Sponsored link
Vyatta –
Linux & Open Source
Alternative to Cisco –
Advanced Routing,
Firewall, VPN, QoS..
Free Download ->
| |||||||||||
OLPC and MicrosoftOLPC and MicrosoftPosted May 16, 2008 2:08 UTC (Fri) by pr1268 (subscriber, #24648)Parent article: OLPC and Microsoft
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.
(Log in to post comments)
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 (guest, #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 (guest, #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 ;-).
|
|||||||||||