____/ The Ghost In The Machine on Monday 16 July 2007 16:27 : \____
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Roy Schestowitz
> <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> wrote
> on Sat, 14 Jul 2007 04:58:41 +0100
> <7371881.L1S1ZVJIco@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
>> ____/ The Ghost In The Machine on Saturday 14 July 2007 03:19 : \____
>>
>>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Ramon F Herrera
>>> <ramon@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> wrote
>>> on Fri, 13 Jul 2007 18:04:08 -0700
>>> <1184375048.273143.278880@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
>>>> On Jul 13, 7:52 pm, John Bailo <jaba...@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>> http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,2158614,00.asp
>>>>>
>>>>> "In a surprise move on Friday, Intel announced that it has joined
>>>>> Nicholas Negroponte's One Laptop Per Child (OLPC) non-profit
>>>>> organization, and will contribute both technology and educational
>>>>> content to the initiative in the future."
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> IOW, everybody is on board with the OLPC Initiative, except Microsoft?
>>>>
>>>> That would be so cool...
>>>
>>> Why shouldn't Microsoft implement a version of Vista Basic
>>> for OLPC?
>>>
>>> Granted, I doubt they can do it (the machine is vastly
>>> underpowered compared to the usual Vista configs, even
>>> Home Basic -- it's a 433 MHz Athlon, 256 MiB, FSB 166
>>> MHz, 1200x900 color or mono display sans GLX/DirectX
>>> capability), but I don't see much point in locking them
>>> out either -- as long as the rules are clear to everybody
>>> and they hew to the standards, without exception.
>>>
>>> (Who properly enforces that is an interesting question.
>>> Niger in particular is not noted for its political
>>> cleanliness. For that matter, neither is Microsoft.
>>> Trust, but verify.)
>>
>> OLPC might be able to run Windows XP given some
>> enhancement, but its purpose is to provide certain
>> functions for education. It's *not* a business
>> laptop. It's not suppose to become one, either.
>>
>
> I'll admit to some curiosity as to what all those OLPCs
> will do as the child grows up. Ideally, admittedly, the
> system would last indefinitely, everyone would have one,
> and it would have sufficient power for everyone.
>
> None of these will ever be the case, for various reasons.
> But disposal of computer equipment is a problem -- and
> one hopes that discarded OLPCs, which after all contain
> a high amount of gold (connectors), lead (solder), and
> various toxic chemicals for the PC board, do not pollute
> the Earth.
>
> Of course, you're right in that it's not a business laptop.
> But what is a "business laptop" nowadays? It gets more
> complicated by the year -- and not just technologically,
> either. Consider, for instance, that many mobile phones
> are small computers in their own right, allowing for
> among other things web browsing. Many can even understand
> Structured Vector Graphics.
>
> The lines are blurring, and I'm not sure if that's good or
> not.
Very good points. I still think that the intention of OLPC is *not* to teach
children computing. This is a tool for children to get education with. In
other words, it's not about learning GUIs and memorising menu item locations.
It is about reading resources such as Wikipedia, drawing (for creativity), and
communicating with other children.
I don't think that last paragraph makes it clear enough, still. Let me put this
differently, using a concrete example. Some people and children in UK schools
would use the PC clusters to provide or acquire skills that are very
applications-specific and very dependent on vendors. Quite often, the task
involved is some mockup exercise where the whole classroom just does the very
same thing (universities have the same 'problem'). In reality, PCs should be
used not to teach how they are to be used. They should be used to /teach/
about a variety of subjects, not necessarily computer-related. It's about use
of the computer, not about how the computer works or what it happens to be
running at some given moment. GUIs have been around for decades. It's ideas
like tickboxes and frames that need to be understood, but at a very shallow
level, without focusing on just one product. Ask a Mac or Windows users about
the notion of mouse focus or multiple (virtual) desktops and you'll see that
choice made arrogantly by developers are simply taken for granted. They reduce
people's ability to think, let alone become more productive and have 'desk
control'. That when you turn an office with a large desk into a tiny cubicle
in a production line.
--
~~ Best of wishes
Roy S. Schestowitz | GPL'd 3-D Reversi: http://othellomaster.com
http://Schestowitz.com | RHAT GNU/Linux | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
run-level 2 2007-06-16 18:32 last=
http://iuron.com - help build a non-profit search engine
|
|
