share the results openly.

That said and according to current SLOBs requirements, SLOBs approval will
get a long tale as according to current motions system it requires that (A)
each disbursement motion gets to be seconded by one SLOB + (B) the motion
gets 4 affirmative votes.


On 11 June 2016 at 16:44, Caryl Bigenho  wrote:
> >
> > What does the SFC say about the management of grant funds?
>
> I understand their policy is that spends have to be agreed by SLOB
> within the terms of the grant.
>
> --
> Cheers
> Dave
>



-- 
Laura V.
I SomosAZUCAR.Org
IRC kaametza

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

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

[Dave Crossland]

Hi

On 16 June 2016 at 13:45, Sebastian Silva  wrote:

>
>
> El 15/06/16 a las 22:02, Dave Crossland escribió:
>
>
> Hi
>
> On 15 June 2016 at 12:51, Sebastian Silva 
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On 15/06/16 08:40, Dave Crossland wrote:
>> > However, http://www.one-education.org has just announced their new
>> > unit, which is US$260 including tax (but plus shipping from Australia)
>> >
>> > Perhaps that should be the reference unit?
>>
>
>
> Just saw this closer and it looks like a really nice laptop. It's a
>> shame that there is no Sugar image tailored for it.
>
>
> When I spoke to Rangan a couple months ago, he said that there is no
> demand from the schools that One Education serves for such an image.
>
>
> It all depends on your intervention principles. In education, *we see
> Free Software as the only ethical and coherent option because it enables
> learners to examine and improve the tools we use to learn*, or do our
> jobs.
>

As a percentage, how many school IT decision makers agree with you?

What is your strategy for engaging the ones who do not agree with you?


> Perhaps Sugar Labs should try to get a donation for distributing to
>> developers.
>
>
> Sadly https://github.com/oneeducation is not updated much, as they are
> working in private repos; he wasn't sure if they will become public repos
> after their launch ramps up.
>
>
>
>> It looks like a classmate-class laptop
>>
>
> What do you see the differences as between a classmate and a chromebook?
>
> I expect to be able to install a standard or customized GNU/linux
> operating system on classmate-class laptops. At a certain scale I expect I
> can have it pre-installed by the supplier and produced with only
> free-software supported parts. I don't expect Chromebooks will offer these
> possibilities.
>

"Basically, all Intel hardware from year 2010 and beyond will never be
supported by libreboot. The libreboot project is actively ignoring all
modern Intel hardware at this point, and focusing on alternative platforms."
- https://libreboot.org/faq/#librem

Do Classmates inherently require the Intel Management Engine?

Do non-Intel Chromebooks?

we really need a good OS proposal for those.
>
>
> Can you point to any proposals that are similar to what you have in mind
> (but perhaps not 'good,' as you define it...)?
>
> There are many. I can point to:
>
>- DouDouLinux http://www.doudoulinux.org/web/english/index.html
>- Qimu http://www.qimo4kids.com/what-is-qimo/
>- Trisquel TOAST http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Trisquel_On_A_Sugar_Toast
>- DebianEdu https://wiki.debian.org/DebianEdu/
>- Minino http://minino.galpon.org/
>- Huayra GNU Linux http://huayra.conectarigualdad.gob.ar/
>- Canaima GNU Linux http://www.canaima.softwarelibre.gob.ve/
>
> They either:
>
>- Don't include / consider Sugar
>- Are 'all or nothing'
>- Are hard to base from
>- Don't run well on classmates [because of drivers]
>- Are dead projects or dormant
>
> We propose development of a common * Sugar Blend *as a base for a
> classmate-class laptop operating system:
> https://wiki.debian.org/SugarBlend/Huayruro
>
> Such a project would overcome the previous limitations by building on a
> common base.
>
I am reminded a bit of https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B8DCMDoCYAEVHOZ.jpg -
especially because of DebianEdu.

Why did you not join one of these projects and reinvigorate it to address
the issues you listed?

(Operating System or Open Source? :)
>
> I never say Open Source. :-)
>

Me too; I prefer to say 'libre' :)


> I'd be happy deploying 10 of them in a community center near
>> Puerto Maldonado and sharing results.
>>
>
> I guess you are touch with Rangan already, but perhaps we could schedule a
> call with the 3 of us if you are not :)
>
> I'm not in contact with him but I'd love to work together towards the goal
> of producing a credible and fully supported operating system for laptops
> such as these (there are many brands). It would be great if we could gather
> support from manufacturers and integrators for producing and releasing a
> supported distribution/platform tested on specific models of laptops.
>

In concrete terms, what can be done to work together with him on this?

Would you want him to send you a laptop? What else could he do for you?

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

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

[Dave Crossland]

On 16 June 2016 at 13:49, Laura Vargas  wrote:

> Great news Dave! hopefully more and more OLPC members will join the
> conversation on the IEP list.
>

Sadly, I must admit that I do not expect anyone at OLPC to join this list.


> - OLPC offered XO-1.75 and XO-4 upgrade kits in the past, to upgrade
>> XO-1s, but they didn't sell that well; she agreed with Tony's assessment
>> that users will run the XO-1 until it fails, and OLPC has no EOL date in
>> mind
>>
>> - OLPC is still offering XO-4s (touch and non-touch) with a minimum order
>> of 100 units through the end of this year for sure, and has a few units in
>> stock in Miami if anyone wants to buy just one or two; and Leah said they
>> could look into updating the laptop.org website to make the offer public
>>
> I belive SL business is the software We should not pay for any hardware
> (besides the servers) that must be provided from PC manufacturers for
> development ans testing. We already have experience with Intell locally.
>

You do not think SL should offer hardware to developers to raise funds?


> - OLPC is now also offering a newer model, a classmate-spec machine, and
>> will send me details about this; its rugged and branded but not got the
>> pixel qi screen.
>>
>> - OLPC only ships Sugar, and is very happy with it, and wants to support
>> the developer community although isn't sure how to so;
>>
>
> And we are very happy supporting the OLPCs too. We would like to continue
> doing so in a sustainable way for active members. We should let them know,
> we are developing a thematic fund structure for OLPC and other "investors"
> to be able to directorate the resources into specific projects.
>

I agree that they ought to be one of the many companies we approach for
funding in the future :)


> - OLPC is willing to put me in touch with deployments if I wanted to visit
>> them to do user testing of the font editor activity and font design
>> workshops for kids
>>
>
> I believe full transparency for technical contacts, year of intervention,
> native language, number of machines, etc should be public information as
> long as it is public education.
>

Leah said she could look into how often their customers upgrade Sugar, so I
guess I'll speak with her again in a couple of months when I have more
information about the font editor and some idea about the upcoming 0.110
release.

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

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

[Dave Crossland]

On 16 June 2016 at 11:30, Sean DALY  wrote:

>
> On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 4:38 PM, Dave Crossland  wrote:
>
>> Where is the original text?
>
>
>
> The old site was zapped before I could archive anything, so I just use the
> Internet Archive Wayback Machine
>

That'll work :) I've filed
https://github.com/sugarlabs/www-sugarlabs/issues/56 to track this
___
IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep

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

[Laura Vargas]

2016-06-17 12:07 GMT+08:00 Dave Crossland :

>
> On 16 June 2016 at 13:49, Laura Vargas  wrote:
>
>> Great news Dave! hopefully more and more OLPC members will join the
>> conversation on the IEP list.
>>
>
> Sadly, I must admit that I do not expect anyone at OLPC to join this list.
>

Could you please explain why?

>
>
>> - OLPC offered XO-1.75 and XO-4 upgrade kits in the past, to upgrade
>>> XO-1s, but they didn't sell that well; she agreed with Tony's assessment
>>> that users will run the XO-1 until it fails, and OLPC has no EOL date in
>>> mind
>>>
>>> - OLPC is still offering XO-4s (touch and non-touch) with a minimum
>>> order of 100 units through the end of this year for sure, and has a few
>>> units in stock in Miami if anyone wants to buy just one or two; and Leah
>>> said they could look into updating the laptop.org website to make the
>>> offer public
>>>
>> I belive SL business is the software We should not pay for any hardware
>> (besides the servers) that must be provided from PC manufacturers for
>> development ans testing. We already have experience with Intell locally.
>>
>
> You do not think SL should offer hardware to developers to raise funds?
>

Can you also please explain what is what you are proposing?

>
>
>> - OLPC is now also offering a newer model, a classmate-spec machine, and
>>> will send me details about this; its rugged and branded but not got the
>>> pixel qi screen.
>>>
>>> - OLPC only ships Sugar, and is very happy with it, and wants to support
>>> the developer community although isn't sure how to so;
>>>
>>
>> And we are very happy supporting the OLPCs too. We would like to continue
>> doing so in a sustainable way for active members. We should let them know,
>> we are developing a thematic fund structure for OLPC and other "investors"
>> to be able to directorate the resources into specific projects.
>>
>
> I agree that they ought to be one of the many companies we approach for
> funding in the future :)
>

I read from your email they are ready to "support the developer community"
so *let's not keep everybody waiting*!

:D


> - OLPC is willing to put me in touch with deployments if I wanted to visit
>>> them to do user testing of the font editor activity and font design
>>> workshops for kids
>>>
>>
>> I believe full transparency for technical contacts, year of intervention,
>> native language, number of machines, etc should be public information as
>> long as it is public education.
>>
>
> Leah said she could look into how often their customers upgrade Sugar, so
> I guess I'll speak with her again in a couple of months when I have more
> information about the font editor and some idea about the upcoming 0.110
> release.
>
> Cheers
> Dave
>



-- 
Laura V.
I SomosAZUCAR.Org

Identi.ca/Skype acaire
IRC kaametza

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

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

[Sebastian Silva]

El 16/06/16 a las 23:32, Dave Crossland escribió:
>
>> When I spoke to Rangan a couple months ago, he said that there is
>> no demand from the schools that One Education serves for such an
>> image.
>
> It all depends on your intervention principles. In education, *we
> see Free Software as the only ethical and coherent option because
> it enables learners to examine and improve the tools we use to
> learn*, or do our jobs.
>
>
> As a percentage, how many school IT decision makers agree with you?
I expect few. Generally, not out of malice.:-)
>
> What is your strategy for engaging the ones who do not agree with you?
To respectfully educate them on the subject.

The point is we cannot be guided by demand alone. We stand for something.

Where there is ignorance there is no demand for knowledge but rather for
entertainment.
Too often people resign their freedom in order to obtain short term
convenience.

We aim to liberate them rather than submit them to technological oppression.
>  
>
>> we really need a good OS proposal for those.
>>
>>
>> Can you point to any proposals that are similar to what you have
>> in mind (but perhaps not 'good,' as you define it...)?
> There are many. I can point to:
>
>   * DouDouLinux http://www.doudoulinux.org/web/english/index.html
>   * Qimu http://www.qimo4kids.com/what-is-qimo/
>   * Trisquel TOAST
> http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Trisquel_On_A_Sugar_Toast
>   * DebianEdu https://wiki.debian.org/DebianEdu/
>   * Minino http://minino.galpon.org/
>   * Huayra GNU Linux http://huayra.conectarigualdad.gob.ar/
>   * Canaima GNU Linux http://www.canaima.softwarelibre.gob.ve/
>
> They either:
>
>   * Don't include / consider Sugar
>   * Are 'all or nothing'
>   * Are hard to base from
>   * Don't run well on classmates [because of drivers]
>   * Are dead projects or dormant
>
> We propose development of a common /Sugar Blend /as a base for a
> classmate-class laptop operating system:
> https://wiki.debian.org/SugarBlend/Huayruro
>
> Such a project would overcome the previous limitations by building
> on a common base.
>
> I am reminded a bit of https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B8DCMDoCYAEVHOZ.jpg
> - especially because of DebianEdu.
> Why did you not join one of these projects and reinvigorate it to
> address the issues you listed?
I did! Most of them were done without thinking of replicability or
continuity. I am collaborating from inside Debian (although I haven't
reached Debian Developer status). You'll notice all of the above have
Debian as a base. Plus it's the only active project of the lot. Jonas
and I worked actively on it last year. Sadly the Ministry of Education
of Peru deployed tablets and did not fund the proposed project. I still
think it is needed.
> In concrete terms, what can be done to work together with him on this? 
>
> Would you want him to send you a laptop? What else could he do for you?
Samples would be nice of course. I would love it if he would commit to
offering Sugar as an option for deployment. It would be even better if
they would commit some resources to making it a practical option. Sugar
Labs should too. I don't think our current software offering set is
adequate and I think this translates into the slow demand he perceives.
No product, no demand.
--
Regards,
Sebastian
___
IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep