is anyone actually doing Windows on XO work here?

[Ed McNierney]

Walter -

I figured I was pushing the envelope with Oswald.... :)

Yes, indeed - I think there's some hope of communicating more clearly  
that the XO-1 and XO-1.5 first have to work properly, and reliably,  
with sustainable power demands, before anyone can start debating what  
applications get run on those machines.

I'll see what I can do to transition NN from the omelet to puff pastry!

	- Ed


On Jul 21, 2009, at 7:37 AM, Walter Bender wrote:

> Ed,
>
> Lee Harvey Oswald was part of an ensemble group. See:
>
> http://chnm.gmu.edu/digitalhistory/links/cached/introduction/link0.20.in-a-gadda-da-oswald_files/oswald.jpe
>
> More seriously, I don't know if it is possible, but getting Nicholas
> to stop making a "scrambled egg" out of the software stack with his
> "omelet" analogy would go a long ways to reducing the confusion in the
> media as well. His continued insistence that Sugar is an operating
> system--the problem--is being spoken out of ignorance and does not
> reflect well on either project. As you know better than most, the bulk
> of the software engineering effort at OLPC has been in support of
> getting the hardware to boot, drivers, security, power management,
> etc. All critical tasks, whether or not this is an education project.
> Sugar (or any other user-facing) bits have always been and still are
> almost entirely separate from these engineering necessities, as is
> content development and the bulk of the deployment work. (The points
> of overlap are in regard to managing some aspects of security and
> updates.)
>
> -walter
>
> On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 7:21 AM, Ed McNierney<ed at laptop.org> wrote:
>> Folks -
>> We've tried many times to make the very simple story about Windows  
>> support
>> on the XO clear.  The conspiracy theorists don't really care.  If  
>> you don't
>> live in a fact-based universe, facts are irrelevant.  Mitch is  
>> quite right,
>> but we've said just about all of that before to little effect.   
>> OLPCNews and
>> Slashdot thrive on controversy, not accurate reporting.  I don't  
>> have much
>> hope that we're going to say something now that makes the "OLPC has  
>> switched
>> to Windows" crowd suddenly realize they're wrong.
>> Of course, Linux development is *far* more expensive for OLPC than  
>> Windows
>> development is (and always has been), so if there were a way to  
>> convert all
>> those Slashdot/OLPCNews typing fingers into volunteer coders it  
>> would be a
>> nice improvement!
>> When we're finished clearing up the confusion about what OLPC is  
>> really
>> doing (and has been doing for a long time), we can move on to  
>> proving that
>> Apollo 11 really did land on the Moon, Barack Obama was indeed born  
>> in
>> Hawaii, and Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone.
>> - Ed
>>
>> On Jul 21, 2009, at 5:50 AM, Christoph Derndorfer wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 3:24 PM, Martin Langhoff <martin.langhoff at gmail.com 
>> >
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 9:00 PM, Christoph
>>> Derndorfer<christoph.derndorfer at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Maybe I missed it before but I'm really very surprised that this  
>>>> is the
>>>> first time I'm hearing this angle of the story in such detail.  
>>>> IMHO it
>>>> would
>>>> have made a lot of sense for OLPC to say exactly what Mitch wrote  
>>>> here
>>>> when
>>>> the Microsoft s*** first hit the fan in May 2008.
>>>
>>> Ummm. ISTR public statements saying _exactly this_, though perhaps
>>> with less technical detail. Everyone was blinded by the "OMG MS!"
>>> effect that nobody actually applied neurons to the situation.
>>
>> These statements might have been made but very obviously OLPC and the
>> aligned community (incl. myself) didn't do all that great a job of
>> explaining what was really going on to the general public otherwise  
>> we
>> wouldn't be in a situation today were a lot of people including  
>> many FLOSS
>> enthusiasts still look at OLPC as having sold out to Microsoft in  
>> May 2008.
>>
>>> Around that time, I spoke in various public events and relayed  
>>> exactly
>>> that message. Some people understood the intent.
>>>
>>> That you don't know doesn't mean it hasn't been discussed...
>>
>> Hence why I wrote "Maybe I missed it..." ;-)
>>
>> Anyway, crying over split milk doesn't really move us forward.  
>> Let's learn
>> our lessons for the future and get back to work.
>>
>> Christoph
>> --
>> Christoph Derndorfer
>> co-editor, olpcnews
>> url: www.olpcnews.com
>> e-mail: christoph at olpcnews.com
>> _______________________________________________
>> Devel mailing list
>> Devel at lists.laptop.org
>> http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Devel mailing list
>> Devel at lists.laptop.org
>> http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
>>
>>
>
>
>
> -- 
> Walter Bender
> Sugar Labs
> http://www.sugarlabs.org