Michal said:
It is generally developed that way - you have a piece of hardware, and
you can put different stuff on it.
However, they needed a complete solution so they also modified a Linux
distribution to work well on their hardware.
Since it's an open project, nearly all of the development history,
status, design decisions, philosophy, debate, etc. is captured in
"readily available" documentation on the Internet. The hardware platform
is what it is for the moment, and no announcements have been made of any
"growth path" or "upgrade path" for the hardware. Given that the
customer base is young children in developing countries and the
projected life span of one of these devices is five years, I can see
where children will outgrow these, hand them down to younger children,
and need something with a little more horsepower and industrial strength
languages like Ruby.
The software is another story -- Microsoft has an active project to run
Windows XP on the device, although I think when the smoke clears, that's
going to turn out to be impractical. Among the Linux distros, Fedora was
chosen because Red Hat and the Fedora project contributed resources to
OLPC and Debian/Ubuntu, Novell/SuSE, Mandriva and Gentoo didn't.
I've spent enough time playing with virtual machines running the OLPC
software that I think I can say that there would be no advantage at all
to switching to another Linux distro. In particular, anyone who wants to
tell me that Ubuntu is in any way superior to Fedora relative to OLPC is
going into my kill file. (For that matter, that isn't just relative to
OLPC).
Now *BSD may be another thing entirely. I don't have enough knowledge of
*BSD to know whether it would be superior to Fedora in the context of
OLPC. An awful lot of low-level hardware/driver work would need to be
done, and I don't think the BSD community has any strong financial
backers that could make that happen. But there *is*, I think, a small
window of opportunity here for Solaris, now that it, too, is open source.
Generally I wish there was something similar but with a decent disk
size. Or something more like normal laptop/palmtop with the screen
they used for OLPC.
Well, there are such things, and as far as I can tell, they're big
sellers (and sellouts) for this holiday season. I do know of real
working adults who have joined the Get One Give One program to obtain
one for work use, feeling it is superior to these other alternatives.
If you really wanted something on OLPC and it did not fit on the disk
you could probably put it on an usb keychain. I guess it's what they
were also thinking when making the disk so small.
There are three USB ports and a Secure Digital slot, so offboard storage
is not going to be a problem. What I don't know is how, without going in
and hacking partitions at the Linux filesystem level, whether one can
make the space available for resident software larger this way. As far
as I know these are simply data/media storage capabilities, not an
increase in resident software space.
But I do know how to do the partition hacking, and I believe the devices
will boot off of a USB disk, so you could in fact run anything that will
fit in 256 MB of RAM. I'm not planning to do that, though. Right now, my
plan is to install only three other languages, R, Steel Bank Common Lisp
and some version of Forth. Anything else I put on the machine will need
to be cross-developed.