On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 8:57 AM, Tomeu Vizoso<to...@sugarlabs.org> wrote: > On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 14:08, Bill Kerr<billk...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 7:18 PM, Bert Freudenberg <b...@freudenbergs.de> >> wrote: >>> >>> On 28.08.2009, at 11:33, Bill Kerr wrote: >>> >>> > n Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 7:20 AM, Walter Bender >>> > <walter.ben...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >> === Sugar Digest === >>> >> 4. The recent FSF campaign condemning the use of Windows 7 in >>> >> education (See http://windows7sins.org/) imputes OLPC in complicity >>> >> with Microsoft. It is disappointing that the FSF is not making any >>> >> constructive arguments in favor of free software alternatives to >>> >> Windows such as Sugar on GNU/Linux, which is currently shipped on >>> >> every machine distributed by OLPC. >>> > >>> > http://windows7sins.org/#1 >>> > When I first saw it I interpreted that page as contrasting the xo as >>> > a positive alternative to Windows (and still think that is a valid >>> > interpretation) >>> > >>> > When I read what walter wrote above later I was shocked to realise >>> > that it could indeed be interpreted the way walter has, as well >>> > >>> > On revisiting I can't see any clarifying text there >>> >>> You need to click the "Learn more" link next to the XO picture. >>> >>> Citing from that concoction: >>> >>> "As a result, it is expected that the main effect of the OLPC project >>> -- if it succeeds -- will be to turn millions of children into >>> Microsoft dependents. That is a negative effect, to the point where >>> the world would be better off if the OLPC project had never existed. >>> The project tragically became yet another example of Microsoft >>> exerting its control to ends harmful to society's freedom." >>> >>> It's tragic how they undermine their allies' efforts in their blind >>> zealousness. >> >> I see it now, thanks Bert. I agree, it's far too zealous and purist. I agree >> with Luke too. >> ( I did click on that link before but it sometimes seems to just reload the >> same page) >> I do give the FSF an annual donation so I'll write to them and complain. I >> thought the over zealousness came more from some FSF supporters than the >> leadership but perhaps I was wrong. > > What I think is bad about the campaign is that they say that the OLPC > project is a vector for Microsoft when the truth is that it's being a > great vector for free software, regardless of what their leaders wish > or have said in the past. > > From reading the FSF campaign, people are supposed to think that > Microsoft is evil and OLPC bowed to their pressure and abandoned their > principles. This, I think can have much less impact that if people > learned that they can help us so more children have a great learning > experience with free software. > > So I wouldn't ask FSF to stop bashing MS, I would ask them to > publicize those projects that can have a big impact on their mission.
That is the point I was trying to make. I don't really care what FSF does re Microsoft, but they are missing out on an opportunity to promote a learning project that is aligned with FLOSS by ignoring Sugar. -walter > Regards, > > Tomeu > > -- > «Sugar Labs is anyone who participates in improving and using Sugar. > What Sugar Labs does is determined by the participants.» - David > Farning > _______________________________________________ > Sugar-devel mailing list > sugar-de...@lists.sugarlabs.org > http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel > -- Walter Bender Sugar Labs http://www.sugarlabs.org _______________________________________________ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
