Re: Sugar\Windows won't ship
Albert Cahalan gmail.com> writes: > > The next demand is obvious: eliminate Sugar. > Well I think the more likely thing is that a Sugar (shell only) ends up as an icon on the Windows desktop. In fact until Sugar is a little more mature I don't think it would be the worst thing in the world if XO's shipped with a lightweight Linux desktop and Sugar as a launchable application. It would deal with speed and bleeding edge science project UI complaints. It wouldn't do anything to address unaccountable rambling FUD from NN about Flash or whatever. Then teachers and students alike would have a real choice and we could see what they choose to do when given the freedom to. -- John. ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: what matters
> In its early days (based on what I read in the media), the project went > to Microsoft, Apple, Dell, etc. for assistance, only to be either turned > down or ridiculed, or some promise of help without commitment. FOSS came > in much later. So, my take on this timeline is that FOSS came into the > picture later. This is not really an accurate retelling. Nicholas did go to Intel early on, only to be rebuffed. We (Nicholas, Jim, Mako, and me) went to Microsoft in January of 2006, but already with a commitment to FOSS. -walter ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: what matters
Edward Cherlin wrote: > On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 9:25 AM, Sameer Verma <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Albert Cahalan wrote: >> > It's clear that we aren't all here for the same thing. >> > Some wish to help all kids, or poor kids, or non-Western >> > kids. Some wish to advance freedom of speech, freedom from >> > EULA slavery, or freedom to learn heretical ideas. >> > >> > Some of us are, assuming good intentions, extremely innocent >> > regarding Microsoft. The historical record shows that those >> > who partner with Microsoft will be betrayed in the worst way. >> > Read "The Scorpion and the Frog" to understand Microsoft. >> > > He who sups with the Devil must e'en have a long spoon. > > >> > To a very limited extent, I agree with the idea that we should >> > not be pedantic about free software. >> > > The community seems to be agreed that Microsoft can spend as much > money as it likes trying to get Sugar running on Windows, but OLPC > shouldn't divert resources from Linux to Windows unless perhaps > Microsoft chooses to pay whoever is willing, and fund the project more > broadly. As if! > > >> For what its worth, here's something that might help in analyzing the >> situation some more. Its an analytical approach called "mission and core >> competencies (MCC) matrix". >> > > Thanks. I don't think that we have such a complex problem. My main reason for providing a pointer to the Mission and Core Competencies matrix was not for addressing complexity, but to perhaps help in clarifying the issue at hand. Some decisions are strategic, while others are tactical. If you look at the mission of OLPC at http://laptop.org/vision/mission/ you'll notice that it talks about education, "learning learning" the XO, constructionism, but nowhere does it mention Free and Open Source Software. In its early days (based on what I read in the media), the project went to Microsoft, Apple, Dell, etc. for assistance, only to be either turned down or ridiculed, or some promise of help without commitment. FOSS came in much later. So, my take on this timeline is that FOSS came into the picture later (perhaps Walter was instrumental in this) and http://wiki.laptop.org/go/OLPC_on_free/open_source_software was added around early 2006. So, going back to the MCC structure (a better picture is at http://www.cipher-sys.com/HofHelp/Mcc/subsequent_adaptations_improvements.htm), the mission of OLPC is to further the education agenda, learning learning, etc. via the XO, and the OS to do all this does not look like a strategic decision, but a tactical one. They did not have the core competency to write an entire software stack for this purpose, so they outsourced it, just like they outsourced the 802.11s stuff. The major difference is that the software stack got outsourced not to a private firm, but to the FOSS community, which contributed to the project as a public commons effort. The GPL provides an exit strategy for the "community" to take it and run if the ship sinks...minus the XO, of course. Once you add the trojan horse angle, things start to look different. We now have many stakeholders and many different missions intersect. Ed Cherlin/Earth Treasury has its own mission for example, (as he stated below), and Earth Treasury has to align with OLPC for competencies that it does not have (such as the XO). We all have our reasons. I'd like to see the journal in my everyday computing platform some day. Its a terrific feature. I'd also like for villages in India to have computers for education. The project has had its problems. Update.1 is way behind schedule. The layout of the zooming interfaces have changed significantly, and that to me (personally) is troubling. But, these are managerial issues, that can be addressed by good communication. Oh, and communication goes both ways, doesn't it? I still think that the implementation of the ideas put forth by OLPC into Sugar running on top of a Linux platform is by far the best option. Apart from the public commons aspect, it provides tremendous technological value. However, for FOSS to become a strong undercurrent in this project, the decision to use FOSS will have to be strategic, and not a tactical one. > The > questions appear to be > > * Should we sell in developed countries? Nicholas--Doesn't contribute > to mission; me--Of course, to build a political base for foreign > educational aid, to address our own poor, and to finance our other > work. > > * Should we ally with Microsoft? Nicholas--It's such a brilliant > strategy, and so obvious when I point it out; me--no way. > > * Should Nicholas discuss these matters with the community? > Nicholas--What for?; me--Yes, unless you want to see the rest of us > walk out and fork Sugar. > > To me, these questions don't appear mission-like. They sound more tactical. > Anyway, nothing happens unless Nicholas decides to talk the the whole > community. Then we can di
Re: [sugar] Sugar\Windows won't ship
On Apr 26, 2008, at 7:36 PM, John Watlington wrote: > Ivan was not the only one fighting this battle, > and I think he quite overstates his role... Sorry, I didn't at all mean to imply I was the only one. I would have preferred to have had no role at all in it, actually, since that entire set of conversations was like a particularly tedious game of broken telephone, and it was never clear who was opposed to what, and for what reason. I'm just glad it's happening. -- Ivan Krstić <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | http://radian.org ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: [sugar] Sugar\Windows won't ship
Ivan was not the only one fighting this battle, and I think he quite overstates his role... On Apr 26, 2008, at 7:33 PM, Ivan Krstić wrote: > On Apr 26, 2008, at 7:20 PM, Edward Cherlin wrote: >> I do recall your earlier statement that the XO would not suffer >> Windows lock-in on your watch. > > While preventing direct lock-in was enough to keep me from screaming > bloody murder, behind the scenes I kept agitating furiously for a > solution that allowed actual dual-boot. Probably out of sheer > annoyance and an overwhelming desire to just make me shut up already, > everyone involved eventually conceded. Dual-boot became the plan of > record at OLPC and MS, and actual technical work began on this > approach before I left. > > -- > Ivan Krstić <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | http://radian.org > ___ > Devel mailing list > Devel@lists.laptop.org > http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel > ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: [sugar] Sugar\Windows won't ship
On Apr 26, 2008, at 7:20 PM, Edward Cherlin wrote: > I do recall your earlier statement that the XO would not suffer > Windows lock-in on your watch. While preventing direct lock-in was enough to keep me from screaming bloody murder, behind the scenes I kept agitating furiously for a solution that allowed actual dual-boot. Probably out of sheer annoyance and an overwhelming desire to just make me shut up already, everyone involved eventually conceded. Dual-boot became the plan of record at OLPC and MS, and actual technical work began on this approach before I left. -- Ivan Krstić <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | http://radian.org ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: [sugar] Sugar\Windows won't ship
On Sat, Apr 26, 2008 at 3:14 PM, Ivan Krstić <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Apr 26, 2008, at 4:55 PM, Albert Cahalan wrote: > > Microsoft will never cooperate with dual-boot. They haven't > > ever even bothered with false promises. Forget about it. > > > Actually, this is the last epic battle I fought at OLPC. To my > knowledge, it's a battle I won. You've either said too much or too little. Please explain who said what to whom. The rest of us have no context for your statement. I do recall your earlier statement that the XO would not suffer Windows lock-in on your watch. http://radian.org/notebook/paradox-of-choice And Microsoft has made it quite clear that it has no interest in dual-boot. http://news.zdnet.co.uk/software/0,100121,39292078,00.htm I have no idea where Nicholas gets the notion > -- > Ivan Krstić <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | http://radian.org > > > > ___ > Devel mailing list > Devel@lists.laptop.org > http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel -- Edward Cherlin End Poverty at a Profit by teaching children business http://www.EarthTreasury.org/ "The best way to predict the future is to invent it."--Alan Kay ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: [sugar] Sugar\Windows won't ship
On Apr 26, 2008, at 4:55 PM, Albert Cahalan wrote: > Microsoft will never cooperate with dual-boot. They haven't > ever even bothered with false promises. Forget about it. Actually, this is the last epic battle I fought at OLPC. To my knowledge, it's a battle I won. -- Ivan Krstić <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | http://radian.org ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: [sugar] Sugar\Windows won't ship
On Sat, Apr 26, 2008 at 3:46 PM, Joshua N Pritikin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > As I have posted before, I am not distressed by the inclusion of Windows > on the XO laptop, perhaps in a dual-boot configuration or whatever. What > would distress me is if Windows was not sold as an option. If laptops > could only be purchased with Windows, raising the price by the Microsoft > tax, that would be a cause for complaint. > > I don't think OLPC intends to go that way. Windows is about more choice, > not less, right? You're kidding I hope. Please don't. Microsoft will never cooperate with dual-boot. They haven't ever even bothered with false promises. Forget about it. Dual-boot is obviously not in Microsoft's interest. Microsoft will vigorously fight "sold as an option". Most likely they will win any such fight. The retail version will be more expensive than the bundled version. Bundling will be pushed as a way to save money. Sugar\Windows may help get a camel into the tent, but will not actually ship. Small trials may use it, but some excuse will be found to prevent actual Sugar\Windows deployments. Microsoft has a **long** history of far worse tactics. ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: browser activity + Totem plugin
Hi Sebastian, I will already reply to the first part of the question. We actually set the user agent. See here in the prefs.js http://dev.laptop.org/git?p=projects/hulahop;a=blob;f=data/prefs.js;h=71310b645401925b5a320559a6ce2f69565e2db0;hb=5818437129222cb7a348f8a948e6b82a6bc5dc1d This went in the 2007-12-11 and in the update.1 build. You can check if it is there in /usr/share/hulahop/prefs.js on your XO. Otherwise you might want to update to a later build (e.g. 703). Best, Simon Sebastien Adgnot wrote: > Hi, > > I have a few questions about the browser activity first and then the Totem > plugin. > > Would it be possible to add something like "XO" or "OLPC" in the user agent > of the browser so the web server can recognize the browser and redirect the > user to a different version of the web site, maybe more adapted to the XO? > > I have an XO laptop with the build 656. I got some problems with the Totem > plugin when I've developed and watched videos online ( > http://olpc.dailymotion.com). Do I report them on the OLPC trac web site or > directly to the main developer of Totem? > > Here is the list of "problems" or questions: > > - I know that it's possible to control or set options to the player through > javascript methods. However, I was able to stop the video but not to play it > again. And others methods were not working (like hiding the progress bar > because it doesn't work). > > - When I reload 2 or 3 times the web page with a video in it, the video > player doesn't appear and it's not possible to watch a video anymore. > > - After a few minutes, (almost) all videos stop playing and get stuck. It > seems the laptop is trying to get more data but nothing happen. > > - I saw that external subtitles are handled by Totem. Do you think it would > be possible to do something like > http://www.mywebsite.com/file.ogg#subtitle:http://www.mywebsite.com/subtitles/file.srtwith > the plugin? > > Thanks for your help. > > Sebastien > > > > > > ___ > Devel mailing list > Devel@lists.laptop.org > http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: [sugar] Sugar\Windows won't ship
On Sat, Apr 26, 2008 at 03:27:21PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > As for Windows, the problem is that you can't scale large > installations without going bankrupt with the annual fees that > Microsoft charges.? This works out to about $100 per computer per year > in many US schools, and is one of the reasons that Brazil moved to > Linux. As I have posted before, I am not distressed by the inclusion of Windows on the XO laptop, perhaps in a dual-boot configuration or whatever. What would distress me is if Windows was not sold as an option. If laptops could only be purchased with Windows, raising the price by the Microsoft tax, that would be a cause for complaint. I don't think OLPC intends to go that way. Windows is about more choice, not less, right? ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Sugar\Windows won't ship
Sugar could run inside a window or as a full-screen app with a hot key to switch. I have run Windows and Linux on the same machine for many years with that sharing style. In such a model, Sugar will be used to the extent that users prefer it. Albert Cahalan wrote: > Let's imagine this several ways, and see why it won't happen. > First consider what a faithful Sugar\Windows system would be like. > > a. the familiar "Start" menu is gone > b. regular Windows programs like Word can't run > c. OS config GUI stuff is (must be) rewritten from scratch > > I doubt anybody wants that. Stand up and shout if you do. > It is pointless, because Windows compatibility has been lost. > > If Nicolas Nigroponte takes that to a potential buyer, the first > complaint will be that Sugar\Windows isn't "real" Windows. > The edutainment junk won't run, the kids wouldn't learn the > normal Windows interface used in business, and regular Windows > users won't be able unable to support the strange mess. > > The next demand is obvious: eliminate Sugar. > > Not that many wouldn't jump for joy, but the price isn't worth it. > (price: loss of localization, loss of trojan protection, loss of > educational value, loss of nearly all volunteer support and nearly > all volunteer development help, power management problems, etc.) > > Given how the Sugar\Windows idea seems to just assume compatiblity > with regular Windows stuff, it is entirely unfair to Sugar/Linux. > Sugar/Linux could easily have compatibility with regular Linux stuff, > but this has been denied despite strong demand. > > Somebody is getting a bait-and-switch. I'm not sure who, but I would > bet that it is the Sugar fans rathar than the Windows fans. One may > even note that Sugar\Windows is a political way to ditch Sugar. > ___ > Devel mailing list > Devel@lists.laptop.org > http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel > ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
browser activity + Totem plugin
Hi, I have a few questions about the browser activity first and then the Totem plugin. Would it be possible to add something like "XO" or "OLPC" in the user agent of the browser so the web server can recognize the browser and redirect the user to a different version of the web site, maybe more adapted to the XO? I have an XO laptop with the build 656. I got some problems with the Totem plugin when I've developed and watched videos online ( http://olpc.dailymotion.com). Do I report them on the OLPC trac web site or directly to the main developer of Totem? Here is the list of "problems" or questions: - I know that it's possible to control or set options to the player through javascript methods. However, I was able to stop the video but not to play it again. And others methods were not working (like hiding the progress bar because it doesn't work). - When I reload 2 or 3 times the web page with a video in it, the video player doesn't appear and it's not possible to watch a video anymore. - After a few minutes, (almost) all videos stop playing and get stuck. It seems the laptop is trying to get more data but nothing happen. - I saw that external subtitles are handled by Totem. Do you think it would be possible to do something like http://www.mywebsite.com/file.ogg#subtitle:http://www.mywebsite.com/subtitles/file.srtwith the plugin? Thanks for your help. Sebastien ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
New faster build 1898
http://xs-dev.laptop.org/~cscott/olpc/streams/faster/build1898 Changes in build 1898 from build: 1897 Size delta: -10.62M -gstreamer-plugins-base 0.10.15-3.olpc2 +gstreamer-plugins-base 0.10.15-4.olpc2 -cdparanoia-libs alpha9.8-27.2 -perl 4:5.8.8-28.fc7 -perl-libs 4:5.8.8-28.fc7 --- Changes for gstreamer-plugins-base 0.10.15-4.olpc2 from 0.10.15-3.olpc2 --- + Disable cdparanoia + Manully remove a perl script to not bring in dependencies -- This mail was automatically generated See http://dev.laptop.org/~rwh/announcer/faster-pkgs.html for aggregate logs See http://dev.laptop.org/~rwh/announcer/joyride_vs_update1.html for a comparison ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: [sugar] Sugar\Windows won't ship
> Sugar/Linux could easily have compatibility with regular Linux stuff, > but this has been denied despite strong demand. Albert, saying that this has been "denied" is overstated. Was it a priority in the beginning? No. Were some decisions made that make it more difficult? Yes. But are people working towards this goal? Yes. -walter On Sat, Apr 26, 2008 at 11:15 AM, Albert Cahalan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Let's imagine this several ways, and see why it won't happen. > First consider what a faithful Sugar\Windows system would be like. > > a. the familiar "Start" menu is gone > b. regular Windows programs like Word can't run > c. OS config GUI stuff is (must be) rewritten from scratch > > I doubt anybody wants that. Stand up and shout if you do. > It is pointless, because Windows compatibility has been lost. > > If Nicolas Nigroponte takes that to a potential buyer, the first > complaint will be that Sugar\Windows isn't "real" Windows. > The edutainment junk won't run, the kids wouldn't learn the > normal Windows interface used in business, and regular Windows > users won't be able unable to support the strange mess. > > The next demand is obvious: eliminate Sugar. > > Not that many wouldn't jump for joy, but the price isn't worth it. > (price: loss of localization, loss of trojan protection, loss of > educational value, loss of nearly all volunteer support and nearly > all volunteer development help, power management problems, etc.) > > Given how the Sugar\Windows idea seems to just assume compatiblity > with regular Windows stuff, it is entirely unfair to Sugar/Linux. > Sugar/Linux could easily have compatibility with regular Linux stuff, > but this has been denied despite strong demand. > > Somebody is getting a bait-and-switch. I'm not sure who, but I would > bet that it is the Sugar fans rathar than the Windows fans. One may > even note that Sugar\Windows is a political way to ditch Sugar. > ___ > Sugar mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/sugar > ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Sugar\Windows won't ship
(Top-posting is evil.) Of course, you could then be somewhat evil and play the flip side - sugar and the environment is what matters; the hardware is being sorted out for you by other companies along side the OLPC project. If people were interested, a bootable image for commodity laptops (note: I'm fully aware of the craziness that'd entail!) may widen the exposure that this whole effort has. Adrian On Sat, Apr 26, 2008, Albert Cahalan wrote: > Let's imagine this several ways, and see why it won't happen. > First consider what a faithful Sugar\Windows system would be like. > > a. the familiar "Start" menu is gone > b. regular Windows programs like Word can't run > c. OS config GUI stuff is (must be) rewritten from scratch > > I doubt anybody wants that. Stand up and shout if you do. > It is pointless, because Windows compatibility has been lost. > > If Nicolas Nigroponte takes that to a potential buyer, the first > complaint will be that Sugar\Windows isn't "real" Windows. > The edutainment junk won't run, the kids wouldn't learn the > normal Windows interface used in business, and regular Windows > users won't be able unable to support the strange mess. > > The next demand is obvious: eliminate Sugar. > > Not that many wouldn't jump for joy, but the price isn't worth it. > (price: loss of localization, loss of trojan protection, loss of > educational value, loss of nearly all volunteer support and nearly > all volunteer development help, power management problems, etc.) > > Given how the Sugar\Windows idea seems to just assume compatiblity > with regular Windows stuff, it is entirely unfair to Sugar/Linux. > Sugar/Linux could easily have compatibility with regular Linux stuff, > but this has been denied despite strong demand. > > Somebody is getting a bait-and-switch. I'm not sure who, but I would > bet that it is the Sugar fans rathar than the Windows fans. One may > even note that Sugar\Windows is a political way to ditch Sugar. > ___ > Devel mailing list > Devel@lists.laptop.org > http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
New joyride build 1898
http://xs-dev.laptop.org/~cscott/olpc/streams/joyride/build1898 Changes in build 1898 from build: 1897 Size delta: -10.75M -gstreamer-plugins-base 0.10.15-3.olpc2 +gstreamer-plugins-base 0.10.15-4.olpc2 -cdparanoia-libs alpha9.8-27.2 -perl 4:5.8.8-28.fc7 -perl-libs 4:5.8.8-28.fc7 --- Changes for gstreamer-plugins-base 0.10.15-4.olpc2 from 0.10.15-3.olpc2 --- + Disable cdparanoia + Manully remove a perl script to not bring in dependencies -- This mail was automatically generated See http://dev.laptop.org/~rwh/announcer/joyride-pkgs.html for aggregate logs See http://dev.laptop.org/~rwh/announcer/joyride_vs_update1.html for a comparison ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Sugar\Windows won't ship
Let's imagine this several ways, and see why it won't happen. First consider what a faithful Sugar\Windows system would be like. a. the familiar "Start" menu is gone b. regular Windows programs like Word can't run c. OS config GUI stuff is (must be) rewritten from scratch I doubt anybody wants that. Stand up and shout if you do. It is pointless, because Windows compatibility has been lost. If Nicolas Nigroponte takes that to a potential buyer, the first complaint will be that Sugar\Windows isn't "real" Windows. The edutainment junk won't run, the kids wouldn't learn the normal Windows interface used in business, and regular Windows users won't be able unable to support the strange mess. The next demand is obvious: eliminate Sugar. Not that many wouldn't jump for joy, but the price isn't worth it. (price: loss of localization, loss of trojan protection, loss of educational value, loss of nearly all volunteer support and nearly all volunteer development help, power management problems, etc.) Given how the Sugar\Windows idea seems to just assume compatiblity with regular Windows stuff, it is entirely unfair to Sugar/Linux. Sugar/Linux could easily have compatibility with regular Linux stuff, but this has been denied despite strong demand. Somebody is getting a bait-and-switch. I'm not sure who, but I would bet that it is the Sugar fans rathar than the Windows fans. One may even note that Sugar\Windows is a political way to ditch Sugar. ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: what matters
On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 9:25 AM, Sameer Verma <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Albert Cahalan wrote: > > It's clear that we aren't all here for the same thing. > > Some wish to help all kids, or poor kids, or non-Western > > kids. Some wish to advance freedom of speech, freedom from > > EULA slavery, or freedom to learn heretical ideas. > > > > Some of us are, assuming good intentions, extremely innocent > > regarding Microsoft. The historical record shows that those > > who partner with Microsoft will be betrayed in the worst way. > > Read "The Scorpion and the Frog" to understand Microsoft. He who sups with the Devil must e'en have a long spoon. > > To a very limited extent, I agree with the idea that we should > > not be pedantic about free software. The community seems to be agreed that Microsoft can spend as much money as it likes trying to get Sugar running on Windows, but OLPC shouldn't divert resources from Linux to Windows unless perhaps Microsoft chooses to pay whoever is willing, and fund the project more broadly. As if! > For what its worth, here's something that might help in analyzing the > situation some more. Its an analytical approach called "mission and core > competencies (MCC) matrix". Thanks. I don't think that we have such a complex problem. The questions appear to be * Should we sell in developed countries? Nicholas--Doesn't contribute to mission; me--Of course, to build a political base for foreign educational aid, to address our own poor, and to finance our other work. * Should we ally with Microsoft? Nicholas--It's such a brilliant strategy, and so obvious when I point it out; me--no way. * Should Nicholas discuss these matters with the community? Nicholas--What for?; me--Yes, unless you want to see the rest of us walk out and fork Sugar. Anyway, nothing happens unless Nicholas decides to talk the the whole community. Then we can discuss the other two points. It isn't a question of who has which competencies, except for Nicholas to realize that he can't outsmart Microsoft, and that he has tried to over-optimize one variable out of an entire equation. And we should hire more programmers, a doc team, and a few others that Nicholas and the community generally agree on, and discuss what to do after that. Then maybe Walter and Ivan and a few other valuable contributors would be willing to discuss coming back. -- Edward Cherlin End Poverty at a Profit by teaching children business http://www.EarthTreasury.org/ "The best way to predict the future is to invent it."--Alan Kay ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Auto backlight management?
On Sat, Apr 26, 2008 at 06:15:22AM -0400, Wade Brainerd wrote: > On Fri, Apr 25, 2008 at 11:46 AM, C. Scott Ananian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I have discussed with Chris implementing a hackish "low-power mode" to > > demonstrate optimal power management on the Gen 1 hardware to > > illustrate the potential of the XO. > > I would really enjoy this feature. Me three! If there's any way I can help please let me know. > Wade Martin pgpFtFF5NCPv9.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Auto backlight management?
On Fri, Apr 25, 2008 at 11:46 AM, C. Scott Ananian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I have discussed with Chris implementing a hackish "low-power mode" to > demonstrate optimal power management on the Gen 1 hardware to > illustrate the potential of the XO. I would really enjoy this feature. I would use it on airplanes to ensure that wireless is disabled, and to get longer battery life. The XO is already the second longest lasting electronic writing device I regularly carry - the iPhone currently wins, but is slower to type on and a pain to retrieve data from. Wade ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: A technical assessment of porting "Sugar" to Windows.
I have just found this link: http://pages.cs.wisc.edu/~driscoll/fuse-nt.pdf This is a report about a failed IFS-FUSE attempt. They ended with a loopback SMB server what should the Sugar windows port should follow IMHO. ps: The report contains the problems writing windows FSs. ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Ad-hoc Networking
On Apr 24, 2008, at 2:26 AM, Carl-Daniel Hailfinger wrote: > Looking at trac, wireless is one of the biggest sources of bugs and > the > community can hardly do anything about it. Normally, somebody who > complains can be told to fix the code, but with a closed wireless > firmware, complaining is the only possible action. Folks, we can just repeat it once more: there *are* open source layer 2 and layer 3 (Holger got that wrong, he said layer 4) mesh software solutions out there. So in case you can not use the marvell solution (which I am a big fan of, I would personally take that if available since it does not need CPU support), then there are many protocols out there to chose from. http://www.olsr.org being the most widely deployed and tested one. But there are also others. Depends on what you want or need. All of these need some CPU cycles however. The advantage on the other hand is of course that it will run on any hardware / any laptop and most wireless cards. The best supported ones are those with broadcom chipset. The new atheros driver is also getting pretty good. So: for energy conservation go with marvell 802.11s! It is a wonderful job and I have the highest respect for Michailis. Regardless of any chaos at 1CC. If you can't have marvell 802.11s.. you still have many choices. There even are very good protocols from the .mil sector out there. For the people who love details: And yes, the olsrd daemon was proven to scale. So you don't have to worry about that. Proof? wind.awmn.net/?page=nodes And yes, wireless interference is a major problem for all devices operating in 802.11a/b/g freq. ranges. This is not the fault of any mesh protocol. The bands are just overcrowded. I propose that you look at 802.11a. Or new ranges. Lots of extra space there. Who am I ? Why should you believe this mail? I built up a city wide wireless mesh in Vienna with some folks here. http://www.funkfeuer.at/ . Holger is also close to the freifunk.net people (and I am too). --- there's no place like 127.0.0.1 ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
