Displaced by XP, Sugar Labs goes it alone

While OLPC tries to wise up to the real demands of the market and build a cheap laptop that people actually want -- which means Windows XP for most -- Walter Bender, OLPC's former president of software and content for the project is taking his open source Linux-based Sugar OS and has started up a new non-profit to aid its development. Bender still has the vision of an open source learning OS, and plans to give Sugar full support for other low-cost platforms like the Eee PC. Ooh, burn.

[Korgmeister @ May 16th 2008 10:05AM]

OK, so let's see if we can port this to the HP Mini-Note. Now that would be freakin' boss!

[OneLove @ May 16th 2008 2:58PM]

MSI Wind FTW!

[w @ May 16th 2008 10:06AM]

good move.

[Rob @ May 16th 2008 10:25AM]

The OLPC sold its soul to MS. They should've never made that deal. I don't care if they had done it with Apple either. The best route for such program was Linux. Indoctrinating these kids into MS is wrong. But, corporate greed always wins. Sad.

[Jeff P. @ May 16th 2008 4:48PM]

Yeah, what a terrible thing to indoctrinate them into the operating system that most of the world uses. Awful.

[Rob @ May 16th 2008 5:38PM]

Jeff:
It's called indoctrination. If MS had given funds to put the computers out and allow them to keep on using Linux, then it would've been humanitarian. Instead, this was a smart business decision for MS, and a bad one for the OLPC program.

[Rudiger @ Jul 11th 2008 6:40PM]

Four legs good, two legs bad! Linux good, Microsoft bad!

*sheep bleating*

OLPC and the XO should be about teaching children. Open-source technology is a means and not an end to this goal.

[Brian @ May 16th 2008 10:31AM]

Yeah, I really want XP on all my computers. (sarcasm intended) Having to work in XP at work just reminds me of the pain these poor kids will be dealing with. But then, hey, that will probably just add to the coffers of MS.

[italophil @ May 16th 2008 10:37AM]

The idea do design and program a new desktop environment in a short time and for a limited market, with very limited full-time programmers and some support from a small community is daring, to say the least. Shooing away the community with no communication and documentation (to program for sugar you have to guess a lot how the API could work) is stupid. The arrogance of many OLPC people (Not only Negroponte) doomed the project from the start.
The Sugar OS is horrible to use, even for children. The educational applications are not even there yet.
Windows might cost $10 more but it works and people can program educational tools for it (open source if they want to).

[dj-kenpo @ May 16th 2008 11:19AM]

clearly you were never a kid that had access to an 'icon' computer in school.

I've played with suger on the xo and it was clearly the right choice over xp.
it had some wicked sound editor programs, drag and drop programming apps, stuff that xp most deffinetly does not come with.

ya, those kids will love ms office and pinball.

[kempcross @ May 16th 2008 10:55AM]

God I hate the "go it alone" phrase.

[patsy @ May 16th 2008 11:09AM]

I've always seen Sugar as a curious direction for a computer that is meant to teach children about computers and prepare them for the "real world." While interesting in and of itself, it looks and behaves nothing like anything these kids will encounter in a future professional life. While Linux and Windows may have their warts and follies, it seems to make a lot more sense to immerse the kids into this universe at an early age to give them a true "leg up." Sugar smacks of the long-standing liberal arts obsession with teaching how to learn while steering clear as much as possible of any immediate real life applicability of the learned material.

[dj-kenpo @ May 16th 2008 11:21AM]

the computers I used 18 years ago for the first time in public school behaved nothing like the ones I have now.

somehow I became a computer programmer..

exposing kids to something different is not in anyway shape or form a bad thing.
I understand what you mean, and see why you're sayign what you're saying, I just disagree from past experience.

[jcwestbrook @ May 16th 2008 12:47PM]

I'm sitting about six feet away from an OLPC (my boss bought one during the "give one get one" push) - and I've played with it quite a bit. I was surprised at how I could just pick it up and figure out the Sugar operating system. It was a bit confusing at first but I clicked around and found everything eventually without needing manuals or help.

As far as Sugar not being what these kids will see in the real world - it doesn't matter. The introduction to the skill set of operating a computer, how to make a file, how to use a mouse, how to type, what the Internet is - those are skills that transfer over. It gets them acclimated to a computer so that they can sit down at any computer and feel confident that they can figure it out.

And far as it being a "liberal art obsession" - look, kids are creative, they want to draw, they want to make things - and really that's OK.

[patsy @ May 16th 2008 1:02PM]

> The introduction to the skill set of operating a computer, how to make a file

That's the thing, though. From what I've read about Sugar, they've tried to hide a lot of the "messy" OS stuff from users--notions such as files and folders--and replaced them with smarts that preserve user state and such without having to worry that a drawing actually ends up in a mundane disk file. One of the biggest computer paradigm hurdles I've encountered in adults has been the lack of understanding of file systems. Without that it's really hard to be truly proficient on a computer. And yet time and again I've seen new computer interfaces try to abstract away the fs, mostly with very little success, sometimes with very detrimental consequences.

[Robert Abramson @ May 16th 2008 1:26PM]

I think he meant 'liberal arts' as opposed to applied sciences like engineering, not 'liberal art.'

[retro77 @ May 16th 2008 11:14AM]

The only reason M$ wants XP on there is because if they grow up using Windows, they become life long Windows users. That just means more money in M$ pockets.

[wjousts @ May 16th 2008 11:18AM]

Wow, did you work that out all by yourself?

[retro77 @ May 16th 2008 11:20AM]

Did someone piss in your cheerios?

[iTroubleiShoot @ May 16th 2008 11:33AM]

Was my previous post not clear enough?

While y'all are arguing the pros and cons of the different operating systems, you fail to realize that OLPC essentially had no choice. If they did not load the Microsoft OS onto the OLPCs, certain countries would not accept the computers.

And that is the most important aspect of the OLPC venture...

[LarryLarryLarry @ May 16th 2008 5:04PM]

Totally and completely wrong. Many, man countries have MANDATED that all government computers use open-source software. They learned the hard way that MS ridiculous pricing and service contracts are simply not reasonable for their budgets.

I would bet $20,000 USD that you can't find a single country in the world which refused OLPCs explicitly because they didn't have Windows installed. Just show me the quote, implicit or otherwise.

Otherwise, shut your pie hole.

[Sean @ May 16th 2008 11:39AM]

If any of us only used the technology we "learned on" we would not have made it very far in the real world. Most of us grew up hacking TSR-80s, and Commodore 64s, neither of which was in use in the real world. My professors in college wisely taught me how to program through proper design techniques and how to test my work instead of teaching me the current "cool" language. That way, when I got to the "real world" I was able to apply my education to whatever technology my employer needed. In that sense I believe that "teaching me how to learn" was and still is the best way to go. The question really is whether or not you want the next generation to keep doing things the same old way, or to invent and innovate. I want to see the next successor for Bill Gates and Steve Jobs, not the next disciple.

[patsy @ May 16th 2008 1:42PM]

I understand your point, and it's a fair and good point. However, on balance I think disadvantaged kids would benefit more from being introduced to current technology than to some avant-garde project that may or may not pan out. While some kids' horizons would definitely be broadened, it's quite depressing what percentage of the population are really followers and not innovators simply by virtue of biology.

[Jon Acheson @ May 16th 2008 11:55AM]

If countries want to buy OLPCs with Sugar on them, they still can. If this gets the OLPC into other countries that wouldn't buy before, then surely it is helping the ultimate goal of OLPC. Because a computer with XP is surely better than no computer at all.

I still say OLPC needs to start selling their product to consumers, if only to build up cash to do the OLPC 2. Because within a few years, the chips used to build OLPC v1 will start to become unavailable.

[iTroubleiShoot @ May 16th 2008 12:01PM]

Before you knock Windows for browbeating OLPC or before you knock OLPC for "selling out", check out this excerpt from a BBC article re: the Windows OS integration:

"The options afforded by Windows will be welcomed by the governments of countries, such as Egypt, which has insisted on being offered the operating system before signing up to the scheme."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/7402365.stm

I have my own opinion on the matter but neither Windows or OLPC seem to deserve the "blame".

[Jay @ May 16th 2008 10:33PM]

But why do you think Egypt wants XP on all the computers? Pressure was applied.

[Tony2X @ May 16th 2008 1:19PM]

Not everyone is destined to become a computer programmer, they are destined to become computer users and that is why XP is a good choice.

[funkenforcer @ May 16th 2008 1:28PM]

its sad to see that the borg will enslave innocent children in the third world.
i cannot see why these kids "acually want" xp.

[wgoodf @ May 16th 2008 2:44PM]

the issue is as has been said - its about a skills set. its not about knowing an OS that will not be around when these 'kids' grow up.

i am going to guess that most of you folk here are comfortable enough using Mac, XP and Linux.
thats the aim - getting folk to use computers, and being able to figure stuff out regardless of the OS presented.

locking folk in to the current dominant OS is simply short sighted/

[Luke @ May 16th 2008 2:13PM]

it really makes me sad that the OLPC is going to be using something from windows on the XO ... it really made sense to have Sugar OS on there for kids in developing nations. it was a simple OS. and it seemed to work. Having an intricate OS like XP on the XO doesn't sound like it will be a good idea.

[Matt @ May 16th 2008 6:44PM]

Luke, I totally agree. Even if there was pressure for a more standard OS look, they could have at least goine with a more traditional Linux OS.

[Jimmy @ May 16th 2008 11:09AM]

In the end, we find it still is always about business. ;(

[Tony2X @ May 16th 2008 1:15PM]

I think it was a good move to put XP on the OLPC, irrespective of what you think about Microsoft, using XP equips these kids with transferable skills that they could actually use in the real world.

[jackflash @ May 16th 2008 2:36PM]

OLPC is dead to me now that they're shipping with XP instead of Linux. That destroyed pretty much any interest I had in the project. Sad.

[dos @ May 16th 2008 2:42PM]

Paul sure hates linux

[Ken S @ May 16th 2008 3:06PM]

We have an OLPC here and like many Linux implementations it was very stable, unfortunately it was not user friendly. Try installing VLC on Sugar and tell me that's something a young child could do. How about Flash?

Now, some could argue that MacOS might have been better than XP in this situation...and I wouldn't disagree. But in the end the customer is always right.

[Paul Livingstone @ May 16th 2008 3:29PM]

First of all... isn't it strange that governments like Egypt were actually demanding that the OLPC runs on a specific operating system? What bloody difference does it make to Egyptian officials if their nation's children are being educated on a linux/mac/windows platform? Zero difference. Infact that Windows XP requirement only makes the scheme more expensive to them. I just don't understand it at all.

Plus it seems that somewhere along the line, people have forgotten that this project was purely about education. Spreading knowledge. Putting the internet into the hands of thousands of children so that they could better themselves and eventually (hopefully), their country. The Linux, Sugar OS could fulfil that obligation admirably. Sure, kids can be educated just as well using Windows... but no more so than on any other operating system. I'm sure learning how to do a 'mail merge' in office or create a powerpoint presentation will be pretty low down in their list of things that will interest the OLPC kids... I could think of a million other interesting and worthwhile things to learn about.

It's just a bloody shame really... it was a wonderful idea intially.

[Jon Acheson @ May 16th 2008 4:15PM]

One possibility: Egypt's educational sysadmins already support XP, and didn't want to have to train their people in some new oddball version of Linux that nothing else uses.

[Dean @ May 16th 2008 3:53PM]

Paul Miller just doesn't get it. The premise in the article's first sentence is absolute crap for at least these two reasons: (1) The OLPC is not meant to be sold to people through the market. The OLPC is intended for children paid for by governments and donations. (2) The target audience, children in third world countries, does not even know what windows xp is. How could they want what they don't know?

The rest of the story is good news. Adding diversity to the global computing landscape is a good thing.

[Greg @ May 16th 2008 4:02PM]

Does the XP version have all the features of the sugar OS? Like wifi networks?
If not, then this is bad for the market. It would be better for them to learn linux. It's easy to learn a mainstream OS, but by learning linux, they'll understand that there's CHOICE in the market, which far too many people have forgotten.

[Igor @ May 16th 2008 5:35PM]

One important thing everyone misses. When talking about educational purpose of OLPC then it is not about learning to use computers but about GENERAL knowledge. It's about maths, physics, arts, writing, music, geography etc. This whole thing is NOT about computers, it is NOT about programming. It is about giving kids access to general knowledge (it's cheaper to copy 100 file based textbooks to 500K computers then to print them) and allowing them to communicate with kids in their immediate neighbourhood (next village) or elsewhere in the world and broaden their horizons (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/7140443.stm) if there's an internet connection available. That's what it is about. Sugar is there to draw attention away from the actual computer and OS and focus it to the content, learning.

[Cassini @ May 16th 2008 5:43PM]

Good. I hope Walter succeeds, too. We need a simpler, open source OS out there, and from what I've seen, Sugar would be a slick little OS to develop for and play around with.

[adrian @ May 16th 2008 7:47PM]

Some people think it's better for the children of developing countries to learn using an OS which is a world standard, That's understandable. However once those countries comes to terms with the shoddy service and raw deals that Microsoft is famed for, They will look elsewhere.

Sugar Labs can now take their time and do their own thing. If it works out for Walter and Co, Users bored of Windows will wonder what it has to offer, And may move to it.

[max Walker @ May 17th 2008 10:08AM]

MS corrupts governments which then demand that OLPC put MS on to the computer. MS is not intuitive its just trying to protect its monopolistic grip on the education market.

All power to SUGARLABS for the future

[Andrew Fong @ May 17th 2008 5:09PM]

While we're being snotty about which operating system they should use, keep in mind that from a kid's point of view, they're getting their own computer for the first time ever! When I was a kid, I spent hours doing ASCII art in WordPerfect for MS-DOS -- and WinXP is way preferable to MS-DOS.

That said, there are obviously much better tools for artistic expression than a word processor -- and here, Sugar definitely has advantages over XP. I totally dig how the Sugar UI encourages collaboration and subtly teaches kids how computers work (e.g. the idea of having memory-intensive programs take up more space on the wheel is a brilliant way of teaching memory management).

But there's no reason why most of this couldn't be replicated in XP. There's nothing inherent in Linux that makes something like the Sugar UI unique to that OS -- just as there's nothing about XP that makes spreadsheets unique to it. The only advantage Linux has over XP, from an educational perspective, is that people can poke around in the source code -- but honestly, but how many of these kids do you expect to do that? The ones that are clever and motivated enough to do so will figure out how to swap XP for Linux and the ones that don't will be happy enough.

[Qugeist @ May 17th 2008 5:17PM]

at the end of the day, it has to be easy for the kids to use them... this is making things complicated if one place uses OS A and another uses OS B.

[kungfoo @ May 21st 2008 2:40PM]

Hey, folks! It shouldn't come as a surprise. The OLPC's project always was intended for running XP. Look at the Wikipedia's summary of the project:

"The XO-1, previously known as the $100 Laptop or Children's Machine, is an ine*XP*ensive laptop computer intended to be distributed to children in developing countries around the world, to provide them with access to knowledge, and opportunities to "e*XP*ore, e*XP*eriment and e*XP*ress themselves [...]."