[Server-devel] [XSCE] Re: XS(CE) integration with other environments?

[Adam Holt]

On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 11:03 PM, Samuel Greenfeld <samuel at greenfeld.org>
wrote:

> much of the hope behind the XO-1, Sugar, and Schoolserver was that
> everyone would rally around them as the superior solution.  Millions of XOs
> would be sold, and everyone would develop Sugar applications.
>
> In practice, this never happened.
>


> The question I am raising is if micro-deployments are enough.
>

Very fair questions all, including Tony's shy-but-globally-informed
responses below, after having trudged thru almost every possible OLPC
country known to man+woman+child!

Similar fundamental=difficult questions: are mega-deployments enough?  Are
medium-sized deployments enough?  Is the OLPC vision of "deployment" (a
military idea synonymous with top-down) even compatible/practical as an
approach to open-sourcing education, or any other parts of democracy for
that matter?  What more relevant approaches can advance+open intentionally
conservationist (don't say conservative ;) educational models?


On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 11:50 PM, <tkkang at nurturingasia.com> wrote:

> Yes .... we had all the discussion in 2013. Here is one (see 2:50 if you
> are impatient)
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2kvIzitQPTo
>
> T.K. Kang
> olpc 2.015
>
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: Tony Anderson [mailto:tony_anderson at usa.net]
> >Sent: Wednesday, March 11, 2015 11:38 AM
> >To: xsce-devel at googlegroups.com
> >Subject: Re: [XSCE] Re: XS(CE) integration with other environments?
> >
> >Hi, Samuel
> >
> >You seem to be making the point that Christophe Derndorfer made so
> >eloquently at the Malaysia summit. We are not going to succeed without
> >some 'wins' at major deployments.
> >
> >Unfortunately, we don't have a product. The current laptop in olpc is
> >the XO-4 which goes for a price 50% above the original XO-1. One
> >Education in Australia is supposed to be preparing a follow-on which
> >could be priced slightly below the XO-4. However, it is not clear
> >whether this system will support the current Sugar builds or only a
> >dual-boot Android system. There is no consensus on a platform as an
> >alternative offering (Classmate?). The current Sugar offering is not
> >viable on an Android device at present.
> >
> >Secondly, in that environment we are competing with major corporations
> >who have relatively unlimited resources. My view is that we can only win
> >by demonstrating success in the wild and our base in open source and
> >open educational resources which means the school system does not have
> >to pay ongoing software fees. It is estimated that in the US, schools
> >spend 50% of their computer budget on fees for software and educational
> >materials. I don't see us competing with any of the major players in
> >this market (or even being invited to make a bid).
> >
> >Tony
> >
> >
> >
> >On 03/11/2015 11:03 AM, Samuel Greenfeld wrote:
> >> No, you can't quite blame Martin for this one.
> >>
> >> I won't go into the various people who've said it, but much of the
> >> hope behind the XO-1, Sugar, and Schoolserver was that everyone would
> >> rally around them as the superior solution.  Millions of XOs would be
> >> sold, and everyone would develop Sugar applications.
> >>
> >> In practice, this never happened.
> >>
> >>
> >> XSCE in many ways is an improvement from the original schoolserver.
> >> But from what I have seen it still seems somewhat oriented towards
> >> micro-deployments.  Or at least everyone loves talking about their
> >> micro-deployments.
> >>
> >> The question I am raising is if micro-deployments are enough.
> >>
> >> A newspaper article locally republished here contained the point that
> >> "Organizations don't die because they provide no value; they die
> >> because they fail to provide enough value to enough people."  And
> >> although the original source appears to be religious[*], if you
> >> substitute "Judaism" with "Sugar" and "Synagogues" with "Sugar Labs"
> >> much of the article still is true.
> >>
> >> How do we get enough value into future versions of XSCE and Sugar?
> >> How do we convince deployments that they are worth using, and
> >> volunteers that they are not wasting their time?
> >>
> >> As much as technical details may be fun to argue about, I think we
> >> need to determine the more fundamental answers.  This is more of an
> >> IAEP discussion though than anything.
> >>
> >> [*]
> >>
> http://www.jta.org/2015/02/08/news-opinion/opinion/op-ed-are-voluntary-dues-enough-to-get-people-to-join-synagogues
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 8:42 PM, Tony Anderson <tony_anderson at usa.net
> >> <mailto:tony_anderson at usa.net>> wrote:
> >>
> >>     Hi,
> >>
> >>     I can't speak to XSCE, but I have never understood the problems
> >>     you cite. I think, try to be diplomatic, that there is problem of
> >>     terminology. When the SLOBS talk about negotiating privatesly with
> >>     a deployment, they apparently mean a national initiative (Uruguay,
> >>     Peru, Rwanda, Australia, Paraguay). I think there are many of us
> >>     who work with what is affectionately known  as micro-deployements
> >>     or boutique deployments.
> >>
> >>     In the latter context, I have never understood this problem. The
> >>     Martin Langhoff model you describe fits the needs perfectly. Even
> >>     if the school has a policy not to provide DHCP or whatever, the
> >>     solution is to connect the schoolserver to that network as the WAN
> >>     (and the WAN sees it as a device.). So far I have not run into a
> >>     'micro-deployment' where there is enough networking around to make
> >>     that even a question. Naturally, it seems clear that if a
> >>     deployment does not like the design of the schoolserver, they are
> >>     free to adapt it to their needs or not use it. I don't see that we
> >>     have any obligation to adapt to those needs (that was the idea, I
> >>     thought, of Activity Central - to provide a way for deployments to
> >>     obtain technical resources to adapt the community products to
> >>     their needs).
> >>
> >>     My own project is to provide a 1TB hard drive with all of the
> >>     relevant software and content to set up a complete deployment (at
> >>     one school). It is assumed that this deployment does not have
> >>     regular access to the internet and needs to access that content
> >>     from the school server. The deployment model is exactly as you
> >>     describe.
> >>     WIthin that constraint, the goal is to allow the deployment to
> >>     prepare routers, XOs, and the schoolserver with support from
> >>     someone familiar with computers but not necessarily with the
> >>     command line. Some command line use is essential (I haven't found
> >>     a way around) and the instructions assume that the installation is
> >>     done from an XO (assuming a deployment has those). The devil is in
> >>     the details, and these seem as endless as a visit to Hell.
> >>
> >>     Tony
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>     On 03/11/2015 03:02 AM, Samuel Greenfeld wrote:
> >>
> >>         You are taking my remarks a bit out of context, although it is
> >>         hard for me to tiptoe around explaining things while trying
> >>         not to insult anyone.
> >>
> >>         >From the schoolserver perspective, schoolservers as
> >>         originally implemented were meant to be an all-in-one system.
> >>         They provide DHCP for the laptops, act as the Internet
> >>         gateway, provide anti-theft & backup services, etc.
> >>
> >>         Sugar & XOs have hardcoded logic expecting the schoolserver to
> >>         be called "schoolserver". Schoolservers are also expected to
> >>         have certain hardcoded IP addresses in case an XO runs into
> >>         anti-theft problems, etc.
> >>
> >>         But in larger networks/school districts, I have seen
> >>         schoolservers installed into networks where they are not
> >>         allowed to control DHCP.  They often were not the Internet
> >>         gateway, and local policies might not allow them to be called
> >>         "schoolserver".  Occasionally the schoolserver isn't even in
> >>         the same building as the XOs, and may be on a completely
> >>         different subnet.
> >>
> >>         This is a whole concept I once called "Sugar for the
> >>         Enterprise {school district}" but I don't know if that is
> >>         worth pursuing at this time.
> >>
> >>
> >>         XSCE is interesting in that it supports things like
> >>         Internet-in-a-box which are not XO specific.  And from what
> >>         I've seen, the XSCE community may in some ways be more active
> >>         than the Sugar community.
> >>
> >>         But it is unclear to me what features the XSCE community is
> >>         implementing to support deployments other than those they are
> >>         directly involved with, or what the feedback loop is there.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
> --
> Unsung Heroes of OLPC, interviewed live @ http://unleashkids.org !
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.laptop.org/pipermail/server-devel/attachments/20150310/69ef280a/attachment.html>