[Olpc-open] Re dual boot XO: Olpc-open Digest, Vol 23, Issue 18

[Edward Cherlin]

On Sun, May 18, 2008 at 12:13 PM, Steve Holton <sph0lt0n at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, May 18, 2008 at 1:37 PM, Sameer Verma <sverma at sfsu.edu> wrote:

>> The matter of Windows booting off of an SD card came into the picture
>> because supposedly some governments have asked for it. However, booting
>> XP off the card is half the picture. The stack isn't complete unless
>> Windows runs Sugar.

As far as I can tell, that isn't happening, and isn't going to happen.
See Controversies on the Wiki for a summary of this and other
arguments, and links to threads such as Scott Ananian's analysis of
how hard a Sugar port would be.

* The OLPC volunteers aren't going to do it
* OLPC has promised not to spend money on it
* Microsoft port Open Source software, and hook it into Windows?! ROTFL

And of course, if I'm wrong on the last point, and Microsoft reinvents
itself as an Open Source provider, hooray!

>> Along the same lines of argument, you could boot
>> into Ubuntu and then run Sugar. The end goal is to run Sugar (and
>> provide a constructionist environment for learning) and not Windows or
>> Ubuntu.

Not running Ubuntu is only a temporary measure while the hardware
doesn't support it fully. Of course we want students to have the full
range of software tools for education, business, and life.

> There are those who think this is an 'education project' and argue the
> end goal is to run Sugar. In this case, any operating system which
> supports Sugar is adequate, provided it supports Sugar adequately.

No, the end goal is to end poverty, degradation, misery, oppression,
and a few other things. With education and communications as tools.
With Sugar to offer improvements to education over what is otherwise
possible.

> Then there are those who think this is a 'laptop project'. They mostly
> couldn't care less if the 'Sugar stack' for an operating system even
> exists.

This theory is that education works fine, and we just need more of it,
so Sugar is irrelevant.

> Because there are two schools of thought, it makes sense for there to
> be an operating system/application stack to address both of the
> diverse needs.

Maybe. That would be the commercial point of view, to supply whatever
the buyers (not, in this case, the users) insist on. But let that
pass.

> The Sugar/GNU/Linux set seems to be the favorite of the education crew.

Sugar developers, educators, definitely. And there's more software
where that came from.

> Windows seems to be the favorite of the laptop crew.

That would be Education ministry officials, Microsoft, and we could
argue about Nicholas Negroponte. Not anybody in the volunteer
community.

> It is curious the Ubuntu/GNU/Linux set will now also support Sugar.
> Clearly more effort supporting this might solve many problems, but not
> all.

Ubuntu, Debian, Fedora, and pretty soon anything else that can use
their packages. BSD, Plan9, and the like will take longer.

See mission statement at SugarLabs,
http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Announcing_SugarLabs

"Sugar Labs will focus on providing a software ecosystem that enhances
learning on the XO laptop as well as other laptops distributed by
other companies, such as the ASUS Eee PC...Sugar Labs will take a
proven learning concept to the next level of refinement, stability,
and cohesiveness, and will be a unifying catalyst for free and
open-source learning systems across multiple distribution and hardware
platforms."

> Not everybody wants Sugar. Sucks, but that's life.

IFYP

As far as I can tell, OLPC has no intention of shipping Windows-only
XOs. That's what Nicholas says, anyway. OLPC controls manufacturing
and distribution, so Microsoft can't get XOs anywhere else. But MS
will undoubtedly try to. Windows costs about $10 extra for an SD card
and a license, whether or not Fedora + Sugar is there. So there is no
legitimate advantage for countries to ask for Windows only.

> But I do take issue with those who think offering kids Windows on a
> laptop computer is going to be any different from what we've already
> seen. OEM's have had the opportunity to put Windows (in one form or
> another) on a laptop computer (in one form or another) for a more than
> decade. For the most part there were no offers. Where there were
> offers, there were few takers. And where there were takers, there were
> mostly disasters.

That's what I expect. Windows is a security nightmare and a pig at the
best of times. On something this small, without swap, I have trouble
imagining what can be offered. Also, note that the $3 Windows license
doesn't cover any apps besides Notepad and Paint. I am looking forward
to scathing reviews from all directions. ^_^ If OLPC News can score a
review unit, I can write one myself. But in a review, unlike my usual
opinion pieces, I will be like Harold Washington, the first black
Mayor of Chicago: "Fairer than fair"

> One has to ask what makes the XO different, and if allowing Windows to
> get there isn't killing the goose which lays the golden egg.

Ah, yes, the golden egg. The children's, or Microsoft's? %-[

> --
> Steve Holton
> sph0lt0n at gmail.com
> _______________________________________________
> Olpc-open mailing list
> Olpc-open at lists.laptop.org
> http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/olpc-open
>



-- 
Edward Cherlin
End Poverty at a Profit by teaching children business
http://www.EarthTreasury.org/
"The best way to predict the future is to invent it."--Alan Kay