C. Scott Ananian cscott at laptop.org
Thu May 22 09:38:12 EDT 2008

On 5/22/08, Bert Freudenberg <bert at freudenbergs.de> wrote:
> So you're suggesting a similar software stack like on the XO-1 will be
>  used? OFW / Linux / X11 / Sugar?

That is the plan.  Most of 1cc is learning about the XO-2 at the same
time you are.  There has been limited discussion about whether Sugar
will need to be forked to support new UI, but the general feeling
seems to be that we will need to maintain a unified stack: we don't
have the resources to do a new UI from scratch, and countries will
inevitably have mixed XO-1/XO-2 deployments, so keeping the UIs in
sync is a good idea.

We may need to rethink how certain parts of the UI work in order to
better support touchscreen operation.  For example, the frame might be
'pulled' out from the corner using a drag gesture; perhaps the same
gesture would be required on the XO-1.  Right click context menus are
not so natural on a touchscreen; will we define a gesture to activate
them, or try to shift to a different mechanism?  How will gestures be
discoverable?  I believe the plan is to cobble together some
touchscreens ASAP so we can start experimenting with these choices;
perhaps we'll start landing changes in 9.1.

There will almost certainly be a 'virtual XO-1' mode for
compatibility, where the lower touchscreen will display a keyboard and
touchpad like the XO-1.

>  The mock-ups didn't really reveal other features than the dual-
>  touchscreen. Are there going to be speakers, camera, analog inputs/
>  outputs, USB, mesh-networking, fold-out antennae etc?

I'm not on the hardware team, so this is just a wild guess:
 a) speakers and camera almost certainly: Record is one of the
most-used applications on the XO-1.  (The kids in Peru asked for a
flash; there are safety issues with that, though.)
 b) mesh networking, yes.  Not connected with USB! (since this is a
big part of our suspend/resume troubles ATM.)
 c) fold-out antennae: these were difficult to manufacture with
repeatable characteristics.  On the other hand, they became an iconic
XO feature.

Some other features that have been discussed:
 d) GPS (unknown whether this will be able to make the cost budget)
 e) accelerometer (so that rotation is magic, not manual)
 f) light sensor (so backlight level can be automatic for better power savings)
 g) hinge-angle sensor (detect 'tablet mode' as well as 'closed')
 h) hardware-protected RTC (bitfrost desiderata)
 i) better protection for firmware FLASH, to avoid the possibility of
bricking a machine if the power is removed at the wrong time.
 j) more open hardware design (schematic) -- this is really a
contractual issue with the manufacturer
 k) more open software: we may not need an EC, and if we do we may be
able to ensure its code is open.  We may change the wireless device,
and/or be able to switch to open firmware for it.

Of course, none of this is final until the machines start being
manufactured, and (as Jim said) we're not even past the processor
selection stage yet.  So right now we're assembling desiderata and
(presumably) pricing out components to get a sense of the possible.

                         ( http://cscott.net/ )

More information about the Devel mailing list