[Its.an.education.project] An OLPC Development Model

[Bernie Innocenti]

Mikus Grinbergs wrote:

> Frankly, I don't see a logic difference between Negroponte talking 
> about extending the OLPC hardware to Windows (presumably to increase 
> recognition of the OLPC),  and those talking about extending Sugar 
> to a standard desktop (presumably to increase recognition of Sugar).

I myself wouldn't oppose a Windows port of Sugar.  I would never
waste my time on it, or encourage anyone to waste their time on it,
but it's free software and thus anyone is free to port it to
anything they wish.

What we contest is not the mere act of porting Sugar to Windows
itself.  It's:

 - the technical viability and usefulness of this whole idea.

 - explicitly endorsing laptops with proprietary software as
   a proper learning tool for primary schools; and

 - letting a dangerous enemy of free software acquire control over
   the platform on which Sugar runs, which is a strategic suicide
   (ask Borland, Norton, Corel and Lotus about it);

 - partnering with a dangerous enemy of free software that will
   demand -- and seems to be already demanding -- that the Linux
   business be shut down in exchange for their support.

-- 
   \___/
  _| o |  Bernie Innocenti - http://www.codewiz.org/
  \|_X_|  "It's an education project, not a laptop project!"