Re: [sugar] [support-gang] Microsoft
On Friday 16 May 2008 6:31:51 am Jim Gettys wrote: Ah, Windows needs more than 1GB to be useful; so to run Windows you need to pay extra for a SD card big enough to hold it. Mmm Windows doesn't need to do anything useful. It just needs to rake in $3. Once sold, you are free to load software that will do something useful. Tongue firmly in cheek, Subbu ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: [sugar] [support-gang] Microsoft
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, 15 May 2008, Steve Holton wrote: On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 8:03 PM, Seth Woodworth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Let's look at this with a slightly different lens before we blow up on NN and Microsoft. What does this agreement equate to? And what are the alternatives to Microsoft? If the XO was running a completely closed source stack with no documentation on hardware, how would the Linux community feel? They would feel that they were being shut out and not allowed to run whatever software they wanted to or develop. This is something the linux community has speared hardware companies over for years. ...and to which the free software (linux) community would respond with a reverse engineering effort, at it's own (collective) expense, and rather quickly have a solution. If turnabout is fair play, let Microsoft adopt the free software community response as well. (When Cisco modified their WRT54G hardware so that Linux could no longer run, the response was to strip-down the gnu/linux stack even more until it would run again.) It's doubtful the free software community would do what Microsoft is demanding: asking the manufacturer to add 5-10% to the cost of the hardware to facilitate their efforts, nor would the free software community charge a $3.00 license fee for the use thereafter. I missed where the hardware was being changed and the cost going up to support this. what I read was that the boot firmware was being modified so that it could dual-boot into windows. please point me at the additional cost involved. David Lang from: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/16/technology/16laptop.html?_r=2oref=sloginoref=slogin Windows will add a bit to the price of the machines, about $3, the licensing fee Microsoft charges to some developing nations under a program called Unlimited Potential. For those nations that want dual-boot models, running both Windows and Linux, the extra hardware required will add another $7 or so to the cost of the machines, Mr. Negroponte said. Simon ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: [sugar] [support-gang] Microsoft
Ah, Windows needs more than 1GB to be useful; so to run Windows you need to pay extra for a SD card big enough to hold it. Doesn't add any cost for Linux, which fits nicely on the internal 1GB flash. - Jim On Fri, 2008-05-16 at 02:57 +0200, Simon Schampijer wrote: from: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/16/technology/16laptop.html?_r=2oref=sloginoref=slogin Windows will add a bit to the price of the machines, about $3, the licensing fee Microsoft charges to some developing nations under a program called Unlimited Potential. For those nations that want dual-boot models, running both Windows and Linux, the extra hardware required will add another $7 or so to the cost of the machines, Mr. Negroponte said. Simon ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel -- Jim Gettys [EMAIL PROTECTED] One Laptop Per Child ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: [sugar] [support-gang] Microsoft
On Fri, May 16, 2008 at 2:57 AM, Simon Schampijer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, 15 May 2008, Steve Holton wrote: On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 8:03 PM, Seth Woodworth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Let's look at this with a slightly different lens before we blow up on NN and Microsoft. What does this agreement equate to? And what are the alternatives to Microsoft? If the XO was running a completely closed source stack with no documentation on hardware, how would the Linux community feel? They would feel that they were being shut out and not allowed to run whatever software they wanted to or develop. This is something the linux community has speared hardware companies over for years. ...and to which the free software (linux) community would respond with a reverse engineering effort, at it's own (collective) expense, and rather quickly have a solution. If turnabout is fair play, let Microsoft adopt the free software community response as well. (When Cisco modified their WRT54G hardware so that Linux could no longer run, the response was to strip-down the gnu/linux stack even more until it would run again.) It's doubtful the free software community would do what Microsoft is demanding: asking the manufacturer to add 5-10% to the cost of the hardware to facilitate their efforts, nor would the free software community charge a $3.00 license fee for the use thereafter. I missed where the hardware was being changed and the cost going up to support this. what I read was that the boot firmware was being modified so that it could dual-boot into windows. please point me at the additional cost involved. David Lang from: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/16/technology/16laptop.html?_r=2oref=sloginoref=slogin Windows will add a bit to the price of the machines, about $3, the licensing fee Microsoft charges to some developing nations under a program called Unlimited Potential. For those nations that want dual-boot models, running both Windows and Linux, the extra hardware required will add another $7 or so to the cost of the machines, Mr. Negroponte said. I think the extra hardware is the 2gb SD card, as XP + Office won't fit into the NAND (especially if you're dual booting...) Correct me if I'm wrong -Bobby Powers Simon ___ Sugar mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/sugar ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
