OLPC Refund
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| azerthoth Jan 09, 2008 5:45 PM EDT |
I'm torn on this. I believe that freedom includes the freedom to ignore it and use whatever OS you prefer. With freedom comes responsibility, and if you choose to be irresponsible so be it. That being said I did not shell out money to OLPC so that they could help repress Open Source. I spent that money to support Open Source with a project that seemed able to help spread it. This if true grates on my nerves to no end. Helping children with open source and technology, that's something I can get behind. This however feels like betrayal. It feels like I was conned out of that cash via false pretenses. It's not truly about the money, it's more of being mad at myself for being suckered by my own generosity. |
| Scott_Ruecker Jan 09, 2008 6:01 PM EDT |
I guess I am glad that I did not buy one yet then.. |
| ColonelPanik Jan 09, 2008 6:46 PM EDT |
Sad! |
| techiem2 Jan 09, 2008 7:01 PM EDT |
Isn't it interesting how MS can suddenly find the time to optimize it's software when it becomes a matter of possibly losing an entire market to Linux? |
| thenixedreport Jan 09, 2008 9:40 PM EDT |
Well, I won't be supporting XO anytime soon then. I do not believe for one second that Microsoft Executives even care about people in other countries. It is only about market share. Nothing more. A potentially good idea has been ruined. |
| Scott_Ruecker Jan 09, 2008 9:47 PM EDT |
Unfortunately I saw this coming..Microsoft had ZERO intention of just letting a laptop get distributed to thousands of children around the world without a M$ O$ on it. |
| Sander_Marechal Jan 09, 2008 10:33 PM EDT |
Nicholas Negroponte should see it coming too. Hasn't the Intel fiasco taught him anything?! |
| jacog Jan 09, 2008 11:35 PM EDT |
Odd turn. I imagine that a fairly large chunk of the buy one/get one crowd are big open source supporters... and one thing companies/orgs should have learned by now, is that FOSS people are an angry and vengeful bunch... and we all come with a /usr/sbin/rant command built in. Tsk tsk. Sooo... wouldn't this push the price of the XO up, since it now has to have a bigger drive? And besides just running a slimmed down version of an operating system they don't want to support much longer- will it support any of the special features of the XO - the mesh networking - that sort of thing? At a glance, Microsoft seems to be becoming embarrassingly desperate. But like with the ISO fiasco, their desperation has a potential to just ruin things entirely. I fear that might be the end result of this. |
| dinotrac Jan 09, 2008 11:40 PM EDT |
This thread really disappoints me. The stated purpose of the OLPC has always been to make computing ubiquitous even for those who have no access to it now. It has been about empowering children in poor countries. By extension, it is about empowering and lifting up whole societies. Free software has been an instrumentality, not a purpose. As it is, Microsoft doing an XP port is a long way from providing the cool features that the XO software provides now. And, if XP is also available, so what? How many of you run machines for which XP is not available? |
| thenixedreport Jan 09, 2008 11:48 PM EDT |
Dino, Re-read what I previously posted. "I do not believe for one second that Microsoft Executives even care about people in other countries." In other words, they see nothing but a market. Nothing more, nothing less. It seems to me that the individual who started this idea did care and did start the thing for all the right reasons. It just seems like plenty of others out there do not want him to succeed........ |
| Sander_Marechal Jan 09, 2008 11:56 PM EDT |
Quoting:The stated purpose of the OLPC has always been to make computing ubiquitous even for those who have no access to it now. It has been about empowering children in poor countries. By extension, it is about empowering and lifting up whole societies. Which is exactly what disappoints me. Putting XP on the XO does nothing to further this goal. On the contrary, it prevents XO from reaching this goal. The children for which the XO is built have no use for XP. But you bet that Microsoft is going to leverage this and push countries and schools to use XP instead of Sugar for their curriculum. |
| hkwint Jan 10, 2008 1:44 AM EDT |
Quoting:The stated purpose of the OLPC has always been to make computing ubiquitous even for those who have no access to it now. No, you're wrong . Just go to the OLPC site and you see how you are wrong. It says, if you click the 1 right on the frontpage: Quoting: “It's an education project, not a laptop project.” If ubiquitous computing was the goal, the laptops would have been distributed to adults too. No, the goal was - and still is - to enable the children which have no access to computing to explore and experiment too. That's not possible with closed software. Therefore, open source software (not necessarily free software if you'd ask me) in fact _is_ a purpose, because exploring and experimenting is a goal. And exactly that is why people like Azerthoth, Scott, the Colonel, Mark II, myself and probably more are disappointed. Providing Microsoft software on the OLPC contradicts its goal to enable the children to explore and experiment. You can't lift up a whole society by learning we give them things they are dependent on; by learning they are beggars who should be glad to receive anything from a rich company. You lift up a whole society by learning they don't need us at all. Only if they have the source of their software, they can become independent. However, since they can choose to be beggars by booting Microsoft or choose not being beggars by booting open source software not all is lost. |
| Sander_Marechal Jan 10, 2008 1:54 AM EDT |
Microsoft just said a dual boot XO is FUD: http://lxer.com/module/newswire/view/98067/index.html |
| azerthoth Jan 10, 2008 2:27 AM EDT |
Now this is fun, whom do you believe? |
| jacog Jan 10, 2008 2:40 AM EDT |
??? |
| dinotrac Jan 10, 2008 3:22 AM EDT |
>No, the goal was - and still is - to enable the children which have no access to computing to explore and experiment too. That's not possible with closed software The heck it's not. My first computing experimentation came on a closed system -- an IBM 360, nearly 40 years ago. I wonder how much experimentation was done with IBM PC's (and their clones) and Turbo Pascal? Microsoft may care about kids, et al, but the project does. That's why it exists. |
| gus3 Jan 10, 2008 8:27 AM EDT |
dino & hkwint, I don't think your two understandings are mutually exclusive. |
| dinotrac Jan 10, 2008 8:53 AM EDT |
gus3 - I will rely on the same thing Hans did not too long ago... Up with insomnia and posting. And...you're right, though Hans is more precisely correct than I am. Had I been awake, I would have put it more properly. The OLPC does seek to make computers ubiquitous in educational settings - as a way to foster it's primary goal of challenging, educating, and delighting children. Standard computers are a tough fit in many settings, hence OLPC and the XO. |
| hkwint Jan 10, 2008 12:24 PM EDT |
Just filling in parameters and see what happens is not the kind of experimentation intended by the OLPC project. Sure, one can experiment using a Windows registry too, and learn something. But again, this doesn't help the people over there. They have to learn they don't need to beg for software. |
| Steven_Rosenber Jan 10, 2008 12:35 PM EDT |
Somebody else is going to come up with a $200 laptop ... I can just feel it. |
| dinotrac Jan 10, 2008 12:41 PM EDT |
Hans - I'm talking about real programming, not just filling in parameters. Admittedly, the OS is off limites with non-free software, but I don't think the XO goes out set up for people to play with the OS -- at least not by it's intended audience. |
| hkwint Jan 10, 2008 3:21 PM EDT |
Ah, I misunderstood. I too doubt the kids will play with the OS. I hope they do. In the past, I read people in Morocco were better and cheaper at customizing an existing LandRover for the Mauritanian desert. It is being said that people in Russia can repair cars with condoms and stockings (more is being said, but if you looked at a Lada once it sounds plausible). And why? Because those people can look under the hood of their cars. However, the manufacturers didn't intende their customers to tear their products down part by part and understand every bit of it, but it seems nonetheless they did. |
| ColonelPanik Jan 10, 2008 5:23 PM EDT |
Lada Lada Lada Lada Lada Lada Mushroom. For awhile there we in the usOFa could not get the "trouble" codes for our cars (dealer only). The kids will be kids, they will hack those lappies in ways we can't even dream of. One review I saw talked about the LED back-light stick, how it would make a great light for a small room. I once lived 100 miles from a hardware store, when the soccer ball was punctured the kids would just inject some sap from the yucca plant, presto, the game goes on. Necessity is a mother that will kick your @ss until you find a way. |
| hkwint Jan 11, 2008 4:01 AM EDT |
Quoting:Had I been awake, I would have put it more properly. You're definitely in need of Lavazza, or more of these bad things might happen! (like saying 'Hans is more correct than I am'). |
| dinotrac Jan 11, 2008 5:14 AM EDT |
>(like saying 'Hans is more correct than I am'). Oh my! Did I say that? I really WAS sleepy!!!!!!!!!! |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!