Registered: 9/2001
Location: Sunny, smogy Southern California
Posts: 5996

Comptia A+, Network+, Linux+, and Server+ Certified

Here's your ultra cheap laptop running XP -- now all you need to do is buy some antivirus/anti-spyware subscription...

Rating: 4/5

Registered: 9/2001
Location: Toronto Canada
Posts: 4582

Aspiring author

LOL!! Funny but very true.

Registered: 2/2005
Location: Midwest
Posts: 4718

Geek ;)

You don't have to buy an antivirus app. Avast, anyone? Spybot S&D for antispyware.

Registered: 8/2004
Location: Joliet, IL
Posts: 2463

And then we'd have more kids signing up asking why they crap spec laptop doesn't play Crysis on ultra high? Forget about anti anything as well, kids would learn the hard way about how nasty the internet is with or without antivirus stuff, and still do it anyway.

Registered: 1/2002
Location: midvale, utah
Posts: 2302

A general all around weirdo.

I don't think cmonsters point went over too well. Either way, it's not about free or the specs, windows is flawed and targeted heavily. Linux is secure in it's obscurity; windows has it's huge support of apps, most of which this machine is made to do are capable in linux. Just mostly a trade off of security for added support to windows world of apps out there. It's still a design flaw to have a machine for kids that will break due to this :p, but maybe that will give them some real world experience with computers, breaking them and fixing them is one way to learn :p

Registered: 9/2001
Location: Toronto Canada
Posts: 4582

Aspiring author

You mean breaking and reinstall the OS because many common Windows problems can't be "fixed" except by a format and reinstall of the OS. Right? LOL!! ;-)

Registered: 2/2005
Posts: 144

^^ Most Windows problems are easy to fix without a reinstall. A quick search online normally gives you a solution to 90% of problems. Hard to say that about the thousands of variations of Linux. At least you don't need to be able to write an OS in order to fix it!

Registered: 9/2001
Posts: 18549

Dont forget these PC's are intended for very low income countries. They may not have access to internet There's no ethernet port in the side of something the equivalent to an adobe hut :) Limited access to electricity yes, internet is not quite as easily accessible

Registered: 1/2002
Location: midvale, utah
Posts: 2302

A general all around weirdo.

I guess you can interpret what I said, but it isn't what I meant. If they do have online access, I was referring to more of what cmonster was on about. Breaking could be, "oh no, why am I getting all these pop up's and alerts", when linux would have avoided that. In a way, windows is everywhere else in the world, so, they will be using the same os and get to use some of the same programs everyone else uses. Either way, its most likely bill gates play at being a philanthropist now with underlying motives.

Registered: 1/2001
Posts: 3567

Google is your next manual. Registered Linux user 260423.

Sad to say, but nobody from the 'free' world stepped up to buy into it as it was initially proposed. While putting to worlds most popular OS on it has the advantage of teaching the young user according to what the user will eventually move on to using later in life, I still see this as teaching the incoming new user to simply 'tow the company line in behalf of Microsoft'. I can't say that the future XO user is getting the best possible solution under the terms with which this was originally promoted: freedom.

Rating: 1/5

Registered: 1/2001
Posts: 3567

Google is your next manual. Registered Linux user 260423.

vass0922: You do know that these are designed to use a mesh network, so wherever one XO gets decent internet access, the mesh could be used to share the connection. I pity the unsuspecting user that gets a decent connection and has that mesh sharing effort activated.... the weight of 1,000 mesh connected XO laptops logging onto the internet should slow his one connection to a crawl.

Registered: 9/2001
Location: Sunny, smogy Southern California
Posts: 5996

Comptia A+, Network+, Linux+, and Server+ Certified

"Linux is secure in it's obscurity;" This is a common misconception. Linux is not obscure; being based on the UNIX model that has been around since before DOS was a twinkle in Bill Gates eyes, the structure and functions of UNIX are hardly unknown. The infamous "Internet Worm" of 1986 was the first widely publicized threat to networked computers --they ran UNIX and the exploit took advantage of the "at" command. Since then, continuing to the present day most network servers, mission critical applications, and super computers run UNIX (many Linux). Linux is more secure than windows for several reasons: First of all, at its inception Linux was designed to be a desktop version of UNIX, so it progressed from a true NOS (network operating system) to a desktop OS, carrying with it a legacy network security model of server/client-user with limited permissions. Unlike windows which progressed from a single user desktop OS to a NOS, having to add layers of security along the way. Secondly, Linux, being open source, might seem to invite hacks but the opposite is equally true --as fast as a hack is discovered by the community a security fix/patch is usually made available. Finally, while I admit that Linux does require the user to be a bit more educated about system administration (there is a learning curve), this makes for superior security, rather than relying on mouse clicks and eye-candy that pops up warning of a threat. As for ease or difficulty of use: Most popular distributions of Linux can be navigated by GUI tools and do not require users to know code or be able "write an OS." Much depends on whether or not the system is preconfigured for the hardware and what programs the user is attempting to run. I admit that a new user trying to install Linux for the first time on his XXX-custom hardware system might experience some frustration, but no more than would be if he were trying to install a PC version of OS-X (if available) on the same hardware. Other problem occurs when these users insist on trying to run a program specifically designed for windows. Perhaps there may be a hack to run such programs but the user may find it is not standardized and does not run on the particular flavor of Linux in question. Lastly, yes, Linux would do well to have standardized software packaging across distributions providing "one-click" install. And it seems to be progressing in that direction.