This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 |
It appears as if that program has been terminated, all references to it (except historical) should be removed from the page. Id rather it be done by someone with an account... 99.253.4.217 ( talk) 04:28, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
In all the naming and renaming and redirecting, this discussion page seems to have become disembodied from the article page. Not sure if the problem lines in the efforts to clean up some double redirects from our friendly bot, Rossbot, but we now have a really tangled web... Can we somehow get back to basics: an article titled "One Laptop per Child," the non-profit social welfare association whose mission is to give every child an opportunity for learning, and an article about the "XO Laptop," aka the "$100 Laptop" or "Children's Machine", designed and built by the association in keeping with its mission? (Would those who oppose a split be willing to make the XO article a section within the main article?) -- Walter.bender 22:45, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
New proposal: rename to OLPC XO and split out One Laptop per Child article
I am wondering whether the Eduwise article should become a part of this article under a section about "Other Developing World Educational Laptops"?
I am wondering this because there is a question of whether the Eduwise article is really notable on its own. The OLPC project spent tens of millions on R&D and made a new graphical operating system interface and set of applications, as well as inventing a new screen, a new wireless card and so on. The Intel laptop however, is a small laptop with a tiny screen. It's in a cool blue colour, but it is just a standard laptop.
There may be loads of small laptops for the developing world coming out. Many of them will have similar issues to the OLPC. The Eduwise could be one paragraph in this new section.
Zeth 02:39, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
The structure of the merged document is at best awkward. The lead should really be the description of One Laptop per Child (its mission, structure, history, etc.) followed by a description of the Children's Machine aka $100 Laptop aka 2B1 aka XO-1, which is the current instantiation of a laptop being deployed to fulfill the mission. OLPC has been very public about its hope that there will be multiple organizations/companies buiding machines suitable for its mission. -- Walter.bender 17:55, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
The naive reader (i.e. me!) needs to have terms such as 2B1 and XO-1 explained the first time they appear in the article.
The result of the debate was PAGE NOT MOVED -- as there was no consensus for the move per discussion below. -- Philip Baird Shearer 10:36, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
Children's Machine → One Laptop Per Child — Damn! I lost all I wrote when my browser crashed! Sigh...there's no way I'll convince you all to vote with me on this one now. :( Anyway, I was proposing that Children's Machine be moved to One Laptop Per Child with a section on the laptop, and a section on the project. I attended linux.conf.au and went to a few talks about OLPC (done by Chris Blizzard and Jim Gettys) and not once did I hear the phrase "Children's Machine". Don't take my word for it. Watch the videos. — Jeremy Talk 10:09, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
There was once an article about OLPC that was separate from the article on the laptop. Against the advice of some, the article was merged. The combined article does not do justice to the mission: one laptop per child, lowercase. That said, I am not sure that the we are covering any new ground in this discussion. -- Walter.bender 20:34, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
Is it time to rename this article to OLPC XO yet? The name " Children's Machine" is used less and less now. — Pengo 04:47, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
Please see the rationale in the beginning of the section. — Jeremy Talk 12:35, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
Suggestion:
+sj + 00:11, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
One Laptop Per Child News is not affiliated with One Laptop per Child, Association. "Offical" news about the project can be found in the project's wiki. -- Walter.bender 21:35, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
Really sure sure it's a good idea to list OLPC News as a news source, the owner of the site has demonstrated considerable bias against the project in the past. -- Basique 00:22, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
Actually, OLPC News is not a troll site, nor do I have bias against OLPC as an idea. As I've said often, I celebrate the ability of One Laptop Per Child to bring technology to the forefront of economic development, and can't wait to have a XO myself, but I fear the lack of a defined implementation strategy and realistic cost estimates will create great waste and disillusionment with technology.
It's only too bad that neither you, nor OLPC can take peer criticism, even though it is promoted as a core OLPC learning & Sugar UI component. - Wayan Vota, Editor of OLPC News
The OLPC News link is back. It is has been a continued source of misinformation about OLPC. While it is probably relevant that it be listed, it should perhaps be noted that it has been a source of opinion, not facts about the project. -- Walter.bender 00:36, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
And Walter just provided the evidence to prove my assertion that OLPC can't take criticism with his opinion that OLPC News is "a continued source of misinformation about OLPC" when respected news organs, and even his peers, do look to OLPC News for independent information and discussion about the project. Wayan Vota, Editor of OLPC News
DISCLAIMER: MIT is not making laptops. MIT is not in the product marketing, development and distribution business, and OLPC is wholly independent of MIT and the Media Lab. In no way does MIT endorse OLPC or any of its products. MIT resources are not being used for OLPC. -- Walter.bender 21:44, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
"intended to provide every child in the world"
I don't see info here regarding a power generator. Is that question still completely open? I have been wondering if OLPC has been considering harnessing the common habit of bouncing the knee while seated. Agape bright 00:17, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
If this project leads to the widespread availability of a cheap, robust human-powered source of electricity, that could be the most important contribution of the whole project to the developing world. Add a one-watt LED reading lamp, replace kerosene lamps, save the planet!- 69.87.204.36 19:13, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
The Sugar page needs a lot of love, there is a ton of media and informaion out there for it just need someone to get the ball rolling. -- 69.136.111.100 13:40, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
"Backlighted color mode, a blurry 1200×900 that is similar to between 400×300 and 693×520. (like NTSC or PAL television)"
We need pictures from the real hardware. It would also be fun to get images from the publicly available screen emulator (a hacked Xephyr? a Google SoC project?) to see how good/bad the emulation is. I've included my two best guesses, obviously limited by the inability to express the brightness of a subpixel via a whole pixel. Note that the test images get scrambled by image scaling; only use them at their full 1200x900 size. They are marked as sRGB and thus should go direct to screen without any additional gamma adjustment. AlbertCahalan 04:42, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
BTW, on the real hardware, please get pictures of: backlight+swizzle (color), neither (greyscale), swizzle only, and backlight only. AlbertCahalan 04:54, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
Mljmlj 23:01, 11 March 2007 (UTC) Mary Lou Jepsen: I've done the measurements on the display myself and have spent much of the last two years of my life designing, building and refining this display. I'm in process of publishing everything about this display including its astonishing resolution performance. The display is the first display I know of that employs something the video encoding experts have done for some time: the human visual system sees higher resolution in luminance (B&W) than chrominance (color): for example MPEG luminance resolution is 4X the chrominance resolution. In that I also added sunlight readability in B&W mode a key thing to understand is that that the ambient light level of the room changes the resolution of the display. The pixel has a reflective part that is B&W, and a transmissive part that is one color: red or green or blue. It should be that a red and a green and blue pixel combine to make a single full-color pixel. Thus the resolution should be 1200/sqrt(3) x 900/sqrt(3) or 693x520. But, when the room is totally dark the resolution given via standard method of determining display resolution is approximately 800x600 or about 133 dpi. I did these measurements a number of ways and am in process of writing them up for publication (some via straight fresnel patterns, other perceptual image detail tests) In a dark room the effect is akin to sub-pixel rendering - we see an improvement in resolution of ~33% via sub-pixel rendering.
With room lights on, an additional effect comes into play: the display has luminance (B&W) information at 200 dpi in it's reflective mode, with the room lights on the display also reflects 200dpi in black and white. This increases the effective resolution to about XGA or 1024x768 when using test patterns to ascertain the display resolution. Finally, the laptop can be brought outside into bright sunlight and the screen is still viewable - now the color is barely visible (if the backlight is left on), but on the screen the 1200x900 200dpi resolution is seen crisply and clearly. - Mary Lou Jepsen Mljmlj 23:01, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
18.85.18.74 17:41, 12 March 2007 (UTC) Mary Lou Jepsen: You agree that the display can be 800x600 resolution in color. Great. Now, I have a task for you - bring your laptop into the sunlight. Put a high resolution pattern on it. Measure it. The resolution is 1200x900 = 200dpi in luminance channel only (Black, white and grey). Bring the laptop back inside. Look at the display under a microscope - count the pixels. Again there will be 1200x900 pixels. The pixels are square with dimensions of 0.127mm x 0.127. Verify this. This is not bias, opinion or anything but fact. If you see anything different - please send your laptop to me and I will personally inspect it and report to you what problems I find. I assume that it would be a software bug, it would be impossible for your laptop to have a different number of pixels than the thousands of other laptops we have already made. OLPC has designated a place to file a bug report at dev.laptop.org - it would be a more appropriate forum than here. Please kindly consider using a more appropriate forum. Mary Lou Jepsen 18.85.18.74 17:41, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
Albert, it was exceptionally bad form for you to confront Mary Lou here. This page is for discussion of the article and nothing else, if you have questions take them to the OLPC Wiki they are more than willing to accomodate you there. Mary Lou, thank you for your detailed briefing on the display, I'm sure that this information will definitely make it onto the article page. -- Basique 20:29, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 |
It appears as if that program has been terminated, all references to it (except historical) should be removed from the page. Id rather it be done by someone with an account... 99.253.4.217 ( talk) 04:28, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
In all the naming and renaming and redirecting, this discussion page seems to have become disembodied from the article page. Not sure if the problem lines in the efforts to clean up some double redirects from our friendly bot, Rossbot, but we now have a really tangled web... Can we somehow get back to basics: an article titled "One Laptop per Child," the non-profit social welfare association whose mission is to give every child an opportunity for learning, and an article about the "XO Laptop," aka the "$100 Laptop" or "Children's Machine", designed and built by the association in keeping with its mission? (Would those who oppose a split be willing to make the XO article a section within the main article?) -- Walter.bender 22:45, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
New proposal: rename to OLPC XO and split out One Laptop per Child article
I am wondering whether the Eduwise article should become a part of this article under a section about "Other Developing World Educational Laptops"?
I am wondering this because there is a question of whether the Eduwise article is really notable on its own. The OLPC project spent tens of millions on R&D and made a new graphical operating system interface and set of applications, as well as inventing a new screen, a new wireless card and so on. The Intel laptop however, is a small laptop with a tiny screen. It's in a cool blue colour, but it is just a standard laptop.
There may be loads of small laptops for the developing world coming out. Many of them will have similar issues to the OLPC. The Eduwise could be one paragraph in this new section.
Zeth 02:39, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
The structure of the merged document is at best awkward. The lead should really be the description of One Laptop per Child (its mission, structure, history, etc.) followed by a description of the Children's Machine aka $100 Laptop aka 2B1 aka XO-1, which is the current instantiation of a laptop being deployed to fulfill the mission. OLPC has been very public about its hope that there will be multiple organizations/companies buiding machines suitable for its mission. -- Walter.bender 17:55, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
The naive reader (i.e. me!) needs to have terms such as 2B1 and XO-1 explained the first time they appear in the article.
The result of the debate was PAGE NOT MOVED -- as there was no consensus for the move per discussion below. -- Philip Baird Shearer 10:36, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
Children's Machine → One Laptop Per Child — Damn! I lost all I wrote when my browser crashed! Sigh...there's no way I'll convince you all to vote with me on this one now. :( Anyway, I was proposing that Children's Machine be moved to One Laptop Per Child with a section on the laptop, and a section on the project. I attended linux.conf.au and went to a few talks about OLPC (done by Chris Blizzard and Jim Gettys) and not once did I hear the phrase "Children's Machine". Don't take my word for it. Watch the videos. — Jeremy Talk 10:09, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
There was once an article about OLPC that was separate from the article on the laptop. Against the advice of some, the article was merged. The combined article does not do justice to the mission: one laptop per child, lowercase. That said, I am not sure that the we are covering any new ground in this discussion. -- Walter.bender 20:34, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
Is it time to rename this article to OLPC XO yet? The name " Children's Machine" is used less and less now. — Pengo 04:47, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
Please see the rationale in the beginning of the section. — Jeremy Talk 12:35, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
Suggestion:
+sj + 00:11, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
One Laptop Per Child News is not affiliated with One Laptop per Child, Association. "Offical" news about the project can be found in the project's wiki. -- Walter.bender 21:35, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
Really sure sure it's a good idea to list OLPC News as a news source, the owner of the site has demonstrated considerable bias against the project in the past. -- Basique 00:22, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
Actually, OLPC News is not a troll site, nor do I have bias against OLPC as an idea. As I've said often, I celebrate the ability of One Laptop Per Child to bring technology to the forefront of economic development, and can't wait to have a XO myself, but I fear the lack of a defined implementation strategy and realistic cost estimates will create great waste and disillusionment with technology.
It's only too bad that neither you, nor OLPC can take peer criticism, even though it is promoted as a core OLPC learning & Sugar UI component. - Wayan Vota, Editor of OLPC News
The OLPC News link is back. It is has been a continued source of misinformation about OLPC. While it is probably relevant that it be listed, it should perhaps be noted that it has been a source of opinion, not facts about the project. -- Walter.bender 00:36, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
And Walter just provided the evidence to prove my assertion that OLPC can't take criticism with his opinion that OLPC News is "a continued source of misinformation about OLPC" when respected news organs, and even his peers, do look to OLPC News for independent information and discussion about the project. Wayan Vota, Editor of OLPC News
DISCLAIMER: MIT is not making laptops. MIT is not in the product marketing, development and distribution business, and OLPC is wholly independent of MIT and the Media Lab. In no way does MIT endorse OLPC or any of its products. MIT resources are not being used for OLPC. -- Walter.bender 21:44, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
"intended to provide every child in the world"
I don't see info here regarding a power generator. Is that question still completely open? I have been wondering if OLPC has been considering harnessing the common habit of bouncing the knee while seated. Agape bright 00:17, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
If this project leads to the widespread availability of a cheap, robust human-powered source of electricity, that could be the most important contribution of the whole project to the developing world. Add a one-watt LED reading lamp, replace kerosene lamps, save the planet!- 69.87.204.36 19:13, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
The Sugar page needs a lot of love, there is a ton of media and informaion out there for it just need someone to get the ball rolling. -- 69.136.111.100 13:40, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
"Backlighted color mode, a blurry 1200×900 that is similar to between 400×300 and 693×520. (like NTSC or PAL television)"
We need pictures from the real hardware. It would also be fun to get images from the publicly available screen emulator (a hacked Xephyr? a Google SoC project?) to see how good/bad the emulation is. I've included my two best guesses, obviously limited by the inability to express the brightness of a subpixel via a whole pixel. Note that the test images get scrambled by image scaling; only use them at their full 1200x900 size. They are marked as sRGB and thus should go direct to screen without any additional gamma adjustment. AlbertCahalan 04:42, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
BTW, on the real hardware, please get pictures of: backlight+swizzle (color), neither (greyscale), swizzle only, and backlight only. AlbertCahalan 04:54, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
Mljmlj 23:01, 11 March 2007 (UTC) Mary Lou Jepsen: I've done the measurements on the display myself and have spent much of the last two years of my life designing, building and refining this display. I'm in process of publishing everything about this display including its astonishing resolution performance. The display is the first display I know of that employs something the video encoding experts have done for some time: the human visual system sees higher resolution in luminance (B&W) than chrominance (color): for example MPEG luminance resolution is 4X the chrominance resolution. In that I also added sunlight readability in B&W mode a key thing to understand is that that the ambient light level of the room changes the resolution of the display. The pixel has a reflective part that is B&W, and a transmissive part that is one color: red or green or blue. It should be that a red and a green and blue pixel combine to make a single full-color pixel. Thus the resolution should be 1200/sqrt(3) x 900/sqrt(3) or 693x520. But, when the room is totally dark the resolution given via standard method of determining display resolution is approximately 800x600 or about 133 dpi. I did these measurements a number of ways and am in process of writing them up for publication (some via straight fresnel patterns, other perceptual image detail tests) In a dark room the effect is akin to sub-pixel rendering - we see an improvement in resolution of ~33% via sub-pixel rendering.
With room lights on, an additional effect comes into play: the display has luminance (B&W) information at 200 dpi in it's reflective mode, with the room lights on the display also reflects 200dpi in black and white. This increases the effective resolution to about XGA or 1024x768 when using test patterns to ascertain the display resolution. Finally, the laptop can be brought outside into bright sunlight and the screen is still viewable - now the color is barely visible (if the backlight is left on), but on the screen the 1200x900 200dpi resolution is seen crisply and clearly. - Mary Lou Jepsen Mljmlj 23:01, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
18.85.18.74 17:41, 12 March 2007 (UTC) Mary Lou Jepsen: You agree that the display can be 800x600 resolution in color. Great. Now, I have a task for you - bring your laptop into the sunlight. Put a high resolution pattern on it. Measure it. The resolution is 1200x900 = 200dpi in luminance channel only (Black, white and grey). Bring the laptop back inside. Look at the display under a microscope - count the pixels. Again there will be 1200x900 pixels. The pixels are square with dimensions of 0.127mm x 0.127. Verify this. This is not bias, opinion or anything but fact. If you see anything different - please send your laptop to me and I will personally inspect it and report to you what problems I find. I assume that it would be a software bug, it would be impossible for your laptop to have a different number of pixels than the thousands of other laptops we have already made. OLPC has designated a place to file a bug report at dev.laptop.org - it would be a more appropriate forum than here. Please kindly consider using a more appropriate forum. Mary Lou Jepsen 18.85.18.74 17:41, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
Albert, it was exceptionally bad form for you to confront Mary Lou here. This page is for discussion of the article and nothing else, if you have questions take them to the OLPC Wiki they are more than willing to accomodate you there. Mary Lou, thank you for your detailed briefing on the display, I'm sure that this information will definitely make it onto the article page. -- Basique 20:29, 15 March 2007 (UTC)