[OT] Test run of 2009/05/25 image

[Edward Cherlin]

On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 10:54 AM, Mikus Grinbergs<mikus at bga.com> wrote:
>>> I think that people who focus on "slimming" the OLPC are missing the
>>> point.  What they end up with is a slow, small Linux system.
>>
>> Are you seriously considering the implications of your statement?
>>
>> If slimming ends up on a slow small GNU/Linux system, then *not* slimming
>> ends up with a slower and bloated GNU/Linux system.
>
> Yes, I am seriously considering the implications of my statement.
>
> My motivation for starting this thread was to go on record as preferring
> that people "add to" what they believe the OLPC can do well, rather than
> "subtract from" what has been done so far because aspects of the OLPC's
> behavior do not meet their expectations.

I believe that you are addressing a different target market than OLPC
does. Until we can get electricity and broadband wireless out to the
hinterlands of every developing country, we have to go for low cost,
low power, and maximum focus on children's needs. Let the rest of the
industry satisfy everybody else's needs for now.

Sugar runs on nine different Linux distributions, and can be run in
emulation on almost any x86 computer running MacOS or Windows. We have
the netbooks covered.

For next year, we will have the XO-1.5 and XO-2, with much more
storage and memory. Then we can have everything you are wishing for. I
encourage you to work on getting ready, and I am happy for others to
join you if they wish. You will be welcome to make your pitch. Just
don't treat it as an exclusive either/or. It isn't. We need both
approaches.

> Given that 'netbooks' are already outselling the OLPC,

Not in the OLPC target market, even including Venezuela and Brazil.

> and that in my
> opinion the development resources available to the producers of netbook
> systems far exceed the resources of organizations producing the OLPC, I
> think trying to sell the OLPC in competition with netbook systems will fail.

That has never been, and is not now the plan. OLPC created the global
1-to-1 computing market, and the netbook manufacturers are competing
with _us_ there. Their other target markets are of no concern to us.

>  Sooner or later, netbooks will cost less than the OLPC, while outperforming
> the OLPC, whether slimmed or not.

Why would you think so? OLPC can always sell at barely over cost, as a
non-profit. No other company can gain a technology advantage worth
bothering about. Where are their savings supposed to come from?

It is possible that some company will dump product below cost in an
attempt to build market share. It is possible that some manufacturer
will take the global education market seriously, and develop a
sufficiently rugged, sufficiently low-power alternative to the XO. It
will still cost them as much to manufacture hardware as it does us.

But even if you are right, It's An Education Project, not a laptop
project. As long as Sugar is available for every educational laptop,
I'm happy.

> My concern is that, even when offered with a non-Sugar interface,
> the OLPC __as a GNU/Linux system__ ( or as a Windows system !) will be
> non-competitive.

Why would we want to compete outside our target education market?

> Therefore I would rather have thought be given by those
> working on the OLPC to how it can be made to 'stand out' from other small
> systems, instead of thought being devoted to fit the OLPC into a "me too"
> mold.  Let's not get sidetracked.

You are asking the wrong questions. If you ask which is the biggest,
fastest netbook, the XO isn't in it. If you ask which netbooks are
designed for the target market, nothing but the XO is in it. We stand
out far above the noise in our own niche.

>>> For those who think the OLPC *is* suited to
>>> the environments in which it is being deployed - let's work on developing
>>> OLPC-scale applications to assist 'the things people do' wherever such
>>> "computerization" could improve matters.

Such as?

>> Then what's your problem, man? :)
>
> My problem is that a number of people want to change the OLPC to improve the
> way it does things __that other systems already do__. If there are other
> systems that work (better) with "square pegs", why fashion the OLPC to be
> "square"?  Think "round".

+1

> mikus
>
> _______________________________________________
> Fedora-olpc-list mailing list
> Fedora-olpc-list at redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-olpc-list
>



-- 
Silent Thunder (默雷/धर्ममेघशब्दगर्ज/دھرممیگھشبدگر ج) is my name
And Children are my nation.
The Cosmos is my dwelling place, The Truth my destination.
http://earthtreasury.org/worknet (Edward Mokurai Cherlin)