×

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!

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

1053 comments

What? (0, Flamebait)

Kasracer (865931) | more than 8 years ago | (#14031388)

If Steve offers OS X to you for free, you take it. Red Hat sucks

The real strategy (2, Insightful)

Mrcowcow (931085) | more than 8 years ago | (#14031419)

To really get publicity, he shouldoffer it for free to the general public! Now that would get media attention.

Re:The real strategy (5, Insightful)

rookworm (822550) | more than 8 years ago | (#14031548)

To really get publicity, he shouldoffer it for free to the general public! Now that would get media attention.

And that's what it's really all about in the end. If they adopted OSX, there would be massive vendor lock-in all over the world. Not to mention, they would be dependent on Apple for support due to Closed-source api's. With a free (libre) solution there would be none of this trouble. Not to mention localization possibilities.... This is essentially an empty offer, since they'd have to be nuts to accept it.

Re:What? (0, Flamebait)

canuck57 (662392) | more than 8 years ago | (#14031429)

If Steve offers OS X to you for free, you take it. Red Hat sucks

Not as bad as Microsoft, mind you I prefer Suse 10. Too bad Novell layed them off like they owned stock in Red Hat.

What does the tech industry have in common with the original Star Trek executives?

They bail too early when they have a good thing going.

Re:What? (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14031452)

Or you use a debian variant. Who knew Red Hat was completely open source? I thought they included pine and other similar things.

Re:What? (3, Insightful)

strider44 (650833) | more than 8 years ago | (#14031463)

Red Hat, however, doesn't take an overwhelming amount of system resources, which I presume is ever so slightly important for something that's supposed to be able to be powered by a hand powered generator. Besides, Red Hat is also donating a couple of million to this project, something which Steve Jobs doesn't seem to be doing.

Re:What? (3, Informative)

Pantero Blanco (792776) | more than 8 years ago | (#14031480)

Somehow, I don't see OS X running very well on a $100 laptop.

Re:What? (4, Interesting)

mboverload (657893) | more than 8 years ago | (#14031497)

Actually, OSX runs VERY well on an old 333MHz iMac with 64 megs of ram. I won't take the latest version, mind you, but it works well. No lag in the dock or anything.

Re:What? (5, Funny)

Trogre (513942) | more than 8 years ago | (#14031487)

Thank you for your contribution to the campaign. Our department will send you your free t-shirt and mug as promised. Please allow 2-5 days for delivery.

In order for us to more easily identify you in future, would you kindly append your Apple Fan Club membership # to your sig? This will allow for more timely notification of prizes and special offers.

Thank you again.

Sincererly,
Ms A. Shill
Apple Marketing Ventures

Red Hat wasn't always bad. (4, Interesting)

CyricZ (887944) | more than 8 years ago | (#14031523)

Red Hat used to be a quality distribution. But we have to go back to the Red Hat 5.x and 6.x days to notice that.

As time has gone on, there have been many improvements that they have failed to adopt. Dropping support for RPM in favour of APT is one such improvement that they didn't make. The whole GCC 2.96 debacle sure didn't help their reputation amongst developers.

Either way, you are correct, Red Hat is not the way to go. Mac OS X, especially free, would have been the best possible choice. Not considering that, Kubuntu would have been the second best option. It'd offer a solid, coherent KDE system, built upon the power of Debian.

Free publicity (2, Insightful)

gcnaddict (841664) | more than 8 years ago | (#14031389)

Gee if I was an OS writer Id do it too - its free publicity!

I feel so glad for the red hat crew right now, because theyre going to get lots and lots of promotion from this :D

Re:Free publicity (5, Insightful)

strider44 (650833) | more than 8 years ago | (#14031521)

*sigh* does *noone* read the article? I've already written this several times in several different threads. This isn't free publicity for Red Hat - they're helping funding the project! They've donated a couple of million dollars to this project: "Five companies -- Google Inc., Advanced Micro Devices Inc., Red Hat Inc., News Corp. and Brightstar Corp. -- have each provided $2 million to fund a nonprofit organization called One Laptop Per Child that was set up to oversee the project."

First Post (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14031390)

This post is the first one.

Looking for OSSOS? (0, Redundant)

notthe9 (800486) | more than 8 years ago | (#14031392)

I thought it was offered free? So where's the problem?

Re:Looking for OSSOS? (5, Insightful)

Threni (635302) | more than 8 years ago | (#14031413)

> I thought it was offered free? So where's the problem?

Your understanding of the word `free` in this context.

Re:Looking for OSSOS? (1, Insightful)

GenKreton (884088) | more than 8 years ago | (#14031435)

It is akin to offering cigarettes to school children for free. You get them hooked early then they pay for the rest of their life (yes I borrowed this from Stallman, and poorly paraphrased too I might add). These guys firmly believe common software should be open source. Especially those wanting to find an opportunity with computers, open source offers them a free way to learn coding methods and such that they may not have access to in their schools. They get free upgrades t their machines if they wish, and do no have to fall behind in the newer software. It is a win-win situation for them.

Whether you believe in open source or not, it is hard to argue it will not benefit those who are receiving these laptops. In the future if they want to use MacOS they can pay for it themselves and leave Linux behind if they feel it will make them more productive or happy.

Re:Looking for OSSOS? (3, Funny)

jcr (53032) | more than 8 years ago | (#14031458)

It is akin to offering cigarettes to school children for free.

WHAT? OS X causes lung cancer? I'm SHOCKED!

I borrowed this from Stallman

Didn't you get the memo? RMS is a crazy hippie.

-jcr

Re:Looking for OSSOS? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14031519)

Someone failed their SAT reading comprehension.

-tpr

Re:Looking for OSSOS? (1)

chronicon (625367) | more than 8 years ago | (#14031461)

I thought it was offered free? So where's the problem?

You can't modify OSX so they want to go with a free OS that's, well... Free. Open. Hackable. So they can use it and learn what makes it tick.

Re:Looking for OSSOS? (0, Redundant)

notthe9 (800486) | more than 8 years ago | (#14031527)

Redundant? Troll, I'd buy. Flamebait, I'd buy. Redundant? Who else had said that? It was the 4th post, the only along these lines.

fools. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14031393)

fools.

Re:fools. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14031585)

Who knows what the future holds ? Why would you want to paint yourself into a corner by relying on an OS where the power is held by Apple ? At least with Linux you aren't under the thumb of oppressive private interests.

Silly? (2, Insightful)

SultanCemil (722533) | more than 8 years ago | (#14031394)

Does this seem like a little bit of zealotry? I mean, why not use a nice, EASY*TO*USE OS instead of something the under-priviledged people using this machine will have to struggle to learn?

Re:Silly? (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14031407)

If Bill Gates made the same offer, would your response be similar?

Re:Silly? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14031414)

An interesting point, but $5 says it gets modded Flamebait...

Re:Silly? (4, Informative)

wlan0 (871397) | more than 8 years ago | (#14031433)

"We declined because it's not open source," says Dr. Papert, noting the designers want an operating system that can be tinkered with. An Apple spokesman declined to comment.

Re:Silly? (1, Informative)

strider44 (650833) | more than 8 years ago | (#14031491)

Not quite: "Five companies -- Google Inc., Advanced Micro Devices Inc., Red Hat Inc., News Corp. and Brightstar Corp. -- have each provided $2 million to fund a nonprofit organization called One Laptop Per Child that was set up to oversee the project."

As I said in another post though this is a low powered low resource computer (a third of the power of the Mac Mini) designed to be powered by a hand generator, and OS-X isn't exactly renouned for being great for extremely low powered computers. This is a simple PR stunt by Steve Jobs, nothing else.

Re:Silly? (4, Informative)

Reaperducer (871695) | more than 8 years ago | (#14031574)

As I said in another post though this is a low powered low resource computer (a third of the power of the Mac Mini) designed to be powered by a hand generator, and OS-X isn't exactly renouned for being great for extremely low powered computers.

Actually OSX works great on computers with a third of the power of a Mac Mini. Tiger is more than fine on my wife's 500Mhz iBook with just 300 megs of RAM. And I saw a guy in the Apple Store today with a Wall Street edition Powerbook (read: under 300 MHz) and the tech was stunned to see how responsive and usable Tiger is on it.

So, aside from making assumptions and being misinformed, what was your point again?

Zealotry? (5, Insightful)

olddotter (638430) | more than 8 years ago | (#14031492)

Well their reason for not selecting it might be zealotry, but I have to beleive that they can create a Redhat based distribution that will work with their hardware all the time. That is part of the Apple secret. If your hardware is a small handpicked set, then having an OS that just works is that much easier.

OS X easy to use -- what are people smoking? (1, Insightful)

Latent Heat (558884) | more than 8 years ago | (#14031514)

I have never found Macintosh easy to use, not back in the day when it came out, and not recently when I tested some Java apps on a Mac.

It is said that the Linux window managers are imitating Windows. Could it be said that it was really Windows imitating X/Motif/Open look? Didn't windowing systems happen on Unix workstations before they happened on PCs, and wasn't Windows trying to be more like the workstations than like the Mac?

For starters, the Mac hangs on to the application program menu as this shared resource where the app that gets the focus also gets control over the single on-screen menu. That may have been fine back in the day of small screens and limited pixels, but in these days of monster displays and ever more pixels, for crying out loud, give each app its own menu as is done by the Linux window managers and by Windows. The Mac system of you have to think which app has control over the menu is too much a distraction. Interestingly, Java apps running under OS-X have their own menus along with a bare-bones Mac main menu.

Re:OS X easy to use -- what are people smoking? (1)

sigzero (914876) | more than 8 years ago | (#14031552)

You must have smoked some crack before posting. My wife switched from Windows to OS X and has had zero problems using it. I tried to get her to use Linux and it was one question after another. OS X just works but Linux you really *have* to know what is going on.

Re:Silly? (3, Insightful)

jaiyen (821972) | more than 8 years ago | (#14031533)

Zealotry perhaps, but if it was Microsoft giving away XP you just know all the comments here would be about how it's only a trick to lock-in new users to Microsoft software. Isn't that argument equally valid (or invalid, depeding on your pov) for Apple too ?

Sometimes it's tough (3, Insightful)

El Cubano (631386) | more than 8 years ago | (#14031396)

However, his offer was declined because the project was looking for a 100% open source solution. The laptops will now be running on Red Hat Linux on AMD chips.

Sometimes it's tough to stick to your principles. However, in the long run it is always better not to compromise on your beliefs.

Re:Sometimes it's tough (-1, Flamebait)

xorjesus (898459) | more than 8 years ago | (#14031456)

[blockquote] Sometimes it's tough to stick to your principles. However, in the long run it is always better not to compromise on your beliefs. [/blockquote] Not if your principles involve closed minded zealotry. Black people should be hanged, jews should be exterminated, and gays should be casterated. No I won't be satisified with anything less, comprimising is for liberals.

Re:Sometimes it's tough (1)

paintswithcolour (929954) | more than 8 years ago | (#14031467)

This sounds good but it assumes those beliefs are the right ones.
It does seem in this case misguided, but good intentioned, thoughts could possibly work out doing more harm than good.

Re:Sometimes it's tough (5, Insightful)

jcr (53032) | more than 8 years ago | (#14031475)

However, in the long run it is always better not to compromise on your beliefs.

What if those beliefs are asinine, as in this case?

-jcr

Re:Sometimes it's tough (3, Insightful)

rayde (738949) | more than 8 years ago | (#14031549)

exactly! honestly not trying to troll here, Mac OS X is a tried and true (and awesome) desktop OS. Red Hat certainly has a good track record as a server OS but it has certainly not yet proven to me that it is worthwhile on the desktop.

I say they should reconsider taking the Mac OS X. Those users who want to tinker will be able to download Linux anyway. (GUESS WHAT, LINUX IS AND ALWAYS WILL BE FREE. Mac OS X is not.)

Re:Sometimes it's tough (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14031576)

Hey, a first post here that makes some sense. Installing Linux on those laptops should be reduced to minimum complexity (a prebuilt install), but using OS X has some merits!

Re:Sometimes it's tough (1)

IANAAC (692242) | more than 8 years ago | (#14031483)

Sometimes it's tough to stick to your principles. However, in the long run it is always better not to compromise on your beliefs.

Yeah, but RedHat? Gadz, just think of all the problems people have when they go out and get rpms and try to install them. There's so many different flavos of RedHat rpms floating around I would think it would be nothing but trouble for the users.

I wonder why they wouldn't consider Ubuntu? Synaptic is dead simple and doesn't really allow for package errors. I say this as a fairly hardcore rpm kinda guy.

biggest mistake ever (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14031399)

Idiots.

Give them a laptop the kinds can more easily use to accomplish their task.

I am an avid Linux user.. But i sure hte hell wouldn't expect most kids to figure out how to configure or install some applications at this point in Linux's development.

Re:biggest mistake ever (1, Flamebait)

MadChicken (36468) | more than 8 years ago | (#14031484)

Exactly, but ask yourself what is "their task"?

Let's not confuse this with "our tasks", that is, "surf the web, write emails, play games". The point of these machines is to teach them about computers. Teach them how to install Slackware, how to compile an app from source, how to build apps... ...who knows, we might end up with people that actually *understand computers*, and not just "[Windows | Mac] users"

But they don't go for it... (1, Insightful)

chronicon (625367) | more than 8 years ago | (#14031402)

FTA:
Steve Jobs, Apple Computer Inc.'s chief executive, offered to provide free copies of the company's operating system, OS X, for the machine, according to Seymour Papert, a professor emeritus at MIT who is one of the initiative's founders. "We declined because it's not open source," says Dr. Papert, noting the designers want an operating system that can be tinkered with. An Apple spokesman declined to comment.

Re:But they don't go for it... (2, Insightful)

shmlco (594907) | more than 8 years ago | (#14031447)

"...noting the designers want an operating system that can be tinkered with."

So they declined a world-class OS with commercially available software because the designers (who are not the intended users) wanted something they could tinker with. Makes sense to me....

Re:But they don't go for it... (1)

chronicon (625367) | more than 8 years ago | (#14031561)

So they declined a world-class OS with commercially available software because the designers (who are not the intended users) wanted something they could tinker with. Makes sense to me....

Err... how would the intended recipients pay for the 'commercially available software'? With a FOSS distribution they can not only learn about what makes a computer work but they will get a nice selections of applications that they can run on it out of the box.

Was Jobs going to throw in an Office suite too? I suppose you could say that they can add the OSS apps in and that would be true, still, the commercially avaiable apps are not really feasible...

Re:But they don't go for it... (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14031572)

more likely the designers wanted an operating system they could tinker with because the sub-$100 laptop is going to have such tight and changable CPU, hdd & 2D graphics constraints that trying to run a generic x86 MacOSX compile on it would be like trying to fight Windows 95 on a fscking 386SX. It'd run alright, or maybe I should say it'd crawl .

free? (5, Funny)

rjhall (80887) | more than 8 years ago | (#14031404)

Open videocard? no
open chipset? no
open OS? of course! We have principles.

Re:free? (4, Insightful)

barc0001 (173002) | more than 8 years ago | (#14031570)

Perhaps you could point out some open chipsets and video cards they could have taken advantage of, given their budgetary and quantity needs?

Wow. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14031405)

There are 3 sentences in the entire (quite long) article about Steve Jobs and Mac OS X. It has virtually nothing to do with the article.

Yet... the Slashdot headline is "Jobs offers free OS X for $100 laptops". That's true and all, but it's hardly what this article is about.

What? (2, Insightful)

wlan0 (871397) | more than 8 years ago | (#14031411)

Red Hat? It looks like they've been helping, but wouldn't using something like Debian Embedded be better, as it could be less bloated?

Publicity stunt? (0, Troll)

cytoman (792326) | more than 8 years ago | (#14031412)

Surely, Jobs knew that the makers of the $100 laptop were looking for an open-source software solution. So, he made an offer knowing fully well that it would not be accepted...but he is getting tons of publicity and goodwill because of this.

What I wonder is, would he have offered free tech support with the free OS X for the laptops? Obivously I haven't RTFA.

good! (0, Flamebait)

boog3r (62427) | more than 8 years ago | (#14031415)

Less corporate market exposure paid for by the government.

More critical thinking skills for the kids that get to fix their linux installs instead of clicking on pretty icons.

Re:good! (1)

SteveX (5640) | more than 8 years ago | (#14031460)

Yeah.. they won't get their homework done but at least they'll learn shell scripting.

Re:good! (3, Insightful)

shmlco (594907) | more than 8 years ago | (#14031468)

"More critical thinking skills for the kids that get to fix their linux installs instead of clicking on pretty icons."

Uh, how about kids who are actually using the notebooks to get their homework done... and not needing to FIX their linux installs at all!

But the blondes!? (5, Funny)

Scrameustache (459504) | more than 8 years ago | (#14031500)

More critical thinking skills for the kids that get to fix their linux installs instead of clicking on pretty icons.

It's that attitude that's keeping the bimbos out of the computer dating sites you know!

Hardware Requirements?! (5, Insightful)

JoeShmoe950 (605274) | more than 8 years ago | (#14031425)

While fast for what it does, OSX does quite a bit. Will you really get a 3d accelerated GUI environment to run on a $100 machine? That seems like asking a lot from the hardware which costs so little. While OSX is nice, I've heard that it can be somewhat slow on even a 700mhz iBook. Do we really want to use it on a $100 laptop?

Re:Hardware Requirements?! (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14031462)

It's not exactly like RedHat is slim and light either, with bloatasaurus apps like OpenOffice and Firefox. Really, the most efficient choice would have been Windows XP/Office XP which runs fine on a 700mhz x86.

Re:Hardware Requirements?! (1)

daveschroeder (516195) | more than 8 years ago | (#14031493)

Um, do you *really think* that OS X would be running as-is on these $100 laptops?

AMD processors with flash memory in place of a hard disk? A tablet mode?

If the project accepted, they'd be running a specially targeted and customized version of OS X specifically for this application, so all of the "hardware requirements" arguments are straw men. They'd be able to run "OS X", as engineered for this project, just fine.

Re:Hardware Requirements?! (2, Insightful)

JoeShmoe950 (605274) | more than 8 years ago | (#14031510)

If your going to use an incredibly stripped down version of OSX, which no longer even resembles OSX to a large extent, why use OSX at all?

Re:Hardware Requirements?! (2, Insightful)

daveschroeder (516195) | more than 8 years ago | (#14031559)

...

I didn't say it would be a "incredibly stripped down" version of OS X that wouldn't resemble OS X.

I said it would be a version of OS X targeted for this platform and program. In other words, all the comments like "OMG, I heard some of OS X's special fancy graphic effects are slow on an iBook, so, OMG, how would it run on a $100 laptop?!??!?!??!!11111one" are completely irrelevant, because the 3D graphic effects aren't what's important. It would most certainly resemble OS X, and would in fact be OS X, and the things that are most important about OS X are things like its frameworks and APIs, and extensive support for languages and extensively polished user interface.

Re:Hardware Requirements?! (1, Insightful)

El Pollo Loco (562236) | more than 8 years ago | (#14031512)

Thank you! This was exactly my thought. I run a minimal WM on X on my 266 mhz laptop, and it still struggles. A $100 dollar laptop won't have the horsepower to run OSX.

Say the designers need more speed. What are they going to do, go to Apple and say "Please optimize your GUI, it's too sluggish"? Apple isn't going to do that, there's no money in it for them. What are they supposed to do then?

This was the correct course of action for them.

Um... (0, Redundant)

Aundy (930631) | more than 8 years ago | (#14031428)

I think that this is a good idea but how many developing countries will actually be able to afford enoughf of these laptops to supply to each child?

Oh wow (1)

Tomchu (789799) | more than 8 years ago | (#14031430)

Let's see ... Red Hat vs. OS X ... yeah, let's make the underpriviledged kids who don't understand computers use an OS designed by and for hackers in their mom's basements as opposed to something designed with usability and simplicity in mind.

What a genius decision.

Redhat? Why? (3, Insightful)

SocialEngineer (673690) | more than 8 years ago | (#14031431)

I don't see any reason why they couldn't take a nice bare-essentials distro, and build to it from the ground up. I've set up Slack boxes to work rather pain-free for computer illiterate users. No worrying about having to use bundled crap.

Oh well, I'm biased. Grain of salt ;)

Re:Redhat? Why? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14031455)

OS X runs extremly laggy on my Min-Mac which costs well over $100, and has upgraded ram to 1 gig.

I find it hard to believe that OSX will run smoothly on a computer that costs $100.

Re:Redhat? Why? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14031473)

You left out the part about you being a loveless and pale faggot who lives in your grandparent's basement (becuase your parents killed themselves after seeing what failures they were in raising you to be a normal person).

AMD now open source nd free? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14031432)

so AMD is opening up their chips to scrutiny? woohoo! oh wait... I guess it isn't REALLY open source now is it? (and i'll bet they aren't getting those processors for free either)

Sensible Choice (4, Insightful)

external400kdiskette (930221) | more than 8 years ago | (#14031434)

Free installs doesn't mean all upgrades and software will be free and the choices might not be as high when you don't want to spend any $ for the software that you'll need to go along with the OS.

By choosing Red Hat not only do they have a free OS and practically guaranteed free upgrades, they'll also have a huge selection of free software to get maximum use out of the laptops.

But what if MS? (2, Insightful)

RequiemX (926964) | more than 8 years ago | (#14031437)

As much as I love my Mac, I must admit that the last thing a developing country needs is to be helplessly tied to a major corporation. If Microsoft offered them Windows and was accepted, we'd all be up in arms.

corporate charity == GOOD (1)

artemis67 (93453) | more than 8 years ago | (#14031520)

This type of thing needs to be ENCOURAGED, not discouraged. Even if it was Microsoft.

Besides, the OS is becoming less and less conspicuous. Get the laptop, load OpenOffice.org, Firefox and Thunderbird.

What's the big deal? Do they think these kids are going to be compiling their own kernels on these $100 laptops?

In other news... (2, Funny)

artemis67 (93453) | more than 8 years ago | (#14031442)

Morton's Steakhouse [mortons.com] offered to give all of the kids a free steak dinner, but the project declined, saying they needed to stick to their previous decision of powdered eggs for everyone...

Re:In other news... (2, Insightful)

Trogre (513942) | more than 8 years ago | (#14031557)

Morton's Steakhouse offered to give all of the kids a free steak dinner, but the project declined, saying they needed to stick to their previous decision of powdered eggs for everyone...

I think you'll find it's more like:

Fluffy Bunny's Candy Shop offered to give all of the kids a free lolly bag, but the project declined, saying they needed to stick to their previous decision of providing fresh vegetables, books on farming, ploughing and harvesting equipment, irrigation systems and bags of seed for everyone.

Next up for MIT - the $100 iPod Project (2, Funny)

mr_don't (311416) | more than 8 years ago | (#14031445)

Pelease from MIT... The $100 iPod project will let every child in every developing country download Sheryl Crow's new single to their own U2-branded iPod.

At the expense of being modded... (1)

crottsma (859162) | more than 8 years ago | (#14031446)

Getting this type of publicity is probably a lot nicer than getting publicity about stiffing your girlfriend for child support. Anyone remember that?

No room for both? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14031451)

Free is free you know.

What version of OSX? (1)

the.Ceph (863988) | more than 8 years ago | (#14031454)

Now these laptops definitely aren't going to be using Mac Hardware so what version of OSX would it be? Did the offer mean that they would have to include hardware to allow the x86 version of OSX to run or would it simply run as is.

Price being one of the main issues it seems like additional hardware would be an obvious no-no. So does this mean that it was going to be OSX running on native x86?

I haven't been following the whole Mac to Intel thing too closely but I was under the impression that most likely not any old PC would be able run OSX.

If off the shelf hardware wasn't going to run the version of OSX offered it seems like not being full OSS isn't the only issue it was turned down. Did Jobs know this prior to the offer for a little extra boost of the public's image of Mac or is that just my "don't trust the man"-sense tingling a little prematurely.

fluk3 (0, Flamebait)

Fluk3 (742259) | more than 8 years ago | (#14031459)

Wow! Anyone who would choose linux over a free OSX should be kicked in the nads and hard. What total ass-hats to reject it over some stupid open-source ego. This is bad for the kids to have to use friggin linux as a desktop. Unbelievable!

redhat?! low-cost!? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14031474)

Now, I use Redhat and I think it is a strong Linux offering. However, it does not run on cheap anything. memory must be at least 256mb if you don't want constant lag, and 512 is only reasonable if you want speed.

I cannot help but find that choosing Redhat immediately raises the minimum bar the hardware can be set at. I can only marvel even more if they succeed in making this $100 (earlier than the time where the concept is no longer impressive. the point is to change things, right? to best what others are making available?).

project destined to fail (1)

1336.5 (901985) | more than 8 years ago | (#14031477)

The learning curve is still to steep, especially for children in developing countries who are unedcated, and honestly challenged form the start to learn the basics of elementary education. Linux is generally something that is picked up in college, as an alternative OS that students learn in Computer Science or Information Science cirricula. Trying to introduce this to a child is not only simply stupid, it is setting those children up for failure as well.

Yes I have a Red Hat account, I love my RHEL AS4 box, but I like the standardization of a *nix OS like OS X better. Mac has the smallest learning curve than any OS on the market. There is a reason Mac dominates the early education market, kids need to learn how to use applications that help them learn. Kids dont need to learn how to use the operating system to help them learn how to use an application that helps them learn (if that makes any sense).

What applications are out for Linux that would even help a child learn in the first place?

Open source is good, but simply to granular for a child to be learning when there are basic grammar, language, and arithmatic that needs to be learned first.

No to OSX but with a wave to Windows? (4, Insightful)

duffahtolla (535056) | more than 8 years ago | (#14031508)

He also says Microsoft, which is a financial contributor to MIT and a backer of its Media Lab, has undergone a change in attitude about the $100 laptop. "Their first reaction was to laugh at the idea, then the next reaction was kind of antagonistic," he says. "Recently, they're very friendly."

Be afraid, be very afraid..

And Mr. Negroponte, after meeting with Mr. Gates, now says, "The machine will run anything, including Windows."

MS might be planing a way to ursurp all those laptops after they've been distributed. Hope Jobs does the same.

Re:No to OSX but with a wave to Windows? (1)

Jords (826313) | more than 8 years ago | (#14031540)

You see, here we don't think theres any concidence that Microsoft and Multiple Sclerosis share the same abbrevation.

Not suited (1, Interesting)

gsfprez (27403) | more than 8 years ago | (#14031525)

This computer is far closer to a PDA than an actual computer. Mac OS X is a desktop computer OS. If Apple made some kind of PDA-like device and acceptable OS UI to go with such a device, then that would have been fine.

But as it sits, it would have been fsck-all impossible to shoehorn Mac OS X 10.4.3 "just work" into a Negroponte laptop. They wouldn't get to adjust the UI themselves - the part of Mac OS X that is totally closed. With Linux - you can change whatever you want to fit your device. Its perfect.

Now, an Apple engineered open source OS for PDA sized devices - aw hells yeah. That would rock like Mac OS X and the iPod OS because they would design it to "Just Work".

When this project fails (1)

winkydink (650484) | more than 8 years ago | (#14031532)

one of the primary reasons will be a sucky desktop OS. This laptop is supposed to be an enabler. OSX vs Redhat? Which is easier to use?

The people running this project have let their prejudices towards FOSS get in the way of doing what is right for the end users. They wanted something more "hackable"? OSX isn't hackable enough? What, are they planning to change the kernel?

Sheesh!

Re:When this project fails (1)

oboreruhito (925965) | more than 8 years ago | (#14031590)

What, are they planning to change the kernel?

More than likely, yes. In fact, they'll probably have to in order to get it to run on the hardwar, which still hasn't been invented yet.

I'd be much, much more impressed if Jobs offered up Apple's UI designers to volunteer time and effort.

I love the justification... (3, Interesting)

daveschroeder (516195) | more than 8 years ago | (#14031541)

"There are people in developing countries who have never seen computers so it's not like, 'How is this better than Windows?"'

Well, with that argument, why not just hand them a pile of dogshit?

That's the most useless justification for staying with Red Hat Linux as I've ever heard.

Further, it's not as if Red Hat-proper is "free". You can bet your bottom dollar that Red Hat is seeing dollar signs out of this deal. Big dollar signs.

Sure, Jobs may have been in it partly for ulterior reasons as well - I'm not going to pretend to know what he's thinking - but considering that the entire core of Mac OS X is open source, and what's not open source is a very polished, easy to use, major-vendor-supported OS with amazing language and multilingual support, revolutionary accessibility support, including the first commercial OS to include a free full-fledged spoken interface, and so on, I think that rejecting it out-of-hand on the basis of wanting to be "100%" open source is a little bit short-signted and foolish, when one steps back and looks at the big picture.

I literally can't believe MIT rejected this offer.

(And no, there wouldn't be concerns with system requirements. Apple would have engineered a targeted version of Mac OS X specifically for this program.)

Offer didn't need to be declined. (1)

0olong (876791) | more than 8 years ago | (#14031543)

Last time I checked you could install more than one OS on a computer..

Laptops suck... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14031547)

This "one laptop per child" thing seems like another "more computers
for schools"-type feel-good nonsense.

For one thing - Laptops, particularly _today's_ laptops are super-
fragile. I've used 3 laptops in the past 30 months or so (on the
company's nickel) and they were ridiculously unreliable. Constant
breakage.

The screens looked great when they issed it to me, but after 3 months,
it was noticeably dimmer and had numerous dead pixels. I doubt there
was a cdrom/dvd-rom drive that worked for a month before crapping out.

Battery lifetime (not per charge, but total # of charges) is much lower
than the old NiMH batteries laptops back in the mid-90s had. Another
consumable...

I can see cheap desktops for every child - but they must have one
heck of a service plan if they want to give easily-broken laptops to
the little monkeys.

And before anyone says anything about the alleged-quality of Apple
laptops - if they're giving them away at those prices, they surely are
NOT Apples.

Dear Steve, (3, Insightful)

simpl3x (238301) | more than 8 years ago | (#14031550)

You had a fantastic little platform in the Newton. The profile of the educational version was perfect. If you would simply provide such a platform again, at a reasonable price, and provide development tools such as HyperCard, you wouldn't need the hundred dollar laptop effort. YOu could create your own!

Making it easier for us to contact your company with such proposals would be nice also.

Apple-Intel Implications (5, Interesting)

ndansmith (582590) | more than 8 years ago | (#14031554)

Did Steve Jobs offer to have OS X running on AMD chips? I presume that Apple already knew what processor the $100 laptop would have. I do not know the ins and outs of Apple's agreement with Intel, but I wonder how they feel about this. Still, since Apple is not actually manufacturing the laptop, I guess they can run their OS on whatever they want. Still, it is interesting to note that Apple would considering running OS X on AMD products.

Double slashdot standards as usual (2, Insightful)

wondercool (460316) | more than 8 years ago | (#14031580)

Unbelievable the reactions.

Apple offers it's OS-X free and everybody in this sections says take it.
Imagine Microsoft would offer Windows for free for this device? Everybody cries out loud.
(You can already see some reactions like that around this reaction)

I think it's very wise not to tie yourself to any vendor.
With commercial OS makers, you will have to hope they keep the terms the same in a couple of years and as Seymour Papert said: you can't tinker.

It's also a bit weird that Mr Jobs refuses 3rd party hardware makers to use OSX and now he suddenly 'donates' OS-X...
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...