[OT] Test run of 2009/05/25 image
Rui Miguel Silva Seabra
rms at 1407.org
Thu Jun 11 14:09:40 UTC 2009
On Tue, Jun 09, 2009 at 09:37:06AM -0400, Mikus Grinbergs wrote:
>>>> Conclusion:
>>>> fedora-olpc, to be a sucess, needs a much slimmer UI than that
>>>> of GNOME.
>>>
>>> "Success" needs to be defined. Seems to me the OLPC was envisioned
>>> mainly for a single-application environment. Except for being slow at
>>> processing, I think it succeeds admirably.
>>
>> I'm not talking about the sugar interface, which is what you're talking
>> about.
>>
>> Non-sugar interface is something I'm also interested.
>
> The reason for my enthusiasm: I think the OLPC offers the bringing of
> technological assistance to economically disadvantaged locations.
>
> I think that people who focus on "slimming" the OLPC are missing the
> point. What they end up with is a slow, small Linux system.
Are you seriously considering the implications of your statement?
If slimming ends up on a slow small GNU/Linux system, then *not* slimming
ends up with a slower and bloated GNU/Linux system.
> But if
> what they want is a small Linux system, today's 'netbooks' offer more
> capability (and as netbooks continue to be produced by the millions, I
> expect tomorrow's models to cost less than the OLPC).
No, they don't. I don't know of a netbook which is as resistant or even
readable in sunlight as the XO can be.
> For those who are interested in using the OLPC to bring conventional
> applications to people who already have access to technology - why not
> work with a netbook instead?
Not conventional, just usable (which it isn't).
> For those who think the OLPC *is* suited to
> the environments in which it is being deployed - let's work on developing
> OLPC-scale applications to assist 'the things people do' wherever such
> "computerization" could improve matters.
Then what's your problem, man? :)
Rui
More information about the Fedora-olpc-list
mailing list