OT: One Laptop per Child - VMS

This is a discussion on OT: One Laptop per Child - VMS ; Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply wrote: > Whenever I hear about this nonsense, I wish all of these self-appointed > gurus would read Cliff Stoll. > So what do those OLPC laptops run then ?...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 76

Thread: OT: One Laptop per Child

  1. Re: OT: One Laptop per Child

    Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply wrote:
    > Whenever I hear about this nonsense, I wish all of these self-appointed
    > gurus would read Cliff Stoll.
    >


    So what do those OLPC laptops run then ?

  2. Re: OT: One Laptop per Child

    JF Mezei wrote:
    > So what do those OLPC laptops run then ?


    They do run Linux.

    More specifically a Fedora variant.

    Arne

  3. Re: OT: One Laptop per Child

    Uusimäki schrieb:

    > Most probably, yes. I don't remember the exact prices, but I don't think
    > the price difference between a X86 laptop and an AlphaBook was so huge.
    > IIRC the high end X86 laptops were also expensive at that time.


    Given the very limited number of units produced (a few thousands),
    the various UNIX/RISC-based notebooks were for sure
    way more expensive than an x86 notebook.
    I don't have numbers for the alpha,
    but I doubt it would be much different from a comparable
    IBM Thinkpad 850/860 running AIX, for example.
    These beasts started at $12000 for the lowest model (about 1995).
    (I got mine for some $150 last year :-)



  4. Re: OT: One Laptop per Child

    In article ,
    helbig@astro.multiCLOTHESvax.de (Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply) writes:
    > In article , JF Mezei
    > writes:
    >
    >> Right now, Linux is being used for the "One Laptop per Child" projects
    >> around the world.

    >
    > Whenever I hear about this nonsense, I wish all of these self-appointed
    > gurus would read Cliff Stoll.


    Why? I can't think of anyone in the industry more clueless. Just
    because he was able to write and sell a book. Heck, so did Al Gore.
    Next you'll be saying Cliff Stoll should get a Nobel Prize.....


    bill


    --
    Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves
    bill@cs.scranton.edu | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.
    University of Scranton |
    Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include

  5. Re: OT: One Laptop per Child

    On Dec 8, 10:27 am, billg...@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) wrote:
    > In article <0cb14cd4-c2c7-41c6-be7c-c07bc6dc8...@s12g2000prg.googlegroups.com>,
    > AEF writes:
    >
    >
    >
    > > On Dec 8, 7:31 am, billg...@cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon) wrote:
    > >> In article <475a7ef1$0$27828$9b536...@news.fv.fi>,
    > >> Uusimäki writes:

    >
    > >> > JF Mezei wrote:
    > >> >> Right now, Linux is being used for the "One Laptop per Child" projects
    > >> >> around the world.

    >
    > >> >> Microsoft, not wanting to be left out, has setup a team of 40 people
    > >> >> trying to fit Windows and office on 1gig (they can't) so now they will
    > >> >> pay for flash cards and the hardware needed to be added on the cheap
    > >> >> laptops, and they still are having problems fitting the bloat that is
    > >> >> Windows onto those cards. And they will also need to update the laptop's
    > >> >> firmware to support booting from the additional flashcards.

    >
    > >> >> Just imagine if many years ago, VMS management had listened to Mr
    > >> >> Dachtera and ported VMS to the then 32 bit 8086. Today, they could load>> >> VMS on those laptops with space to spare simply because VMS engineers
    > >> >> have always been fairly mature, efficient and frugal in system resources
    > >> >> needed to run their software. It would have paid off big time if VMShad
    > >> >> been selected to be the OS of choice for those laptops all around the
    > >> >> world. (put in Mosaic, update MAIL and DECWRITE and you're set).

    >
    > >> >> It, way too late now, of course.

    >
    > >> >> But it is interesting to see Microsoft struggle with this and hopefully>> >> they will fail and millions of kids around the world will learn Linux first.

    >
    > >> > Quite so, but it wouldn't have been too much of an effort to convert
    > >> > e.g. the VAXstation 4000-VLC into a laptop case. There was about
    > >> > everything needed on a main board with only one daughter card (the
    > >> > graphichs card). If the SIMM sockets would have been inclined, it would
    > >> > have been ready for putting into a laptop case.
    > >> > I think it would have been better to make a VAX laptop than trying to
    > >> > fit VMS on every other possible hardware combination. That would never
    > >> > have made it worth while. There is way too much work and the result
    > >> > would be too uncertain.

    >
    > >> > In mid 90's there was built a AlphaBook, as you surely know, but for
    > >> > some reason it never became popular. IMHO the reason was exactly what
    > >> > you mentioned; VMS vas not made available early enough on laptops.

    >
    > >> BUt it would have lacked the most important part needed for this
    > >> program. A price low enough to give away a million of them. The
    > >> recently released EeePC is $300-400 and it is not part of this
    > >> program because it is being sold at a profit. You can figure the
    > >> likely real cost from this. What would a VAX laptop or an Alphabook
    > >> cost? And we need not even go into the shortcomings of VMS for a
    > >> project like this.

    >
    > >> bill

    >
    > >> --
    > >> Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves>> b...@cs.scranton.edu | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.
    > >> University of Scranton |
    > >> Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include

    > > The problem with this argument is that it is comparing apples to
    > > oranges.

    >
    > How so?


    Because you're ignoring the premise of the argument. Quoting from the
    original post:

    "Just imagine if many years ago, VMS management had listened to Mr
    Dachtera and ported VMS to the then 32 bit 8086. Today, they could
    load
    VMS on those laptops with space to spare simply because VMS engineers
    have always been fairly mature, efficient and frugal in system
    resources
    needed to run their software. It would have paid off big time if VMS
    had
    been selected to be the OS of choice for those laptops all around the
    world. (put in Mosaic, update MAIL and DECWRITE and you're set).

    It, way too late now, of course. "

    You talk about VAX and Alpha laptops. He's talking about 8086 (or
    whatever the hell the stupid architecture is called). He's talking
    about if it had been done way back.

    >
    > > Are regular Linux or Windows or Mac laptops currently cheap
    > > enough to give away? NO!

    >
    > OLPC is not giving away "regular Linux or Windows or Mac laptops"
    > it is giving away OLPC Laptops. My ASUS EeePC IS a "regular Linux"
    > laptop and it can run Windows as well. And, even with the need to
    > make a profit it is selling for less than $400. Real cost is probably
    > in the neighborhood of around $200.


    But you spoke of VAX and Alpha laptops. Not what would have been
    "8086" (OWTHTSAIC) laptops running VMS. You keep comparing to what VMS
    would cost if done now instead of what it would have cost if it were
    ported to WTHTAIC long ago. That's apples to oranges.

    >
    > > That's apples to apples (and Apples!). The
    > > question how much it would cost if one went through the same procedure
    > > to make cheap VMS laptops.

    >
    > Well, if you want to be pedantic, I can run VMS on my EeePC. Just load
    > SIMH and then load VMS. The question being who would want to? It would
    > definitely not fit the criteria for the OLPC program.


    Again you're comparing to present VMS, not to VMS according to the
    original premise.

    >
    > > Remember, while these laptops are very
    > > cheap and have some capabilities regular laptops lack, they are very
    > > limited compared to regular laptops in other ways.

    >
    > I would need to look at the actual specs for the OLPC laptops, but I
    > really can't see where they would be lacking any needed funtionality.
    > My cheap EeePC has all the capabilities of my IBM Thinkpad and comes
    > pre-configured to do a lot of things that took considerable adjustment
    > to do on the Thinkpad.


    I saw the report on 60 minutes about it. I think it was very limited
    in some respects. You can't put CD's in it. There's no hard drive. No
    bays or ports. Lots of stuff like that is missing, I think. I don't
    know anything about the EeePC, however, as this is the first I've
    heard of it.

    >
    > > And keep in mind
    > > the assumption that VMS would have already been ported to the
    > > appropriate architecture, etc., etc., You can't assume what would it
    > > cost to do this now. That was not the point. (Another level of apples
    > > to oranges!).
    > > Just what shortcomings were you thinking of?

    >
    > The total lack of a usable interface and the necessary applications for
    > it to be usable by the target audience.


    Again comparing to present VMS instead of what VMS would have been
    according to the original premise.

    >
    > bill
    >
    > --
    > Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves
    > b...@cs.scranton.edu | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.
    > University of Scranton |
    > Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include


    AEF

  6. Re: OT: One Laptop per Child

    JF Mezei schrieb:

    > Just imagine if many years ago, VMS management had listened to Mr
    > Dachtera and ported VMS to the then 32 bit 8086.


    To be effective today, this decision would have to be made
    about 20 years ago. I doubt that many people in this
    group (incl. Mr Dachtera) would have advocated to ditch
    VAX, stop alpha, and port to x86 around 1990.
    x86 became viable only towards the mid-90s,
    after intel managed to put RISC inside and,
    together with M$, shovelled their stuff into
    children's and living rooms. From their
    it crept back into the offices.

    > Today, they could load
    > VMS on those laptops with space to spare simply because VMS engineers
    > have always been fairly mature, efficient and frugal in system resources
    > needed to run their software. It would have paid off big time if VMS had
    > been selected to be the OS of choice for those laptops all around the
    > world. (put in Mosaic, update MAIL and DECWRITE and you're set).


    Well, "official" Mosaic stopped at 2.7-sth IIRC.
    This version is unable to render most of the stuff
    which is around in the WWW today.



  7. Re: OT: One Laptop per Child

    JF Mezei schrieb:

    > It isn't that they weren't "able". It is that their management decisions
    > didn't result in low cost competitively priced machines. I am sure
    > Digital Equipment Corporation had the brains and ability to produce
    > competitive equipment had top management tasked its troups to make it so.


    Well, you may think of DEC's engineering as a league of superheroes,
    defying the laws of physics and economics. I don't think so.
    The VAX was at the end of its road, and with alpha they indeed
    tried to enter the low-end, see e.g. the alphaVME and alpha-PC efforts.
    Both failed because a low-end alpha with a tiny native software
    portfolio but a premium price was nothing enough people wanted to buy.

    > My original point was that because VMS engineers had managed to prevent
    > bloat over the years, VMS would now be considered a great OS for those
    > resource-limited OLPC laptops.


    You are generously mixing past, present and future.
    In the distant past, VMS might have been "non-bloated",
    but so were the other OSs. IIRC Windoze 3.x and MS-DOS-sth
    fit on few floppies and used less than 4MB.
    To satisfy modern requirements an OS has to be
    "bloated" in some way, and VMS wouldn't be the exception.
    OTOH, I'm pretty sure it carries along a lot of baggage
    of the past which is useless on a modern laptop.

    > And if VMS had been made available on a viable platform, its limited
    > footprint would have also made it quite interesting for lots of embedded
    > applications. Imagine if Nokia had chosen VMS as kernel for its handsets
    > instead of buying the leftovers from PSION's OS.
    >
    > Consider VMS still able to run on a 16 meg all-mighty Microvax II. I
    > think my phone requires more memory to boot :-)


    Well, try to run a modern browser.
    Just loading it will probably exceed your MV's available memory
    by a factor of two or three.
    And: can you phone and SMS with your MV ?


  8. Re: OT: One Laptop per Child

    In article <475B1EEA.9020907@comcast.net>, "Richard B. Gilbert"
    writes:

    > Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply wrote:
    > > In article , JF Mezei
    > > writes:
    > >
    > >
    > >>Right now, Linux is being used for the "One Laptop per Child" projects
    > >>around the world.

    > >
    > >
    > > Whenever I hear about this nonsense, I wish all of these self-appointed
    > > gurus would read Cliff Stoll.
    > >

    >
    > Do you mean "The Cuckoo's Egg"? A great book, but how is it relevant?


    That's an excellent book as well, but I was referring to "High-Tech
    Heretic: Reflections of a Computer Contrarian". Stoll makes a good case
    for keeping computers out of the classroom (and, by extension, out of
    the hands of third-world children). I won't repeat his arguments here,
    since they literally fill a whole book. Highly recommended.

    Of course, many Luddites have made superficially similar demands. The
    interesting thing, of course, is that Stoll has spent his entire life
    working with computers.

    > (I'm not familiar with "One Laptop per Child".)


    The idea stems from this self-appointed guru Mr. Digital himself, the
    guy with the Greek name from MIT. His idea is that all children in the
    world should have a laptop. I'm not saying we shouldn't do that since
    other things are more important, I'm saying that even if the children
    had everything else, they don't need a laptop (and neither do well-to-do
    children in first-world countries).

    The "One Laptop per Child" project is developing a cheap laptop (with a
    crank to recharge the battery etc) intended for distribution to the
    children of the world.


  9. Re: OT: One Laptop per Child

    In article , JF Mezei
    writes:

    > Consider VMS still able to run on a 16 meg all-mighty Microvax II. I
    > think my phone requires more memory to boot :-)


    No smiley needed JF; I remember putting my mobile phone together which I
    was issued at work (my personal one is much older, from 2001 or so, the
    Nokia 3310---all you need, but no bull****). I remember being taken
    aback when I inserted a 32-MB memory chip, realising that I have VAXes
    with less memory.

    Of course, these days it's not uncommon for portable electronic devices
    to have GB of memory.


  10. Re: OT: One Laptop per Child

    In article <13ce4$475b2683$cef8887a$5430@TEKSAVVY.COM>, JF Mezei
    writes:

    > Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply wrote:
    > > Whenever I hear about this nonsense, I wish all of these self-appointed
    > > gurus would read Cliff Stoll.
    > >

    >
    > So what do those OLPC laptops run then ?


    Some sort of Linux.


  11. Re: OT: One Laptop per Child

    In article <5s0u1dF16h4t1U1@mid.individual.net>, billg999@cs.uofs.edu
    (Bill Gunshannon) writes:

    > In article ,
    > helbig@astro.multiCLOTHESvax.de (Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply) writes:
    > > In article , JF Mezei
    > > writes:
    > >
    > >> Right now, Linux is being used for the "One Laptop per Child" projects
    > >> around the world.

    > >
    > > Whenever I hear about this nonsense, I wish all of these self-appointed
    > > gurus would read Cliff Stoll.

    >
    > Why? I can't think of anyone in the industry more clueless. Just
    > because he was able to write and sell a book. Heck, so did Al Gore.
    > Next you'll be saying Cliff Stoll should get a Nobel Prize.....


    I think his "High-Tech Heretic" book is relevant here. "The Cuckoo's
    Egg" is entertaining---not Nobel-Prize material, but a good read.


  12. Re: OT: One Laptop per Child


    "Uusimäki" wrote in message
    news:475a7ef1$0$27828$9b536df3@news.fv.fi...

    > In mid 90's there was built a AlphaBook, as you surely know, but for
    > some reason it never became popular. IMHO the reason was exactly what
    > you mentioned; VMS vas not made available early enough on laptops.
    >


    One big reason for its lack of popularity is clear enough, but may be
    disappearing in the mists of time.

    The Alphabook, from Tadpole (who also did the SPARCbook), was based on a
    21066/21068 Alpha chip. That's the same chip as was used in the Alpha
    Multia, and the AXPpci33 motherboard. 21066 was 21064 core with most of (all
    of?) the external glue logic integrated on-chip - it didn't need what PeeCee
    people now call Northbridge or Southbridge, it was pretty much all on the
    chip - just connect the DRAM to the CPU, and the PCI bits (if needed) to the
    CPU, and off you go. You can see this quite clearly if you look at a Multia
    or AXPpci33 motherboard.

    Unfortunately although the idea was great, in real life the implementation
    was a *lot* slower than a corresponding-speed 21064, and added to the other
    21064 gotchas (e.g. no byte addressability, which was Bad News for PeeCee
    class software), it wasn't competitive and didn't exactly sell like hot
    cakes. You could run it fanless though which made it unique among the Alphas
    of its time.

    Afaict there still isn't a glueless fanless reasonable performance volume
    market x86. If there was, would it sell? The "media centre PC" and "set top
    box" markets (which were among 2016x target markets) would surely snap them
    up?

    One Laptop Per Child is basically irrelevant in the bigger picture, except
    as a demonstration of how far Billco will go to retain their market
    dominance. Getting something other than Windows into the education system
    would be a worthy task.

    regards
    John



  13. Re: OT: One Laptop per Child

    In article , helbig@astro.multiCLOTHESvax.de (Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply) writes:
    > In article <475B1EEA.9020907@comcast.net>, "Richard B. Gilbert"
    > writes:
    >
    >> Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply wrote:
    >> > In article , JF Mezei
    >> > writes:
    >> >
    >> >
    >> >>Right now, Linux is being used for the "One Laptop per Child" projects
    >> >>around the world.
    >> >
    >> >
    >> > Whenever I hear about this nonsense, I wish all of these self-appointed
    >> > gurus would read Cliff Stoll.
    >> >

    >>
    >> Do you mean "The Cuckoo's Egg"? A great book, but how is it relevant?

    >
    > That's an excellent book as well, but I was referring to "High-Tech
    > Heretic: Reflections of a Computer Contrarian". Stoll makes a good case
    > for keeping computers out of the classroom (and, by extension, out of
    > the hands of third-world children). I won't repeat his arguments here,
    > since they literally fill a whole book. Highly recommended.


    One of the main goals of One Laptop per Child is for the children to
    take the laptops home.

    I have a friend who works for them, so I hear about some of the glitches
    in the endeavor. They are prepared to send these around the world, but
    not to Nigeria where the green and white design of their product is not
    acceptable to the government because green and white are the colors of
    the opposition political party.

  14. RE: OT: One Laptop per Child

    > -----Original Message-----
    > From: Michael Kraemer [mailto:M.Kraemer@gsi.de]
    > Sent: December 9, 2007 5:36 AM
    > To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com
    > Subject: Re: OT: One Laptop per Child
    >
    > JF Mezei schrieb:
    >
    > > Just imagine if many years ago, VMS management had listened to Mr
    > > Dachtera and ported VMS to the then 32 bit 8086.

    >
    > To be effective today, this decision would have to be made
    > about 20 years ago. I doubt that many people in this
    > group (incl. Mr Dachtera) would have advocated to ditch
    > VAX, stop alpha, and port to x86 around 1990.
    > x86 became viable only towards the mid-90s,
    > after intel managed to put RISC inside and,


    Also - Lets not forget where some of the x86 "RISC" architecture came from.
    Remember the lawsuit.

    [snip...]

    Regards

    Kerry Main
    Senior Consultant
    HP Services Canada
    Voice: 613-592-4660
    Fax: 613-591-4477
    kerryDOTmainAThpDOTcom
    (remove the DOT's and AT)

    OpenVMS - the secure, multi-site OS that just works.



  15. Re: OT: One Laptop per Child

    On Dec 9, 6:28 am, hel...@astro.multiCLOTHESvax.de (Phillip Helbig---
    remove CLOTHES to reply) wrote:
    > In article <475B1EEA.9020...@comcast.net>, "Richard B. Gilbert"
    >
    > writes:
    > > Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply wrote:
    > > > In article , JF Mezei
    > > > writes:

    >
    > > >>Right now, Linux is being used for the "One Laptop per Child" projects
    > > >>around the world.

    >
    > > > Whenever I hear about this nonsense, I wish all of these self-appointed
    > > > gurus would read Cliff Stoll.

    >
    > > Do you mean "The Cuckoo's Egg"? A great book, but how is it relevant?

    >
    > That's an excellent book as well, but I was referring to "High-Tech
    > Heretic: Reflections of a Computer Contrarian". Stoll makes a good case
    > for keeping computers out of the classroom (and, by extension, out of
    > the hands of third-world children). I won't repeat his arguments here,
    > since they literally fill a whole book. Highly recommended.
    >
    > Of course, many Luddites have made superficially similar demands. The
    > interesting thing, of course, is that Stoll has spent his entire life
    > working with computers.
    >
    > > (I'm not familiar with "One Laptop per Child".)

    >
    > The idea stems from this self-appointed guru Mr. Digital himself, the
    > guy with the Greek name from MIT. His idea is that all children in the
    > world should have a laptop. I'm not saying we shouldn't do that since
    > other things are more important, I'm saying that even if the children
    > had everything else, they don't need a laptop (and neither do well-to-do
    > children in first-world countries).


    Did you see the piece about this on "60 Minutes"? I heard a broadcast
    of it on the radio and the point was that with this project,
    attendance at schools in the Third World is way, way up because of
    this laptop project. I well understand that much learning must be done
    without computers, but at least this is getting the kids to go to
    school. So I think the point is not that the kids have a laptop -- the
    point is that the laptop gets the kids to go to school.

    >
    > The "One Laptop per Child" project is developing a cheap laptop (with a
    > crank to recharge the battery etc) intended for distribution to the
    > children of the world.


    AEF

  16. Re: OT: One Laptop per Child

    Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply wrote:
    > In article <13ce4$475b2683$cef8887a$5430@TEKSAVVY.COM>, JF Mezei
    > writes:
    >> Phillip Helbig---remove CLOTHES to reply wrote:
    >>> Whenever I hear about this nonsense, I wish all of these self-appointed
    >>> gurus would read Cliff Stoll.
    >>>

    >> So what do those OLPC laptops run then ?

    >
    > Some sort of Linux.


    Fedora based.

    Arne

  17. Re: OT: One Laptop per Child

    In article , Michael Kraemer writes:
    > JF Mezei schrieb:
    >
    >> Just imagine if many years ago, VMS management had listened to Mr
    >> Dachtera and ported VMS to the then 32 bit 8086.

    >
    > To be effective today, this decision would have to be made
    > about 20 years ago. I doubt that many people in this
    > group (incl. Mr Dachtera) would have advocated to ditch
    > VAX, stop alpha, and port to x86 around 1990.
    > x86 became viable only towards the mid-90s,
    > after intel managed to put RISC inside and,
    > together with M$, shovelled their stuff into
    > children's and living rooms. From their
    > it crept back into the offices.
    >
    >> Today, they could load
    >> VMS on those laptops with space to spare simply because VMS engineers
    >> have always been fairly mature, efficient and frugal in system resources
    >> needed to run their software. It would have paid off big time if VMS had
    >> been selected to be the OS of choice for those laptops all around the
    >> world. (put in Mosaic, update MAIL and DECWRITE and you're set).

    >
    > Well, "official" Mosaic stopped at 2.7-sth IIRC.
    > This version is unable to render most of the stuff
    > which is around in the WWW today.


    I am curious why you think "official" would be a requirement?


    George Cook
    WVNET

  18. Mosaic (was:Re: OT: One Laptop per Child)

    George Cook wrote:
    > In article , Michael Kraemer writes:

    [...]
    >> Well, "official" Mosaic stopped at 2.7-sth IIRC.
    >> This version is unable to render most of the stuff
    >> which is around in the WWW today.

    >
    > I am curious why you think "official" would be a requirement?


    Indeed, Mosaic runs on VMS, and renders many WWW sites:

    Your VMS version appears to be V8.3 running on a Digital Personal
    WorkStation .
    The TCP/IP software is TCP/IP Services (or UCX compatible).
    Your Mosaic executable was generated using Motif 1.6
    and was built on 5-SEP-2007 19:33:35.16 with image Ident 4.2
    using DEC C.
    It was linked with HP SSL.

    Thanks, George :-)

  19. Re: OT: One Laptop per Child

    George Cook schrieb:
    > In article , Michael Kraemer writes:
    >>
    >>Well, "official" Mosaic stopped at 2.7-sth IIRC.
    >>This version is unable to render most of the stuff
    >>which is around in the WWW today.

    >
    >
    > I am curious why you think "official" would be a requirement?
    >


    I'm well aware that you are the current maintainer of Mosaic.
    This is of course appreciated and I might consider it even
    for other historical platforms left in the cold
    as far as browsers are concerned.

    However, I'm curious how a single person can hope to keep
    up with the ever changing web standards, as compared to the number
    of people working on Mozilla, Firefox, Opera etc.
    And as compared to the number of people working at M$ to spoil the
    standards.


  20. Re: OT: One Laptop per Child

    In article
    <7c16e6f4-35f6-44d8-8503-5765d580b029@s8g2000prg.googlegroups.com>, AEF
    writes:

    > Did you see the piece about this on "60 Minutes"?


    No.

    > I heard a broadcast
    > of it on the radio and the point was that with this project,
    > attendance at schools in the Third World is way, way up because of
    > this laptop project. I well understand that much learning must be done
    > without computers, but at least this is getting the kids to go to
    > school. So I think the point is not that the kids have a laptop -- the
    > point is that the laptop gets the kids to go to school.


    That might be true, but I doubt that that is the motivation for those
    behind the project. Considering the cost, I'm sure that one could spend
    the equivalent on almost anything else and get the children to school
    with that as bait.


+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast