The simple concept is deceptive in it's impact. We at one time had niche hardware such as mail stations and Pocketmail devices. And they *STILL* have a devoted following of users in their niche markets. If all one does is a limited range of functions they have no need for more. The value of accepting that fact hatches a new zen like wisdom. If all the user is doing is Function list X- than they can use whatever will comfortably do the list. YES- many of us really want or need to do "bleeding edge" stuff with computers. But there is a major chunk of our society that "nothing beyond a browser" is needed. We even can consider skipping a local printer. All that is needed is a net browser. There are countless numbers of folks who do NOT have easy access to a web browser of any sort. Having one in the day room of a care facility for example. Having the less fortunate among us get one per family! One Laptop Per Child ? When America does not have one web browser enabled seat for each FAMILY? That reality sort of is derogatory to America. Sending a single usable system or laptop to recycling is a shameful failure. The preferred recycling should be into productive service. By running a Linux distro suited to that minimum functionality. The details can be made trivial. Oh? Who pays for this? Our whole species if we flunk at it.
--- On Mon, 10/13/08, Oren Beck orenbeck@gmail.com wrote:
YES- many of us really want or need to do "bleeding edge" stuff with computers. But there is a major chunk of our society that "nothing beyond a browser" is needed. We even can consider skipping a local printer. All that is needed is a net browser. There are countless numbers of folks who do NOT have easy access to a web browser of any sort. Having one in the day room of a care facility for example. Having the less fortunate among us get one per family! One Laptop Per Child ? When America does not have one web browser enabled seat for each FAMILY? That reality sort of is derogatory to America. Sending a single usable system or laptop to recycling is a shameful failure. The preferred recycling should be into productive service. By running a Linux distro suited to that minimum functionality. The details can be made trivial. Oh? Who pays for this? Our whole species if we flunk at it.
And of course this is why Linux needs to be demonstrated on older hardware: because then people see that older hardware, hardware they do not personally have a use for, can give "browser seats" to the have-nots with minimal outlay of hardware and cash.
The reason people leave computers in closets and warehouses to gather dust is because they don't know how useful their old PCs can be to the less fortunate in the U.S.A., and thus underestimate their tax deduction value when donated to a charity. I suspect billions are lost every year to corporations not knowing the value of their computers to the rest of the U.S.A. (and the world) and thus choosing to pay exorbitant disassembly and destruction costs (or risk exorbitant government fines when they illegally dump them somewhere) rather than donate them to charity for huge tax deductions.
I blame EBay for some of it. In Ye Olden Days, there was no central clearinghouse for the "value of older computers", so you'd assume your computers went down only slightly in value and donate them to some charity. Thus, for example, PC-XTs appeared in Salvation Army stores in the early-1990s, just in time for an impoverished college student who'd finally gotten his own apartment and needed a computer for next-to-nothing.
Nowadays EBay allows companies to see "computer values" which are no more accurate than stock market speculation bubbles, think their older systems must be worthless, and not donate them to charity for the tax deduction.
--- On Mon, 10/13/08, Oren Beck orenbeck@gmail.com wrote:
there is a major chunk of our society that "nothing beyond a browser" is needed. We even can consider skipping a local printer.
Skipping a local printer is a valid exclusion. Hotels providing "free wireless Internet" rarely provide a printer as well, yet the service is still a big draw.
All that is needed is a net browser. There are countless numbers of folks who do NOT have easy access to a web browser of any sort. Having one in the day room of a care facility for example. Having the less fortunate among us get one per family! One Laptop Per Child ? When America does not have one web browser enabled seat for each FAMILY? That reality sort of is derogatory to America.
It should be pointed out that the "One Laptop Per Child" laptops fit neatly within [irrelevant guy's] definition of "garbage" computers (on which the running of Linux should not be encouraged). Computers which "aren't garbage" must be able to: edit home movies/photos, use openoffice, use firefox, use flash player, use compiz, and use pidgin, and use all of them *quickly*.
"One Laptop Per Child" laptops are all (currently) the OLPC XO-1 model. The OLPC XO-1 uses a 433Mhz processor (with integrated graphics controller using some of the unit's physical RAM for video RAM), with 256MB physical RAM, a 1GB "hard drive" (flash memory), three USB ports (available SD slot), built-in AC97 audio, and built-in 640x480 color camera. The keyboard is sized for child hands, and there is a touchpad for mousing. The OLPC XO-1 has no hard drive, no CD/DVD drive, no floppy drive, and no CapsLock key.
The display uses non-standard pixel geometry (tall thin rectangles instead of pixels, and only one color per "pixel") and while it is a 984x738 "perceptual" resolution, a conventional liquid crystal display with the same number of green pixels (green carries most brightness information for human eyes) as the OLPC XO-1 would be 693×520. The resolution is further hampered by variable resolution based on angle: Resolution is greatest from upper-right to lower left, and lowest from upper-left to lower-right. Images which approach or exceed this resolution will lose detail and gain color artifacts. The unit achieves its maximum 200dpi resolution only in grayscale mode, and color mode is between 50% to 75% of that resolution.
With these specifications, the OLPC XO-1 unit:
1-2) is *incapable* of quickly and easily editing video/photos (and no editing software for either one is included), not to mention the weird pixel geometry making it difficult to create images which will look normal on a non-XO-1 PC;
3) would run OpenOffice *very slowly*, and need 200MB of its remaining 800MB just to house the OpenOffice application, installed as an extra application after receiving the XO-1;
4) cannot run Firefox (it comes with a stripped-down Gecko-based browser);
5) cannot use Flash Player (and even if it could, existing complex Flash sites such as Disney's Flash sites frequently use 1GB+ of hard drive space, exceeding the limited 800MB flash drive space on the OLPC XO-1);
6) and cannot use Compiz.
7) Of note is that the laptop doesn't come with Pidgin, but rather with something even better: Retroshare Instant Messenger, a "friend 2 friend" IM application which supports online chat and VoIP. Given the built-in sound and wireless networking, this may be one area where the OLPC XO-1 is very much not "garbage".
The XO-1 does come with a limited "Draw" application (think "MSPaint" or "TuxPaint"). It also has the option of recording video to OGV format (Ogg/Thedora), but you cannot play the videos an XO-1 laptop creates on an XO-1 laptop. You will have to copy the video file off the XO-1 to view/edit it on another PC (one which is not another XO-1).
So for those keeping score, thats 5 "garbage" points, one 1/2 "garbage" point (OpenOffice might be able to run on it, but no one will enjoy running OpenOffice on the XO-1), and one "not garbage" point. This brings the total to a 5.5 out of 7 score, which makes the OLPC XO-1, the laptop of "One Laptop Per Child", in [irrelevant guy's] opinion, a "garbage" PC on which the running of Linux should not be encouraged.
===============================
Oddly enough, there's a rumor that the "One Laptop Per Child" organization may be feeding into [irrelevant guy's]-type propaganda, as apparently a deal has been reached with Microsoft to create a version of Windows XP Home for the OLPC XO-1 (http://tinyurl.com/xp-olpc) at $10 per laptop. How they are going to do this, let alone cheaply, is a mystery, as the version of Windows XP Home SP2 being served up to other ultraportables such as the Eee uses 1.1GB+ just for the OS (or about 100MB more than the entire 1GB flash drive insider the XO-1), and according to Microsoft updates will add 165MB to that size every year, requiring a much bigger (and more expensive) flash drive in the XO-1.
Since the XO-1 currently costs $188 per laptop (with an original target of $100 per laptop), increasing the size of the flash drive to accomodate Windows XP Home (let alone the additional $10 per laptop Microsoft fee) will only increase that cost per laptop, further limiting the chance that Third World children will actually get those laptops.
The issue not being considered at all is if Linux is dropped and XP Home used in its place, that XP Home, while being kept alive for another two years solely for use on ultraportables, will still die off in 2011 and leave millions of XO-1 laptops without an OS.
-
Leo Mauler -
Oren Beck