next »

[teapot]

Are there hurdles?  Probably.  The DPI of the XO screen would probably make most applications marginally usable.  Imagine the font size of Opera's menubar, only having to deal with that system-wide. 

Actually this is the easiest part -- just tell applications that DPI is half of what it really is. This is how Ubuntu on XO is configured. Opera only has problems when installed with Sugar, because Sugar uses real DPI.

Other things probably haven't been implemented on XP before either, like mesh networking, so they would have to do that from scratch.

Or not implement at all. It's not like Microsoft actually cares for those features being used.

They probably have to do some fine-tuning of the system since certain components probably would bog down the XO, and they probably have to do so to fit in their business models.

What the hell are you talking about? Microsoft provided bare-bones Windows system with minimal set of applications. Everything they demonstrated except video recording is not resource-consuming, and video recording was obviously faked.

I think that all of this talk about "faked" demos is pure bulls**t.  Sure there may be an overlay of a screenshot on a photo of an XO, but there is probably a pragmatic reason that has more to do with publishing photos than conspiracy theories (see my prior post).  If there are issues with the video, it probably has more to do with the people shooting the video then editing it into something palettable for viewing.

No, video recording shows things as blatant as camera light showing that it is powered down when it was supposedly recording.

Do you seriously think that video clips on the evening news, from credible broadcasters, receive any less editing?  No.

Actually yes. Don't make answers for people you are talking to.
First of all, Microsoft demo has nothing to do with "evening news" or "credible broadcasters". It's supposed to be the "proof" to the public showing their accomplishments and supposedly soon-to-be available product. Second, Hell would break loose if video of any notable event was edited to include "re-enactments" such as imitation video recording.

Because the sad fact is, an unedited video would be dreadful to watch.  Just watch amateur productions on YouTube to see what I mean.

You probably are supposed to be interested in

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/v/yMU5gMskYGM" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/v/yMU5gMskYGM</a>
and
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/v/ozRazfg2Ujw" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/v/ozRazfg2Ujw</a>

that contain an actual session of Ubuntu being used on XO. If you watch really closely, you can spot a typo in one of the captions.

However being a Microsoft troll, you are not going to watch them.

Mostly though, I think that the ideas being put forth by Linux zealots are just red herrings.  The Linux camp are the ones who lack credibility because of their persistent desire to overstate irrelevant facts, their persistent desire to claim that issues with Microsoft products 10 years ago persist to this day, and their blinders that refuse to let them see anything positive in Microsoft.

So you are basically here to defend Microsoft because you don't like Linux developers. Thank you, I don't like you, either. Can we both wish each other to get cancer, and stop pretending that this is a productive discussion?

If you want Linux to be credible on the XO, make Linux credible on the XO.  If you cannot develop the software or document the system so that others can develop the software, at least sit down and create a list of reasons why Linux (and particularly Sugar) is a better platform for education in the developing world.  That list should emphasise the positive about Linux rather than the negatives about Microsoft because, quite frankly, Linux zealots have absolutely no credibility when it comes to their innate beliefs about Microsoft.

When you make the list, make sure it is things that educators and kids would care about.  Quite frankly, no sane educator is going to care about an open source kernel or an open source web browser or an open source word processor.  While it may provide freedom, it is not a meaningful form of freedom for what they do.  Things like open source activities may make sense, but you have to phrase it in the right way.  "You can customize the software for your needs," just doesn't cut it because most educators don't have the time to do that.  Something like, "motivated students can investigate and experiment with the inner workings of the software, to explore concepts beyond the pre-programmed confines of the software," may interest a few educators and a few kids.

Also make sure the benefits are honest.  Saying that the XO encourages collaboration is dishonest.  From what I've seen, very few of the activities allow children to collaborate.  Saying something like the XO has a collaborative word processor is honest, because it is here today.

The XO has an image problem.  Yes, a big part of that image problem comes from Negroponte and his gang.  Yet a big part of that image problem comes from the open source world as well.  If we're going to get over that image problem, we're going to have to get over being so darned negative about everything and we're going to have to be honest.

This is precisely the kind of "requirements" that Microsoft propaganda machine throws at Linux to be "taken seriously" by its enemies. Guess what? We don't care what Microsoft marketing people think about us. We don't expect them to accept Linux -- at least as long they are Microsoft marketing people. There is nothing -- absolutely nothing -- on any platform other than Linux, that ever was designed to fit XO purpose. Just like there is nothing on any platform other than Linux that runs Google-scale data centers and plenty of other things that were built without asking you or your friends at Microsoft for advice.

If you think, someone wants to run Sugar on Windows, port it to Windows. If you want to turn OLPC into "throw cheap laptops at poor people" pseudo-charity program, talk to Negroponte. Either way you are wasting your time talking to people who are not interested in supporting either of those things.

[Jordan]

Thank you, I don't like you, either. Can we both wish each other to get cancer, and stop pretending that this is a productive discussion?

So you basically want me to become seriously ill, and perhaps die, because I am a "Microsoft Troll".

Cripes, get a life.

I've been a Linux user for well over a decade.  I have used Linux for serious work.  I have used Linux for play.  I did not use Windows, or any Microsoft products, on my home computer for a decade.  I did not use Windows in the context of work (and yes, my work involved computers -- mostly running various flavours of Unix) for about half a decade.

But at the end of the day, I cannot support this dream world that claims Linux is ideal for education.  I have used it for astrophysics reasearch, and yeah Linux is great for that.  I'm sure that Google loves Linux, but Google uses a lot of software that is built in-house.  But Linux has very little software that supports its role in education.  And as the old cliche goes, "it's the software, stupid."

[teapot]

But at the end of the day, I cannot support this dream world that claims Linux is ideal for education.  I have used it for astrophysics reasearch, and yeah Linux is great for that.  I'm sure that Google loves Linux, but Google uses a lot of software that is built in-house.  But Linux has very little software that supports its role in education.  And as the old cliche goes, "it's the software, stupid."

That would have some kind of validity if there was useful educational software that required Windows.

What software that is essential for education exists for Windows? I mean, of course, education other than teaching how to use Microsoft and Adobe software -- those things are microscopic compared to the rest of school curriculum. Have you seen what "educational" computers at schools have now? What kids who have Windows laptops use them for and how is it reflects on their education? What kinds of negative skills, bad habits and false knowledge ("Text files always have formatting and fonts", "Just use Clone tool in Photoshop", "Files run code on your computers when they are opened", "It's dangerous to look at web pages", "All instant messaging systems arre full of spam and creepy people asking everyone a/s/l") do kids learn from Windows software?

[Jordan]

Uh, since when does Microsoft and Adobe software constitute educational software?

The following software is licensed by the Ministry of Education in Ontario.  It is by no means the only educational software out there, and it is by no means the only educational software used in Ontario schools, but it does reveal that there is a world of learning with computers that extends beyond learning computer skills:

http://www.osapac.org/dbOESS/biglistAll.asp?lang=e

Applications that I find particularly useful are Fathom and Geometer's Sketchpad.  Both can be used by teachers who have a constructivist bent.  Both are useful for mathematics and science education.  Both have fairly extensive complimentary curricular resources that help teachers use the software to meet learning objectives.

I do agree that "learning the software" is a huge concern.  I would never want a kid to learn Photoshop or learn Office in place of image processing and word processing.  And yeah, that concern ran through my mind in Microsoft's video exposition of XP on the XO (let's face it, they were pretty much showing off XP and Office).  I refer to this type of teaching as deskilling, but that is just my opinion.  An employer who wants their staff to know Office would obviously object.

But that isn't really the point, is it?  The point is that kids should be able to learn more than office skills on their computer.  Linux is marginal in that respect.  Windows and the Mac excel.

[teapot]

Uh, since when does Microsoft and Adobe software constitute educational software?

The following software is licensed by the Ministry of Education in Ontario.  It is by no means the only educational software out there, and it is by no means the only educational software used in Ontario schools, but it does reveal that there is a world of learning with computers that extends beyond learning computer skills:

http://www.osapac.org/dbOESS/biglistAll.asp?lang=e

Most of applications in that list are not educational, or are a pretty bad kind of "educational" software.

Applications that I find particularly useful are Fathom and Geometer's Sketchpad.  Both can be used by teachers who have a constructivist bent.  Both are useful for mathematics and science education.  Both have fairly extensive complimentary curricular resources that help teachers use the software to meet learning objectives.

Both can be easily reimplemented, integrated into Sugar and improved upon. This is a kind of applications that open source developers are good at, and a kind of application that can benefit from python scripting/data manipulation attached to them.

I do agree that "learning the software" is a huge concern.  I would never want a kid to learn Photoshop or learn Office in place of image processing and word processing.  And yeah, that concern ran through my mind in Microsoft's video exposition of XP on the XO (let's face it, they were pretty much showing off XP and Office).  I refer to this type of teaching as deskilling, but that is just my opinion.  An employer who wants their staff to know Office would obviously object.

Employers also would love to have perfect slaves working for food. Fortunately educators usually care more about kids than about employers' opinions.

But that isn't really the point, is it?  The point is that kids should be able to learn more than office skills on their computer.  Linux is marginal in that respect.  Windows and the Mac excel.

Excel with what? Two applications that can be easily re-done better?