Microsoft Takes On the OLPC 218
A number of readers sent us links to a BBC story on Microsoft's plan to provide the "Microsoft Student Innovation Suite" for $3 to governments around the world, for use in schools. The suite contains Windows XP Starter Edition and Windows Office Home and Student 2007, along with other educational software. To qualify, a government would have to provide free PCs to schools. Microsoft's stated goal is to double the number of PCs in use (and running Windows). An unbiased observer might wonder about an agenda of slowing the OLPC project and the spread of open source in general.
If you're seeing conspiracies against opens source (Score:5, Insightful)
However....even paranoids have enemies, and just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get you.
Can't we stop Microsoft using the word innovation? (Score:4, Insightful)
Unbiased my arse. (Score:2, Insightful)
No, an unbiased observer would probably see this as an extension of student discount programs Microsoft already offers or an attempt to make a little extra money from markets that currently bring in none. Only a tinfoil-hat-wearing free software zealot would wonder about an agenda of slowing the OLPC project and the spread of open source in general.
XP starter edition != education (Score:4, Insightful)
Meanwhile, in other news ... (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:If you're seeing conspiracies against opens sou (Score:5, Insightful)
Seriously, if Microsoft's motives were entirely philanthropic, don't you think that they would use their very large and powerful cone of influence to provide these schools with some cheap hardware? I'll bet some folks at Microsoft have a few contacts at a few major OEMs who might just help them out if pressed...
Re:Hmm... (Score:2, Insightful)
Yeah, I'm not sure why anyone starting to build their infrastructure (not already locked in) would want to start with Windows. Even at $3 a copy, that's $3 more than Linux.
WHAT a fantastic show of generousity (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Unbiased my arse. (Score:5, Insightful)
Are you a shill, or just incredibly stupid and/or naive?
Microsoft has stated repeatedly that Open Source is the enemy and in so many words. If you missed that, you are simply not informed enough to be qualified to contribute to this discussion.
Now, Microsoft is saying that they are prepared to work with Open Source. But based on Microsoft's past record of falsehood, fraud, abuse of their monopoly position, price fixing, illegal dumping and bundling, and the laundry list of other complaints, you would have to be some kind of idiot to trust them now.
Re:Unbiased my arse. (Score:4, Insightful)
As for OLPC, I doubt they want to slow the project -- they want to make the pie bigger and OLPC will help them do that. They would, however, like to make sure that those children eventually migrate to Windows, which is where the $3 SIS comes in.
But the PC still cost money (Score:5, Insightful)
Any old $200 to $300 PC will work, right? Oh, wait, the OLPC is currently $150, or something like that.
Eh.
Re:Can't we stop Microsoft using the word innovati (Score:3, Insightful)
That being said though, I've been away from Linux as a daily user for a while, and I downloaded Ubuntu a couple weeks back to see what it was like. I have to say, something like this would have been a much gentler in-road to an open source OS. The other stuff is still going on in the background but it has what I consider to be a practical menu arrangement and usable interface. I am pretty sure the tables have not turned in this area yet - OSX or Windows are going to be much less frustrating for the vast majority of the world population - but the gap is narrowing. The OLPC interface also looks like it was well thought-out for use by school children.
Groan (Score:2, Insightful)
In any other product this is called "dumping". (Score:2, Insightful)
What makes MS a special case? Nothing.
Re:But the PC still cost money (Score:5, Insightful)
I still think the OLPC is a better idea. Cheaper, and less likely to crash.
Re:Open your eyes. (Score:5, Insightful)
Wow! You really drank the Microsoft kool-aid! Let's dissect your statement and find out if it stands up to the ultimate test: that of factuality.
Assertion one: If its the same price, the governments would be best suited to choose Microsoft.
First, it is not the same price. It is $3 more expensive per unit. The OLPC project is charging for the hardware, not the software. So your statement is foolish since it is clearly not the same price.
Second, it is not clear that even a stripped-down version of Windows XP would run properly on the OLPC. The XO Laptop [laptop.org] has a 433 MHz Geode LX processor, which is an architecture known for its low IPC (as compared to other x86-compatible processors of this era.) It has only 256MB RAM and 1GB flash storage. Windows XP is not capable of operating in 256MB without swapping heavily, which would destroy the flash memory. You CAN run Windows XP on a system this slow, or even slower. But it will run like dookie.
Third, there are a number of reasons not to use Microsoft. I will not go into them now, we all know what they are whether we agree with them or not. But there are basically no compelling reasons for Windows to be used for this purpose. And in fact, there are no compelling reasons to ever run Windows except interoperability with Windows. And that is becoming less and less of an issue all the time.
Assertion two: The software works
I find this to be the most hilarious of your assertions. Windows is a gigantic pile of junk. It is utterly, laughably unreliable. It is extremely poorly documented, and there is no way but reverse-engineering to find out what many of the settings in the registry and config files are for. In fact, without using a registry monitor, you have no idea that some of the settings are even possible, because they are undocumented and the keys are not created unless they are needed.
Windows is not the fastest operating system. Windows does not support the most hardware. Windows is not most secure, or even secure - it is insecure by design and nothing short of a complete security audit (which Microsoft claims is in progress) could fix the problems. And if you did one, you'd probably break all backwards compatibility.
Oh wait! That's the story of Windows Vista! Which has already been shown to also be insecure, many times over.
Assertion three: just about every company uses it
I hope you are aware that Linux is the only operating system consistently gaining market share in the server market. It's good for a wide variety of purposes for which Windows is severely deficient. About the only thing Windows has ever been better than Linux at was serving static pages - and then we got kernel-level HTTP acceleration in Linux. Now there's nothing.
Also, if everyone else jumped off a bridge, would you do the same?
I've used Linux pretty much everywhere I've worked. I have to admit, this is the first time I didn't feel I needed a Windows box. I do actually still run Windows, because I haven't yet found an alternative to Crystal Reports, and WINE's ODBC is pretty crap still (not that I could necessarily do any better.)
But I don't feel I need a Windows box! And these schoolkids need one even less.
Assertion 4: Its best for the customers.
Right. Because what customers want is DRM, a "security" scheme that asks them for confirmation every time they pick their nose, and utter instability. Those are really features that will help them. Granted, some of that is a Vista feature - but that's the "upgrade" path from Windows XP. Your proposal is that instead of educating a gener
Re:Can't we stop Microsoft using the word innovati (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Hmm... (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:Hmm... (Score:3, Insightful)
I hope any politician that gets into this is removed from power and put in jail along with the MS exec who made the sale.
OLPC is not about the software (Score:3, Insightful)
"Slight" profit? It's 200%! (Score:4, Insightful)
I don't know what kind of profit is "slight", but at that price they won't be able to compete in the free market against Third World street vendors.
I live in Brazil, where you can buy a copy of XP for R$5, which is about US$2.50 at today's rates. This includes the CD with a plastic cover and a printed sheet with the activation key. Think of that, someone can copy a CD in his home PC and sell it at a lower price than the biggest software vendor in the world can do in a worldwide production and distribution scheme.
If Microsoft really wanted to distribute Windows with charitable intentions, they could do it without financial loss at less than $1 per copy.