Microsoft Looking to Run Windows on OLPC 392
pete314 writes "Microsoft has been provided with a number of test models of Nicholas Negroponte's One Laptop per Child computers and is trying to get Windows installed on them. The current design runs a custom version of Red Hat's Fedora Linux. Running Windows will take quite a bit of additional memory: the OLPC has 512Mb of Flash, where XP requires a minimum of 1.5Gb storage."
Windows Fundamentals? (Score:4, Interesting)
A trap? (Score:5, Interesting)
Why? (Score:5, Interesting)
Windows Mobile 2003 (Score:3, Interesting)
1.5GB assertion unfair (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Open Spurce? (Score:3, Interesting)
I'm a big fan of FOSS in general but concerns about free code, open standards and the like are first world luxuries that really aren't important compared to getting these people better lives. If I could take a whole african country out of poverty in return for shutting down the copyleft lliscenses all together I would do it despite how much it would suck for me.
Re:Open Spurce? (Score:3, Interesting)
OLPC and slimware Linux (Score:3, Interesting)
But the real question is why has Linux got so bloated ? When I started using Redhat, it ran very well in 16MB, with X. At the time Linux the system you installed to revive your obsolete PC with 4MB of RAM. And you could recompile your kernel with those 4MB of RAM. Now that Linus has moved to making multiprocessor kernels, you'de better buy an up to date machine to install any current distro.
I can't wait for OLPC, because the necessity for supporting it will mean the resurgence of a slimware distro.
Re:Just sick (Score:2, Interesting)
This is a charitable organization we're talking about here. Bill Gates is possibly the most generous philanthropist on the planet. Whatever you may think of his business tactics, the thought of DRM and activation on these cheap little devices made for the third world is just plain silly. The thought that Gates wants to use this little laptop to take over the rest of the world doesn't pass the laugh test.
I'm not a MS shill. I'm worse than that. I'm a Mac guy. I just think the picture you're painting in your modded-up post is ludicrous and paranoid.
As a contributor... (Score:5, Interesting)
Remember, they want to send MILLIONS of laptops into the field and avoid downtime caused by viruses, bugs, overflows, etc. The laptops are going to be hardened down quite a bit so even if a user app is exploited the laptop as a whole is still ok. They're using GNU/Linux for more reasons than the fact it costs $0 to license. They have to be able to recover from flaws in the field, of which they want to have precious few of.
And besides, even if Windows were secure, they would have to give away fully functional copies for FREE to make the budget. Even charging OLPC $1 for the license would hurt the budget ($1 * millions of laptops == no good). In short, there isn't really a "market" here other than trying to expose another generation to inferior software.
Tom
Fedora/Red Hat in the Third World (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:As a contributor... (Score:2, Interesting)
I suspect, as others have already said, that we're talking about Microsoft offering a version of Windows for the laptop, not trying to get it pre-installed.
The children might be even more disappointed (Score:5, Interesting)
I am afraid that if OLPC machines are distributed throughout the Third World and Windows is the OS, we may see a global conflagration. We better be prepared to train a few million of the world's poorest people to be Support Techs. Microsoft might be willing to donate a few million MSCE training DVDs.
If we took the cost of the Iraq War for six months, we might be able to improve these folks' situation enough that in a year or two they could afford to buy their own PC parts from Tiger Direct and put it together themselves, just like God intended.
Re:You might be a little disappointed then (Score:3, Interesting)
They've already offered free Windows licenses for OLPC. I think it's a OLPC is a bit like Netscape, they basically want a product to compete with it, even if they don't see any money for the forseeable future. More generously, the Gates foundation pays billions to charity, and free Windows for the third world is probably worth it for the publicity.
I think they'll run Windows CE on it.
http://www.windowsfordevices.com/news/NS261936762
Though it's got a x86 compatible AMD Geode, so it could run XP or Win2K. Given the huge number of platforms NT&CE have run on (x86, x86-63, Itanium, Alpha, Mips, PowerPC, Alpha64, i860, ARM, Hitachi SH, Matsushita AM33, Mitsubishi M32R *) there are obviously some people inside Microsoft who are keen or porting things to new hardware.
These guys, http://www.litepc.com/xplite.html [litepc.com]
say
And this is just hacking
But XP in 300MB is no problem even if you just hack inf files.
* OK, maybe not that huge but consider how many they absolutely needed to support. On NT, Mips, PowerPC and Alpha had negligable market share or support from applications and were eventually dropped. But despite that, someone in the kernel team decided to pay for the work to port to them. There's a document with the of PE processor types here
http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/system/platform/fir
Re:You might be a little disappointed then (Score:3, Interesting)
I still remember a story about one of those nice folks in Africa trying to spread the wealth of computing to the poor asking MS if they would support. They would...if he agreed to allow them to slap their name all over the thing and parade it around as a huge PR thing, and for doing this they would "donate" a bunch of MS Office stuff. Unfortunately by the time all was said and done it would cost him an order of magnitude more in funding to make use of their "donation" due to the increased hardware costs associated with running copies of Windows that he would have been forced to purchase.
Even if they do get it stripped down enough to work, ignoring all of the associated applications and updates that you need on a Windows system, I think the killing point will be the fact that the OS will cost something like 2-3x the laptop itself.
Re:Btw E,mbedded XP takes 300meg (Score:3, Interesting)
Not only that, but as you alluded, a default install of XP (fresh off the CD) doesn't have anything useful [for kids]. It has no Office suite, no PDF/SVG/etc viewer, no decent web browser, no media player (that isn't corrupt), no games, no educational games/tools, etc...
Worse yet, is most commercial Windows software is written with "1GB of ram is standard, and 4GB of disk is nothing." So pretty much everything is bloatware and horribly redundant.
The OLPC box has 128MB of ram and a 512MB flash. You'd be hard pressed getting a lot of tools on there. Hell, just MS Word takes ~150MB of space. Now add on Excel, Adobe Reader, IE7 (shudder...), etc... and oops you filled up the flash without even getting to the games or the users personal storage.
Granted not all OSS is perfect either. IIRC they're leaning towards abiword/gnumeric for their document and spreadsheet tools. I'll bet because OpenOffice is too large, complicated, and requires too much memory (hey it's not perfect). They're writing their own WM to simplify the layout for kids and make it more fun to use. And various other things like that. But that's kinda the point. Because it is OSS based they are free to perform these modifications/ports without shelling out cash money.
Tom
Re:You might be a little disappointed then (Score:2, Interesting)
Per Person Seat License vs Site License (Score:3, Interesting)
When you apply for a job, you list what software you are "licensed" for. Hiring will be done by qualifications and the completeness of your personal licensing. "I'm sorry, you are not licensed for our version of Microsoft Office. Next!".
I once thought such scenarios were just a figment of my imagination, but more and more I see that this may well become reality one day.
Re:Open Spurce? (Score:5, Interesting)
Wrong! Price is irrelevant; the only consideration is that the device must be hackable by the user. The developers of the OLPC are insisting on Free Software specifically because they want the kids to have the four freedoms [gnu.org]; no more, no less.
By the way, if you don't believe me consider this: the OLPC people rejected Mac OS X even when it was offered for free (i.e., zero cost).
Re:Open Spurce? (Score:4, Interesting)
Negroponte is avoiding the kiss of death for charities: getting involved in the open market.
For example, imagine you are running the Red Cross, MSF, Salvation Army, or some other large charity that does large amounts of shipping. You may look at Exxon-Mobil's record profits and think, "this is insane...we're lining the pockets of this company's shareholders with money that could otherwise be helping the needy. Our mission burns tons of fuel, but there must be a better way." To fix this you start investing capital in your own not-for-profit private fuel suppliers, just to keep the costs in-house. A little later you look back and realize your suppliers are horridly inefficient because they never had to answer to the open market, all your working capital is tied up in wells, refineries, pipelines, and tankers, and your bureaucracy nightmare puts most banana republics to shame.
This example is excessive, but it demonstrates the simple trap of a good idea ("Lets feed the needy, not Big Oil Inc.") becoming a living hell ("Why are we drilling for oil in Greenland instead of feeding the needy?"). Charities constantly make this mistake on a smaller scale, especially in the printing, mailing, and call-center businesses. The siren-call of "let's keep this in-house" is so tempting, it's hard to realize it's the same as signing an exclusive contract with a supplier that has no competition and no experience.
Negroponte doesn't really care what operating system ends up on the OLPC, so long as it meets requirements. He does want to avoid getting into the operating system business.
Negroponte only cares about the nail getting pounded in. If you can do it cheaper with a different tool, you're hired.
Negroponte doesn't care about the hammer.
Re:The Eye of Redmond is Upon You. (Score:3, Interesting)
They have already tried WinCE. Recall the device from AMD [windowsfordevices.com] also targeted at countries of 3rd world. And they - M$ and AMD - have miserably failed [slashdot.org].
Shortly: nobody needs another closed, limited to single vendor platform.
Re:Open Spurce? (Score:4, Interesting)
What did I miss? Mainly the ability to get an application for anything I wanted to do without having to pay an arm and a leg. Yeah... it was the "free beer". Even though I had to "brew" it, it was still better than having to pay premium prices to buy the premade stuff. The second thing I missed was how the apps in most Linux distros tend to have a lot more options (something that most users wouldn't care about) available for both GUI and especially CLI environments. I don't know how many people experience this in Windows, but I do all the time: "Hmmm.. I wonder if I can do action X with application Z"? Poke around a bit and find that you can't, or worse... you can but only if you upgrade to the deluxe version of the software meaning that you have to fork out more cash. And finally, the extensibilty of the OS itself. Unless someone writes a particular driver for something, you're pretty much out of luck if you're not an MS developer if you want the core OS (ie. kernel) to do something new. Again, to cite an example, I point to the Linux kernel's network block device support. All I had to do to enable it was compile the kernel/module and load the module, install a user space app for server and client and bam... I had new and amazing functionality. I was then able to export hard drives, CD-ROM and DVD drives as network block devices which could be imported to remote systems via TCP. This is NOT file sharing. It's basically like making a disk on one system appear as a disk on a remote system that can be partitioned, formattted or in the case of a DVD, played via the network.
As much as I wish it weren't so, I think that people like me are relatively rare. Most people have no problem paying out lots of money for new functionality, or worse, pirating software. I'm in a situation where my interest in computers and software exceeds my financial situation. So GNU/Linux is a natural fit in that way. The XP system I was using was provided by my employer so it was no cost to me. But after having drank of the FOSS well, I can't go back for reasons more than just the finances... I've nearly eliminated Windows from my life other than at work (only on the servers I have to deal with from time to time. My workstation is Gentoo) and the occasions when I use a virtual machine at home to access Windows only online media. Whatever fits your situation... use it.