[OLPC-SF] Microsoft Is Joining Low-Cost Laptop Project - New York Times

[jim]

   as to the bulk of your point, very nicely said. 

On Sun, 2008-05-18 at 00:15 -0700, Mike Travers wrote:
> But
> the choice of operating system seems like a relatively minor element
> of the medium/message/massage, compared to the fact of connectedness
> and interactivity.

   As to the above, i think the OS technology is 
not a minor consideration. 
   Consider the open-closed spectrum such that at 
the open end absolutely all software (and hardware) 
comes with source code and nice, clear docs and at 
the closed end there is no info and no tools other 
than directions "click the mouse here, darling." 
   The current XO product (it is such despite its 
genesis) is close to the open end; windows-based 
boxes are close to the closed end. 
   The open model allows kids to dig into the 
innards, an innately kid thing to do. Kids will 
sense the ownership of their work much more deeply, 
and that sense will affect their connectedness and 
interactivity, i think, a lot. The fact of lower 
costs will promote the kids' community to do so 
faster than the limited access of a more closed 
model. 
   As to the educational goals, the open source 
model is immediately superior in teaching morality, 
technology, math and reading/writing, and closely 
adjunct fields such as electronics, system 
administration, sensor-based physics-related 
projects (light, heat, motion, robotics). The 
open source model, with a little more time, will 
also have an affect on more distantly related 
fields that benefit from data manipulation 
(agriculture, health, pollution...). The open 
source, very low cost, model promotes ownership of 
action and ideas, creativity, and independent 
thinking. 
   Does anyone think that a closed platform 
would be better in the above educational regards? 
If so, how? 

   It seems to me that the underlying technologies 
of the OS are an important consideration (again, 
a la "the medium is the massage").