PDA

View Full Version : Microsoft looking to run Windows on OLPC



newbie2
December 5th, 2006, 07:10 PM
take them while they are young :twisted:
http://lxer.com/module/forums/t/24199/

Josh1
December 5th, 2006, 07:12 PM
MS is probably paying for nearly the whole thing, then when they are like 20-40 they will always use windows..

Shay Stephens
December 5th, 2006, 07:12 PM
I don't know how successful they will be seeing as how the memory requirements and all are more than what the machine provides. But they have gotten pretty good at stripping out functionality in vista, so maybe they can do something here ;-)

Could we see a refreshed Windows 98 type version that would run on it?

Henry Rayker
December 5th, 2006, 07:16 PM
doesn't the OLPC system have 500MB flash, whereas WinXP requires 1.5GB for installation? Isn't that a bit of a .... problem?

utabintarbo
December 5th, 2006, 07:21 PM
Given that there are people out there looking to put linux on everything from mainframes to digital watches, is it not hipocritical to say that MS shouldn't attempt to get windows on OLPC?

kylevan
December 5th, 2006, 08:12 PM
Given that there are people out there looking to put linux on everything from mainframes to digital watches, is it not hipocritical to say that MS shouldn't attempt to get windows on OLPC?

perhaps, but there seems to be a connotation of purity or altruism that goes along with the OLPC project, and M$ running on it seems almost like it's being defiled.

Brunellus
December 5th, 2006, 08:17 PM
perhaps, but there seems to be a connotation of purity or altruism that goes along with the OLPC project, and M$ running on it seems almost like it's being defiled.
Well, yes. And/or the OLPC can be conceptualized as a way of getting an IT industry off the ground in countries that don't currently have one.

Simply giving away Windows only adds more people who are dependent on Redmond, perpetuating the core/periphery dependency.

BlaineM
December 5th, 2006, 09:08 PM
Didnt you all hear... that life is all about how much money you can make... or so I would believe if I lived under Microsoft's House. Greed baby... greed.

"Given that there are people out there looking to put linux on everything from mainframes to digital watches, is it not hipocritical to say that MS shouldn't attempt to get windows on OLPC?" I put linux on my ipod... and that was just fun... and did I also mention that it was free to download. I dont think that Microsoft will be doing this on the 100 dollar laptops for free. I cant believe that Microsoft will be not getting any amount of the price of the laptop... and that they are doing this for the betterment of IT in poor countries.

I have tried to not look at Microsoft with a raised eyebrow or a turned eye, thinking oh well, just another company for choices... but I think that this might have put them over the edge for me.

Josh1
December 5th, 2006, 09:14 PM
How come my post was edited and what was changed?

aysiu
December 5th, 2006, 09:15 PM
perhaps, but there seems to be a connotation of purity or altruism that goes along with the OLPC project, and M$ running on it seems almost like it's being defiled.
Microsoft is a corporation. Linux is an open source kernel.

If Red Hat pulls out of the OLPC project or somehow becomes closed source or unnecessarily controlling, OLPC can easily move over to Puppy Linux or Damn Small Linux or some version of Ubuntu or Debian or Slackware.

If OLPC were predominantly Windows installations, the minute Microsoft says, "Oh, by the way, you will have to give us extra government contracts for X, Y, and Z; otherwise, we pull the plug on OLPC," the project is completely directed by Microsoft.

Or, as Brunellus puts it, it becomes "dependent on Redmond." Bill Gates once said something to the effect of his hoping that (particularly Asian countries) would use legitimate copies of Windows, but he'd prefer them pirating Windows than using another operating system.

That should tell you something.

Josh1
December 5th, 2006, 09:36 PM
Microsoft is a corporation. Linux is an open source kernel.

If Red Hat pulls out of the OLPC project or somehow becomes closed source or unnecessarily controlling, OLPC can easily move over to Puppy Linux or Damn Small Linux or some version of Ubuntu or Debian or Slackware.

If OLPC were predominantly Windows installations, the minute Microsoft says, "Oh, by the way, you will have to give us extra government contracts for X, Y, and Z; otherwise, we pull the plug on OLPC," the project is completely directed by Microsoft.

Or, as Brunellus puts it, it becomes "dependent on Redmond." Bill Gates once said something to the effect of his hoping that (particularly Asian countries) would use legitimate copies of Windows, but he'd prefer them pirating Windows than using another operating system.

That should tell you something.

True, but those asians countries are all getting raided (Mainly Phillipenes) and LAN Cafe owners have switched over to Linux and are using Cedega to run their games - A Cedega subscription is less then a copy of WIndows XP and a huge fine.

Also, MS could switch off all illegal copies of Windows XP that haven't been patched right now, they already have nagscreens.

aysiu
December 5th, 2006, 09:45 PM
True, but those asians countries are all getting raided (Mainly Phillipenes) and LAN Cafe owners have switched over to Linux and are using Cedega to run their games - A Cedega subscription is less then a copy of WIndows XP and a huge fine.

Also, MS could switch off all illegal copies of Windows XP that haven't been patched right now, they already have nagscreens.
Exactly my point--it's all about control.

Linux-based operating systems give control to the users/clients. Windows gives control to the vendor/corporation.

BlaineM
December 5th, 2006, 10:11 PM
edit: nevermind, misunderstood... I didnt know that you could edit someone elses posts. That is not a good idea.

utabintarbo
December 5th, 2006, 10:22 PM
perhaps, but there seems to be a connotation of purity or altruism that goes along with the OLPC project, and M$ running on it seems almost like it's being defiled.

Please do not equate purity with altruism. That defiles purity.

BTW, what are the terms under which MS wishes to contribute? If this information is innocuous or not extant, this thread amounts to nothing more than "Yet Another 'I Hate Microsoft' Thread". :rolleyes:

aysiu
December 5th, 2006, 10:30 PM
Please do not equate purity with altruism. That defiles purity.

BTW, what are the terms under which MS wishes to contribute? If this information is innocuous or not extant, this thread amounts to nothing more than "Yet Another 'I Hate Microsoft' Thread". :rolleyes:
There are actually quite a few news stories on this topic (http://news.google.com/news?q=microsoft%20olpc&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&sa=N&tab=wn).

By the way, I don't think you're using the words innocuous and extant properly in this context. I believe the word you're looking for is fabricated.

innocuous means harmless. extant means still existing.

DoctorMO
December 5th, 2006, 11:35 PM
hmm, it's odd because windows doesn't support any of the features that are going to make the OLPC a great device in the field.

The amount of kernel tweaking, the dual screen modes, the wifi mesh network, the firmware upgrades; I mean it's nice to see Microsoft jealous and everything but it shouldn't be surprised that OLPC choose to develop on an open expendable platform which is technical superior for the job.

I do hope that OLPC is humouring Microsoft so they don't put too much effort into their AMD OLPC competitor. although I'm wary of Bill Gates his nice, lovly, soft foundation could easily deny medical help to countries that use Linux OLPC machines.

utabintarbo
December 6th, 2006, 01:25 AM
...

By the way, I don't think you're using the words innocuous and extant properly in this context. I believe the word you're looking for is fabricated.

innocuous means harmless. extant means still existing.

And those were precisely the meanings I wished to apply. Please read it again.

</pedant>