Slashdot Log In
Proprietary Parts in OLPC Project Draw Criticism
Posted by
Zonk
on Tue Oct 10, 2006 08:47 AM
from the not-entirely-open dept.
from the not-entirely-open dept.
An anonymous reader writes "The Jem Report is running a story about the recent controversy surrounding the hardware used in OLPC laptops. Some devices require NDA's to write drivers, and some parts require firmware that cannot be freely redistributed. Richard Stallmann and Theo de Raadt oppose the use of such devices. Jim Getty defends OLPC's choice (de Raadts response). Jem Matzan has interviewed all sides and published the answers."
Related Stories
[+]
Hardware: The Hundred-Buck PC 562 comments
skreuzer writes "MIT Media Lab founder Nicholas Negroponte has a plan to build a $100 PC for the developing world, which is supposedly going to have a 14-inch color screen and run on Linux, has the backing of AMD, Google, Motorola, Samsung, and News Corp. Apparently they're all getting mixed up in a joint-venture to produce the PC, which will be sold directly to governments only."
[+]
Preview Of The $100 Laptop 304 comments
cynical writes "Harvard's Ethan Zuckerman, founder of GeekCorps and Global Voices, got a chance last week to drop in on Nicholas Negroponte and get a preview of the $100 laptop Negroponte has designed for students in the developing world. Zuckerman talks about both its hardware and the One Laptop Per Child project, and asks the readers for suggestions for innovative ways the $100 laptop can be used." From the article: "The mockup I saw was about the size of a large paperback book. There's a stiff rubber gasket around the edge of the machine, which can double as a stand. The keyboard on the mockup was detachable, but will probably fold out on a hinge ... Two trackballs, surrounded by four way buttons, on each side of the screen act as controls, and function keys on the back act as additional buttons.)" We've previously reported on this device here on Slashdot.
[+]
News: U.N. Lends Backing to the $100 Laptop 253 comments
willki wrote to mention an AP story stating that The United Nations has pledged support to the $100 Laptop. From the article: "Kemal Dervis, head of the U.N. Development Program, will sign a memorandum of understanding Saturday with Nicholas Negroponte, chairman of One Laptop per Child, on the $100 laptop project, at the World Economic Forum's annual meeting. The program aims to ship 1 million units by the end of next year to sell to governments at cost for distribution to school children and teachers. UNDP will work with Negroponte's organization to deliver 'technology and resources to targeted schools in the least developed countries,' the U.N. agency said in a statement."
[+]
Backslash: No OLPCs for Indian Schoolchildren 98 comments
Yesterday we linked The Times of India's report that India's Ministry of Human Resource Development has rejected implementation of the One Laptop per Child initiative in that country. Readers speculated both on why India rejected the program, and whether it's a good or bad move to have done so. As usual, there are some insightful comments with wildly divergent conclusions; read on for the Backslash summary of the discussion to see a handful of the most interesting ones.
[+]
One Laptop Per Child Gets 4 Million Laptop Order 419 comments
An anonymous reader writes "DesktopLinux.com is reporting that four countries have together ordered 4 million low-cost, Linux-based laptops from the One Laptop Per Child (OLPC) project. The countries of Nigeria, Brazil, Argentina, and Thailand have each placed the 1 million unit orders."
[+]
News: $100 Laptop Takes Flight in Thailand 162 comments
EmperorKagato writes "Nicholas Negroponte's project for every child to have a laptop will come true for over 500 students in Thailand. Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra expects each child to receive a laptop instead of books as the books will be provided electronically.
The laptop, mentioned previously on Slashdot, will now be brought to children in Thailand in October and November, with hopes for future shipments to Nigeria, Brazil and Argentina in 2007."
This story selected and edited by LinuxWorld editor for the day Saied Pinto.
[+]
OLPC Now Officially 2B1: The Children's Machine
Quanta is doing their part to make sure school children all over the world have access to technology. Quanta's 2B1: The Children's Machine , is being produced for the One Laptop Per Child (OLPC) project. The 2B1, the laptop-handheld hybrid device is set to go into production sometime in the first half of 2007. "The OLPC group says that 2B1 is "unlike any laptop ever built," which is fairly true. Although many believe that 2B1 is simply a highly reduced laptop from today's entry level models, 2B1 goes far beyond that and is actually something entirely new from the ground up. Despite using some of today's common computer components such as lower-power AMD processors, 2B1 for example introduces high DPI LCD displays. Power saving features are also what sets 2B1 apart. According to the OLPC group, the LCD in 2B1 consumes merely 0.2 watts in reflective mode. The entire machine itself consumes less than two watts when operating -- low enough says the OLPC group, to be powered by a person."
[+]
Slashback: ICANN, OLPC, Agile, Yahoo, BayStar 84 comments
Slashback tonight brings some clarifications and updates to previous Slashdot stories, including: Spamhaus case tests ICANN; Getting your own OLPC (CM1) computer; Followup Agile commentary from Steve Yegge; Yahoo's time capsule permit revoked by Mexico; and Microsoft denies BayStar connection. Read on for details.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
Theo's right (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Theo's right (Score:4, Insightful)
I mean, Theo has critized intel for not releasing specs and releasing instead just open source drivers for lots of their products. There're tons of companies that will even sue you if you try to reverse engineer their hardware devices but hey, because we're the OSS leaders and we've nothing better to do, let's critize the companies that do release opensource drivers and no specs, instead of wasting all your efforts into the ones that don't do even _that_.
Parent
What is asked for by OpenBSD (Score:5, Insightful)
This is a common misunderstanding on Slashdot as well, and is seen every time OpenBSD uses public pressure (after months and years of private e-mail correspondance has failed) to get hardware vendors give hardware documentation (freely, not under NDA) and reasonable distribution rights of firmware. Actually, it is quite sad to see so post extolling the glory of GPL and in the next sentence demands the latest binary only driver.
Make a good contract (Score:5, Insightful)
In other words, good or bad, the part is NOT replaceable without harming the end product significantly.
If there's concern that Marvell (the chip maker) will randomly drop support for their product at one point of time, things should not be left to guesses but this should simply and plainly be covered in the contracts.
I also am susprised at the opinion that OLPC is targeted at OSS community. It has never been isn't and won't be. The goal is efficient, capable product using efficient solutions to solve a concrete proplem, of children having laptops with network connectivity for education, discussions, information exchange, communication and so on.
Don't forget: not everything proprietary is evil. If WindowsCE would provide much better and cheaper solution, OLPC would use it without thinking twice about it. Windows CE in fact *was* considered briefly at a point.
I'd also like to note... (Score:5, Interesting)
- Jim Gettys
Locking in a new market (Score:5, Insightful)
Why does MS have a de facto monopoly on the OS market? Because their software is the best? Don't make me laugh. Because it is the most stable? *smirk* Because it is the most convenient? *pets Apple*
No. Because everyone grew up with it, knows how to use it and, well, old dogs don't really enjoy learning new tricks.
Now, in Africa, we're back to base one. Anything or anyone could get a hold of people who have never had a computer before and have no preferences because they are "used" to a certain flavor or appearance of the OS. There, every OS, every piece of hardware is on equal ground, provided it's affordable.
NDAs and CS software would start to build the foundation of yet another monopoly there. With OS, it is way harder, CS gives you an edge over your competitors. And once the people get "used" to having this kind of chip or that kind of software on their PC, the lock in has started.
So even if it means only 90 out of 100 kids instead of all of them get a PC, OS is the right way to choose in the long run. Just trying to push a computer into every hand right now is quite shortsighted, simply because with CS you're just handing over yet another market to vendor lock in.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
If your goal is to put computers in the hands of people because it empowers them to explore their world, then that is your goal. If your goal is the spread of open source software, then that is your goal.
Clearly the project is dealing with issues above and beyond "do we use Windows or Linux?" Rather, they're asking "Is there an open alternative to this chipset that doesn't use 5x the power?" And the answer is simply "no." by going with the alter
Re:Locking in a new market (Score:5, Insightful)
When was the last time people felt locked-in by device drivers?
You're kidding, right? Device drivers are one of the largest sources of computer lock-in ever. In fact, it was a device driver (a printer driver, to be specific) that motivated RMS to start the Free Software movement. Until the last couple of years, device drivers were the most oft-quoted reason why switching to an F/LOSS operating system wasn't feasible, and they're still very high on the list.
Device drivers matter. A lot. Maybe only programmers deal with them directly, but end-users certainly feel the pain when they're not available or don't work.
That said, as I mentioned in another post, this conflict isn't about device driver availability or even device driver source, it's about device documentation. Theo wants it, Marvell won't give it, Getty and company have found a way to work around the issue by getting it under NDA so they can write open source firmware and drivers.
Parent
Am I missing something here? (Score:5, Informative)
"A GPL Linux device driver for the Marvell wireless chip, the Libertas driver, still under development but also fully functional can be found in our GIT tree.
We are having open firmware for the Marvell wireless chip developed by Meraki. I don't know yet what license that code will be released under, though would expect it would likely be one or more of the MIT, LGPL or GPL licenses; but we'll have to think through the usage cases and needs of the communities involved before we can make that choice."
So yes, open and free drivers and firmwares are being developed as we speak. So is this an issue not about what OLPC will use in the future, but about what they are temporarily using at this very moment?
Re:Just because 'they' oppose it... (Score:4, Insightful)
But then the OLPC project should say so and not piggy-tail on the percieved value of open source. Understandably, several are disappointed.
Parent
Re:Just because 'they' oppose it... (Score:5, Insightful)
RMS and Theo are trying to use this project as a soapbox to further their own political views, and that disgusts me.
Those political views created open source, without which the OLPC project could not achieve its goals.
These are all good people doing good things, and they mostly share the same goals. There's a disagreement over which of the goals is most important, and some of them (Theo) tend to be a little bombastic, but there's nothing to be disgusted about.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Just because 'they' oppose it... (Score:5, Informative)
Of course you were sharing, just like RMS.
You are right, they didn't create "open source", but they are key to its continued existance.
The problem is that there was a point in time where corporations decided that it was a bad thing, and they started imposing restrictions on that, like NDAs and tough licenses on code.
The FSF was created to protect what you did with your friends, and has the consequence of being useful globally.
Parent
Re:Just because 'they' oppose "the one true way". (Score:5, Informative)
The straightest path for the project may have been OSS, but I seriously doubt that OSS is the ONLY WAY.
Yes, it is the only way, because OSS is *part* of the OLPC project's goals. The project not only wants to provide laptops, it wants to provide *open* laptops, so that kids in impoverished countries can poke into the internals and learn how their computers work, and how to change how their computers work. The project wants to help educate a new generation of programmers and computer scientists as well as provide all of the other educational benefits. OSS is critically important to that goal.
Parent
Re:Not True at all (Score:5, Informative)
Intel's Classmate PC is beefier than the OLPC - faster processor (900MHz), 1GB of flash (double the current iteration of half a gig), twice the RAM, XP embedded SP2, and costs about $100 more due to the larger processor and memory.
And due to the closed-source operating system, does not provide the same educational potential as the OLPC. Allowing kids to tinker with the guts of the software is part of OLPC's goals, and the Classmate does not achieve them.
Parent
Re:Just because 'they' oppose it... (Score:5, Insightful)
RMS and Theo are good folks to have, to keep us from wandering down a blind alley. In the case of OLPC, their position has caused the launch of a subproject to create free replacements for the proprietary bits.
At the same time, those replacements don't exist yet, and OLPC is constrained (by power and mesh-networking issues) to use the proprietary bits in the meantime, to be able to ship product.
Sounds to me like a good plan: they know they want both laptops and free software, so they're working on a plan to have both. Which is a very healthy approach!
--dave
Parent
Re:Just because 'they' oppose it... (Score:5, Informative)
We already had the alternate firmware project underway.
Theo has not helped the situation in the slightest.
Parent
Re:Just because 'they' oppose attention. (Score:4, Insightful)
Most disappointing would be a project which managed to get many kids to have access to laptops and then start them developing towards doing things.. and then left them with software for which security patches were no longer available, effectively cutting them off from the world they have just been shown. That's exactly the kind of thing which leads directly to social problems with no benefit.
We often think about our laptops as two year investments, in which case unmaintainable software doesn't matter. For this kind of project, which may eat up a large fraction of the education budget for a long time, it's not possible to demand constant upgrades. The use of proprietary hardware without a long term (20 year?) guarantee of support is irresponsib;e.
Worse; this destroys much of the value of the project by making it difficult for the kids to fully learn how their laptops work. Something which could really have spread computer literacy becomes much less valuable than it could have been. We begin to see that the Indian government may have had a point that there are better things to spend money on.
Parent
give a man a program... (Score:3, Informative)
No, seriously, the OLPC (and other development projects) should be about empowerment. And for this goal open source is the way to go.
If you take a look at e.g. agriculture, you see a lot of (probably) well meant development projects that ended in dependence from some major company and did in the long run as much (or more) harm as they helped.
(And, by the way, OLPC is - intended or not - a political statement though not about free
Re:Just because 'they' oppose it... (Score:4, Informative)
If you think you are right, I think you should tell that to the web site management:
The MIT Media Lab has launched a new research initiative to develop a $100 laptop--a technology that could revolutionize how we educate the world's children. To achieve this goal, a new, non-profit association, One Laptop per Child (OLPC), has been created, which is independent of MIT.
It's not the standard for-profit corporation as you suggest.
Parent
Re:Given the choice (Score:4, Informative)
RMS even states that some OSS developers signing NDAs (a big no-no to him) so that they can see the specs in order to write Free firmware may be a solution. Hmm, sounds like a COMPROMISE.
Parent
Re:Given the choice (Score:5, Informative)
Theo de Raadt, on the other hand, has not been civil in the slightest.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
It's not the hardware that is proprietary, it's the current firmware that works with it. Marvell is okay with developers writing Free firmware for the hardware, but to do so the developers would
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
My skepticism about OLPC has just been captured by someone looking at the numbers [olpcnews.com] (from the Jem report article cited above.) At first, I tho
Re:OLPC = One Laptop Per Child (Score:4, Insightful)
Of course you are right, but the point is that we hope to get a lot of bang for the buck with the OLPC project. The laptop could be a great educational tool. Also, books could be provided electronicaly, thus saving on the costs of books and paper, which after a few years of schooling, is not negligeable.
Parent