Negroponte succumbs [LWN.net]

Negroponte succumbs

Posted Apr 23, 2008 23:58 UTC (Wed) by djabsolut (guest, #12799)
Parent article: Negroponte on OLPC's commitment to Sugar

Either Nicholas is smoking something, or Microsoft has put its thumbscrews to use again. The main interface is Sugar, and it could be argued that it doesn't matter what is underneath. However, why pay for the "underneath" when an almost-zero cost and a considerably technically better alternative exists ?

Putting XP on the OLPC doesn't make any technical sense. Firstly, XP ("lightweight" version or not) is not exactly a good match with a laptop that is deliberately limited in resources. Secondly, and probably more importantly, the security track record of XP is like Swiss cheese -- and it's supposed to run on machines that create a wide mesh network. This will end being an effective bot network: spam, denial of service attacks, captcha cracking, etc. The potential size of this bot network can have political implications with international overtones -- president X of 3rd World Country Y might not be very impressed when he/she gets pressure from USA & EU over continuous spam originating from his/her country.

(Log in to post comments)

Negroponte succumbs

Posted Apr 24, 2008 4:58 UTC (Thu) by jmorris42 (subscriber, #2203) [Link]

> The main interface is Sugar, and it could be argued that it doesn't matter what is
underneath.

Exactly.  If you try to parse what he said it makes zero sense.  His complaint is Sugar is
immature so he is going to replace the underlying Linux with XP.  But he is totally committed
to Sugar.  Huh?

Don't have one, but don't recall any serious complaints about the underlying OS, just about
the immaturity and strangeness of Sugar.  But if you ignore the words and observe the actions
it makes alot more sense.  After so many people and entities contributed effort it would
trigger a firestorm if he announced an instant about face to Windows so he is doing it in
parts.

Sugar can't be abandoned later unless Windows gets in underneath now.  Once Windows is
underneath it will be a straightforward step to add the ability to get at the XP desktop and
then slowly deprecate Sugar.  In a year or so it will be, "Sad really, just never could get it
to work, but we have to be practical about these things.... blah blah. Remember it is all
about what is best for the children.  blah blah."

This was all planned.  There was zero chance Microsoft was going to permit millions of users
to grow up without being addicted to Windows, thus the only way this project could succeed was
with their blessing.  The trick was finding a way to make Microsoft WANT to be in so bad they
would contribute free (or almost) licenses and the porting efforts.  Lots of people were
warning about this outcome years ago.

Negroponte succumbs

Posted Apr 24, 2008 10:21 UTC (Thu) by dgm (subscriber, #49227) [Link]

I have zero evidence, but I guess that many more deals could have been signed if the XO was
Windows based. Not in the poorest countries, mind you, but in the ones that already have
computers running Windows (and educative software for Windows).

What I miss here is a bit more openness, something Negroponte should have learn from Open
Source. Is there *really* any problem with the Linux OS the XO are using? Is there *really*
any problem with Sugar? Have all those purported problems been discussed in the open?

Regarding Negroponte's selling-out, I think that he has seen Open Source as a means to an end,
that being giving the children tools for learn better, and their professors tools to teach
better. The goal has never been to promote Open Source/Free Software nor Sugar "per se", the
same way they do not promote their particular display or the mesh networking stuff. They are
cool, but are just tools.

On the other hand, all those defections of late do not speak good of Negroponte's ability to
lead the organization. But let their acts speak for them.

Negroponte succumbs

Posted Apr 24, 2008 12:41 UTC (Thu) by zooko (subscriber, #2589) [Link]

I suspect that to the majority of educated people in those countries (and especially the
majority of Ministers of Education and Ministers of Technology and suchlike), Linux and Free
Software for end users is understood as simply a cheap knock-off of Windows.  They probably
think of Free Software as being simply the "produced-as-cheaply-as-possible flimsy knock-off"
product, or perhaps as "the failed competitor product that is now slashing prices out of
desperation".  If they have ever heard a philosophical or strategic argument for Free Software
for end users being a better alternative than Windows, they probably thought so little of it
that they forgot about it a minute later.

So I strongly suspect that in trying to sell OLPCs to those people, the Linux factor was a
millstone.  "We don't want our children to learn how to use incompatible, failed technologies!
We want them to learn Windows like Western children do!"

Negroponte succumbs

Posted Apr 24, 2008 17:30 UTC (Thu) by allesfresser (subscriber, #216) [Link]

That's funny--your enquoted descriptions pretty much match my opinion of *Windows*.
Especially the flimsy part.

Negroponte succumbs

Posted Apr 24, 2008 22:25 UTC (Thu) by man_ls (subscriber, #15091) [Link]

To me too. Sadly we are in the minority here. Most people think that Windows is the good OS and Linux is "the bad one", as a coworker put it when I showed her my Eee. Of the rest, most think that Linux is a do-it-yourself OS not really suitable for end users. A pity, but not something that cannot change.

Negroponte succumbs

Posted Apr 26, 2008 8:27 UTC (Sat) by Cato (subscriber, #7643) [Link]

"Most people" have no opinion about Linux because they've never heard of it...  If they have
heard of it, the opinion is more likely to be "too techie" than "bad" (what does "bad" mean
for an OS anyway?).

Negroponte succumbs

Posted Apr 26, 2008 9:38 UTC (Sat) by man_ls (subscriber, #15091) [Link]

"Bad" means in this context "cheap", "of poor quality". I suppose part of this reputation is due to companies giving it away. Its presence in low cost computers may also be a factor. Most people don't know e.g. that the vast majority of supercomputers run Linux (although they have most certainly heard of Linux).