jdow wrote:
From: "Gene Heskett" <gene.heskett@xxxxxxxxxxx>
On Monday 10 April 2006 00:05, John Wendel wrote:
Food for thought,
http://news.com.com/Negroponte+Slimmer+Linux+needed+for+100+laptop/210
0-7346_3-6057456.html?tag=nefd.lede
* BOSTON--The One Laptop Per Child organization will use Linux on its
inexpensive machines, but the operating system suffers the same code
bloat as Windows, the project's leader said Tuesday.*
"People aren't thinking about small, fast, thin systems," said
Nicholas Negroponte, chairman of the One Laptop Per Child
<http://dw.com.com/redir?destUrl=http%3A%2F%2Flaptop.org%2F&siteId=3&o
Id=2100-7346-6057456&ontId=1001&lop=nl.ex> nonprofit association, in a
speech at the LinuxWorld Conference and Expo
<http://news.com.com/LinuxWorld+not+just+for+Linux+fans+anymore/2009-
7346_3-6056446.html?tag=nl> here. "Suddenly it's like a very fat
person (who) uses most of the energy to move the fat. And Linux is no
exception. Linux has gotten fat, too."
Regards,
John
Well, he could put cp-m on them I suppose, or freedos maybe...
Talk about setting the 3rd world back to the stone age.
Seems to me that "what we want to do with a computer" is what has
bloated. If you look at it dispassionately the web has gotten horridly
bloated with HTML email where regular email will do, web pages with a
lot of pictures where lynx will do, and so on and so forth. Linux, the
operating system, can be trimmed down remarkably small if you remove
the cruft that targets it to an incredible variety of machines.
If all the $100 machines are the same, CPU, Graphics, IO, and all, then
the kernel only needs to address that small microchosm of options. It
shrinks. Do we put in IPV4, IPV6, or both? That choice could shrink the
footprint. Follow that tree with each configuration option. Then optimize
for size.
Carry the same process through for other issues like word processors. Do
we need all of OpenOffice to make the computers third world useful? Might
<shudder> emacs perform the job all by itself? It probably would. But the
demand is for the bloat. And the egoboost that pays for the Open Source
development comes from feeding that demand for bloat.
Linux is as bloated as we've all "demanded". Now, is that really "bloat"
or is the increased foot print really adding value? That's for each person
to decide for her own needs. I consider Open Office to be incredible bloat.
But "cc" is still feature starved, perhaps. Others might think of this the
exact other way around.
Oh, isn't that the definition of a bandwidth wasting religious war? Oh
nuts - another source of noise that's going to last weeks.
{^_^}
OK everyone, Ms. Dow has spoken - no more followup posts <grin>!
I don't regret starting this thread because all the followups have
been intelligent and informative (like 99% of the posts on this list).
Thanks to you all!
John
