Microsoft's 'kiss and make up' with OLPC

Well, it's a long way from Bill Gates saying poor countries should 'go and get a decent computer' instead.

Microsoft hasn't always had the smoothest relations with the One Laptop Per Child (OLPC) project, which aims to bring cheap computers to the developing world.

Mostly that's been because OLPC, the brainchild of Nicholas Negroponte, opted to run the device on 'open source' software. But it probably also had a bit to do with the fact that the machine, the 'XO', uses flash memory rather than a hard drive for storage - meaning it's not really roomy enough for Windows. (Think of trying to stick a gorilla in a shoebox.)

Now the two sides seem to be reaching something of a rapprochment, with Microsoft announcing yesterday it would adapt a version of XP to run on the machine, possibly as early as the middle of next year.

In a post on his blog, James Utzschneider, a manager in Microsoft's Unlimited Potential group, which is doing the 'port' of Windows, said that field trials of the new software would begin in January, and that he was "hopeful" that within six months, 'Windows for XO' would be ready to ship.

But, he cautioned, it shouldn't be assumed that the new software was "a done deal". "We do not want to set expectations we subsequently cannot meet."

It's an interesting little post - as much for the coded messages about Microsoft thinks of OLPC as for the technical explanations, which effectively amount to: XO is really small, it's quite tricky to squash Windows inside it, this is going to take a while.

The short of it: because XO only has 1GB of flash memory, Microsoft is having to add an internal SD card that will provide the extra 2GB of memory required to run the pared down version of Windows.

Along the way, however, Mr Utzschneider can't resist reminding readers that:

-the costs of the machine have ballooned, thwarting the project's original goal of selling a $100 laptop. ('Using flash memory is one of the reasons OLPC has been able to get the production cost of the computer down to $188')

-Intel, with whom Microsoft is also partnering on a low-cost computer, had been smarter designing a machine with bigger memory. ('The Intel computer comes with 2GB of flash storage, so we did not have to use the SD card approach we are designing for the XO.')

-at times the OLPC operation has been a bit chaotic. ('It is literally like designing parts of a car – well, actually a school bus -- while it is running down the highway at a high speed. I am not meaning this as a knock on the OLPC organization, because they are a small group of people doing an amazing amount of innovative design work in a short period of time.')

The OLPC, certainly, has had its setbacks. Not only because of tiffs with potential suppliers and rival machines (alongside Intel's Classmate PC, there is also ASUS' Eee PC), but also because of wavering commitment from 'interested' governments. (At the moment, only Uruguay has placed an order - for 100,000 laptops. A deal with Peru is 'very, very close', a spokesman told Times Online recently.)

But its machine also has some some very innovative features, including a mesh networking capability, and the ability for the screen to be seen in daylight, both of which are praised by Mr Utzschneider.

Perhaps the greatest relief for Mr Negroponte and his team, however, will be that Mr Gates, the world's biggest philanthropist, is no longer maligning them.

And that, surely, can only bode well.

Comments

[miles williamson]

of course it might also be that microsoft are unwilling to make their OS easier to run as a ramdisk and so make getting round their hardware tie in easier!!

[David van Huyssteen]

Microsoft has made its fortune by changing the way offices work, not by making them more efficient or productive. Anyone who has had to sit through a bloated slideshow or been forced to spend more time on the format of their document than on its content might agree that the developing world be better served by more lightweight 'solutions' to problems that do not - yet - exist.

[roxbury]

Now for the 10.000 swedish crowns question. Where is the MacBook $100 computer?

[Mike]

I still fail to see why anyone would want to use Windows (at a cost) for the lowest cost lap top possible. No matter how you cut it, 2 Gb of extra flash memory just so a cut down version of XP can be used is totally outrageous for a low cost lap top targeted at the third world. There are Linux OS distributions out there for free that cost nothing and using only 50mb of memory (Puppy Linux), which can surf the net, run email and write documents. For an extra 75mb you can install a full Office suite (Open Office) giving you everything you really need for most home users let alone the third world. The 1gb flash memory for the XO will still allow 800 mb or more of data storage, more than enough for a starter lap top. Windows OS's are very bloated and especially so for Vista. Even users with 400gb of hard disk and 1gb of memory have found out to their cost that Vista sucks, but an XP version cut down will still be bloated & slow for this application. It is a well established fact that any OS designed for everything (Ie: Windows) will always be larger and slower than one designed for a specific purpose. A classic example of this is the processor power needed for Windows to play a DVD on your PC compared with the custom processor used in a $30 DVD player or even mobile phone video. This is where Linux scores because of its modular approach, compact size and free use. The only reasons Microsoft is making overtures towards the XO is the very valid concern that any inroad towards their home territory is a threat whether from Linux OS itself or the free apps that come with it.

[Nigel in Hong Kong]

Did I read that right? Because the XO "only has 1GB of flash memory" it will need an additional 2GB SD card to be able to run a pared-down version of Windows XP. How bloated does an OS have to be to not fit into 1GB and leave some space for user files. It wasn't so long ago that PCs with less than 100MB hard drives and 1MB RAM were running Windows 95 or 98 perfectly happily. Why do these machines need anything more?

[Mohamed Patel]

Don't the people in the third world have enough problems already. Installing XP on their fine Linux laptops is surely going to hurt them.

As long as the dont get a version of Windows Mobile9, they may atogether give up on technology.

[Michael Lightfoot]

Why would anyone WANT to put XP onto the XO ? what will the extra 2GB SD card do for battery life ?
This begins to get a little self-defeating.
Why can't Microsoft admit that they are beat at the machine OS level and focus their efforts on getting a slimmed-down version of sharepoint to work on their school server ?