I understood the time limitt had something to do with restrictions on nonprofit status, though I am sorry I forget where I heard it -- maybe laptop.org before the sale started. I certainly agree that I would want to at least make sure a friend of my kid in the same neighborhood was doing the same thing, or buy double myself. Andy On Nov 12, 2007 9:31 AM, Michael Tobis <mtobis@gmail.com> wrote:

I think this "limited time only" idea defeats the purpose of the whole software environment. Why should I buy a community building tool that will not be available to potential members of my local community?

What are the prospects of a commercial product running the XO software system?

I agree, I am tempted to buy four and get two rather than buy two and get one. That starts to be enough money that I hesitate though.

I disagree about Java, though. I think that moves in the wrong direction.

mt _______________________________________________ Edu-sig mailing list Edu-sig@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/edu-sig

-- Andrew N. Harrington Director of Academic Programs Computer Science Department Loyola University Chicago 512B Lewis Towers (office) Snail mail to Lewis Towers 416 820 North Michigan Avenue Chicago, Illinois 60611 http://www.cs.luc.edu/~anh Phone: 312-915-7999 Fax: 312-915-7998 gdp@cs.luc.edu for graduate administration upd@cs.luc.edu for undergrad administration aharrin@luc.edu as professor

Paul D. Fernhout wrote:

For a more typical home user, especially one who does not already know and like GNU/Linux, I'm not sure if it would meet expectations in the developing world as other than either as special purpose device (like used as an ebook reader or robot controller) or alternatively, for a family who buys several, as a family activity to use some of the built in "connectivist" software (either what is there now or what might be speculatively available in the future).

That should have read "in the developed world", meaning like the USA. And I really should not be using "developed" / "developing" as they are loaded terms (even though the OLPC project uses them too), since there is a lot the USA can learn from other countries, including poor ones, some of whom rank higher in overall happiness in various surveys -- here's a different one: http://worlddatabaseofhappiness.eur.nl/ On using Java/Jython and the OLPC: "Pepper on the OLPC" http://www.pepper.com/linux/olpc.html "A technology preview of a special version of the Pepper environment is now available for the One Laptop Per Child (OLPC) XO laptop. This version of Pepper for OLPC runs on the XO laptop and replaces the standard Sugar environment while retaining the XO's Fedora-based Linux distribution. ... The Pepper environment is written primarily in Java, though it includes open source components like Mozilla and Java that are written in C or C++. The Pepper application framework supports Java, C, C++, XUL, HTML, etc. We're also working on adding Python support soon. ... We'll be making the source code for the Pepper for OLPC environment available soon. We're planning to release it under an LGPL license. We'll also be sponsoring an open source community to maintain the Pepper for OLPC environment." Using Pepper (if it is indeed released under the LGPL as announced above), which is an environment built in Java and including JVM 1.5, I hope I can run Jython on the OLPC. I'll have to try it and see. Maybe the Pepper people do not know about Jython? Of course, software written there in Jython is not going to run on the regular OLPC environment (which is CPython+pyGTK). An informative pro-OLPC post at Slashdot: "Worth Careful consideration" http://hardware.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=357665&cid=21325111 An excerpt: "While you can certainly waste time and goof off on the web, there is also a wealth of instructional material, learning material, free encyclopedias, and help of all kinds to be had on message boards. Children could learn, for example, methods of improving local sanitation, agricultural techniques, and health information which could end up saving the developed world millions or billions of dollars in humanitarian aid. They could also learn other languages which could open up entire worlds to them. Even if they didn't have the internet, they could learn how to program, how to compute, make art, photographs, drawings, and a whole bunch of other stuff with it. Not to mention the fun factor. It's not an educational panacea but it WILL change the world. " And as another slashdot poster says, you can't buy that many paper textbooks for $200, especially compared to what you can cram into 1GB of Flash (or even more if you get the files from local servers and delete old ones). And paper books have their own problems in areas of high humidity (mold, chewed by rodents, fade in the sun, etc.). I think a lot of the economics that governments are considering for deploying OLPC have more to do with replacing plain old paper textbooks with a single laptop than any of the issues of connectivity or simulation or learning to program which are more the sorts of things we think about for computers in, say, the USA or Europe, where we pretty much take purchasing textbooks and access to local libraries of tens of thousands of printed books for granted. Still, even for USA schools, OLPCs may make sense if they save money on textbooks. So, USA school districts could save money of textbooks (if they were free, as in here:) "Global Text Project – Wiki Textbooks" http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/09/05/230201 http://globaltext.org/ (or even just at direct author royalty cost) and kids get Python and educational simulations thrown in as a bonus. Plus, they get a lighter load and less back pain. "Heavy backpacks lead to early strain and pain for schoolkids" http://cnnstudentnews.cnn.com/2001/fyi/teachers.ednews/02/13/backpack.pain.a... Anyway, as an ebook reader alone the OLPC might be worth the US$425 cost, which is only a $100 more than what a Sony Reader costs with an extra waterproof cover, and that amount is less than the more flexible (but heavier) iRex Iliad. See: http://www.mobileread.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5664 I think key to happiness with the OLPC in the USA is reduced expectations. Consider that for $425, you get an OLPC ebook reader than runs Python, and then some kid somewhere else with limited access to books gets one too. I'll be curious to compare them side-by-side with an ebook reader. Maybe if that eight year old reviewer was asked -- would you rather carry a three pound OLPC XO-1 back and forth to activities or two or three times as much weight in textbooks in your backpack, they might have gone for the OLPC. --Paul Fernhout

Michael Tobis wrote:

I think this "limited time only" idea defeats the purpose of the whole software environment. Why should I buy a community building tool that will not be available to potential members of my local community?

From there: "On walking around school I saw kids that had laptops with spoiled screens, torn off "ears", and defect batteries ­ one kid even told me that his laptop had been stolen. There are teachers for whom the idea of using the laptops in learning is not yet natural, and there are challenges regarding how to digitalize the curriculum the kids must go through during

A very good point. And you can find lots of people who agree the OLPC distribution model is problematical for various reasons, for one example: http://www.olpcnews.com/sales_talk/countries/negroponte_change_olpc_distribu... But as I see it, this is not about the OLPC XO-1 as an innovation by itself. For me, this is about experimenting with doing education with lightweight portable "dynabooks" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynabook running GNU/Linux supporting dynamic languages (like Python) with wireless connectivity, which don't break when you drop them or use them outdoors around a little bit of water or heat or dust. That's the big picture, long term. I've bought several portable devices (with hopes of running Python software on some of them) -- none have had the (projected) robustness of the OLPC. The robust alternatives I could buy still seem to be in the thousands of dollars, for example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toughbook Still, it is possible the XO-1 won't live up to the hype of toughness. And if it doesn't, in my eyes it will have been a failure, because I think that is the most important aspect of it -- reasonably performing GNU/Linux and Python in a tough but cheap enclosure. The software can be fixed up, and I expect will improve over time like it did for the Zaurus SL-5500 or Nokia N800. If the hardware has problems, then you're stuck. Here is a related article with a video clip of earlier (prototype) OLPC's with problems: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fm9bTrpjTZ0 http://www.olpcnews.com/countries/nigeria/olpnc_galadima_school_interview.ht... primary school." I found that clip a little heartbreaking as at the end the child puts his hand across the apparently defective laptop screen, me thinking -- is he wonderingly if perhaps there goes his chance at a hopefully better education? Probably need at least 1.2 laptops per child to account for spares. :-( Still, even if only a few people can only get a few now, the general principles related to "dynabooks" will become more and more ubiquitous as years go by. And they are already happening -- one can get a Nokia N800 for a similar price (although it isn't quite as robust, and it is harder on the eyes). This has been an ongoing trend for many years. With a couple decades this trend might even culminate in devices equivalent to the OLPC XO-1 given away for free on the back of cereal boxes. :-) "Electronics goes organic" http://www.my-esm.com/digest/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=199700530 But even if that seems to hard to believe, it's not much of a stretch to imagine in ten years buying the equivalent of the OLPC XO-1 used on ebay is only going to cost in the tens of dollars. At that price, almost everyone in the world can afford one (or someone can afford to buy them one if they can't themselves). We are seeing the continued emergence of Pierre Teilhard de Chardin's "noosphere". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noosphere Whether that will be seen as good or bad for most remains to be seen. So, I see the XO-1 as mostly a funky vehicle for this kind of "dynabook" experimentation. But I expect in two or three years this OLPC XO-1 will be obsolete (if it isn't already. :-) Though on the other hand the Newton MP2100 has held its value for almost a decade, and probably still exceeds the OLPC XO-1 in good power management and ease of use -- although that is mostly software related, for example the Newton may sleep 100 times during the time it take you to draw a line across its screen. I could write a lot on OLPC failings based on the Newton's successes (OLPC didn't use an ARM processor like the Newton, color maybe wasn't essential and if it was, it could have been done the usual way, http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Image:Blurry-develop.png the Newton OS and GUI really did get out of your way most of the time and worked well in a mobile setting). I could even point out at length how the OLPC project duplicates some of the Newton's mistakes (making it hard for developers to use existing code or develop using existing desktop equipment, as OLPC could have made Sugar optional add-ons to Gnome instead of essentially replacing Gnome, etc.), http://www.osnews.com/story.php/16582/The-OLPC-Sugar-Interface-Dont-Do-it/ Still, I think there are also a lot of good points about the general OLPC concept anyway (and even about Sugar's aspirations). I also admire the way it was done as a non-profit using free and open source methods. One can quibble about how organized they are, etc., or lots of other things they may have had difficulties with, or with the distribution models, or the hype machine, but as I see it the OLPC is the biggest game in town working on hardware and software this way -- and they have chosen Python to pull everything together. I feel a little about it like I feel about GNU/Linux, which I resisted for years because it was obvious UNIX was an antiquated technology compared to all the other promised OS's (Plan 9, Microkernels, Inferno) or even just plain old pre-DOS QNX or the Mac OS. But in the end, the GNU & Linux communities have kept chugging a long and become the biggest game in town in that free OS arena. I don't know if OLPC will have that much momentum, of course. I doubt it -- not because it isn't a ultimately a good idea to make robust cheap dynabooks for kids (or adults :-), but just because there will be so much hardware competition with dropping prices that in a few years one may have many choices with a variety of OS's or software environments (e.g. the Java powered PepperPad http://www.pepper.com/ to name just one competitor). And some of this is happening precisely because the OLPC project paved the way and stirred up the commercial competition. But all that is good news ultimately for anyone who wants to use computers in education -- better, faster, cheaper, lighter, more robust. It's all part of an ongoing revolution, perhaps leading up to Vernor Vinge's Hugo-award-winning short science fiction story "Fast Times at Fairmont High" http://www.kurzweilai.net/articles/art0518.html?printable=1 where he talks about the equivalent of sprinkling smart dust (called "localizers") around schools. From the review: "One thing that was believable is that it seemed that a lot of the kids cheated, and it was almost impossible for the adults to catch them. With universal network connectivity it would be hard to make sure kids are doing their work on their own. I got the impression the school sort of looked the other way, the idea being that as long as the kids solved their problems, even if they got help via the net, that was itself a useful skill that they would be relying on all their lives." One can even question the whole idea of whether kids in developing nations are better off without today's conceptions of computing. Certainly many of these developing nations already rank as "happier" than much of the developed world. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/3157570.stm http://thehappinessshow.com/HappiestCountries.htm Are we really sure we want to tinker with that happiness? But it is happening anyway -- so at least hopefully they can get the benefit of the good part of it while perhaps using their own unique cultural strengths to work around the bad parts. The OLPC XO-1 is a first of a kind. It's almost certain it will fail as a specific product because it is a very ambitious undertaking. Or, as "Fake Steve Jobs" sarcastically wrote: http://www.olpcnews.com/commentary/press/one_fake_steve_jobs_sarcasm.html "Frankly I'm shocked to see these guys having problems. I mean, a brand new hardware design, a new screen technology, a customized Linux operating system, a one-off user interface, and the customers are the poorest nations in the world, …and the whole project will be run by woolly academics who have never even worked in a real company let alone run one. What could possibly go wrong?" But, as an idea, I think it has a lot of momentum, even if others in the end may carry the idea forward in better ways. And it is an idea -- the Dynabook -- with roots back in the 1960s or even earlier. This is just a step on the way. I think the biggest thing to take away from this is that the dynabook hardware is pretty much there. It is the software and content that is the problem. And that's where edu-siggers etc. can play a vital role. Again, from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynabook "Though the hardware required to create a Dynabook is here today, Alan Kay still thinks the Dynabook hasn't been invented yet. The key software and educational curriculum are the missing pieces."

What are the prospects of a commercial product running the XO software system?

Probably zero. I would even think the OLPC project would think this probability should ideally be zero, to minimize the risk of theft. Having said that, I know there was interest by groups who do outdoors type applications -- like surveying or inspection.

I agree, I am tempted to buy four and get two rather than buy two and get one. That starts to be enough money that I hesitate though.

I agree. I actually really wanted three. Even just two seems like it doesn't fully get at the idea of, say, a third person joining an existing networked group activity. I was hoping maybe I could substitute one emulator session on a desktop for that third laptop.

I disagree about Java, though. I think that moves in the wrong direction.

True, Java has its own issues as well. Sometimes it seems it can't make up its mind if it is an OS or a software library or a VM or a language. And dealing with a proliferation of versions and configurations is its own set of potential headaches, and a major weakness in the Java concept. Nothing is perfect, in part because one person's priorities may differ from another's -- in my case, easy Mac installation is important for me (while still being cross-platform) and I like Swing better than, say, wxWidgets. --Paul Fernhout