<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 12:13 PM, <<a href="mailto:msevior@physics.unimelb.edu.au">msevior@physics.unimelb.edu.au</a>> wrote:<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<br>
This lack of transperency is *exactly* the sort of behaviour that kills<br>
free software and other volunteer projects. People are not going to donate<br>
their own precious time to a project that may ultimately shaft them.<br>
<br>
The community that OLPC has built up is global, outstanding and committed<br>
on many, many levels. It would be almost impossible to find the people,<br>
let alone the money, to do what has been delivered by the community<br>
already, let alone what could be delivered in the future.<br>
<br>
You can't buy this community. You can only create it with an inspiring<br>
vision and outstanding people living the vision. It is not the least bit<br>
inspiring to be the spearhead of the latest MS and DELL sales pitch.<br>
<br>
Management would do everyone a grand favour by sticking with the original<br>
vision come what may because they have no hope without the community.<br>
<br>
Martin Sevior</blockquote><div><br>I'm new around here, but it seems like this whole conversation is based on a bunch of what-ifs surrounding that AP article. People generally seem on the same page that switching to Windows and non-free software would be a Bad Thing. Maybe we could take a break from talking about the sky falling until we hear something from Negroponte or someone else at 1CC regarding Windows?<br>
<br>Just my 2¢.<br><br>yours,<br>Bobby Powers<br></div></div>