The position on XP-on-OLPC has been clear: the OLPC is an *open* platform. And therefore
anyone has the right to port anything to it.
Nicholas Negroponte attempting to block XP on OLPC would be like Linus Torvalds trying to
prevent a specific political party using linux for their election campaign. It's just not an
option; open means open for everyone.
Of course, if you can show evidence that the OLPC staff have been spending their donations
working on an XP port, or that they are changing the design specifically to help Microsoft
then that would be different. Can you prove any such thing?
Posted Apr 22, 2008 16:11 UTC (Tue) by bronson (subscriber, #4806)
[Link]
Just what's on the tech/rumor sites.
http://www.mobilemag.com/content/100/334/C15015/http://www.engadget.com/2008/04/21/olpc-head-of-software-...
Half the stories on http://olpcnews.com
etc.
A lot of people seem to be under this impression. If they're not actually working on XP then
OLPC have a PR gaffe on their hands. They might want to issue a press release or at least a
position statement.
Well, we'll see! I still predict the slow demise of Sugar -- no big loss IMO -- but I love
the hardware and hope it has a bright future.
Walter Bender's "goodbye OLPC" note
Posted Apr 24, 2008 3:23 UTC (Thu) by lysse (guest, #3190)
[Link]
> Nicholas Negroponte attempting to block XP on OLPC would be like Linus Torvalds trying to
prevent a specific political party using linux for their election campaign.
Er, there are other options; it's not a binary choice between prevention and exclusive
endorsement... having said which, Negroponte seems to be sailing rather closer to the latter
these days, and that certainly does seem to be something of a volte-face.