12:54 p.m.
> I think that people who focus on "slimming" the OLPC
are missing the
> point. What they end up with is a slow, small Linux system.
Are you seriously considering the implications of your statement?
If slimming ends up on a slow small GNU/Linux system, then *not* slimming
ends up with a slower and bloated GNU/Linux system.
Yes, I am seriously considering the implications of my statement.
My motivation for starting this thread was to go on record as
preferring that people "add to" what they believe the OLPC can do
well, rather than "subtract from" what has been done so far because
aspects of the OLPC's behavior do not meet their expectations.
Given that 'netbooks' are already outselling the OLPC, and that in
my opinion the development resources available to the producers of
netbook systems far exceed the resources of organizations producing
the OLPC, I think trying to sell the OLPC in competition with
netbook systems will fail. Sooner or later, netbooks will cost less
than the OLPC, while outperforming the OLPC, whether slimmed or not.
My concern is that, even when offered with a non-Sugar interface,
the OLPC __as a GNU/Linux system__ ( or as a Windows system !) will
be non-competitive. Therefore I would rather have thought be given
by those working on the OLPC to how it can be made to 'stand out'
from other small systems, instead of thought being devoted to fit
the OLPC into a "me too" mold. Let's not get sidetracked.
> For those who think the OLPC *is* suited to
> the environments in which it is being deployed - let's work on developing
> OLPC-scale applications to assist 'the things people do' wherever such
> "computerization" could improve matters.
Then what's your problem, man? :)
My problem is that a number of people want to change the OLPC to
improve the way it does things __that other systems already do__.
If there are other systems that work (better) with "square pegs",
why fashion the OLPC to be "square"? Think "round".
mikus
2:37 p.m.
New subject: [OT] Test run of 2009/05/25 image
On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 01:54:04PM -0400, Mikus Grinbergs wrote:
> Then what's your problem, man? :)
My problem is that a number of people want to change the OLPC to improve
the way it does things __that other systems already do__. If there are
other systems that work (better) with "square pegs", why fashion the OLPC
to be "square"? Think "round".
Which is why I think having a GNOME desktop on the OLPC XO is pointless.
It should be either Sugar or something that allows it to be useful for other
purposes.
GNOME doesn't make it useful for other purposes.
I think I'm definitly not being "square" as you imply, quite the opposite.
Rui
3:17 p.m.
New subject: [OT] Test run of 2009/05/25 image
On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 10:54 AM, Mikus Grinbergs<mikus(a)bga.com> wrote:
>> I think that people who focus on "slimming" the
OLPC are missing the
>> point. What they end up with is a slow, small Linux system.
>
> Are you seriously considering the implications of your statement?
>
> If slimming ends up on a slow small GNU/Linux system, then *not* slimming
> ends up with a slower and bloated GNU/Linux system.
Yes, I am seriously considering the implications of my statement.
My motivation for starting this thread was to go on record as preferring
that people "add to" what they believe the OLPC can do well, rather than
"subtract from" what has been done so far because aspects of the OLPC's
behavior do not meet their expectations.
I believe that you are addressing a different target market than OLPC
does. Until we can get electricity and broadband wireless out to the
hinterlands of every developing country, we have to go for low cost,
low power, and maximum focus on children's needs. Let the rest of the
industry satisfy everybody else's needs for now.
Sugar runs on nine different Linux distributions, and can be run in
emulation on almost any x86 computer running MacOS or Windows. We have
the netbooks covered.
For next year, we will have the XO-1.5 and XO-2, with much more
storage and memory. Then we can have everything you are wishing for. I
encourage you to work on getting ready, and I am happy for others to
join you if they wish. You will be welcome to make your pitch. Just
don't treat it as an exclusive either/or. It isn't. We need both
approaches.
Given that 'netbooks' are already outselling the OLPC,
Not in the OLPC target market, even including Venezuela and Brazil.
and that in my
opinion the development resources available to the producers of netbook
systems far exceed the resources of organizations producing the OLPC, I
think trying to sell the OLPC in competition with netbook systems will fail.
That has never been, and is not now the plan. OLPC created the global
1-to-1 computing market, and the netbook manufacturers are competing
with _us_ there. Their other target markets are of no concern to us.
Sooner or later, netbooks will cost less than the OLPC, while
outperforming
the OLPC, whether slimmed or not.
Why would you think so? OLPC can always sell at barely over cost, as a
non-profit. No other company can gain a technology advantage worth
bothering about. Where are their savings supposed to come from?
It is possible that some company will dump product below cost in an
attempt to build market share. It is possible that some manufacturer
will take the global education market seriously, and develop a
sufficiently rugged, sufficiently low-power alternative to the XO. It
will still cost them as much to manufacture hardware as it does us.
But even if you are right, It's An Education Project, not a laptop
project. As long as Sugar is available for every educational laptop,
I'm happy.
My concern is that, even when offered with a non-Sugar interface,
the OLPC __as a GNU/Linux system__ ( or as a Windows system !) will be
non-competitive.
Why would we want to compete outside our target education market?
Therefore I would rather have thought be given by those
working on the OLPC to how it can be made to 'stand out' from other small
systems, instead of thought being devoted to fit the OLPC into a "me too"
mold. Let's not get sidetracked.
You are asking the wrong questions. If you ask which is the biggest,
fastest netbook, the XO isn't in it. If you ask which netbooks are
designed for the target market, nothing but the XO is in it. We stand
out far above the noise in our own niche.
>> For those who think the OLPC *is* suited to
>> the environments in which it is being deployed - let's work on developing
>> OLPC-scale applications to assist 'the things people do' wherever such
>> "computerization" could improve matters.
Such as?
> Then what's your problem, man? :)
My problem is that a number of people want to change the OLPC to improve the
way it does things __that other systems already do__. If there are other
systems that work (better) with "square pegs", why fashion the OLPC to be
"square"? Think "round".
+1
mikus
_______________________________________________
Fedora-olpc-list mailing list
Fedora-olpc-list(a)redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-olpc-list
--
Silent Thunder (默雷/धर्ममेघशब्दगर्ज/دھرممیگھشبدگر ج) is my name
And Children are my nation.
The Cosmos is my dwelling place, The Truth my destination.
http://earthtreasury.org/worknet (Edward Mokurai Cherlin)
9:13 a.m.
New subject: [OT] Test run of 2009/05/25 image
> Therefore I would rather have thought be given by those
> working on the OLPC to how it can be made to 'stand out' from other small
> systems, instead of thought being devoted to fit the OLPC into a "me too"
> mold. Let's not get sidetracked.
You are asking the wrong questions. If you ask which is the biggest,
fastest netbook, the XO isn't in it. If you ask which netbooks are
designed for the target market, nothing but the XO is in it. We stand
out far above the noise in our own niche.
The OLPC XO-1 is far and away the standout in small systems for kids.
I mean, my four-year-old saw it and said "Look - a computer for
children!". No other machine available matches the XO's
sunlight-readable screen and native mesh networking. None are as
rugged as the XO-1, nor as easy to repair, nor as inexpensive (with
the possible exception of the EeePC 701 which is lacking in the other
departments especially screen size).
However, there are indeed netbooks designed for the K-6 education 1:1
target market:
* The Intel Classmate series (Gen1/Gen2 "Clamshell" with 7" and 8.9"
screens, Gen3 "Convertible" with 8.9" swivel touchscreen). Usually
runs with locked-down Easybits Magic Desktop over Windows XP, however
Canonical has just announced Ubuntu Remix support for the series and
is with Intel and Microsoft in Miami today and Cairo next week
(http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/marketing/2009-June/001489.html).
Intel licenses to local builders on favorable terms, who rebrand the
machines; there are two dozen such partners worldwide now, the latest
being Archos in France
(http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/marketing/2009-June/001452.html).
Intel positions the Classmate for all markets and relies on the local
partners to find the sweet spot for governments and education
ministries. Microsoft follows Intel into local deals and tacks Office
on where it can.
* The Dell Latitude 2100 education netbook
(http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/marketing/2009-May/001026.html),
with Ubuntu standard (WinXP optional) and backed by a specific
education support structure. Rollout is in the USA with a $4000
classroom rack charger/router which can update/backup the netbooks
while they are charging at night. The netbook has a tattletale LED bar
in the lid to inform teachers what's happening (student network
activity, or has completed a task - it's programmable).
Also, education solutions designed to leverage existing PC
infrastructure in school computer labs (slightly older student
positioning):
* NComputing (http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/marketing/2009-June/001243.html)
* Microsoft Multipoint
(http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/marketing/2009-May/001169.html)
Finally, netbooks designed for the age group at home, with an emphasis
on parental controls and filters:
* The Disney Asus Netpal netbook
(http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/marketing/2009-June/001486.html)
runs a locked-down kids' Disney-themed desktop over Windows XP and
will be widely distributed at Toys 'R' Us and the Disney Store.
I boot Sugar on a Stick on a Gen1 7" Classmate, a pair of Asus EeePCs,
an Acer Aspire One, a Dell Inspiron Mini 10, a Dell Latitude 2100
education netbook, and under VirtualBox, on a Mac Mini in fullscreen.
Sugar has the potential to leverage the hardware offers above, and
given the lack of interest by governments in an Windows XP-equipped XO
to date, could potentially displace Microsoft in the K-6 education
markets of developed countries too, which would be great for education
(and great for Fedora). In this space, it's Sugar versus Magic Desktop
and other proprietary products, and in my view Sugar is far superior.
Ideas I've encountered for non-education uses of XOs are usually NGOs
needing rugged hardware for e.g. surveying or medical applications.
Sean
Sugar Labs Marketing Coordinator
9:27 a.m.
New subject: [OT] Test run of 2009/05/25 image
On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 7:13 AM, Sean DALY<sdaly.be(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>> Therefore I would rather have thought be given by those
>> working on the OLPC to how it can be made to 'stand out' from other
small
>> systems, instead of thought being devoted to fit the OLPC into a "me
too"
>> mold. Let's not get sidetracked.
> You are asking the wrong questions. If you ask which is the biggest,
> fastest netbook, the XO isn't in it. If you ask which netbooks are
> designed for the target market, nothing but the XO is in it. We stand
> out far above the noise in our own niche.
Sorry, Britishism. (I lived there for a year.) "Nothing else is in it"
doesn't mean that there are no competitors, but that they are not
actually competitive.
The OLPC XO-1 is far and away the standout in small systems for
kids.
I mean, my four-year-old saw it and said "Look - a computer for
children!". No other machine available matches the XO's
sunlight-readable screen and native mesh networking. None are as
rugged as the XO-1, nor as easy to repair, nor as inexpensive (with
the possible exception of the EeePC 701 which is lacking in the other
departments especially screen size).
However, there are indeed netbooks designed for the K-6 education 1:1
target market:
They fail in comparison with the XO on power, ruggedness, appropriate
software, and other measures.
* The Intel Classmate series (Gen1/Gen2 "Clamshell" with
7" and 8.9"
screens, Gen3 "Convertible" with 8.9" swivel touchscreen). Usually
runs with locked-down Easybits Magic Desktop over Windows XP, however
Canonical has just announced Ubuntu Remix support for the series and
is with Intel and Microsoft in Miami today and Cairo next week
(http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/marketing/2009-June/001489.html).
Intel licenses to local builders on favorable terms, who rebrand the
machines; there are two dozen such partners worldwide now, the latest
being Archos in France
(http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/marketing/2009-June/001452.html).
Intel positions the Classmate for all markets and relies on the local
partners to find the sweet spot for governments and education
ministries. Microsoft follows Intel into local deals and tacks Office
on where it can.
* The Dell Latitude 2100 education netbook
(http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/marketing/2009-May/001026.html),
with Ubuntu standard (WinXP optional) and backed by a specific
education support structure. Rollout is in the USA with a $4000
classroom rack charger/router which can update/backup the netbooks
while they are charging at night. The netbook has a tattletale LED bar
in the lid to inform teachers what's happening (student network
activity, or has completed a task - it's programmable).
Also, education solutions designed to leverage existing PC
infrastructure in school computer labs (slightly older student
positioning):
* NComputing (http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/marketing/2009-June/001243.html)
* Microsoft Multipoint
(http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/marketing/2009-May/001169.html)
Finally, netbooks designed for the age group at home, with an emphasis
on parental controls and filters:
* The Disney Asus Netpal netbook
(http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/marketing/2009-June/001486.html)
runs a locked-down kids' Disney-themed desktop over Windows XP and
will be widely distributed at Toys 'R' Us and the Disney Store.
I boot Sugar on a Stick on a Gen1 7" Classmate, a pair of Asus EeePCs,
an Acer Aspire One, a Dell Inspiron Mini 10, a Dell Latitude 2100
education netbook, and under VirtualBox, on a Mac Mini in fullscreen.
Sugar has the potential to leverage the hardware offers above, and
given the lack of interest by governments in an Windows XP-equipped XO
to date, could potentially displace Microsoft in the K-6 education
markets of developed countries too, which would be great for education
(and great for Fedora). In this space, it's Sugar versus Magic Desktop
and other proprietary products, and in my view Sugar is far superior.
Ideas I've encountered for non-education uses of XOs are usually NGOs
needing rugged hardware for e.g. surveying or medical applications.
Sean
Sugar Labs Marketing Coordinator
--
Silent Thunder (默雷/धर्ममेघशब्दगर्ज/دھرممیگھشبدگر ج) is my name
And Children are my nation.
The Cosmos is my dwelling place, The Truth my destination.
http://earthtreasury.org/worknet (Edward Mokurai Cherlin)
5468
days inactive
5474
days old
4 comments
4 participants
participants (4)
-
Edward Cherlin -
Mikus Grinbergs -
Rui Miguel Silva Seabra -
Sean DALY