Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Comparison of Windows XP and Linux/Sugar On the OLPC XO

timothy posted more than 6 years ago | from the but-the-hardware-is-awesome dept.

Education 203

griffjon writes "OLPCNews has a comparison of Windows XP to the Sugar/Linux OS on the One Laptop Per Child XO-1, based on the Microsoft Unlimited Potential video, touching on video recording, power usage, boot times, and mesh networking. An interesting, if saddening, read."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

What's the real plan? (5, Interesting)

clang_jangle (975789) | more than 6 years ago | (#24353245)

I thought MS was determined to kill XP, so what point are they trying to make showing how well it can run on the XO? I find this a bit confusing, like MS is talking out both sides of their mouth or something. Are they really going to stop selling XP as they keep claiming, or are they going to build a "new" windows netbook edtion based on XP, or are they just going to keep offering XP alongside Vista? Seems to me either the second or third options would be the most realistic, but they keep saying the opposite. What gives, MS? TFA also links to a blog containing a claim of an XP RTM for the Intel Classmate [technet.com]
Puzzling.

eat my shorts slashdot !! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24353267)

Eat my shorts slashdot !!!

Re:eat my shorts slashdot !! (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24355275)

Oh Balmer, for crying out loud - don't you have anything better to do?

Re:What's the real plan? (-1, Troll)

Zosden (1303873) | more than 6 years ago | (#24353329)

I think that Vista hasn't gone far enough with pop-up boxes. Window's users are stupid so they don't always know what they want. I think every time a user clicks or types or even tries to breath windows should ask the user if they really want to do that. Now that that is out of the way. I hope they keep supporting XP. At least until after I have to get a new desktop so that I can have a dual boot, with some sort of Linux.

Re:What's the real plan? (5, Interesting)

belmolis (702863) | more than 6 years ago | (#24353441)

Well, if I put my tin-foil hat on, I figure that Microsoft hopes to make the OLPC dependent on XP. With XP no longer available anywhere else, people who really want it will have to get it from OLPCs, rendering them unusable. In this way, MS will satisfy customers who really want XP, while destroying the OLPC.

It's an easier smear than that. (4, Insightful)

twitter (104583) | more than 6 years ago | (#24353587)

Despite all the shortfalls mentioned, M$ marketing will tell you that XP is better than that toy OS but XP is all you can run on toy hardware and be able to do "real work". If you want to do real work right, they will tell you to buy Intel's latest and cripple it with Vista. I know, that has nothing to do with reality but that's what they will tell you.

When it comes to education, they will point to piles and piles of really awful "educational" software available for XP that will soon be ported to Vista. Or they will do what they did here and act like XP + Office and a thumb drive for "sharing" is all you need. Who knows, as the article pointed out, none of it will work once you put in AV and viruses eat it anyway. The sad fact is that XO and Sugar met a real need in a way that M$ can't, but M$ is going to bribe and lie until XO is destroyed.

Re:It's an easier smear than that. (1)

palegray.net (1195047) | more than 6 years ago | (#24353961)

Listen everyone, I dislike twitter as much as anyone. However, the parent post appears to contain a valid statement of opinion regarding Microsoft's tactics with respect to the OLPC project. Moderation should probably be according to the content of the post, not simply the poster's name.

Today one thing, tomorrow another (0, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24354087)

twitter has exhausted the good will of Slashdot by blatantly gaming the moderation system with so many accounts.

That, and constantly spitting out lies, fabrications and exaggerated bull doesn't help him. A lot of people who are honest advocates of free software are probably tired of him making them look bad by association.

No, honestly I don't think he should be given a pass just because he posts something halfway insightful once in a blue moon. And I'd even disagree that this particular post is even close to being that. He usually makes sense only when he's talking about the MPAA and things like that.

Re:It's an easier smear than that. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24354147)

I'm sick and tired of the whole twitter bullshit, but I agree with the other AC (no, that wasn't me, I'm posting AC because I don't want to get hit with offtopic moderations).

You can't run around a website insulting everyone's intelligence, pretending you're a group of ten people who agree [slashdot.org] with each other, start yelling at everyone when it doesn't work, and then expect everything to just go away.

He had his chance. If I believe what his detractors are saying, he's had 12 chances so far, and so far it's the same thing as far as I can see. No kidding, this guy thinks [slashdot.org] Microsoft is actually on Slashdot attacking him personally!?

I hope to hell I can troll a website like that for months and then expect bygones to be bygones.

Re:It's an easier smear than that. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24355045)

Moderation should probably be according to the content of the post, not simply the poster's name.

I agree, except when the poster "contributes" to Slashdot with things like these [slashdot.org] .

Re:It's an easier smear than that. (1)

NosTROLLdamus (979044) | more than 6 years ago | (#24354605)

Okay guys, I admit it. I'm twitter.

Re:It's an easier smear than that. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24355139)

So am I, and so is my wife...

Re:What's the real plan? (0, Redundant)

couchslug (175151) | more than 6 years ago | (#24354061)

"With XP no longer available anywhere else, people who really want it will have to get it from OLPCs, rendering them unusable. In this way, MS will satisfy customers who really want XP, while destroying the OLPC. "

No longer available? It's easier to download a copy or a key than go buy one. Anyone geeky enough to bother with an OLPC is geeky enough to have multiple copies of every MSFT OS since DOS...

Re:What's the real plan? (5, Insightful)

ConceptJunkie (24823) | more than 6 years ago | (#24353501)

I thought MS was determined to kill XP, so what point are they trying to make showing how well it can run on the XO?

They were. Then they realized that Linux would eat their lunch on the OLPC and they knew that Vista boot times on an OLPC would be geologic... if it could run on the machine at all.

Basically, Microsoft got caught with their crappy product being wholly incapable of supporting a new market that was emerging. XP would get a reprieve from this death sentence only to prevent Microsoft from (rightly) looking incapable of supporting low-end hardware. Basically, the cold hard reality of Vista's bloat is too big for even Microsoft to ignore.

Hopefully more and more people will realize that Microsoft hasn't done anything useful since XP was released, except for fixes to XP.

Re:What's the real plan? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24353693)

Or it could be the XP on the OLPC is an offshoot of XP embedded, and as such kind of unrelated to XP's EOL in the consumer space.

If one looks at the OLPC as more of a computing appliance, and it seems to fill a kind of grey area, but kind of more on the appliance side, it makes a lot of sense. But I own a number of shares in a world resource fund, so your tin/aluminum foil consumption eventually benefits me. Rock on overlord welcoming/fearing soldier.

Re:What's the real plan? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24355077)

That's bullshit. They have to use WindowsXP for minimal installs because miniWin kernel was dropped from win7. This is the only reason behind this.
Microsoft hasn't done anything useful? Windows 2008 server ROCKS. .NET framework, ASP.NET MVC, etc...

Re:What's the real plan? (4, Funny)

Drakonik (1193977) | more than 6 years ago | (#24353543)

Have you ever tried to talk out of ONE side of your mouth? Nobody can understand you.

Re:What's the real plan? (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24353865)

Worked for Jean-Chrétien. /duck

Re:What's the real plan? (1)

Mr. DOS (1276020) | more than 6 years ago | (#24354037)

Darn, and just when I run out of mod points. Even if it is AC, and even if it does just back up the parent's point ;)

      --- Mr. DOS

Re:What's the real plan? (5, Insightful)

stavros-59 (1102263) | more than 6 years ago | (#24353583)

Microsoft really don't get the point of the OLPC. They've missed the market for mini laptops and only have Windows XP to offer that market. Shoehorning a kludgy XP and Office, antivirus and protection onto the OLPC makes it a far less useful product.

They are doing the same thing to the EEEPC.

Microsoft's Plans for the distribution of EEEPCs in India [techtree.com]

Re:What's the real plan? (4, Informative)

RobertM1968 (951074) | more than 6 years ago | (#24353671)

Microsoft never claimed they were killing off XP. They claimed that for normal desktops and most laptops, it soon will be no longer available.

Microsoft still "maintains" and sells their older operating systems for a variety of other needs, such as embedded devices, low power devices, etc. This move coincides with that. In the Windows world, the XO is far from what people would consider a normal PC. While Linux variants, eComStation and OS/2 can still run on "outdated" hardware, newer versions of Windows cannot (run being defined as run in a usable fashion, including doing such things as word processing, etc). While their OS strategy is largely to blame for that, their policy does address it by their continued selling of older operating systems when the requirements are met (ie: slower and/or less powerful hardware, embedded devices, set-top boxes, xBox/xBox360s, etc).

The sadder point, which would have been a valid one for you to bring up, is that the current bloat in their newer OS incarnations is the cause for them having such a policy. Bloat which is not needed in any form or fashion - as an example, a fully implemented (we can hope for that day) Wine or Odin on Linux or OS/2 or eComStation would be able to run virtually any Windows app on OS's that require a much smaller CPU and memory footprint, and make far better use of the available resources.

Thus, (to bring this conversation full circle), Microsoft, instead of being technologically innovative in OS design, has decided to hold on to their older operating systems for the hardware still being built that they know their newer ones cannot run on. It's the same reason why Win3.1 sales in similar vertical markets is just ending now.

Re:What's the real plan? (1)

RobertM1968 (951074) | more than 6 years ago | (#24354883)

Keep modding me down for being correct. You dont have to like the truth... how about spending the mod points on the GP instead - it's not like this hasnt been covered on /. enough.

Gotta love /. - glad I have karma to burn...

Re:What's the real plan? (1)

YttriumOxide (837412) | more than 6 years ago | (#24355309)

Many points here that I could debate on end, but I'm not really in the mood, so I'll leave those.
I do however have a question. You said:

It's the same reason why Win3.1 sales in similar vertical markets is just ending now.

Can you point me to such a vertical market? I haven't seen 3.1 in a LONG time. "NT Embedded", yes... "3.1", no.
(not saying you're lying, I'm actually just genuinely interested if there's a hole in my knowledge somewhere

... the real plan ... (1)

Joseph_Daniel_Zukige (807773) | more than 6 years ago | (#24355497)

Don't look at the plan on the wall behind the current. That was from a sales job we did to a different group of people, and they don't need to know the real story. Look over here at this white board that we've been keeping hidden in a top-secret closet and wheeled in just for this meeting.

Ya think?

No, it doesn't really require conspiracy against conspiracy theories, or even seeing through the old shell game here. This is all FUD. Worry the Boards of Education of some poor backwater (in Microsoft's opinion) easily deluded South American countries about advertised performance. Hide the fine print.

Specified values are 50% better than you will obtain.

to quote an old spoof of a Darkness Emitting Arsenic Diode spec sheet that I can't seem to find in my archives any more.)

eat my shorts slashdot !! (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24353247)

Eat my shorts slashdot !!

Re:eat my shorts slashdot !! (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24353385)

Shut up nigger.

$3 (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24353393)

MS has no plans to Kill XP. Its the best OS they have going. Now that it is a stable version, and no longer "for sale" on new pc's, they can sell it for $3, and put it on low end laptops in order to reach a new set of customers, and keep them in the MS loop forever.

Sugar is worse (0, Troll)

r00t (33219) | more than 6 years ago | (#24353449)

Sugar is god-awful slow. It's not even a real program; it's just a Python script.

Sugar has this thing called the journal. It "manages" your files with less sophistication than the 1984 Mac. There are no directories. It's all one big pile. It's full of spam even; every time you run a program you get a useless file in your journal.

Re:Sugar is worse (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24353545)

I suggest you read and understand the philosophy behind OLPC, the XO laptop, and Sugar, before posting such blatantly ignorant posts as this one.

Re:Sugar is worse (1)

sumdumass (711423) | more than 6 years ago | (#24353717)

What would the philosophy have to do with anything? Maybe you meant specs or white papers or something. Google's philosophy is to do no evil yet if you ask the right people they have. The philosophy really has nothing to do with the actual implementation besides being a guide.

BTW, I'm not looking anything up on this so what did he say that was wrong and such blatantly ignorant posts?

Re:Sugar is worse (4, Informative)

grumbel (592662) | more than 6 years ago | (#24353793)

That the underlying philosophy is good doesn't change the fact that Sugar has still a lot of problems. The journal getting filled with tons of completly useless entries, which basically render it unusable, is just one of them, the other is that even a "Hello World"-app takes almost 10 seconds to start up, while it starts instantly when started from the terminal.

Re:Sugar is worse (4, Insightful)

edalytical (671270) | more than 6 years ago | (#24353629)

Besides slow, which I can't comment on, everything else you mentioned is a feature. I don't think they're all that bad either.

If sugar was a "real" program (whatever that means) as opposed to a script it wouldn't be user modifiable (at least at runtime).

Honestly when is the last time you saw a novice user create a directory? My mom and my sister certainly don't. On that same note it's not like you couldn't use a naming scheme that would effectively manage your files like directories. All you have to do is prefix related files with some kind of identifier. For all intend and purpose that's what a directory name really is, a prefix. It doesn't matter if it's not supported at the file system level.

If those so-called "spam" files contain the amount of time you spent with a program and other useful things like your interactions with the program then I think they aren't useless. Tracking your time is an important skill that many people haven't learned. Doing it for the user is very useful. The Wii tracks your time it's pretty interesting and useful too.

they really are spam (1)

r00t (33219) | more than 6 years ago | (#24354251)

Start some random activity. (terminal will do)

Having done nothing else, quit the activity.

You have spam!

You get a new spam each time. A kid can create dozens or hundreds in a day, limited mainly by the general bad performance.

These entries have no reasonable use. They are clutter. Important stuff gets lost in the mess.

You're expected to regularly delete these I suppose. This is busy-work. It's difficult too, because you have to take care to avoid deleting something useful. It's additionally difficult because the journal's UI is both unintuitive and abysmally slow.

Re:Sugar is worse (1)

TerminaMorte (729622) | more than 6 years ago | (#24354603)

Novice users create a directory all the time; it's not a concept people have difficulty with.

I find it very surprising that there are no directories, especially if these "spam" files are getting dumped to the same place you save your documents and other files.

This is a feature that is embarrassing not to have.

Re:Sugar is worse (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24354927)

Directories are stupid. But you need an alternative MORE powerful -i.e. categories/labels, not nothing, to replace them.

Re:Sugar is worse (1)

Mista2 (1093071) | more than 6 years ago | (#24355099)

I think it is also a point about whether you want to provide a tool for kids to learn about computers, and hwo to make them work, or just another PC to edit documents and browse the web on like good little trainie consumers. I cut my PC teeth on breadboarded motorolla CPUs and hacking my z80 based spectrum. I also has an amiga and commodore 128 but I didn't use them except for games. However my speccy got to run a robot, interface with my lego, drive my fathers model railway (track moving trains, route them and set points etc) I learnt about electronics, code, hacking, memory management and why not to bump the ram add on. The keayboard was terrible, so I built my own. On my commodore I learnt how to wait for games to load on serial floppy disk. My Amiga got used for a little video editing and sound mixing, but again mostly games. I cannot see a viable entry level box for learning on (and cheap enough to replace if an experiment fails) apart from the XO. I'm glad that sugar isn't perfect, because then my son & daughter might be able to have a go at learning how to fix it, rather than just post up more trash on facebook and twitter. Putting XP on it fails to get the point of what the XO is for. It is very well designed, just not for Microsoft to run their apps on. If you want XP on an underpowered laptop, buy one second hand.

Re:Sugar is worse (5, Funny)

oldhack (1037484) | more than 6 years ago | (#24353723)

Sugar is god-awful slow. It's not even a real program; it's just a Python script.

That's a really bright thing to say. What, you program only with solder?

An interesting, if sad, read? (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24353489)

OK, so I'm a Linux fanboy. I don't find tfa the least bit sad.

Comparison of Windows XP and Linux/SugarOnthe OLPC (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24353499)

I guess in a word it is like a mermaid half something we recognize and the other half (windows) we are not really sure how it affects the half we know about.

I suppose if it hadn't been changed, bugs fixed, assurances that one could buy one without windows on the machine, completely open source as before, wifi working, webcam, good screen, etc. that it could be thought of as the new TSR -100 under linux. I'd buy one for $100, but how does that help the desperate children of the world or their governments who may or may not want this machine for their children? Very sad.

Sugar and XP accomplish different things.... (5, Informative)

Manip (656104) | more than 6 years ago | (#24353533)

Comparing Sugar to Windows XP is kind of like comparing a pushbike to a 747 engine...

They're designed to do different things. Sugar is designed to be incredibly simple needing little training (or reading skill). It allows people to use a computer without having to learn how to use a computer.

Windows XP is a versatile monster trying to offer all things to all people. It is hugely complex and requires the average person a great deal of time to pickup and use.

I can understand why Microsoft might wish to run XP on the X0 but what I struggle to understand is why anyone is comparing them to one another.

If Microsoft develops some kind of child friendly interface that children can use then we can start talking about it. But until that happens you just aren't comparing the same thing at all.

Re:Sugar and XP accomplish different things.... (1, Informative)

Kangburra (911213) | more than 6 years ago | (#24353555)

You mean like Bob? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Bob [wikipedia.org]

Re:Sugar and XP accomplish different things.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24353841)

Yes, exactly like Bob, only done right. Face it, that's all Sugar is. Apple had a similar idea, around the same time, assort of "Finder Litiand theirs was better, but still far from perfect. But was not a bad idea. It was a great idea, a very simple interface to let you quickly do what you need to do. It was, however, a horrid implementation,

Re:Sugar and XP accomplish different things.... (1)

RobertM1968 (951074) | more than 6 years ago | (#24353937)

The thing I dont understand about BoB is that it was a blatant ripoff of PackardBell's crappy similar entry - which went nowhere at all. How Microsoft made the mistake of "borrowing" their design, adding "Clippy" and the rest of his idiotic designs, and thinking it would go anywhere still amazes me.

You have no idea how many thousands (palettes worth) of BoB they sent to each CompUSA for launch...

It was quite funny. Well, for us... I dont think anyone at Microsoft thought it was funny... (or if they did, they probably didnt keep their jobs very long).

Re:Sugar and XP accomplish different things.... (1)

Airline_Sickness_Bag (111686) | more than 6 years ago | (#24354991)

And look at what MS did to the BoB project manager. Makes Gitmo look like a summer retreat.

Re:Sugar and XP accomplish different things.... (1)

Tacvek (948259) | more than 6 years ago | (#24355181)

Are you talking about the Packard Bell Navigator software? It was a piece of shit much like Bob, and presented a "house" with rooms, organizing your software according to room or some such nonsense. IIRC the keyboard on my Pack of Hell even had a key specially marked for launching the software.

But I'm pretty sure Bob was not a true ripoff of Navigator, as they both came out the same year. I suspect they were really just simultaneously developed, and modified to add interesting fewatures they heard were going to be in the other.

Re:Sugar and XP accomplish different things.... (5, Insightful)

Flavio (12072) | more than 6 years ago | (#24353637)

I can understand why Microsoft might wish to run XP on the X0 but what I struggle to understand is why anyone is comparing them to one another.

The point of comparing Sugar to XP is to demonstrate what most of us predicted -- i.e., that XP is completely unsuitable for this application.

Having XP in the marketplace annoys me, but my irritation is limited because people have alternatives. A child who gets XP preinstalled on the XO will probably have no alternative and will be left with an inferior product. I hope reviewers keep denouncing Microsoft's involvement with the XO, because no good can come of it.

Re:Sugar and XP accomplish different things.... (5, Insightful)

fm6 (162816) | more than 6 years ago | (#24354205)

The point of comparing Sugar to XP is to demonstrate what most of us predicted -- i.e., that XP is completely unsuitable for this application.

And that, believe it or not, is actually good news.

People want Windows on the XO because they think that kids need "practical" tools, like Microsoft Office, so they can develop "marketable" skills. Which is nonsense. There aren't that many jobs for people with those kinds of skills, especially not in rural villages in the developing world. Kids in those places need learning tools that help them build their knowledge and skill base on their own.

So Windows on the XO is unworkable. Great. Now the OLPC people can get back to doing something more useful than producing yet another Wintel clone.

Re:Sugar and XP accomplish different things.... (3, Interesting)

hairyfeet (841228) | more than 6 years ago | (#24355141)

What amazes me is that nobody at the OLPC seems to be even thinking this through. You are putting WinXP,which can be hijacked in no time flat if it isn't running AV,anti-malware,firewall,and patched up(and the patches can take up a TON of space). Since we know that a machine with specs as low as the OLPC can't run all those,not unless they run something ultra stripped like "XP Beast Edition" to make room for the extra software and to cut down on the avenues of attack,which of course MSFT isn't about to give them, we can assume that it will be no time at all until the XP OLPCs will be hijacked.

As someone who fixes Windows machines for a living I can tell you that no matter how much RAM and CPU you have the average virus or malware is going to thrash the hell out of the drive,that is just the nature of the beast. Since the OLPC uses SSD for storage the XP machines will burn through the write cycles pretty damned fast once they get pwned. And unless they are planning to give out read only flash drives containing the OS I'm guessing the hacked together version of XP they are getting is going to be a royal PITA to reinstall once it burns up the SSD. So they are going to end up with a bunch of dead OLPCs,and since we are talking third world and I doubt they have crates of SSDs to replace all the burnt ones from viruses, the OLPC goes from being a tool for schoolkids to learn with to just another piece of dead Windows junk.

Maybe when the OLPC goes out of business someone will buy the fab and the design and sell them to everyone so the economies of scale will kick in and we can all have cheap Linux Netbooks. Because going with XP on the OLPC seems to me to be a recipe for failure.

Re:Sugar and XP accomplish different things.... (3, Insightful)

griffjon (14945) | more than 6 years ago | (#24354641)

The point of comparing Sugar to XP is to demonstrate what most of us predicted -- i.e., that XP is completely unsuitable for this application.

Exactly -- It seems... obvious? But the pushback (slashdotters in favor of Windows over Linux? Is it Opposite Day??) is pretty amazing. Sugar is built to be an educational tool; XP was built to be a business tool. There are many, many great arguments why XP is a bad idea for the OLPC XO; but they are often lost on people. TFA is just trying to do a straight, point-by-point comparison to show how bad XP really is as a replacement for Sugar.

Re:Sugar and XP accomplish different things.... (1)

_Sprocket_ (42527) | more than 6 years ago | (#24353643)

One of these two OS environments was designed to be on a XO and one wasn't. That's why they're being compared - and why the comparison is valid.

Re:Sugar and XP accomplish different things.... (4, Informative)

perlchild (582235) | more than 6 years ago | (#24353711)

but what I struggle to understand is why anyone is comparing them to one another.

Because there have been pressures on the OLPC to replace one with the other. To know how useful such pressures are, you have to compare them. That the pressures are lobby-driven and really have nothing in common with what people associate with "sense" is the result of that comparison.

Re:Sugar and XP accomplish different things.... (0)

edalytical (671270) | more than 6 years ago | (#24353715)

Well, good thing the comparison was XP vs GNU/Linux with Sugar and not just Sugar in and of itself.

Re:Sugar and XP accomplish different things.... (1)

DarkOx (621550) | more than 6 years ago | (#24355217)

I think that is sorta the point. What is "needed" on the OLPC and XO is something simple that someone with not experience, and limited reading skills, a child in the developing world for example is something like sugar.

If you are trying to decide to ship Windows XP or Linux with Sugar on top, it might be useful to compare them from the point of view of the target user. Also Sugar is just the shell, the linux based operationg system its running on is still a "versatile monster trying to offer all things to all people. It is hugely complex and requires the average person a great deal of time to pickup and use."
Once they start learning they can go on to use just about and UNIX software which as a general rule has a lot better odds of doing something useful on such a limited hardware platform then any Windows based counter part.

Sugar / the windows shell, in this case should be almost thought of as a boot strap for the user. Its supposed to be providing them enough access to get started without much prior education so they can go on an teach themselves from there. Having never used sugar only reading about it a looking at pictures that it appears it might be a success where XP is obviously a total failure at such an objective. Evidence you say just look at all the thick dead tree books, and traning videos designed to teach basic Windows usage to extreemely well educated by comparison users here in the Western World. Windows is not some magically intuative system most people can just figure out, its just that its so popular everyone gets exposure.

So - the moral is... (0, Troll)

silverdr (779097) | more than 6 years ago | (#24353549)

that GNU/Linux is not for children...

Negroponte (0, Flamebait)

Stephen Ma (163056) | more than 6 years ago | (#24353565)

Nicholas Negroponte, the founder of the OLPC project, has a brother named John Negroponte. Yes, that Negroponte: the current Deputy Secretary of State. So it's probably not surprising that the OLPC project is now under Microsoft's thumb: the huge octopus in Redmond has a lot of tentacles inside the Bush administration; this political influence was probably how Microsoft escaped being seriously punished after losing the anti-trust case.

By the way, John Negroponte was ambassador to Honduras in 1981-85, and to Iraq in 2004-5. We started hearing about death squads in both countries not long after his appointment. Death squads started appearing in El Salvador and Guatemala at about the same time as Negroponte's stint in Honduras. There is no proof that he was the instigator of the death squads, but I would not be surprised to learn that he was the evil force behind them, not surprised at all.

So Nicholas Negroponte has some heavy political connections, not all of which are entirely savory.

Re:Negroponte (3, Interesting)

johnlcallaway (165670) | more than 6 years ago | (#24353719)

Amazing how one can take pieces of disparate information, couple it with nonsensical comments and very flimsy commonality and turn it into a conspiracy theory.

Remember, just because someone is paranoid doesn't mean people aren't out to get them ...

Re:Negroponte (1)

Stephen Ma (163056) | more than 6 years ago | (#24353873)

Wherever Negroponte went, there were death squads. You can call it coincidence if you want. But remember the following military maxim: once is an accident, twice is a coincidence, three times is enemy action.

Re:Negroponte (1)

johnlcallaway (165670) | more than 6 years ago | (#24354435)

By it's very definition, it can be called a coincidence until there is more than simple causal connections . I don't have to call it that at all, it will be that until there is physical evidence. And then linking two people together simply by an accident of birth takes it just beyond conspiracy theory in my opinion.

Or a good story to scare young children and influence naive adults with.

Re:Negroponte (2, Interesting)

Stephen Ma (163056) | more than 6 years ago | (#24354693)

By it's very definition, it can be called a coincidence until there is more than simple causal connections.

Tell that to the military then. As they say, "three times is enemy action". When death squads appear wherever Negroponte shows up, without exception, a reasonable conclusion -- not ironclad proof mind you, just a reasonable conclusion -- is that one is a consequence of the other.

And then linking two people together simply by an accident of birth takes it just beyond conspiracy theory in my opinion.

Yeah, you're probably one of those who believe George W. Bush earned his presidency by merit, not because he was the son of George H. W. Bush.

Re:Negroponte (2, Insightful)

johnlcallaway (165670) | more than 6 years ago | (#24354917)

A coincidence doesn't imply that one shouldn't be careful. If I find that money is missing from my car whenever I give Freddie a ride, it doesn't mean Freddie is stealing. Police use coincidences all the time. Fortunately, our legal system requires physical proof rather than coincidence most of the time. Three coincidences probably would not be enough to convict anyone, that damn reasonable doubt thing and all.

I might be more careful leaving money in the car when Freddie is around. But I sure wouldn't go around telling all my friends Freddie is a thief either.

I don't find it a reasonable conclusion. An interesting theory, but without facts it is baseless. That's like saying 'I don't know where those lights in the sky came from, therefore aliens spaceships must be the cause'. Interesting theory, but I'll need more facts.

Your last comment is irrelevant, there could be hundreds of reasons George W Bush is president without any merit that have nothing to do with his father. Sidestepping a discussion this way is a common tactic that conspiracy nuts use when they run out of evidence. That doesn't mean someone who uses it is a conspiracy nut.

It's just a coincidence, I'm sure.

Re:Negroponte (1)

Stephen Ma (163056) | more than 6 years ago | (#24355365)

Remember, the death squads always follow Negroponte's appearance on the scene. Always! That is more than enough coincidence for a strong suspicion. Police routinely arrest people on far less. Negroponte should have been tried long ago by a war crimes tribunal.

Proof is a different matter, but I am willing to bet that Negroponte will be found guilty by an impartial international court. The evil coincidences are just too strong to ignore.

Re:Negroponte (1)

johnlcallaway (165670) | more than 6 years ago | (#24355425)

Wow .. that was some convincing argument. I think that maybe you've convinced me and everyone else with your unbelievable use of strong arguments based on sound fact gathering and irrefutable evidence.

Oh wait .. we were talking about coincidences, and I switched to sarcasm. Sorry ....

Police can arrest anyone, anytime. Whether a DA will prosecute or a judge and jury will convict on 'strong suspicion' is highly doubtful.

I think I can safely ignore future posts as just being more of the same. Yawn ... I think i will search for intellectual discussions elsewhere.

Re:Negroponte (0)

Stephen Ma (163056) | more than 6 years ago | (#24355479)

Feel free to keep banging your head against the same brick wall. You probably think it's only coincidence that your head is hurting.

Re:Negroponte (1)

RobertM1968 (951074) | more than 6 years ago | (#24353973)

Amazing how one can take pieces of disparate information, couple it with nonsensical comments and very flimsy commonality and turn it into a conspiracy theory....

Ummm... this IS Slashdot... why is that so amazing? Happens here every few minutes!

;-)

Re:Negroponte (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24353731)

You REALLY need to go outside once in a while..

Re:Negroponte (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24353781)

In the famous words of Stephen Colbert, did you also know that the "Golden Gate Bridge's suspension cables form the exact same geometric shape as the Pyramids of Giza"?

Compare... this [wikipedia.org] with this [wikipedia.org] ! There must be a conspiracy.

Also, the Golden Gate Bridge shares the exact same colour as the surface on the planet Mars! This obviously means the Golden Gate Bridge was built by evil Martian overlords, the US Government has been in contact with these evil overlords for decades, and that therefore, the US government is planning to rule the world. Oh, and the moon landing was faked, the government did 9/11, and the government is intentionally planning to "ruin" the OLPC with Windows XP.

See? I can make up conspiracy theories too.

Re:Negroponte (1)

roster238 (969495) | more than 6 years ago | (#24353803)

There is no proof that John Negroponte was not in Dallas in November of 1963. I'm not implying anthing, I'm just saying that there is no proof. Coincidence? I think not.

Re:Negroponte (0)

Stephen Ma (163056) | more than 6 years ago | (#24355417)

There was no proof that Joe Capone was a gangster chieftain (he was convicted on tax evasion, believe it or not).

And yes, there is no proof that John Negroponte was behind the death squads in Honduras, Guatemala, El Salvador, and Iraq. But isn't it amazing that the killing fields appear wherever he shows up? If you think that is still a coincidence, fine. I think he's evil.

I have an olpc and would love windows 98' most (5, Interesting)

magsk (1316183) | more than 6 years ago | (#24353649)

Firstly let me just say I purchased my olpc to use while I travel to third world countries and off the grid (as mot of them are), I like the olpc for its battery life its ability to be recharged without an outlet, and most of all its ruggedness. Now while I understand that xp is a great operating system and modern. I must say that I would be thrilled to use windows 98' on my olpc. . For a few reasons... 1)Suger is very boring, its like using a graphing calculator. 2) I would prefer to use word 97 and excel, along with IE (or ideally firefox, but beggars be choosers) 3) I am more familiar with windows and do believe that my ability to connect to other computers and receive files will be much more successful than using sugar. 4) hopefully will not need to load from SD card Let me finish by saying I know what the olpc was made for, but as someone who did the whole give 1 get 1 because they genuinely appreciate the innovations of the laptop I am an adult and do use it for work.

Re:I have an olpc and would love windows 98' most (3, Interesting)

nawcom (941663) | more than 6 years ago | (#24353853)

Note that this is only an outside opinion, but your whole paragraph equates to someone being served a a nice wet-n-sloppy dog-shit sandwich, and quickly getting back in line for seconds. Though myself a unix dev, I'm sure any Windows user would prefer Windows 2000 to a horribly coded frontend to DOS. Hell, I still use 2000 (either Windows 2000 or Windows FLP [wikipedia.org] ) on a VM in OS X, *BSD, or Linux.

What am I saying? You would like Win2000/WinFLP more, since it's up-to-date and doesn't require heavy memory. But me telling you to use an NT OS instead of a DOS/9x one isn't really help at all; it's about as equivalent to telling a Heroin user to give morphine a try as a better alternative. ;)

Re:I have an olpc and would love windows 98' most (1)

magsk (1316183) | more than 6 years ago | (#24353939)

You are probably 100% right, windows 200 sounds really good. I am not IT or software savvy and only know thru my own use of windows 98'. I assumed 98 wold be lite on the memory needs and such so thought that it could be a good choice. I will have to post requests on the olpc newsgroups to see if anyone can configure windoes 2000 for the olpc.

Re:I have an olpc and would love windows 98' most (2, Interesting)

nawcom (941663) | more than 6 years ago | (#24354353)

I know xp drivers usually use the same resources as windows 2000, it's just that the installers might check to see what OS you are using, and freak out if you aren't using XP. I usually use WinRAR to pull these files out of the EXEs, and if i can't I run the installer and then copy all of the extracted files from your $TEMP folder before closing the installer app. I was checking out AMDs site for geode level support for windows, and it's pretty low, so I would personally depend on the drivers that came with the OS. There's always Windows FLP too, I prefer that over regular XP since its XP without the unneeded bloat. Also I feel bad for sounding harsh, just had a bad night so far; and putting it on someone else was wrong - so I apologize for that.

The main reason I suggested 2k is because the amount of memory that OS needs is considerably lower than XP; if you install it on an updated PC or laptop right now, you'll see a big difference. Same with Windows FLP, but not as much. Anyways, good luck with whatever your end goal with your Eee ends up being ;)

Re:I have an olpc and would love windows 98' most (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24353983)

Beggars are choosers now? Interesting...I would have thought that they were not in a position to be picky.

Biased Write (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24353743)

The author of the article was clearly biased in his opinion. I won't take a position in the matter, but the author doing so made the facts more difficult to grasp when reading the article.

Re:Biased Write (1)

Vexorian (959249) | more than 6 years ago | (#24354007)

You mean (Intel) OLPCnews is biased? What a shocker.

Help me out here??? (0)

roster238 (969495) | more than 6 years ago | (#24353745)

Please help me out here, does the author really think that kids in third world countries are going to be doing development work on these limited devices? Based on the quote below from the article the author really beleives that these devices should be open to tampering/fiddling. Does he think that if the device fails there will be a geek squad near by? Are hacking skills of value when you live in a mud hut?

Windows is designed against this, with no programming tools built in, and an almost anti-hacker/explorer/fiddler philosophy that goes beyond it merely being "closed source" to putting up impediments to learning any useful skills.

Re:Help me out here??? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24353849)

Please help me out here, does the author really think that kids in third world countries are going to be doing development work on these limited devices?

The guy displays the stereotypical self-centeredness of the OSS crowd.

Re:Help me out here??? (5, Insightful)

oldhack (1037484) | more than 6 years ago | (#24353877)

Please help me out here, does the author really think that kids in third world countries are going to be doing development work on these limited devices? Based on the quote below from the article the author really beleives that these devices should be open to tampering/fiddling. Does he think that if the device fails there will be a geek squad near by? Are hacking skills of value when you live in a mud hut?\

Kids today. Many of us had Apple/Commodore as the first computer, mucked around a good bit just for no good reason, and learned a good bit of how computer works, and there were no Geek Squad. That's how you learn.

Btw, these are going to developing countries where computers for kids makes some sense, not cavemenistan. It'd be nice if they marketed these things here (US) also rather than only those countries though - today's mainstream PCs just ain't designed for kids to learn the basic.

Geek Squad, pah.

Re:Help me out here??? (1)

roster238 (969495) | more than 6 years ago | (#24353979)

My first computer was an Atari (yes young man they made computers back in the day) and it was a far cry from these systems. We did tinker with our hardware but these devices are made to allow access to information to school children in remote villages where power is an issue. I personally consider anything east of London to be Caveministan but having lived in Europe for a few years I do remember a few folks who thought some parts of France were civilized.

Re:Help me out here??? (1)

oldhack (1037484) | more than 6 years ago | (#24354169)

Yeah, but how many years have you put into your abacus before your fancy Atari upgrade? Oh, they lied to you about France.

Re:Help me out here??? (2, Insightful)

markov_chain (202465) | more than 6 years ago | (#24354187)

This argument comes up a lot; I guess it has a lot of appeal for the geek types, who started out early, tinkering with their {Atari|Commodore|Apple|Spectrum}, learning to program, etc. Sugar is almost exactly aimed at those types of kids. But I can't help but think that such users are a minority, and that the effort is lost on most others. When I think of average kids in my grade they would probably just stare blankly when told about "source code" and go send penis pictures to each other or something.

Re:Help me out here??? (1)

oldhack (1037484) | more than 6 years ago | (#24354297)

But that's pretty much the basic premise behind the whole project, no? Sending penis doodling is the purported goal, but if it doesn't work for whatever reason, the kid will try a few things to get it to work, in the process learning a thing or two. Or so the expectation goes.

Re:Help me out here??? (3, Informative)

NewbieProgrammerMan (558327) | more than 6 years ago | (#24353879)

Please help me out here, does the author really think that kids in third world countries are going to be doing development work on these limited devices?

I think that was generally the idea, that the kids would be able to change almost anything they wanted in the user environment they were given.

Based on the quote below from the article the author really beleives that these devices should be open to tampering/fiddling. Does he think that if the device fails there will be a geek squad near by?

If I understood correctly, there was supposed to be a reset feature that would restore the original state of the OS if you really screwed it up, so that there needn't be any fear of allowing them to fiddle with things.

Are hacking skills of value when you live in a mud hut?

Again, if I understand correctly, the idea was to avoid putting up artificial barriers by assuming that kids have no need to poke and prod and see how things work. Maybe hacking skills will be of little interest and/or value to most kids, and for them the OLPC was supposed to be at least a container for a lot of textbook material, at a cost less than a big stack of textbooks. And, as a bonus, for the kids that find hacking on software interesting, maybe it's something that will help them.

If you think money is better spent on something else, please agitate in favor of that other option instead of railing against a program that (whatever you think of their chances of success are) is trying to provide education to people that can benefit from it.

Re:Help me out here??? (1)

roster238 (969495) | more than 6 years ago | (#24354067)

No one is railing against the program just the author who is missing the point of providing this device to children in "the most remote regions of the globe". Making a device that is easy to break makes failure of a noble endeavor that much more likley. As long as it runs reliably (which apparently the Sugar OS did not) who cares what OS it uses.

Re:Help me out here??? (1)

NewbieProgrammerMan (558327) | more than 6 years ago | (#24354139)

Oh, as far as I could tell, you were talking about fiddling with the software, not taking a screwdriver to the machine. Sorry.

Re:Help me out here??? (5, Informative)

nawcom (941663) | more than 6 years ago | (#24353969)

The concept is to integrate computer technology into areas that cannot afford it. This is more than just "learning how to click things and checking your email", it (at least the initial plan) was to spread the knowledge of computer technology, programming, and to expand interests to areas that are involuntarily cut off from it.

And for your GeekSquad comment: People who work at GeekSquad are stupid. 99% get confused when "unix" is mentioned, so they whip out their nutsack to show that they haven't had theirs removed. I've had to help GeekSquad kids multiple times with issues; in fact one time I had to tell one of them that they have to use the 48-bit MAC address from the person's laptop in order to set up the router, and he blatantly stated, "Well, we only support Windows." Nuff said.

If you can find someone who is struggling with their preinstalled Linux laptop due to the retarded causes (like spyware, horribly fragmented filesystems, viruses, un-needed bloatware, driver irq issues, etc) that are common in Windows, let me know. Hell, Submit a post here when it happens. In the mean time, when someone in a third world country decides, "Hey, I want to make a program just like this (points at app on the screen) they have the freedom (as in costs) to learn about it and complete their goal.

Re:Help me out here??? (2, Insightful)

DarkOx (621550) | more than 6 years ago | (#24355305)

Does the author really think that kids in third world countries are going to be doing development work on these limited devices?

I don't see why he would not expect that, I learned my first programing in basic on a much smaller machine in terms of power and storage, even if it was much larger and more power hungry (TI99/4A).

Are hacking skills of value when you live in a mud hut?

I don't see why not, not every application has to be some complex financial app, or web browser, big gui anything. Maybe you need a basic calculater to help you decide when to plant crops. I can easily imagine some farmer wanting to record daily temperatures or rain fail year over year and have the computer provide some basic trends. That is the kind of thing you could do in BASIC or Python and could be highly useful.

nothing to see here, move along! (4, Interesting)

AlgorithMan (937244) | more than 6 years ago | (#24353945)

god, that article is crap! first of all he compares his XO to A VIDEO!? wtf!?
  • i read the conclusion first (which i always do, to save reading time, since usually everything else is just explanations on why the conclusion is the way it is) but the conclusion basically says "sugar encourages learning, windows wants to be idiot-proof"
  • so after the conclusion was useless i wondered how the mentioned battery-life comparison went out - but that section says "Microsoft claims 20 hours of battery life while watching movies - and I didn't really test, how long it runs with sugar"... great comparison, really - comparing a marketing statement (yes, with our cars we all get as far on one fuel filling as the commercials tell us...) to nothing!?
  • recording audio is easier to find in sugar, as is video recording (well, you don't get options on quality-vs-size, but who cares about disk space, right? everyone has 1tb nowadays, right? the XO has 3-5 gb online storage - not much and slow...)
  • then he rants about how horrible sharing files is on windows-XO - you have to pass around a data storage medium - OMG!... oh btw it's the same thing with sugar, unless you have a file-server nearby...
  • wifi probably might be shitty on windows - although they barely sayd anything in the video about that... but windows sucks anyways...
  • security will be an issue, because kids might believe lies... anti-virus, anti-spyware, anti-malware, anti-phishing will eat up battery life and performance

now i really hate microsoft and wish them all the worst, but this article is just plain ridiculous! nothing to see here, move along!

Re:nothing to see here, move along! (3, Interesting)

pembo13 (770295) | more than 6 years ago | (#24354231)

Well a video is all Microsoft has provided, while doing their best to push their operating system onto the XO. And a video is likely all they are using to convince people that Windows XP is the only thing that can make the XO work. I guess the author could have waited for an actual working instance of XP on the XO. But there is no reason to be confident that such will ever come to past. In the meantime, just being to claim that XP on the XO is better is all Microsoft need to achieve their assumed goals.

I personally use Linux as my OS of choice, however, I think that any operating system that can meet the technical requirements AND meet the "open" (as in open software) requirement would be a good choice for the XO. Assuming that the XO works, someday locals could be writing their own software, and customizing and maintaining the operating system and desktop environment. Unless things change radically in the future, this is an impossibility with Windows XP -- ie. owners of Windows XP on XO, regardless of geography, will be forever dependent on Microsoft.

Ubuntu on the XO (5, Interesting)

P3Ed (631257) | more than 6 years ago | (#24354003)

I had to pry my wife's XO out of her lap to post this. Sugar may be good for kids & education or not, but I found it to come up short. Ubuntu on the XO works well, even plays SD video recorded on Myth TV with out stuttering. It's damn hard to type on this little keyboard.

Re:not Ubuntu -- DEBIAN on the XO (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24354763)

I switched to Debian and saw a world of difference from XFce Ubuntu to Debian XFce gtk+ only!
No Gnome except the keyring.
Low memory footprint is essential with flash file system. Allows for lots of caching etc.
With Firefox Gvim and more I'm at about 100Megs ram for programs leaving 150 for buffers and cache.
I turn off disk caching in firefox. No Flash player now but can download the flv with right click so probably a net positive. Flash is annoying.(e.g. Ads)

Etch seems a good fit.. Let people know -- only hires solution yet. Works very well for everything if you tune it a bit. Mp4 movies at 592x256 mplayer sdl -- belive it.

http://layer-acht.org/debian/olpc/ [layer-acht.org]

Keep the XO alive...

Never mind... (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24354059)

Never mind. Pretty much just Windows bashing. I expected more.

I have an OLPC. I think that the Sugar UI is *terrible* and that the file system is a complete disaster. I originally thought that it would be a neat device for my son to use. Instead, it's a messed-up crapfest of "not invented here" crossed with "we'll get the rest done later." Unusable, in other words.

OLPC is Irrelevant (4, Insightful)

awitod (453754) | more than 6 years ago | (#24354119)

They should have extended the BOGO (buy one get one) promotion or made it possible for people in the developed world to buy one. As it is, noone can develop software for it, because, near as I can tell, you can't buy one.

So, of course, TFA is based on a video. The OLPC is resigned to a third world ghetto and will eventually fade into obscurity, which is a shame.

Re:OLPC is Irrelevant (2, Informative)

MacTO (1161105) | more than 6 years ago | (#24354995)

They are supposed to be offering another round og G1G1 (give 1 get 1) this autumn. But based upon the last round, I don't think that you're going to get many buyers who will end up developing for it. Another indicator is that Sugar has been ported to other Linux distributions. If you want to develop for it, you can do so today. Some people do, but it is by no means a massive outpouring of support.

Don't get me wrong, the XO itself is a nice piece of hardware. Alas, Sugar is buggy and does not perform all that well. Many of the original claims simply have not be met, and it does not appear that they ever will be. Battery life is a classic example here. The XO does reasonably well: roughly 4 hours on a new battery. That is roughly what a new battery in my old PowerBook G4 managed, while the XO battery is half the capacity. Performance sucks, and you can expect the machine to lockup like clockwork. I suspect this is because it is in Python, which not only slows things down, but chews up an incredible amount of RAM. The joyride branch seems to be much faster and has bumped up the battery life to 8 hours or so in some circumstances, but it has a long way to go. For instance, RAM consumption is still beyond the means of this machine. (Remember, it has no swap file. Those who want a swap file are using disposable USB keys.)

I'm one of the people who picked it up thinking that I could program this thing. While I did learn a lot by exploring the internals (which are in the form of accessible Python code), I have a hard time seeing how a well-meaning but inexperienced adult can program the critter. Nevermind a child in the third world. The code itself is not very clear, and the whole thing is (or at least was) pitifully documented.

Will XP solve these problems. Maybe, maybe not. It won't make it easier to program, and it certainly won't allow kids to explore the internals. It will allow kids and schools to access more education software in principle, but who knows how well that would work out in the developing world because software licenses are often expensive.

Re:OLPC is Irrelevant (1)

Mista2 (1093071) | more than 6 years ago | (#24355151)

A pitty because I guess it would just dissappear if given to 100 million chinese kids.

XP and Linux (0)

icedcool (446975) | more than 6 years ago | (#24354157)

Are these two friends now that MS has disbanded xp?

Atrocious writing (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24354931)

I read the first paragraph and had no idea of the author's conclusion. I read the second paragraph and had no idea of the conclusion. I read the third, fourth, fifth, and six paragraphs and had no idea of the conclusion.

Tech articles aren't murder mysteries. State your conclusion up front, then explain and confirm it in later ones. I may not have time or desire to read the whole article, but at least this way I get your point right off the bat.

Linux Ignorance (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24355085)

Why is it that whenever a Linux user writes something about Windows, they get it wrong? WTF does the author mean by suggesting you have to click "Safely Remove Hardware" to remove a thumb drive in Windows XP? Write caching is disabled by default on removable drives, and that means you can just pull them out. I think the author hasn't used Windows XP.

Am I the first to say: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24355091)

IMAGINE THAT!

they still think Microsoft is doing this to help (0, Troll)

Locutus (9039) | more than 6 years ago | (#24355381)

Why would they do that? They are out to put the XO and OLPC out of business or whatever they are doing. We know that XP on this is going to suck and it'll take $30-$50 more hardware to make it even close to usable. That alone is enough to destroy the OLPC if they put all their eggs in the Microsoft basket. And seeing how Microsoft spent $25 million to tie the Egyptian government to Microsoft Windows, they've got plenty more to tie up a whole bunch of poor countries.

I only hope that Sugar lives on. It really looks like a great entry level desktop for educational use. Teachers wasting hours on teaching kids what buttons to push in Windows is not teaching them anything useful.

And what is with these idiots constantly saying that teaching kids Windows XP is going to prepare them for when they get into the work force. For many of these kids, that's ten years out and there is no way Microsoft's software is going to act the same in ten years. Besides, they are supposed to be using the XO for learning about the world, not how Microsoft decided to tie you to their money train. IMO.

LoB

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?