[OT] Test run of 2009/05/25 image

[Rui Miguel Silva Seabra]

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