MacDailyNews - Where Mac news comes first

Well get freak'n tinkering!

Lately we've been doing a lot of work with FreeBSD. It's been solid and relatively easy to tinker with. It also has roots in Apple Darwin.

Let's see what the Open Source movement comes up with. I like their spirit, but generally, you get what you pay for.

Who cares. It's their loss...

so why are they talking to microsoft? open and insecure are NOT synonyms!
MW: paper (+ t)

The $100 laptop crowd is going to have a steep learning curve.

I have been using computers since I was 10, have a BA in Computer Science, and work in IT, yet my experience is that Red Hat Linux in it's current form can be extremely frustrating to administer. Even if the $100 laptops include someone to set them up for "daily use" type work, the OS simply does not approach the ease of use of Windows, which says a great deal.

I understand the altruistic purpose of putting OSS on these laptops, but if they want the project to succeed, they need someone _intuitive_ for people who quite possibly have never touched a computer before. Even if you ask Red Hat's marketing folks, it is not an OS for first time computer users!

MSN word: science

Who cares????!!! If this initiative gets off the ground what do you think it will do to Apple's laptop in schools business?

Is the point to get tools to the children or have toys for the grownups? They were offered an awesome tool for free. Free?! That is a shame. They couldn't use it at least temporarily while they work on their "project".
Too appropriate MDN word: soviet

"...the designers want an operating system can be tinkered with."

For Pete's sake, why? I'm sure some middle-schooler is going to tweak OpenOffice or the Linux file system -- and rebuild it! -- on a $100 laptop. That's going to take a lot of cranking...

Or maybe, just maybe, the designers want to hand-tune the OS to the hardware. Darwin doesn't enable this?

More likely is that this is more about the designers' egos and the giant sandbox they want somebody to build for them, as opposed to, say, the needs of the users of those laptops?

I am sure that "every student in middle school and high school in his state" will just LOVE to tinker with that OS when they start trying to hook up printers and networks and cameras and hard drives! (Not to mention their parents!)
BTW, are they going to give the 3rd world countries the necessary accessories (printers, etc.) and software to make these machines really useful?
This whole scheme just seems pie-in-the-sky to me. In order for computers to be really useful for most people, they need a large infrastructure: software, peripherals, etc. which is not easily available in third world countries.

When did Darwin become closed source?!!

I see why they're wanting to use Open source but if they're being OS X for free why not just install it along with some Linux distro and allow use of both? If OS X then becomes expensive or inpractical or whatever then dump it and they've lost nothing but gained x amount of times use on the most advanced OS on earth.

The only problem I could foresee is how to build in the security measures apple is including to make sure OS X will only run on apple machines, how much would that add to the cost of these machines?

Urban myth has it MIT is full of smart people....???

The purpose of computers is to do work. Having to "Tinker" with an OS runs contrary to that purpose.

Linux is "cool", but it's a time burner. For an average desktop user, Linux is too needy in its requirement for attention and its demand for thorough understanding.

OS X is the antithesis of that.

Let me get this straight: they declined a free version of OS X because it is not open source and now they are in discussions with Microsoft?! This can't be real. No-one is that stupid.

2 quotes caught my eye:

1) "Steve Jobs, Apple Computer Inc.'s chief executive, offered to provide free copies of the company's operating system, OS X, for the machine, according to Seymour Papert, a professor emeritus at MIT who is one of the initiative's founders. "We declined because it's not open source," says Dr. Papert."

SJ offered them FREE copies of OS X (probably OSx86) and they turned him down?!?!? Idiots.

and 2) "Mr. Negroponte discussed the project last week with Microsoft Chairman Bill Gates... 'We're in serious discussions to determine what the appropriate type of involvement is with us with their project,' says Mr. Mundie.

Answer to Mr. Mundie: how about NONE!

Okay, let me get this straight: Apple offers them FREE OS X and they turn it down 'because it's not open-source'. Yet, they are 'in serious discussions with Microsoft', because... they're the king of 'open-source wares'??? More like, 'open SORE' wares.

Mr. Negroponte, et al, are a bunch of morons.

I have been using computers since I was 10, have a BA in Computer Science, and work in IT, yet my experience is that Red Hat Linux in it's current form can be extremely frustrating to administer. Even if the $100 laptops include someone to set them up for "daily use" type work, the OS simply does not approach the ease of use of Windows, which says a great deal.

Or even the greater ease of use of Mac!

Can't really see why Jobs just didn't give them the computers too. He's obviously thinking about growing the market share. But I got to believe that there were plenty offers by everyone in the computer industry too. If it were me, I'd have thrown in the computers and OS for $100, but then again, I'm not an numbers guy nor a marketing guy. Sounds to me like that was the best offer he could make and it didn't get taken, is all.

hypocrites.

some of the best software for OS X is open source.

Why not an operating system.

Here we go with the car analogies again...
I personally rather have a Fiesta (but not he Festiva) than a Lexus. I really enjoyed our `79. It was economical, fun to drive, responsive, cute... great basic transportation! Fiesta is still one of the most popular models in Europe. Unfortunately, Ford only imported them to the USA for three years. I'd have one now, if it was sold here.

Lately, the U.S. car buyer has really gotten their heads up their butts... believing that quality cars can ONLY come from Toyota, or Honda.
Not so! I just hope we don't kill off some U.S. car companies before the fog lifts.

Not hard to see why this was refused. In developing countries, there is a big movement gathering steam to ensure that they are not dominated by the US-led tech companies. The "tinkering" mentioned in the article has nothing to do with schoolchilren using vi to edit their smb.conf, and more to allow, for example, the Government of Brazil to tailor the laptops to their needs whilst, for example, schools in Botswana take a different direction.

If the laptops ran OSX, the project would be entirely at the mercy of Apple to ensure it stayed current with the future. However nice and cuddly some here think Apple are, being at the mercy of ANY single company is not what MIT are trying to achieve.

What an idiot! You have a project, which may turn out to be great, focused on getting computers to the people, but then you develop a crippling ideology—"no software that isn't open source".

My comments have nothing to do with open source technology, I use quite a lot of it. But they do have everything to do with what's the mission/primary goal of the project. Is it just get those poor people some computers, regardless if they can afford $100 or not; or is it let's make an affordable laptop so that people/children in developing countries can participate in tomorrows economy. The first assumes that technology itself is the saviour, the second assumes that people can use technology to save themselves. But that still requires the technology to be usable.

And let's face it, Linux, while great server software, has a ways to go before it becomes a great desktop environment. An offer of a free OS that is worldclass, easy to use, encouraging to educational endeavors, has open source underpins, and can be run much of the open source code in today's marketplace, seems like a no brainer. But then, my thought is if your going to offer a country that could use $100 to pay for food, education, and some shelter for a number of people per year; a laptop that would cost $100, then the least you can do is guarentee that the laptop is easily usable and readily learnable.

But what can I say, I also believe that if your going to come up with a cheap laptop for under developed countries, you shouldn't try to get $15 billion dollars out of them that could be used on actually feeding the people who would be using the laptops. You know so they could actually focus on learning and or the computer screen without those distracting hunger pains.

This project will fail. Brazil which is a country of over 150M people (very key to Microsoft). CNET has already detailed the problems that they have had with their national laptop initiative and open source. Check it out at:
http://news.com.com/Brazils+bumpy+road+to+the+low-cost+PC/2100-1041_3-5928985.html.

This is a bigger deal to MS. They do extensive biz in the region. Bill Gates has tried to stir the president of Brazil away from open source initiatives but has failed. I can't speak for Taiwan but I have travelled to Latin America extensively and I can tell you that no one there would use/pay for OSX because it is fairly unknown and hardly supported. Accesabiliy to Apple hardware/software there is scarce. In addition to this you can buy Windows PCs for $300-$500 and mac mini doesn't have enough power to be used as a substitute. Jobs should not be surprised. Apple does very little marketing in Latin America in fact I believe is the only region of the world where they don't have an Apple office/walk in-store/music store. It would be great if Apple had more direct presence in Mexico, Brazil, and Argentina. Markets of almost 300M people.

With lack of support from Apple there you can't blame developers for not wanting to use in their regions.

I never had a reason to really hate Dell until I read that elitist quote from Gretchen Miller from Dell's marketing division where she says:

..."We don't believe it's feasible at this point to manufacture a $100 notebook that meets our quality performance standards. Those things are all customer driven," she says, adding, "It's important that a computer prepare students for the applications they'll be using after they get out of school."

No Gretchen, you just don't get it. These kids are so poor that any help is better than no help. Microsoft was antagonistic and then changed. A future market perchance? What the hell. Apple's Steve Jobs made an offer as well. Ditto and good for him.

The spokesperson for Intel was open in their answer:

…Meanwhile, Intel Corp. says it isn't worried about the thought of millions of laptops in developing countries powered by a competitor's chips. "Our view is that whatever it takes to get computer power to places where it hasn't been before is a good thing," says spokesman Chuck Mulloy. "But there will be different flavors of these kind of devices."

Ms Miller talks of such a notebook not meeting their performance standards? I hear case after case of Dell computers just packing it in. Now if we're talking of HP well that's a different matter. They make good machines. They just spoil the package with a sub-standard operating system.

I come back to my original point. I may dislike windows and hate Microsoft's predatory business practices but in the past few years they have tried to help or at least Bill Gates has tried to help the needy. Apple has done the same thing.

Well Mr Dell, so that's what your company is all about, performance at a price. And now you know why I hate Dell so much. Their company is all about greed. When Dell is taken over (and the company sales aren't exactly healthy) I for one will be pissing on their grave. New advertising slogan. "What's that smell? Oh it's a Dell"

They are still in talks with microsoft probably because their laptop is in the 400 to 500 dollar range and MS will kick in 300 if and only if windows is the only OS allowed on the laptop. Or maybe Seymour Papert will lose an endowment if he doesn't go with winders.
You can be sure though that the decisions will be made in the best interests of the users not the greedy corporations pulling the strings.
uh huh.

1) may be they rejected Mac OS cause they do not want to be dependent on Apple's generosity - now Apple offers it for free and tomorrow asks for money;
2) may be what they are discussing with Microsoft is that Microsoft would write an open source OS for them rather then just give them Windows for free;

Bit of sense from Dave H. Cheers.

Odd though that they're even talking to M$, unless M$ is willing to give away Win 98 source when Vista ships.

Maybe Steve could give them the OS9 source now ?

Dave H pointed out: 'The "tinkering" mentioned in the article has
nothing to do with schoolchilren using vi to edit their smb.conf, and more
to allow, for example, the Government of Brazil to tailor the laptops to
their needs whilst, for example, schools in Botswana take a different
direction.'

Good point. But is this something that can really be addressed effectively by open source, as opposed to just flexible configuration?

As I understand the issue, developing countries don't want to be forced to accept the entire OS/application package, as Microsoft is fond of delivering: you buy Windows, you get IE, Windows Media, etc., whether you want them or not. Countries want more choice over the configuration they deploy.

You don't need the OS source to do that. You do need buy-in from the OS supplier to enable you to configure the deployed system to your needs, not the vendor's marketing ploys.

If MIT had said, "Steve Jobs offered OS X but wouldn't let us unbundle QuickTime or replace Safari with Firefox at will", I'd at least understand their motivation. But I don't see the logic of demanding open source per se.

>Microsoft's Mr. Mundie says he wasn't aware of any antagonism, adding,
>"At the end of the day, I think we have fundamentally the same
>objectives that the Media Lab project has relative to the kids." And Mr.
>Negroponte, after meeting with Mr. Gates, now says, "The machine will
>run anything, including Windows."

anything but not os x?? fscking idiots... too bad microsoft is a sponsor of MIT... but it explains hell of a lot :@

Open source

WHAT A PACK OF CHUMPS. so pissed. this was a great opportunity, but because of some bone head idiot, thinking of the under the table money they can get, instead of the possibility to offer the most stable , and easy to us OS millions of kids are going to miss out. f*cking pissed off. they want kids to use redhat? these guys have NO IDEA.
and theyre talking to microsoft? , these kids probably already have viruses, now theyre gunna have them on the computer too.
they need a bullet these pricks.

its a crock of shit. Those people just want to get filthy rich by sticking it to the poor. This exactly what large corporations are doing to the masses.

RetiredMidn

Although I mentioned it to clarify the point for earlier posters, the tinkering is not the core reason why I believe MIT have chosen the right path by turning Apple down.

The important part of choosing open-source is that it removes the problem of having a single supplier for the OS. Politically that will speed adoption of the project whilst also future-proofing it. After all, it's not as if we've never known Apple to be completely behind a product only to later drop it, is it?

PURE,
Pure as the driven snow.
Like unpublished authors and unrecorded composers, the extreme open source geeks only want an OS that takes 17 hours to set up. All on command line, of course. That's why LINUX will ultimately fail to produce the vision most hoped for it. Instead of 2 or 3 really good variants there are countless distros that are all in eternal beta.
They wouldn't pollute their computer with any commercial software. Besides, locking the end user into KDE wouldn't be good if they really wanted to be a Gnome user, now would it? Amazing bunch of clueless dreamers. If you are an academic you can afford a certain amount of that--but not in the real world. The kids they want to empower live in the real world-- not behind the ivy-covered walls of academia.

a couple of things......

first re JEGS comment above: I live in Buenos Aries and we have pretty good apple options here inc a bonafide apple store plus several independents, i see more apple laptops in wireless zones and cafes in general than i do ordinary laptops and the amount of cars with apple stickers is amusing at times. Also press coverage is high and the ipod is pretty much ubiquitous. Of course this a cosmopolitan city in a eurpoean vain, that is style obsessed, outside of it and in other countries JEG is closer to the mark i suspect.

second is as much as i love apple it seems logical for such an initiative to avoid being tied to some big corp (apple is not a charity and is not to be totally trusted either). it seems to me that these open source offerings are pretty robust and all the bells and whistles of the big OS's are excessive, remember this comp is clock work!

Cheers to Dave H. That is exactly right. It isn't about providing a Lexus to the kids in the villages of Burundi. It's the same issue as autos. This is why the VW bug (the old one, not the fancy new one) was in production around the world for over 50 years. The thing could be worked on in a ditch in Venezuela, and here's the important part, be brought back to life over and over again. What the hell use would a Ferrari be to a poor family in Calcutta? I'm sure their mechanic-on-retainer could keep that kind of solution running, right?

We shouldn't be thinking of the OS for this as some kind of Linux in a hardened, cost-reduced box, or even Windows, or OS X. No, this needs to be a sort of Mars Rover OS in a hardened, cost-reduced box. A hardened, redundant, entirely open OS environment with a small footprint. THAT is what they need on these $100 notebooks.

The only, and the easiest to set up and run is always Mac OSX. At the moment I have several computers running Linux, Win2000, WinXP, and Mac OSX. Period!

Those who will argue are doomed. The masses are not prepare for a system that always needs to be comfirgured(Windows), This also goes for Linux.

I don't get it. A $100 laptop for every kid in the third world. It hard to keep expensive laptops from breaking when given to any kid. Most of these laptops will turn to trash in a week. Then power? What is going to power these pieces of crap. It would be smarter to just have a few big powerful desktops in the local schools.

Auotmatic! is the word. the general public just needs and automatic system that will just go, like the Mac OS.

you got a big poing iDon't.

No one so far mentioned the following:

Steve Jobs means to outsource OS X! It is clearly evident from this article that SJ offered OS X to run on non-apple hardware. This is huge.

Might we see Dell's with OS X after all?

I hope not...

All those degrees but they are still stupid. Goes to show that just because you have a Ph.D. after your name, it does not mean you are smart.

So Brasil wants to get cheap technology into the hands of the population?

Maybe a good idea to start would be the remove the 60%-100% customs they put on everything tech that comes into Brasil.

What a bunch of socialist IDIOTS!!!

LULA wake up. Castro is not going to help ya...

iDont

Back when I lived in Kwazulu-Natal, the local schools were constantly having to replace furniture, cooking pans, writing materials, and pretty much everything that couldn't be nailed down. If you left a computer overnight in that environment, it would have to be the size of an elephant to stop people carrying it away.

If the computers aren't light and small enough for the kids to carry everywhere they go, they won't stay with the kids very long. That's why it has to be laptops.

iDon't:

Have a look at the picture of the laptop in the WSJ article. it will give u some answers to your question about the power source...

Did anybody actually read the article? They are planning on running Linux on them, not anything from Microsoft.

"Under present plans, the first production version of the laptop will be powered by an AMD microprocessor and use an open-source Linux-based operating system supplied by Red Hat."

I could see why they would chose Linux, they don't want to be tied to something that might end up costing cash to upgrade in the future. It won't be as easy to use as it would be if it had OS X but I guess it might make the kids learn more since you have to "tinker" with Linux a lot. This could be a huge development for the Linux community.

Since I am an Apple Fan, I would have liked to see them take OS X with some sort of guarantee of free upgrades though. I'm not sure but I think it might be tough to find people who can teach Linux in developing countries.

I recently went to a workshop given by an MIT academic regarding the MIT Open Courseware and iCampus initiatives. The programs are funded by Microsoft to the tune of tens of millions of dollars. I imagine there is additional investment in other computing initiatives as well. Few of their software tools function on a Mac.

Free is not lucrative enough.

guys, don't be idiots. Open source and LINUX is good for the 3rd world. And gives the countries the flexibility to make changes to the OS to fit their needs.

Its the best solution.

iDon't is a dumb tool. Read the article, she-man.

The REAL reason for rejecting OS X:

"...Microsoft, which is a financial contributor to MIT and a backer of its Media Lab..."