Jun 11

It’s easy to take education for granted, especially when you consider that every child in the UK has access to a computer, whether it’s at home or at school. But what most people forget is that 1 billion children in the developing world have little access to education, and no access to computers, which is where a burgeoning non-profit organisation called One Laptop per Child (OLPC) comes in.

The OLPC in Nigeria

Nigerian school children get their hands on the XO and immediately start learning how to use it.

The organisation hit the headlines in 2007 when it developed a low cost laptop called the XO, which was designed to be bought cheaply by governments of developing countries and distributed among school children. The XO was originally dubbed the $100 laptop, and although three years on it still hasn’t achieved its target price, it has been purchased by 21 developing countries and distributed to 1,284,500 children across the world. However, while the organisation has helped so many children around the world, it has courted controversy, created rifts with the world’s biggest technology companies, and spearheaded the biggest consumer technology trend in the last decade.

One Laptop per Child was the realisation of an altruistic dream by a MIT director and professor Nicholas Negroponte. In 2005 he unveiled his plan to see a laptop given to every child in the developing world, to aid their education, and offer them the similar advantages in the digital age as children in the developed world. The idea was based on the creation of something completely unique: A laptop which was durable enough to withstand the stresses and strains of life in a developing world, cope with the challenges of intermittent power and internet availability, and cost just $100.

The design of the XO PC was outstanding, and should be regarded as a feat of computer engineering. Against the back drop of the prices of technology in 2005, before low cost and low power components were prevalent, Negroponte designed a laptop with a 433MHz processor, 256MB RAM, a 7.5” LCD display and wireless networking. This may not sound impressive, but its base cost of £199 was unheard of at the time, it had enough power to drive its bespoke Linux operating system dubbed Sugar, it could function as a laptop, ebook reader, had a screen which was clearly visible outside in direct sunlight, had 12 hours of battery life and was completely shock-proof, waterproof and dust-proof.

While the XO preceded the market in terms of design, its biggest challenges were to overcome the rigours of a life in the hands of children in developing countries. Availability and reliance on power was a problem for Negroponte, and the XO could not succeed if it was too power hungry. They also had to iron out the biggest failing point on consumer laptops: Hard disc crashes. The XO introduced flash drives, which eliminated the mechanical wear and tear of traditional spinning disc drives. What’s more, the XO featured a revolutionary new screen, which used a dynamic LED backlight, which reduced operating wattage down to 3W under normal conditions. This put battery life at 12 hours, far beyond that of normal consumer laptops, and made the XO a force to be reckoned with.

A new kind of PC

The XO laptop caused such a stir, that it’s credited with spearheading the resulting netbook craze, which is still the only PC sub-market which is growing. Once OLPC had mastered the low power components, screen and size, it started selling them in the US. They retailed the laptop as part of the Give One Get One campaign, where a US consumer would purchas a laptop for $400, and donate one to a child in a developing country at the same time. It’s this that Wayan Vota, editor of OLPC News, an independent community of OLPC supporters, believes caught the eye of companies such as Asus and Acer.

The XO PC is waterproof and dustproof

The XO PC is waterproof and dustproof, making it ideal for children in the developing world.

“The real threat of OLPC introducing a “$100 laptop” was enough to spur technology companies into action. And they had to act fast. OLPC sold 160,000 XO laptops at $400 for two- and you didn’t even get both. That had Asus rightly excited when they launched the EeePC line to amazing success,” he said.

Once ASUS made a commercial success of their EeePC, the whole market had to catch up, and within six months, every laptop manufacturer was shipping its own netbook version. In 2009 there were 33.3 million netbooks sold globally, and the sector achieved a 72% growth in sales, compared to a 13% decline in amount of notebooks sold. If its supporters are correct, One Laptop per Child caused one of the biggest technology sensations of the decade.

“The creation of the netbook market is largely, and appropriately credited to OLPC,” says Ed McNierney, Chief Technical Officer of OLPC. “We wouldn’t have $300 netbooks in the consumer market if that push from OLPC hadn’t happened.
Consumer product companies in the technology world are not known, in general, for their risk-taking behaviour,” he told PC Plus.

When asked for a comment, an ASUS spokesman told PC Plus that the XO had no bearing or effect on the creation of the EeePC 701 which launched in 2008, and that the company would have come to market with a similar product even if the XO hadn’t been invented.

Competition

It’s not often that a non-profit organisation courts competition and controversy, but the technology industry can be an unpredictable world, and it wasn’t long before OLPC found itself embroiled in a war of words with Intel. The world’s biggest chip maker had seen the market potential of the developing world and built its own low cost laptop, the Classmate PC, soon after the announcement of the OLPC XO- a move which incensed Negroponte. He called Intel ‘predatory’ in a lecture at MIT, accused the company of “hurting the [OLPC] mission” on the CBS news show 60 minutes, back in 2007. If this wasn’t enough, Negroponte then accused Intel of selling its Classmate PC to the same governments he was trying to persuade to take up orders of the XO, but “dumping” them at a loss making sum, scuppering his project.

Nigerian children recieve a lesson supported by the XO

Children in Nigeria recieve a traditional lesson from their teacher, but use the OLPC XO laptop to support their learning.

In the face of widespread criticism, Intel joined forces with OLPC in December 2007, in an uneasy alliance, which caused public disconcertion from AMD, who was a founding partner of the OLPC project. While the Intel – OLPC partnership promised a new beginning, the reality was very different. Less than six months later Negroponte dropped Intel representatives from OLPC’s board of directors, demanding that Intel dumped its Classmate project if the two companies continued to work together. With the money Intel has invested in its own project it was never going to can the Classmate PC project, and the relationship ended.

Since 2007, both laptops have seen their share of success and failure, with Intel shipping 1 million Classmate PCs to Venezuela and 150,000 to Libya. OLPC has saturated Uruguay and Peru with approximately 1 million XO laptops, as well as completing smaller orders from Colombia, Rwanda and Mexico. Whether Intel’s Classmate PC project hurt the OLPC effort is still the subject of debate, but Wayan Vota, editor of OLPC News, an independent community of OLPC supporters, doesn’t think so. He believes that the enthusiasm created by the XO and Classmate PC made Negroponte’s dream a reality: “I’ve heard from Intel insiders that the XO laptop moved the netbook revolution forward by a few years. Intel would’ve come out with a Classmate-like device, but not as soon as they had to with OLPC’s pressure. For this, both organizations should be thankful because netbooks are the only bright spot in the laptop business,” he told PC Plus.

However, the bright spot of technology might not look so good for OLPC. It’s not been able to get its cost down to the desired $100, and orders have been far from overwhelming. What’s more, the consumer market has caught up, and it’s possible to buy standard netbooks at cost as cheaply as an XO. While they’re not built as ruggedly with the developing world in mind, they do feature fully functional operating systems, such as Windows, which some say would better prepare children for a connected future.

An ‘irresponsible strategy”

Despite its rocky road to success, OLPC still has a long way to go before it can claim any kind of success. Its intention to deliver PCs into the hands of the world’s poorest children is admirable, but experts have called its methods in question, warning that the charity risks wasting the hard work and achievements by equipping communities with laptops and then leaving them to work out how to use them for themselves- a criticism which Walter de Brouwer, European CEO of One Laptop per Child flatly rejects. “The charge is false,” he told PC Plus in an exclusive interview. “Typically, teachers and schools receive a two-week introduction not only to the machine and its technical features and operation, but more critically on how to integrate it into the learning experiences,” he said. De Brouwer continued: “OLPC works with the country to develop a team that works with the schools. The team supports the schools, technically and pedagogically. This team also works to develop capacity at the schools and locally in the communities.”

In the UK schools require entire departments to keep their networks and PCs in running order, and the use of IT in classrooms as a key part of teacher’s training. Wayan Vota, an outspoken supporter of the OLPC project, has questioned the level of support provided by OLPC called their deployment strategy “irresponsible.”

“OLPC has always maintained distance from actual implementation, claiming it was the country’s responsibility to integrate XO laptop into their educational system. That might work for Uruguay, a stable, advanced country. But it’s irresponsible in lesser developed countries. OLPC has the responsibility to educate countries on what they are buying – an XO laptop should be one small part of a whole educational system change,” he said. “Just handing off the XO laptop, like it’s a self-installing app, leads to Ethiopian teachers banning them from classrooms as a plague on education.”

Last year, teachers and parents in Ethiopia criticised the deployment of the XO, claiming that it was a distracting toy for the children, and could not be a worthwhile tool in their education system built around memorising from a blackBoard and then passing the national test. Without teacher training to implement the laptops, the XO couldn’t fulfil its function. While self-learning is an important part of the XO’s purpose, it’s clear that there’s a serious risk that the laptops will either not be used effectively, or fall into disrepair.

One has to admire what Negroponte and OLPC has achieved in the last three years, battling adversity which would have overcome many other organisations. OLPC claims that attendance in schools improves with the introduction of the XO. OLPC is currently working on a new version of its laptop, the XO-1.5, which it hopes to start deploying later this year, and has released concepts of a $75 tablet PC which it aims to make a reality by 2012. No-one can argue that getting an internet connected laptop into the hands of children in the developing world is essential for those countries to grow and prosper. However, unless OLPC ask difficult questions of the XO’s recipients, it risks wasting an opportunity to really make a difference.

Concept of success

No-one can accuse Negroponte of not being ambitious and if his mission to put an internet connected PC into the hands of every child in the developing world wasn’t challenging enough, he wants to build a paper thin touchscreen tablet PC which will retail at under $100. This concept design is the OLPC XO-3 (pictured) and is the latest dream of OLPC founder Nicholas Negroponte. It’s to be based on the XO 1.75 spec, which will feature an ARM mobile processor, which will provide twice the speed of the XO-1 and operate at 25% of the power. However, the main difference is the form. Negroponte wants to move away from a standard laptop form, and go for a purely touchscreen device.

The XO3 concept, due 2012

A vision of the future: Negroponte wants to launch a handheld tablet similar to this concept, costing less than $100, in 2012.

Whether or not the XO-3 can actually be achieved is another matter. Producing something similar to the iPad in form, in just two years and dropping the cost to under $100 seems ludicrous, and whether such a device could power an OS capable of supporting a child’s education is another matter. What’s more, whether this form factor is suited to education is another matter. It seems that Negroponte has learned a few things about the nature of the technology industry, in the last three years promoting the XO. While the threat of releasing a sub-$100 netbook spurred the rest of the industry to react is a seismic way, he’s hoping that the design of a low-cost tablet could have the same effect. He told Forbes: “We don’t necessarily need to build it, we just need to threaten to build it.”

If OLPC can use the industry to its advantage this time, rather than do all the leg work while the consumer market reaps the benefits, then the dream of getting tablet PCs into developing countries could become a reality.

Jun 01

Any operating system that contains the letters B, S and D usually conjures images of geeky elitism, arcane interfaces and the undead world of UNIX. Despite its similarity, this is an image Linux has largely been able to shake off, thanks to its friendly graphical installers and configuration tools. But BSDs can offer a unique insight into what has made Linux popular, as well as an opportunity to hone your command-line and trouble shooting skills in a world that might be getting too easy. And while you do need a little technical confidence to get any BSD system up and running, it’s not half as difficult as it first appears.

FreeBSD is not as demonic as its logo might suggest. Honest.

FreeBSD is a the most popular implementation of version 4.4 of the Berkeley Software Distribution. This was the original BSD, a version of UNIX that was developed between the late-70s and the mid-90s and used a famously liberal licence. This licence has meant that anyone can use, copy and redistribute and re-implement its code and APIs. Which is exactly what FreeBSD attempts to do, alongside other projects like OpenBSD and NetBSD. In turn, there are many projects like Apple’s OS X that build upon the foundations in FreeBSD, all thanks to the liberal licences of the original.

Step 1: Prologue

There are several important differences between FreeBSD and Linux, but the most fundamental is the kernel. The term ‘Linux’ is most often used to refer to the entire operating system, from the boot code and drivers to the desktop and the applications. We’d call Ubuntu, Fedora and OpenSUSE different versions of Linux, for instance. But this definition isn’t accurate. ‘Linux’ should only really refer to the kernel – the chunk of code at the heart of the system that deals with hardware, networking, drivers, storage, CPU and process management, and the BSD kernel is entirely different.

The Linux kernel that was originally developed by Linus Torvalds, and it’s still the only part of the whole operating system he has control over. The remainder of what makes a complete operating system, the windowing environment, the desktops and the applications, are pulled from open source project that are mostly using one of the the GNU Public Licences. Hence, the official name for the entire Linux operating system is really GNU/Linux to show that there are two parts of the whole project. Which is why replacing the kernel isn’t a trivial operation.

Don’t be scared of text mode. It’s part of Linux’s legacy, and serves a very useful purpose.

Any new kernel needs to be broadly compatible with Linux so that the remainder of the software stack can be ported without too much difficulty. Fortunately, both FreeBSD and Linux are UNIX-alike, which means there are many similarities, and the result is that with a standard installation, you’ll find many of the tools you’re already familiar with, albeit in a different configuration.

Many system administrators feel FreeBSD is has been a more stable choice for servers over the years, and that it can out-perform its cousin on certain tasks. It’s also a great choice if you want to run a server on limited hardware, as the requirements for a BSD-based system are often less than for the Linux equivalent. FreeBSD, for example, lists its minimum requirements as a 486 CPU with 24MB RAM, which is quite staggering in today’s world of terabytes and quad core processors. FreeBSD is also a i386-based platform. There are ports to other processors, but the project’s focus has always been compatibility with Intel’s standard architecture, and as a result, could be better suited to the majority of machines that parts of the Linux kernel.

Step 2: Installation

While there are Live CD versions of FreeBSD, the traditional install disc is still the most common medium for getting hold of the latest version. But you’ll need to steel yourself against its antiquated installation mechanism.

When you boot your machine with the disc in the drive, the first thing you’ll see is the black and white ASCII art of the install menu. You won’t see any other graphical embellishment until you’re able to boot successfully into a working desktop. For most installs, you’ll need to choose option 1 from the menu, but if you’re using an older machine, you may want to try 2 (with ACPI disabled) to avoid any potential problems.

Unlike trial Linux installation packages like Wubi, installing BSD has a tendency to be destructive. Make sure you’re not going to obliterate anything important before continuing.

You’ll then have to wait a few moments while various kernel messages scroll by before you’ll see the text-based installation and configuration screen. If you’ve used Debian, this kind of text installer will feel familiar. There’s no linearity to the install process. You can move backwards and forwards through the various options, and continue to make adjustments to the installation until you quit the installer and restart the system.

For a basic, working environment, you will need to do at least the following. Select the second option in the menu to initiate a ‘Standard Install’ and read the information on the screen that follows. The next page displays ‘fdisk’, the disk partitioning and formatting tool. Press F1 for documentation, but if you’re using your entire hard drive for this installation, press ‘a’ to select everything, followed by ‘q’ to apply the changes. This will delete everything currently on the drive, so be careful.

The next page will ask if you want to install a boot loader, which is the menu that lets you choose between whatever operating systems you have installed. Choose the second option (BootMGR), and on the following page, you need to create the various partitions used by FreeBSD using the same fdisk-like interface we’ve just seen.

Once again, if you’re using an entire drive for the installation, you can just press ‘a’ to let the installer create the most appropriate array of partitions followed by ‘q’ to make the changes permanent.

The next page will ask you to choose a distribution. Unlike a Linux distribution, FreeBSD uses the term to refer to the default selection of packages that are to be installed. Select ‘Custom’ and add ‘base’ and ‘kernels > GENERIC’ to your installation.

This will give you enough package to get a working system, and we’ll need to add the desktop environment at a later stage. Return to the ‘Exit’ option at the top of the list and press space to jump into the package installation routine.

Step 3: Post-Install

After all the preliminary configuration has completed, you’ll be asked whether you want to configure any Ethernet or SLIP/PPP devices. Select ‘Yes’ if you are connecting to the internet through your machine’s ethernet port, and you should see your adaptor listed in the top of thew connections list. Choose the adaptor, say no to IPV6, say yes to DHCP and skip through the configuration page to the OK button. Say ‘no’ to your machine being a network gateway,’no’ to enabling any inetd services or running SSH, FTP and NFS server and clients, and don’t edit the console settings. You can safely setup a timezone for your machine and enable the PS2 mouse emulation if you’re using one.

Don’t worry too much about your initial selection of packages. You can easily add more later.

Say ‘Yes’ to the next question, and you’ll now be looking at the package manager. This is where you choose what applications you want to be installed on top of the default option we chose earlier, and there are thousands of packages to choose between. For a simple setup, jump into the ‘x11’ menu and select the ‘kde4-4.3.1′ package. It’s exact name will depend on the version of FreeBSD you’re playing with. If you’re not a fan of Gnome, you could also choose ‘gnome2-2’ from the same list of packages. Selecting either will also mark their dependencies for installation. You also need to select xorg-7, and any other packages you know you’re going to need.

When you’re ready to go, jump back to the top package list, select ‘Install’ and press space. You’ll need to wait a while for all the packages to install. The next step is to create a user account. You can do this by saying ‘Yes’ to the option, then selecting ‘Add User’, and entering a user name in the page that follows. Select OK to make the change permanent and exit from the users and groups menu. You’ll then be asked for the system manager’s password, and you’ll need to type this twice.

After that, you can say ‘No’ to the post-install configuration request and wait for your machine to reboot. You’re now at the point where you should have a basic, working installation, and you can quit from the installation menu and restart your system.

Step 4: Configuration

When your machine re-appears, you’ll be greeted by the sombre monochrome of the command line. Login as ‘root’ with your system manager’s password. For both Gnome and KDE, you need to add the following two lines to the ‘/etc/rc.conf’ configuration file:

dbus_enable="YES"
hald_enable="YES"

Unfortunately, you’re going to need to use the ‘vi’ text editor. Type ‘vi /etc/rc.conf’ to load the file. Press ‘i’ to enter insert mode, move to a new line and type the following. Press escape to exit insert mode, followed by ‘:wq’ (without quotes) to save the changes and quit the editor. Next type ‘reboot’ to restart your system.

FreeBSD doesn’t come with a desktop activated by default, but it’s simple enough to change.

When you get back to the login screen, enter your user account details this time, and when you get dropped back to the command line, type ‘vi .xinitrc’ and add the following line to the file:

exec /usr/local/kde4/bin/startkde4

This is telling your system that when the X.org graphical system starts, you want KDE to be used as your desktop environment. Save and exit vi.

Step 5: Launch Desktop

Usually, at this point, you need to create an ‘xorg.conf’ file to define the display properties for your machine. But recent releases of the X server are able to create a working configuration without any further editing. Which means typing ‘startx’ is all you need to do to launch a graphical environment running KDE. If this doesn’t work, then you will need to create create a working /etc/X11/xorg.conf file.

But with FreeBSD 8, it’s more likely that you are now looking at KDE running through its Akanadi porting routines as it builds up a configuration for your desktop. After a couple of minutes, this will leave you with a KDE desktop running on-top of FreeBSD, and you’ve just earned another trophy for your awards cabinet.

At long last: a GUI! And one of the more stable interfaces you’ll find. Here’s hoping BSD serves you well.

This is exactly the same KDE you’ll find on Linux, and you’ll be hard pressed to find any difference between the way it works on FreeBSD and the way it works with Kubuntu. It’s only when it comes to system configuration that you’ll notice because FreeBSD doesn’t have any graphical configuration tools, which means if you need to change anything, you’ve got to be prepared to go back to the command line. But that’s another story.

See also: PC-BSD 8.0

If you’ve followed the main text to install a shiny new version of FreeBSD, you might have noticed that the install mechanism really wasn’t all that shiny or new. It reality, it feels ancient. But this doesn’t mean that the operating system has been languishing unloved and undeveloped, it just means that making the installer easier to use is low on the priority list.

Fortunately, this being open source, demand for a better way of doing things has led to several alternatives, the best of which is PC-BSD, which you’ll find at www.pcbsd.org. It does several impressive things. Firstly, it replaces the tepid monochrome installer of FreeBSD with a graphical application much-more in-line with its Linux counterparts. It will also automatically install and configure a recent version of the KDE desktop, which should mean you can get productive with a FreeBSD system as quickly as possible, without touching the command line, and there’s a wonderful wiki full of helpful documentation.

This means you can install PC-BSD by placing the disc in the drive, rebooting your machine, answer the questions that appear and wait for the operating system to install. You won’t even need to worry about manually partitioning your drive unless you want to create a custom configuration.

Another important difference is that it PC-BSD doesn’t use the same package management as FreeBSD, although you can still get to it if you need to. Instead, package are available as single files with the ‘.pbi’ file extension, which can then me installed with a simple click. It’s more like how packages are handled on OS X, and is far better than the weird world of dependencies you find on Linux.

May 12

There’s a delightful story that does the rounds regarding one of the founding fathers of Linux. It’s said that during the early days of the open-
source operating system’s development, this fellow took to attending conferences in complete silence. All attempts to communicate via means other than hand gestures were refused. Instead, he pointed at things.

Apocryphal or not, the tale remains highly relevant today. Our hero’s beef was with the windows-based graphical interface metaphor and its knack for turning us into mouse-pointing morons. Fast-forward a decade or two and astonishingly little has changed. The windows GUI has, you might say, proven to be extremely gluey.

The classic case study is Microsoft’s eponymous Windows OS. Admittedly, early versions of Windows would seem pretty alien to today’s users – but that’s an illusion. Look past the clunky graphics and Windows 95 is largely identical even to Windows 7, Redmond’s latest and greatest OS. Icons, taskbar, the folder metaphor – all are essentially the same as they were 15 years ago.

That’s a long time in any industry, but it’s an absolute eternity in information technology. Along the way, Microsoft has flirted with a few interesting new features. Early betas of Vista included widespread use of virtual folders and the promise of a fully vectorised and hence scalable graphical interface, for instance. But in the end, the retail build of Vista was yet another reskin of Windows NT, just a bit prettier.

Linux and Apple’s Macintosh operating systems have scarcely been any more innovative. More user-friendly and configurable? Perhaps. More polished? Certainly. But both remain firmly rooted in the window-juggling keyboard-and-mouse camp.

Compared to the enormous advances made in computer hardware, it’s all a bit bizarre. Back in 1995, a single-core Pentium processor running at 100MHz or so was your lot. That’s an in-order 3.1 million transistor chip with 8kB of cache memory, for goodness sake. Today, we’re up to six cores, multiple GHz, over a billion transistors and cache pools nigh on double-digits in MB.

If you think that’s merely a matter of scale rather than a new paradigm per se, what about features such as virtualisation or hardware-accelerated 3D graphics? That’s to say nothing of the rapid rise of LCD monitors and more recently solid-state drives. By any sane metric, computer hardware has been in a constant state of revolution. It’s utterly relentless.

So, not to put too fine a point on it, what gives with GUIs? The answer, frankly, is that I don’t know. Over the years, I’ve visited several labs dedicated to advanced interface research, including those of Microsoft and Intel. I’ve even interviewed luminaries from the heyday of interface research, including some who worked at the fabled Xerox PARC lab in Palo Alto. The very people who invented the GUI, in other words. In fact, I reckon I’ve spoken to all the right people. I’ve played with all the latest table-top, touchscreen human-machine interfaces. But I remain essentially clueless. Nothing I’ve seen or heard of is obviously the next big thing.

At this point, Apple’s iPad inevitably hovers into view. A remarkable device in many ways, it’s no good for data input or content creation and therefore doesn’t offer a plausible alternative for desktop computing. However, what it does is underline just how painful the Windows interface is. Once you’ve danced around a few of your favourite websites courtesy of the iPad’s delightfully responsive screen, the scrolly-scrolly, pointy-clicky PC experience seems pretty laughable.

Even a good smartphone can make the PC feel clumsy; I often prefer reading emails on mine. Replying to them is out of the question, but as a viewing device it’s very pleasant and provides temporary relief from what is becoming an overly familiar and oppressive desktop computing experience. You could say the differences are largely arbitrary, but trawling emails on my phone feels like a break from work. That’s got to say something about the tiredness of the windows metaphor.