[Community-news] on Sugar

[C. Scott Ananian]

On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 12:06 PM, Nicholas Negroponte <nn at media.mit.edu> wrote:
>  For this reason, Sugar needs a wider basis, to run on more Linux platforms
> and to run under Windows. We have been engaged in discussions with Microsoft
> for several months, to explore a dual boot version of the XO. Some of you
> have seen what Microsoft developed on their own for the XO. It works well
> and now needs Sugar on top of it (so to speak).

You have been saying variations of this for a while now, but:
 * OLPC has not hired any Windows developers
 * OLPC has not adjusted its timeline to allow for time necessary for
such a port.

What are we to make of this?  Are you serious about Sugar on Windows
or not?  If you are, then you need to immediately hire *at least* 10
windows developers to actually perform the port, and inform the
deployment countries that we are placing a hold on new development for
at least 6 months while the port is prepared.  And the result, of
course, will be a new version of Sugar which is guaranteed to run *no
better* than the one on Linux.  From an IT management perspective,
this is madness.

If you are not serious about Sugar on Windows within the next year,
please continue to avoid 'now' and use 'might' and 'someday' when you
talk about it, and we'll continue to try to make Sugar-on-Linux
achieve its potential.  I approve of keeping OLPC's options open, in
case your current development team (myself included) cannot deliver on
Sugar's potential, but setting vague (and demoralizing) goals for
future development -- without actually devoting the resources to
achieve those goals -- is madness.  You have only succeeded in
alienating the developers you need to make Sugar-on-Linux work,
without actually achieving any progress on Sugar-on-Windows.
 --scott

-- 
 ( http://cscott.net/ )