Microsoft and OLPC Agree To Put XP On the XO Laptop

Apro+im points out a NYTimes report which states that Microsoft and the OLPC project have officially agreed to put Windows XP on the XO laptop. While Microsoft has been working toward this for some time, analysts began to think a deal was more likely after Walter Bender resigned from the project and was replaced by Charles Kane. Former OLPC security developer Ivan Krstic had a lot to say about Windows on the XO as well. From the Times: "Windows will add a bit to the price of the machines, about $3, the licensing fee Microsoft charges to some developing nations under a program called Unlimited Potential. For those nations that want dual-boot models, running both Windows and Linux, the extra hardware required will add another $7 or so to the cost of the machines, Mr. Negroponte said. The project's agreement with Microsoft involves no payment by the software giant, and Microsoft will not join One Laptop Per Child's board. 'We've stayed very pure,' Mr. Negroponte said.

Give it to them for free

If Microsoft really cared about education so much, why wouldn't they just give Windows to the OLPC project for free? $3 may be a lot when you multiply it by the numbers of copies that will be sold, but that's still less than 1/30 the price of a retail copy of Windows, and their brand image would probably improve as a result.

Re:Give it to them for free

They have to get kids in the third world used to cutting Microsoft in on every transaction in their lives.

Re:Give it to them for free

Without trolling for MS fans, and without faulting any of the philanthropic gifts from the Gates Foundation, I can honestly say that I don't think that Microsoft as a company is concerned about these kids' education. I think they are more concerned about training new users to use MS rather than linux, and with keeping 90%+ of desktop OS market.

What really pisses me off is that including XP on these things will increase the cost directly and indirectly ($3+$7) a total of 10% of the target $100 price of the laptop. It's taken a lot of hard work to put something together that is workable and to get the price down to the $200 it is at now. If they license at $3/copy, and are successful enough to get it on a million laptops, they've grossed $3 million ... which is nothing to them. So why bother?

You're right. Their corporate image would look a lot better if they just said 'Okay, here, install it all you want, this is on us.'

Re:Give it to them for free

NotBornYesterday said -

I can honestly say that I don't think that Microsoft as a company is concerned about these kids' education

If you read the blog by Ivan Krstic in the submission, it would seem that Nicholas Negroponte isn't too bothered about education when compared to shifting the OLPCs -

Nicholas told me -- and not just me -- that learning was never part of the mission. The mission was, in his mind, always getting as many laptops as possible out there

It is a huge shame that the OLPC project has deteriorated in this way. When first announced,I was really keen on getting hold of one of these machines to see what I could do to help. I downloaded the .iso of the Sugar GUI and ran it in a VM - very clunky in the VM, but you could see the potential. Others I demonstrated it to were equally impressed. Now it seems to be floundering desperately and the Microsoft sharks are closing in for the kill.

Re:Give it to them for free

That's essentially what Negroponte has boiled the project down to by letting Sugar dev's out of the loop. Many, Walter Bender included, have gone to start Sugar Labs [sugarlabs.org] to ensure that Sugar remains available regardless of what OLPC does.

It destroys the "It's an education project, not a laptop project." to not ship with an operating system and educational software.

"extra hardware"?

For those nations that want dual-boot models, running both Windows and Linux, the extra hardware required will add another $7 or so to the cost of the machines

Why does dual boot require extra hardware??

Re:"extra hardware"?

They have to install a special blue screen to run MS products.

Re:"extra hardware"?

Why does dual boot require extra hardware??

To make sure the one with Linux costs more...

Re:"extra hardware"?

It's a 2gb SD card. Linux would be on the 1gb NAND flash and Windows would boot off of SD.

So $10 gets you what

to run an OS MSFT will stop supporting in 45 days? the OS will run horribly as the hardware isn't fast enough to support XP, and the Interface isn't up to running on a small screen. Not to mention if you ever have any problems and re install you run into WGA activation which requires internet access which may or may not be available to the region in which the system has been deployed.

Can someone tell me why this makes sense again? or is it more of MSFT buying customers as they can't earn them through capitalistic competition.

How about applications?

to run an OS MSFT will stop supporting in 45 days?

Under Linux, I assume all the necessary applications are included, whereas under XP, they have...... notepad?

Re:So $10 gets you what

"The people who buy the machines are not the children who use them, but government officials in most cases," said Nicholas Negroponte, founder of the nonprofit group. "And those people are much more comfortable with Windows."

Somewhere Balmer strokes his horns and drinks a toast to another soul!

One Blue Screen Per Child?

Now, even poor kids can learn to hate M$

It's just as well

I for one was not looking forward to welcoming a new generation of young, creative, inquisitive, independent minded developing country overlords.

Pure?

'We've stayed very pure,' Mr. Negroponte said.

Yet from their core principles:

There is no inherent external dependency in being able to localize software into their language, fix the software to remove bugs, and repurpose the software to fit their needs. Nor is there any restriction in regard to redistribution; OLPC cannot know and should not control how the tools we create will be re-purposed in the future.

And they seem to have adapted their "core principles" to be more positive towards closed source. A real shame is you ask me. source: Core Principles [laptop.org] (Renamed to "Five principles" instead of "Core principles" as the seem to value their principles less and less).

Purity is in the eye of the beholder?

'We've stayed very pure,' Mr. Negroponte said.

Yep, as pure as the bride wearing a white dress for her wedding when she's six months pregnant.

Phew

That was a close call. For a while there was a threat that emerging countries could grow into the computer world with a fast, reliable and stable platform to develop on.

Now we drag them down to our level!

what is windows going to provide?

IE 7? Office 2007? (in someone's dreams) .NET? (.NET's virtual machine is probably too much to run on OLPCs) If anyone knows what the features are in running windows on these laptops, let me know.

I used to be a Negroponte fan, but since he allowed the MS move in this project he designed, I am no longer. No, it's not because I'm anti-MS, it's because I thought that this project wasn't a place for competition with commercial software. If MS wants to help out, the should do what Steve Jobs did with OS X: Offer it for Free. No deals, no licensing BS.

A total loss of focus at OLPC

Windows will add a bit to the price of the machines, about $3, the licensing fee Microsoft charges to some developing nations under a program called Unlimited Potential. ... [cut] ... The project's agreement with Microsoft involves no payment by the software giant.

What? That's totally ridiculous. It means that the XO becomes nothing more than a vehicle for transfer of money from 3rd world children to Microsoft.

Whoever thought that idea up at OLPC has shit for brains.

Microsoft should be *PAYING* for the privilege of getting its O/S installed on a machine to which it contributed absolutely nothing during development, and which will become an instrument of propaganda for Microsoft among the children of the world.

OLPC guys, you've really dropped the ball on this one, and forgotten that the XO was not intended as a normal western product for exploitation of consumers.

Sad news

I Can't believe people, even inside Microsoft, can see this as a good thing. This is like McDonalds bullying and lobbying to make the BigMac the preferred choice for UN's world food programme, and succeeding. And having people like Negroponte not mad about it just makes me think there's little to no hope.

So much for that.

Off the OLPC website:
"XO is built from free and open-source software. Our commitment to software freedom gives children the opportunity to use their laptops on their own terms. While we do not expect every child to become a programmer, we do not want any ceiling imposed on those children who choose to modify their machines. We are using open-document formats for much the same reason: transparency is empowering. The children--and their teachers--will have the freedom to reshape, reinvent, and reapply their software, hardware, and content."

That's the last nail

congratulations, it's dead. Can OLPC be saved from Negroponte?

i find it hard to believe...

Seems odd that getting people indoctrinated into MS culture is so much more valuable than the hit to your reputation from a shitty user experience. Face it, while it might run XP, trying to run a program and XP must totally suck on that little thing.

They are quite confident of their monopoly it would seem.

There will be (hopefully) a million kids growing up thinking 'Windows is sooooo sloooow'

If i was in charge i don't think i would let windows only versions ship as then they think the same about you.

Re:Send them a message!

You should send an impolite message too.

Re:Maybe

this could extend XP's life a little longer until a non-shitty version of Windows comes out?

I believe MS has finally set an appropriate value on their OS. $3.00 is a fair price.

Now governments of the world should mandate a price cap for all versions of XP, based on that value. Otherwise Microsoft is using price dumping to drive out competitors, an illegal tactic for a monopoly.