Weekly Edition
Return to the Announcements pageSponsored link
Serve your customers, not your servers, with VERIO Linux VPS. Full-access test-drive here.
| Weekly edition | Kernel | Security | Distributions | Search |
| Archives | Calendar | Subscribe | Write for LWN | LWN.net FAQ |
OLPC and Microsoft
| From: | Nicholas Negroponte <nn-AT-media.mit.edu> | |
| To: | devel-AT-laptop.org, sugar-AT-laptop.org, support-gang-AT-laptop.org | |
| Subject: | Microsoft | |
| Date: | Thu, 15 May 2008 19:15:42 -0400 | |
| Message-ID: | <6.2.1.2.2.20080515191440.02c83008@hq.media.mit.edu> |
One Laptop per Child is announcing an agreement with Microsoft to make a dual boot, Linux/Windows, version of the XO laptop. In addition, our intention is to engage one or more third parties to port Sugar to run on Windows in order to reach a wider installed base of laptops. In the meanwhile, OLPC remains fully committed to our goal: a completely free and open learning platform for the world's children. The mission statement of OLPC has not changed in three years (attached).
Sugar is the first user interface specifically designed for children and teachers to learn and collaborate, and remains central to our strategy. Broadening Sugar's reach to as many children as possible remains key to OLPC's mission.
To enable the Sugar environment to reach as many children as possible, particularly in the poorest areas of the world, OLPC must be able to bid on educational technology contracts, some of which require that Microsoft Windows be able to run on our hardware. The increased volumes will lower the XO-1's price, already lowest in the industry with capabilities no other laptop shares.
OLPC is substantially increasing its engineering resources and all software development continues entirely on GNU/Linux. We will continue to work to make Sugar on Linux the best possible platform for education and to invest in our expanding Linux deployments in Peru, Uruguay, Mexico and elsewhere.
No OLPC resources are going to porting Sugar to Microsoft Windows, although as a free software project, we encourage others to do so. The Sugar user interface is already available for Fedora, Debian and Ubuntu Linux distributions, greatly broadening Sugar's reach to the millions of existing Linux systems. We continue to solicit help from the free software community in these efforts. Additionally, the Fedora, Debian and Ubuntu software environments run on the XO-1, adding support for tens of thousands of free software applications.
Open Firmware V2, the free and open source BIOS, is now capable of running Linux, Microsoft Windows XP and other operating systems, and was developed by Firmworks with support from OLPC. This will enable dual boot of OLPC XO laptops with Microsoft Windows XP in addition to the existing Fedora-based system and will become the standard BIOS/bootloader for all XO systems when completed. With this "free BIOS," the XO-1 continues to be the most open laptop hardware currently available.
For more information, see http://wiki.laptop.org/go/AnnounceFAQ.
_______________________________________________ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
(Log in to post comments)
OLPC and Microsoft
Posted May 16, 2008 2:08 UTC (Fri) by pr1268 (subscriber, #24648) [Link]
The CNN/Money article seems more damning of GNU/Linux (and Open Source in general), especially given the headline, "With Microsoft, OLPC may finally succeed." My initial reaction from this article was that the OLPC had failed to garner support from developing countries' governments because the XO didn't support Microsoft Windows. What a load of crap.
I thought I heard somewhere that Negroponte et al originally shopped for a Microsoft version of Windows for the XO, but MS balked at the concept. Now it's strange how MS is all too eager to throw their support to the OLPC project seeing how it seems like a realizable project.
I will concede that it's at least admirable (and unusual) that MS will maintain dual-boot support for the XO--seeing how they can't stand any other competition either in the market, or on one's hard drive.
OLPC and Microsoft
Posted May 16, 2008 3:24 UTC (Fri) by mattdm (subscriber, #18) [Link]
It's worth noting that that's a Fortune Magazine article. They've always been (rabidly, at times) anti-Linux, anti-Free Software, anti-Open Source.
OLPC and Microsoft
Posted May 16, 2008 13:46 UTC (Fri) by andrel (guest, #5166) [Link]
And yet they run their web site using Apache on Linux. Go figure.
OLPC and Microsoft
Posted May 16, 2008 4:01 UTC (Fri) by mtall (guest, #52045) [Link]
it's at least admirable (and unusual) that MS will maintain dual-boot support for the XOMS is an amoral (some would say immoral) company, and anything they do is carefully calculated in an attempt to get maximum gain through whatever means possible (including things bordering on being illegal).
The "dual-boot" support is nothing more than lip service on Negroponte's part. I wouldn't be surprised in the least if the next message from Negroponte is along the lines of "OLPC will strive towards dual-boot", or "provide an option for dual-book if a customer really wants it".
OLPC and Microsoft
Posted May 16, 2008 8:01 UTC (Fri) by jmettova (subscriber, #25848) [Link]
_Every_ company only seeks for gains&profit&money. That's what they are for. Philanthropy is different. Hobby is different. Those effectively "spend" money.
OLPC and Microsoft
Posted May 16, 2008 12:23 UTC (Fri) by dgm (subscriber, #49227) [Link]
In an ideal capitalist society every individual should just seek for money and profit, and a company would be just another individual. Imagine a society like this (or just read books about early-industrial Great Britain) and you will realize *why* we cannot accept that enterprises just seek profit.
OLPC and Microsoft
Posted May 16, 2008 22:54 UTC (Fri) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link]
Just another individual: immortal and required by law to be sociopathic. So just like normal men and women, then.
What companies are
Posted May 16, 2008 13:41 UTC (Fri) by tialaramex (subscriber, #21167) [Link]
No, this is a popular misconception. Companies may be created and operated for any goal or set of goals. Public and some types of private companies must specify these goals at the time of incorporation and update them as necessary. It is very rare for the stated purpose of the company to be just "Make money any way possible". It is very rare (perhaps even unheard of) to hire a CEO for a company and tell him "The only thing we care about is making money". It goes without saying that a company, like a person, usually must generate income in order to survive and certainly to thrive. But that doesn't have to come at any price, many companies have principles that they hold about profitability.
What companies are
Posted May 18, 2008 5:45 UTC (Sun) by drag (subscriber, #31333) [Link]
YES. Absolutely. Many companies are created for the pure pursuit of money. Many are not. (what could you do if you were rich?) It's like saying that all political parties are created with the goal of pure power and they don't care about anything else but achieving that power. That's obviously very silly. Corporation is just a legal category for company. A legal entity that shields it's owners from certain amount of liability.. ie: if you business fails they won't take your house. This sort of thing allows companies to take more aggressive risks, like starting a new restaurant at the edge of town. If you look at the charter of many businesses they are created for a goal. Maybe it's getting into space, build a better bicycle, or a new sprocket or whatever. This sort of thing is all over the map. It's better then being a wage slave for your entire life. Don't confuse 'corporations' with the sort of publicly held corporations that you'd find on the stock market. Most of those guys are mostly publicly owned and the board of directors have a pure profit motivation. They control most of the capitol, but (at least in the USA) the vast majority of people work for (and most work gets done by) much smaller businesses. Small and medium businesses are the true backbone to our economy. Hell the entire stock market isn't really all that relevant to the economy anyways.. although people pretend it is. (I think it's due to the fact the stock market is so heavily controlled and everything is accounted for so on a daily basis so it's easy to make pretty graphs to point at on the news at night and on newspapers)
What companies are
Posted May 21, 2008 8:50 UTC (Wed) by pboddie (subscriber, #50784) [Link]
Most of those guys are mostly publicly owned and the board of directors have a pure profit motivation. They control most of the capitol
I'm not sure if you meant to write that (instead of "capital"), but there's an element of truth to it, certainly. ;-)
OLPC and Microsoft
Posted May 16, 2008 5:03 UTC (Fri) by bronson (subscriber, #4806) [Link]
I find it hard to disagree. :( The G1G1 laptops have awesome hardware and awful software. The software ruins the whole package. It's cranky, slow, buggy, hard to use, and did I mention slooooow? I predict that XP will feel 2X faster and should have no trouble eating Linux's lunch here. Talk about a PR disaster. Here's the thing: I think Linux is way better than Windows both technically and socially. But the XO has terrible power management, buggy drivers, and really cryptic software that requires a lot of hand holding. It's frustrating... all things that Linux is notorious for. If XP-on-XO allows me to easily copy files to and from the SD card, launches apps fast, is fairly bug free, and doesn't require continuous updating, I'll put XP on it in a heartbeat. I'm a pragmatist but I'll be crying inside. BTW, it wouldn't surprise me at all if the XP port has had more man hours put into it than the Linux port... It's a lot easier for MS to affort coders than it is for OLPC.
OLPC and Microsoft
Posted May 16, 2008 7:36 UTC (Fri) by luya (subscriber, #50741) [Link]
Which build do you currently for the G1G1 XO. I am running the latest joyride build that appears to be faster than the default 656. I think the lack of staff is significant even though volunteers can get the XO image running via emulator like QEMU. The real issue for the OLPC as a non-profit organization IMHO is the lack of focus and a good leader who can further push the development of Sugar interface. Windows XP as operating system is fundamentally flawed by design. The fact Microsoft already set the EOL made it useless. Users can always remove it and install another OS. Microsoft just want its big part.
Eee and Microsoft
Posted May 16, 2008 22:01 UTC (Fri) by man_ls (subscriber, #15091) [Link]
Just get an Eee. It's cheaper (than $400), has good enough hardware, and the software is great: fast, excellent power management, a minimalistic and very easy to use interface, and hardly any upgrades. You can replace the default Xandros desktop with any other Linux; under Debian power management still works perfectly.It doesn't have mesh networking, but let's face it: who needs that? As for the outdoors-readable screen, Linus himself said it best:
So stop worrying about those dangerous ultraviolet rays, and instead get your Vitamin D in the form God (and the pharmaceutical industry) intended: small easily swallowed pills. Beaches are overrated anyway, the sand gets into the laptop fan and soon it won't work.To ease your conscience you may just buy the cheapest $300 model, and donate the extra $100 to a charity. It will probably help the poor kids more this way.
As an aside: does anyone know if the default Debian-based Xandros is generating faulty crypto keys? Since the system hardly sees any upgrades, it might be dangerous.
XP and the future
Posted May 16, 2008 15:17 UTC (Fri) by Max.Hyre (subscriber, #1054) [Link]
I'm surprised no one has mentioned the (IMHO) real reason: indoctrination. Kids booting to XP will learn MS == OS == computer. Once that's learned, MS's work is done. Older kids (often called ``adults'') will feel at home in XP, and default to MS when they buy their next computer, or spec their next corporate purchase.It'll be interesting to see how long XP, with its declared EOL, will be sold for the XO. Somehow I don't see Vista running on one of those.
XP and the future
Posted May 16, 2008 15:25 UTC (Fri) by NigelK (guest, #42083) [Link]
Indoctrination would have been a good argument ten years ago, but now not only is Linux out there amongst the masses, but it's got a hell of a Google footprint too. The moment a smart and curious kid gets Internet access and stumbles upon it, then there'll probably be no going back unless the latest version of Windows can offer a better experience for him.
XP and the future
Posted May 17, 2008 12:16 UTC (Sat) by pflugstad (subscriber, #224) [Link]
Heh - unless the kid wants to play games, and let's face it, 95% of what kids do with computers will be games. In which case it's Linux that loses. I'm just pessimist though.
XP and the future
Posted May 21, 2008 8:53 UTC (Wed) by anandsr21 (guest, #28562) [Link]
Well you won't expect "those" children to buy the 50$ games. They will probably only be playing the freely available ones, probably flash, which have a high probability of working on Linux. Out of the box linux has more games ;-).
OLPC and Microsoft
Posted May 16, 2008 4:25 UTC (Fri) by donbarry (guest, #10485) [Link]
The key point is that Negroponte, in claiming others took an education process and made it about free software, is impugning the labor put in by people who contributed precisely *because* the OLPC was sold to the community as being about education via free software. He has stabbed those people in the back, and regardless of how he tacks politically (there are undoubtedly many more shifts with the prevailing winds to come), his character to many people in this community -- including me -- is now mud.
Getting volume
Posted May 16, 2008 4:29 UTC (Fri) by eru (subscriber, #2753) [Link]
The increased volumes will lower the XO-1's price,So why not finally sell it the world over also to ordinary customers, like normal laptops are sold???
Getting volume
Posted May 16, 2008 4:49 UTC (Fri) by dilinger (subscriber, #2867) [Link]
Because it's not a laptop project, it's an educat.. Oh, wait.
OLPC and Microsoft
Posted May 16, 2008 5:07 UTC (Fri) by mtall (guest, #52045) [Link]
The situation is actually a lot worse than Negroponte spin of "dual-boot".In reality most machines will now be Windows only.
From MS press release:
The intention is to create a version of the XO laptop that provides the ability to host both Windows and Linux"Intention of ability" does not equate to dual-boot actually being the default.
From BBC:
Machines will eventually be offered with the ability to run either Windows XP or Linux, although he admitted there were still some technical issues to overcome to achieve this.So either Windows or Linux?
Windows will add a bit to the price of the machines, about $3, the licensing fee Microsoft charges to some developing nations under a program called Unlimited Potential. For those nations that want models that can run both Windows and Linux, the extra hardware required will add another $7 or so to the cost of the machines, Mr. Negroponte said.
In other words: Windows is now standard, Linux is optional, until OLPC figures out how to make it dual-boot, evenutally somewhere down the line.
OLPC and Microsoft
Posted May 16, 2008 6:17 UTC (Fri) by Cato (subscriber, #7643) [Link]
What is there to 'figure out' about dual-boot? As long as there's enough storage space it is completely trivial to do this.
OLPC and Microsoft
Posted May 21, 2008 8:56 UTC (Wed) by anandsr21 (guest, #28562) [Link]
There is the problem of freebios which doesn't work with Windows. And the Linux version used for OLPC will not use normal bios ;-).
OLPC and Microsoft
Posted May 16, 2008 8:28 UTC (Fri) by ryans_linux_weekly (subscriber, #34936) [Link]
I don't really like this. The idea was for children, and now it seems the reason is for governments or public officials. Children can learn, and learn more with linux cause of the openness. With windows running, then the laptop is back to square one with all the programs needed to do things. I mean, with windows, if you want more than notepad, then you pay. I thought the whole idea was to escape from this.
OLPC and Microsoft
Posted May 16, 2008 9:05 UTC (Fri) by NigelK (guest, #42083) [Link]
What we're seeing here is a failing project trying to get finance so it can have a fighting chance at fixing its problems. We've all recently read about how NN has failed on the logistics side of things, so they need to employ talented people to organise that not just centrally but also out in the field. That takes a lot of money, so widening the potential market of the XO makes sense here. The OLPC computers were never going to be Linux-only in the long-term. Get used to it.
OLPC and Microsoft
Posted May 21, 2008 9:02 UTC (Wed) by anandsr21 (guest, #28562) [Link]
No. The problem is that NN made completely impractical projections which did not work out, and so the equipment makers are angry. Now to meet the projections he has to do all this. I think the mistake was hyping the project. If the project went simply by allowing manufacturers to sell the XO after giving a cut to the OLPC project. And using that cut to give discounts to early adopters (in poor countries). This project may have succeeded. But in no case could you sell 1million laptops to a single country. That was a stupid aim, and we are reaping the results.
OLPC and Microsoft
Posted May 21, 2008 13:39 UTC (Wed) by NigelK (guest, #42083) [Link]
Well, yes, that too - this *is* a monumental fsck-up in so many different ways. The only way NN can make things worse is to announce the XO2 whilst he's still trying to sell the first model. <checks news website> Oops.
OLPC and Microsoft
Posted May 16, 2008 10:19 UTC (Fri) by gowen (guest, #23914) [Link]
Children can learn, and learn more with linux cause of the openness.One keeps hearing this mantra repeated; in fact it seems the raison d'etre of the "No XP for OLPC" fraternity.
You are aware there's not one single solitary shred of supporting evidence, right?
OLPC and Microsoft
Posted May 16, 2008 10:43 UTC (Fri) by niner (subscriber, #26151) [Link]
You mean except for simple logic?
OLPC and Microsoft
Posted May 16, 2008 10:47 UTC (Fri) by gowen (guest, #23914) [Link]
Go on then. Demonstrate this "simple logic" to me. State your premises and show your working.
OLPC and Microsoft
Posted May 16, 2008 10:59 UTC (Fri) by jhellan (subscriber, #17103) [Link]
Probably not hard. Simple logic has successfully proved the validity of everything from Leninist communism to Randite objectivism. You just start with premises which almost everybody will agree to, but which do not capture the nuances.
OLPC and Microsoft
Posted May 16, 2008 11:11 UTC (Fri) by niner (subscriber, #26151) [Link]
The assumption is that children can learn more by using an open system, where the inner workings are not hidden. It is not that children may learn reading, writing or basic math better on an open system. But once they did that, with an open system, they have much information about the workings of a computer, an operating system, and applications right there for them to discover. More information means more things one can learn. Also with an open system, they have the possibility to experiment and play around like children tend to do and like children tend to learn. This is strictly about learning about computers, which is arguably not the main goal of the OLPC project. But this also could have the side effect of more development going on and thus more things to play around with for the children and thus more to learn. This is the part that's speculative.
OLPC and Microsoft
Posted May 16, 2008 11:46 UTC (Fri) by NigelK (guest, #42083) [Link]
"This is strictly about learning about computers, which is arguably not the main goal of the OLPC project." I'm glad you mentioned that. This is what I meant earlier when I said that by taking your eye off the ball and focussing on others' agendas, you actually prevent yourself from achieving your goals. I'd say be happy that the kids will be able to not just use the laptops for everyday learning, but also there's enough open source on there to help them learn to edit programs and write applications (very useful when it comes to building your own tools). Even if they couldn't hack the operating system there's still a massive scope for other things they can write for themselves. So, on the XP XOs provide all the tools they need to hack and compile Sugar, throw in the code and binaries for OpenOffice, Firefox, whatever as well, and you'll still have a ton of new open source programmers at the end of it. Remember that one of the major advantages of open source software is that you can port and maintain code across other platforms - we shouldn't be preventing others from porting to and from Windows.
OLPC and Microsoft
Posted May 16, 2008 12:25 UTC (Fri) by Zack (guest, #37335) [Link]
>So, on the XP XOs provide all the tools they need to hack and compile Sugar, throw in the code and binaries for OpenOffice, Firefox, whatever as well, and you'll still have a ton of new open source programmers at the end of it. So who will be providing all these tools and programs (most of which are in direct competition with their microsoft counterparts) on an XO with XP shipped OEM ? >but also there's enough open source on there to help them learn I think it's safe to assume there will be no general purpose open-source software of any significance shipped by default. The chances of OLPC just becoming a vessel to subvert Free Software are real. I don't think Microsoft at the moment has any real monetary incentive to support OLPC, which leaves the reason of simply trying to halt what might have become the largest OEM shipment of the GNU/Linux os ever. You may dislike Free Software and its agenda, but it is pretty obvious that it is the lesser of two "evils" in this case.
does openness result in more learning?
Posted May 16, 2008 11:42 UTC (Fri) by pjm (subscriber, #2080) [Link]
The simple and obvious version of the argument is that you can't learn what's kept secret from you, by definition. There's more to openness than “not secret” (e.g. openness to modification), so in principle something could be more open without being less secret, but in the current case, the free software install is less secret and more learnable. I could go on and say why I think “more learnable” will in fact translate to being “more learnt” (as has been the case for me using free software compared to previous proprietary operating systems), but I suspect that that isn't gowen's objection: I suspect that the objection is that learning about the software on one's computer is not the most important type of learning, and that learning about other things (chemistry, say) can benefit more from having access to software running in most of the world's schools (advantages of scale) than by being modifiable by the students and teachers using the software. I can't conclusively argue either way. Getting back to “the most important type of learning”, I think we can agree that cooperation and helping oneself and one's friends are very important things to learn, and software one is forbidden from sharing or improving will be less conducive to that than software that encourages one to look at and improve (and that needs improving!). A less important point is that schools even in rich countries are increasing turning towards free software and Linux/Gnu for education (anyone disagree?), so the network effect argument will tilt less towards Windows over time.
OLPC and Microsoft
Posted May 16, 2008 16:19 UTC (Fri) by leoc (subscriber, #39773) [Link]
Well, this has nothing to do specifically with the OLPC, but at the very least it is clearly easier to localize Linux than it is to localize Windows due to the open source nature of Linux. Case in point.For Windows Operating Systems, E-Tools has partnered with Microsoft; however the available funding from Microsoft is extremely insufficient due to the fact that Rwandan market is very small and the return on any Microsoft investment in Rwanda is very small. Microsoft became interested in converting Windows to Kinyarwanda after witnessing the interest generated by Linux in Kinyarwanda.
OLPC as Microsoft advertising program
Posted May 16, 2008 13:09 UTC (Fri) by Seegras (guest, #20463) [Link]
That's what this OLPC has become. Cheap advertising for Microsoft. And if there is anyone to blame for the "non-adoption" of the OLPC, it's not the lack of "Windows", but Microsofts BRIBERY. Guess who paid the money to make the Libyan Ministry switch to the "Classmate" instead?
OLPC as Microsoft advertising program
Posted May 16, 2008 13:29 UTC (Fri) by ms (subscriber, #41272) [Link]
Yes, because Microsoft is clearly the only one at fault here. The despotic government of Libya is obviously without blame.
What does the machine encourage kids to do?
Posted May 16, 2008 17:01 UTC (Fri) by johnny (guest, #10110) [Link]
I think the best part of the "original" version of the machine was that it simply wasn't compatible with PC games and that it didn't encourage kids to waste time looking for pirated software instead of learning. As adults, we take for granted that choice is a good thing - and it is, but remember that we don't allow our children that freedom. We tell them what to eat, when to go to sleep, and so on - because we know that if we don't, if we give them the freedom to do whatever they want, the average kid will probably always take the easy way out and do what's most fun, not what's most prudent. Basing the machine on Linux, and even slapping a non-standard interface on top (Sugar), makes sure that most kids who receive it don't immediately fire up Word of Warcraft and then stay there. Instead, they are encouraged to play educational non-violent games, and play with other instructional parts of the system (including the source code for older kids). My fear is that with a Windows version, most kids will regard the machine as something to run games and perhaps watch youtube on, and also make prioritize learning how to obtain pirated software. I sure would have, if I was a kid.
What does the machine encourage kids to do?
Posted May 17, 2008 20:35 UTC (Sat) by felixrabe (subscriber, #50514) [Link]
Thanks, I agree. We don't need "more quantity" (games), we need "more quality" (code to tinker with).
OLPC and Microsoft
Posted May 19, 2008 3:38 UTC (Mon) by stock (subscriber, #5849) [Link]
Microsoft certainly has a interesting trackrecord when it concerns computers and education : NEWS://Microsoft Bullies Beat Up Toronto Teacher; Trash His Lab http://groups.google.com/groups?as_umsgid=pan.2006.07.07.... On Thu, 06 Jul 2006 16:18:15 -0700, John Bailo wrote: > http://www.itbusiness.ca/it/client/en/home/News.asp?id=39... > > "Ed Montgomery, a computer science teacher at Monarch Park Collegiate, > said in an e-mail to ITBusiness.ca that he was given a note in May, > telling him that the Linux lab would be dismantled and replaced with a > Microsoft-based Classroom Migration Technology Initiative (CTMI) lab. > > On June 21, according to Montgomery, Terry Wister, the head of school > wide services for Monarch Park, removed all of the Linux computers from > the lab room under the direction of the school's principal, Rob > MacKinnon, while Montgomery was out at lunch. When Montgomery came back > from lunch, he said all of the machines in the lab were running > Windows. Montgomery had received a note from Terry Wister a month > earlier." I'd say that Microsoft software has become a critical part of modern day mind programming on schools. Its however just plain wrong. You want mind programming? ok, place a normal teacher in the class room. Do not allow a piece of propiatary software to takeover for almost 100% that essential part. A frequent used argument in favor for Microsoft Sofware are the widely supported apps like MS word and excel. What is the point in teaching kids about programs that they will never see in the business world. To earn money with programming one should use the Windows platform and Linux won't earn you a living. Well thats just a illusion, earning money with programming only happens in dreams. Microsoft controls that completely, or at least thats what they want. Next their software programs us, the people. end of story. The use of microsoft software inside education is not only nurturing a mono-culture, its even dangerous. The field of visual mind programming is currently already exploited in a very dangerous way inside computer shootout games. The windows desktop is a visual mind programming job in itself IMHO. What the kids are learning inside their subconcious? I dunno, maybe Bill Gates can tell ya. With Linux you at least have open source. If some nasty sublimals are hidden, you can track it down. Do not allow software to take over the essential part of mind programming kids. a normal teacher inside the class room should do that. Do not allow your kid to grow a 2-bit brain by the use of microsoft software. Robert -- Robert M. Stockmann - RHCE Network Engineer - UNIX/Linux Specialist crashrecovery.org stock@stokkie.net