Seeking help for learning system for absolute beginners
pg
I am in the process of setting up computers for a group of children,
in the age between 7 to 12, who have never operate a PC before, with
the intention to install educational / entertaining freewares for
them.
The computers will be Windows 98SE based, with Pentium III or better
CPU, 256MB of RAM each. Graphic is VGA, mostly S3-powered graphic
cards.
I am thinking of installing Logo for them, but before I do that, I do
need to ask the Gurus here for help.
Before I continue, some background. I'm from Malaysia, a third world
country, and the children that our computers are for are from poverty
stricken families. The computers will be placed in a "after school
hang out place" operated by a Catholic Charity organization. The
children can understand the Chinese language but not very familiar
with the English language.
Okay, now .. which flavor of Logo do you think best suit the children,
as well as the computers? Or if you know of any offering from Lisp and/
or Dylan that suit this task, kindly please share.
The computers are all donated stuffs, so they are not really fast, nor
powerful. With 256MB of RAM each, I doubt they can run any fancy
programs.
Would be very grateful for any help / suggestion / pointer that you
can offer.
Thanks again !
Rainer Joswig
<e67cd980-fdd3-4565...@s8g2000prg.googlegroups.com>,
pg <pen...@catholic.org> wrote:
You might also want to ask comp.lang.scheme . There are
useful Scheme systems (like DrScheme) for education that will run on
smaller computers quite well.
Maciej Katafiasz
> The computers will be Windows 98SE based
Please don't. It's the worst possible OS to install for such a scenario.
It'll be unmaintainable for you, and (what's even worse) will teach the
kids that computers are inherently unreliable and not to be trusted. If
it has to be windows, try to get win2k licenses, it'll run on 256MB just
fine. If you don't have to stick to windows, try a linux (unfortunately
my personal favourite desktop, GNOME, won't quite run satisfactorily, but
XFce will, I have used it on a 48MB machine, and it's still easy to use
set up); for instance Ubuntu is a very easy to install distribution and
has plenty of flavours, including Xubuntu for which XFce is the primary
desktop.
I wonder if OLPC's Sugar is currently portable to anything besides XOs,
it's designed exactly for the type of usage you have, so it'd be a
perfect fit.
As for programming environment, I can't really help with Logos, I have no
idea about them. I don't think there's any pre-packaged CL distro that
you could just give to kids for them to play with, especially the
graphical part is lacking. As Rainer suggests, there are several schemes
that concentrate on rich feedback, http://www.pawfal.org/fluxus/ is one
of the new things it seems. A Smalltalk would also do, they're all big on
the "play with things on the screen" side.
Cheers,
Maciej
pg
> Den Sun, 27 Jan 2008 04:42:40 -0800 skrev pg:
>
> > The computers will be Windows 98SE based
>
> Please don't. It's the worst possible OS to install for such a scenario.
> It'll be unmaintainable for you, and (what's even worse) will teach the
> kids that computers are inherently unreliable and not to be trusted. If
> it has to be windows, try to get win2k licenses, it'll run on 256MB just
> fine. If you don't have to stick to windows, try a linux (unfortunately
> my personal favourite desktop, GNOME, won't quite run satisfactorily, but
> XFce will, I have used it on a 48MB machine, and it's still easy to use
> set up); for instance Ubuntu is a very easy to install distribution and
> has plenty of flavours, including Xubuntu for which XFce is the primary
> desktop.
Thanks for replying.
There are several problems that we are facing here:
A) Everything we have are donated stuffs. All the computers are
donated, actually, they are computers that people throw away. We got
them for free, fix them up as well as we could, and we can only find
256MB of RAM for each of them.
B) Due to the limited RAM, we can't run any other OS than Win98SE or
WinME. Plus, we do not want to infringe on any copyright issue. We got
a pile of old Win98SE genuine MS CDs, so we kinda like like have no
other choice but to use Win98SE.
C) This entire operation runs on a very very tight budget. These are
the children that people don't care about. They all come from poverty
stricken families, and they are at the edge of becoming street kids.
What we do there is to keep them in school, provide them with some
incentives to keep learning, keep exploring, etc.
D) We do not have any license to run Win2000 or WinXP, and we do not
have the money to buy them either. On the Linux side, so far I am
still trying to learn Linux, I can set up a system, just a base
system. Installing packages, on the other hand, is still too much for
me.
E) As I mention earlier, these are the kids people don't care about,
therefore, our operation is facing the same fate - people just do not
care about us, period. No funding, no help, no nada. We all do it out
of our own time, our own pocket, our own everything. In other words,
we have absolutely NO leeway to get fancy stuffs. That is why I'm
looking for freeware, abandonedware, and/or open-sourced softwares to
get the whole thing going.
Yes, it's like a chop-chop thing, nothing fancy. But we are doing it.
That is why I need the help from all the Gurus here. Please share with
us any of your suggestion, opinion, point, tip, etc. I thank you for
it.
> I wonder if OLPC's Sugar is currently portable to anything besides XOs,
> it's designed exactly for the type of usage you have, so it'd be a
> perfect fit.
See, even OLPC is a luxury for us. Do you know what USD100 can buy
here? Remember that this is a third world country, and our conversion
rate is 3.3 to 1. USD100 is 330 of our local currency here, and this
can buy A LOT OF STUFFS !
In fact, if I purchase 2 OLPC for USD100 each, the USD200 can get me a
NEW PC with Intel Duo-Core CPU, and 1GB of DDR2 RAM and a 120GB SATA
hard disk. Of course, it doesn't have any software, nor any OS.
And in our situation, all our PC are FREE - yeah, NO CHARGE. Yes, they
are OLD PCs, Pentium III, ranges from 500MHz to 900MHz. But they do
run, and that's the important thing here.
> As for programming environment, I can't really help with Logos, I have no
> idea about them. I don't think there's any pre-packaged CL distro that
> you could just give to kids for them to play with, especially the
> graphical part is lacking. As Rainer suggests, there are several schemes
> that concentrate on rich feedback,http://www.pawfal.org/fluxus/is one
> of the new things it seems. A Smalltalk would also do, they're all big on
> the "play with things on the screen" side.
> Cheers,
> Maciej
I'll check with the Scheme people, thank you very much for sharing the
info (and thanks to Rainer as well!). My initial pick was Logo because
it was made with the original intention of giving kids a start in
programming, at least, conceptually. Perhaps you're right, there are
other things out there, like Scheme. But I'll check with them.
Thanks again for everything.
Hope that other Gurus here, if you have anything to share, please do
so.
Maciej Katafiasz
> There are several problems that we are facing here:
>
> A) Everything we have are donated stuffs. All the computers are donated,
> actually, they are computers that people throw away. We got them for
> free, fix them up as well as we could, and we can only find 256MB of RAM
> for each of them.
This is not a problem for win2k, I'd run win2k on a 256MB machine for
several years and it worked perfectly. Lack of licenses is a bigger
problem.
> B) Due to the limited RAM, we can't run any other OS than Win98SE or
> WinME. Plus, we do not want to infringe on any copyright issue. We got a
> pile of old Win98SE genuine MS CDs, so we kinda like like have no other
> choice but to use Win98SE.
Or you can use on of the free ones, which is even better from several
standpoints (like me generally believing in the whole "free as in speech"
thing). You can get Ubuntu install CDs shipped to you for free, and if
you mention how you want to use them, it's not entirely unlikely that
you'll get extra help.
> C) This entire operation runs on a very very tight budget. These are the
> children that people don't care about. They all come from poverty
> stricken families, and they are at the edge of becoming street kids.
> What we do there is to keep them in school, provide them with some
> incentives to keep learning, keep exploring, etc.
This is why any of Win9x (Me included) is the worst possible choice. It
will provide them with frustration, not incentive.
> D) We do not have any license to run Win2000 or WinXP, and we do not
> have the money to buy them either. On the Linux side, so far I am still
> trying to learn Linux, I can set up a system, just a base system.
> Installing packages, on the other hand, is still too much for me.
Again, I heartily recommend Ubuntu. It's close to being as easy to
install as it gets. Administration is fairly easy as well.
>> I wonder if OLPC's Sugar is currently portable to anything besides XOs,
>> it's designed exactly for the type of usage you have, so it'd be a
>> perfect fit.
>
> See, even OLPC is a luxury for us. Do you know what USD100 can buy here?
> Remember that this is a third world country, and our conversion rate is
> 3.3 to 1. USD100 is 330 of our local currency here, and this can buy A
> LOT OF STUFFS !
Sugar is the custom-made software that makes up the user environment that
runs on OLPC. I wasn't referring to the hardware here. As it was designed
to be run by kids who have never before seen a computer, on machines with
hardly any computing power, it'd fit your needs perfectly, provided you
can run it on stock PCs. Which I don't know if you can.
Cheers,
Maciej
Maciej Katafiasz
> Sugar is the custom-made software that makes up the user environment
> that runs on OLPC. I wasn't referring to the hardware here. As it was
> designed to be run by kids who have never before seen a computer, on
> machines with hardly any computing power, it'd fit your needs perfectly,
> provided you can run it on stock PCs. Which I don't know if you can.
I asked around on #sugar, and it seems you can in fact install Sugar on
any Linux, with precompiled packages available for Ubuntu:
http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Sugar_on_Ubuntu_Linux#Option_3_-_Deb_Packages_for_Gutsy
While it's not entirely streamlined, the whole process should be
relatively painless, and I'm sure you will be able to get help on the
relevant IRC channels (#sugar and #olpc on FreeNode) if you run into
problems.
Cheers,
Maciej
Xah Lee
Many people here (of comp.lang.lisp) are fat, tech geeking assholes
here, they wouldn't have the faintist idea of what pain is. They are
the type that tells you to eat meet when you say you don't have rice.
And the technical recommendations from most of them are worthless,
trust me on this. (in particular i refer to the recommendations made
by Maciej Katafiasz. They usually have political agendas.)
As to what language, i'd recommend to keep thinking Logo. It is a lang
designed for this purpose, with a lot existing literature. Dont bother
at all with Scheme. It is completely useless and good for nothing for
the your kids.
If you don't know already, there's Wikipedia article:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logo_(programming_language)
which should provide you many resources. There are many free
implementations, as well as many now freely downloadable books that
was published in the 1980s and 1990s.
Am not sure how familiar you are with computer languages. A useful
alternative, is Visual Basic. Personally i don't know Visual Basic,
but it is a easy language, and one of the top 5 deployed language
today and actually valuable as a skill. I think there are variant
versions out there that are free.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visual_Basic
(also check Real Basic)
Am not exactly sure for this kinda situation you would need to teach
them computer programing in the first place. Isn't using a computer,
such as browsing the web, the text editing with Notepad, and the
bundled basic paint program sufficient?
For programing, how about teaching them basic HTML? That would be
useful. PHP is also a good candidate, as it is also one of the most
easy to learn, as well one of the top 5 deployed language, highly
demanded skill in the market.
So far, Logo, Visual Basic, PHP... i think are good candidates, as
they require little hardware resource, easy to learn, and the latter 2
are highly valuable skills...
Just noticed that the ages are 7 to 12... adding the fact they don't
speak English, i'd say just consider Logo and HTML.
(just noticed that you also posted to comp.lang.dylan. Dylan is a very
advanced, industrial, and also dead language. It is not a language for
kids. Even a professional programer would have hard time learning
Dylan.)
Best wishes,
Xah
x...@xahlee.org
∑ http://xahlee.org/
☄
Vesa Karvonen
> In article
> <e67cd980-fdd3-4565...@s8g2000prg.googlegroups.com>,
> pg <pen...@catholic.org> wrote:
> > The computers are all donated stuffs, so they are not really fast, nor
> > powerful. With 256MB of RAM each, I doubt they can run any fancy
> > programs.
> You might also want to ask comp.lang.scheme . There are
> useful Scheme systems (like DrScheme) for education that will run on
> smaller computers quite well.
Not to critique the DrScheme environment on other grounds, but a few years
ago, on my old Linux laptop, which had only 128MB of memory, the DrScheme
environment was pretty much unusable (swapped like crazy). The DrScheme
web site (http://www.drscheme.org/) says:
"The latest version of DrScheme is useful with at least 256MB of RAM in
your computer, and installing requires roughly 60MB of disk space."
Who knows, maybe it runs perfectly with just 256MB, but I know that it
certainly didn't run nicely with 128MB. I would recommend trying it on a
256MB machine having 1-2 memory hog applications like a browser running in
the background (which is what many would probably be doing anyway) before
going with DrScheme.
-Vesa Karvonen
Waldek Hebisch
> I am in the process of setting up computers for a group of children,
> in the age between 7 to 12, who have never operate a PC before, with
> the intention to install educational / entertaining freewares for
> them.
>
> The computers will be Windows 98SE based, with Pentium III or better
> CPU, 256MB of RAM each. Graphic is VGA, mostly S3-powered graphic
> cards.
>
> I am thinking of installing Logo for them, but before I do that, I do
> need to ask the Gurus here for help.
>
> as well as the computers? Or if you know of any offering from Lisp and/
> or Dylan that suit this task, kindly please share.
>
You may consider Poplog system:
http://www.cs.bham.ac.uk/research/poplog/poplog.info.html
Poplog gives you four programming languages: Pop11, Common Lisp,
SML, and Prolog. Poplog need only a few megabytes of memory and
will run pretty fast on 500 MHz processor. Installation takes
about 70 Mb of disk space. Pop11 is a language with similar
power to Common Lisp, but is more similar to traditional languages
(it uses Pascal like syntax). For beginners Pop11 offers words
and list maniputaltions in Logo style, while advanced users can
use much more.
Let me mention some drawbacks. First, on Windows Poplog is text-only
-- Poplog support graphics only on Linux. Second, Poplog is not
localised: messages and documantation is in English. AFAIK the
program can handle any language, but somebody would have to
translate texts...
--
Waldek Hebisch
heb...@math.uni.wroc.pl
John Thingstad
Just thought I would warn you that Microsoft no longer supports Windows 98.
This in particular means browsers and the like will be out of date.
Some plugins probably won't install some pages won't display right etc.
Personally I would feel better running a Linux and a new version of
Firefox or Opera.
What you save initially by not learning Linux could quickly be eaten up in
the time spent fixing problems.
Linux's can be gotten for free and Linux comes with a vast number of
languages out of the box.
For teaching programming I might suggest Python which is easy to learn.
There is a also a SmallTalk implementation called Squeak which is child
friendly, free, and not very demanding on resources. Java is the last
thing I would choose at it is almost guarantied to eat up all your
resources. (And it is a fairly difficult language to learn.)
--------------
John Thingstad
Peter Flass
>
> Again, I heartily recommend Ubuntu. It's close to being as easy to
> install as it gets. Administration is fairly easy as well.
>
I'd also throw in another plug for DSL (damn small linux). Runs fine on
a 32MB pentium. Comes complete with GUI and office suite. Desktop
looks a lot like the os-that-must-not=be-named. With 256MB, you should
also have no problem with Ubuntu.
Timofei Shatrov
tried to confuse everyone with this message:
>Den Sun, 27 Jan 2008 04:42:40 -0800 skrev pg:
>
>> The computers will be Windows 98SE based
>
>Please don't. It's the worst possible OS to install for such a scenario.
>It'll be unmaintainable for you, and (what's even worse) will teach the
>kids that computers are inherently unreliable and not to be trusted.
What a bunch of FUD. Win98 is easily the best OS Microsoft has ever created. Too
bad they don't support it anymore.
--
|Don't believe this - you're not worthless ,gr---------.ru
|It's us against millions and we can't take them all... | ue il |
|But we can take them on! | @ma |
| (A Wilhelm Scream - The Rip) |______________|
Andreas Micheler
> The computers will be Windows 98SE based, with Pentium III or better
> CPU, 256MB of RAM each. Graphic is VGA, mostly S3-powered graphic
> cards.
Pentium III are already pretty fast.
I have developed a few years on an Pentium II 300MHz,
before I got my Pentium IV.
I had 192 MB, and WinXP ran quite well on it.
At the time I had used it,
I had absolutely no experience with Linux,
and I feared it's complexity.
But that's long over.
Now I'm using several Linuxes, and especially Kubuntu is great & easy.
> I am thinking of installing Logo for them, but before I do that, I do
> need to ask the Gurus here for help.
I have compiled aUCBLogo for Kubuntu-6.06 and 7.04.
Here are the packages:
<http://www.physik.uni-augsburg.de/~micheler/Logo.html>
You can also try
<http://www.physik.uni-augsburg.de/~micheler/aucblogo-4.8-windows98-debug.zip>
but Win98 itself is very unstable,
as well as the Debug version of aUCBLogo-4.8.
I'm developing aUCBLogo already for several years,
and aUCBLogo-4.7 is quite nice
and can produce high quality 3D animations.
> Before I continue, some background. I'm from Malaysia, a third world
> country, and the children that our computers are for are from poverty
> stricken families. The computers will be placed in a "after school
> hang out place" operated by a Catholic Charity organization. The
> children can understand the Chinese language but not very familiar
> with the English language.
aUCBLogo-4.7 is localizable, but still only ASCII.
aUCBLogo-4.8 can be compiled in Unicode mode,
and the primitives are in parts already translated into Chinese,
as is the user interface.
> Okay, now .. which flavor of Logo do you think best suit the children,
> as well as the computers? Or if you know of any offering from Lisp and/
> or Dylan that suit this task, kindly please share.
On Windows 98 you may also run FMSLogo or Elica, I guess.
But Linux is so much nicer than Win98,
so I really recommend Kubuntu and aUCBLogo or XLogo.
XLogo is also translated into several Languages,
but I guess they use Java, so it might not be as memory efficient.
aUCBLogo-4.7 is a pure interpreter,
so it's not really fast,
but I'm working on a "compile" function in aUCBLogo-4.8,
which already can compile simple procedures,
that use only global variables.
> The computers are all donated stuffs, so they are not really fast, nor
> powerful. With 256MB of RAM each, I doubt they can run any fancy
> programs.
If harddisc space is the problem, you may try Knoppix Linux:
it even does not need a harddisc.
Cheers,
Andreas
Slobodan Blazeski
> On Jan 27, 6:54 am, Maciej Katafiasz <mathr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> > > The computers will be Windows 98SE based
>
> > Please don't. It's the worst possible OS to install for such a scenario.
> > It'll be unmaintainable for you, and (what's even worse) will teach the
> > it has to be windows, try to get win2k licenses, it'll run on 256MB just
> > fine. If you don't have to stick to windows, try a linux (unfortunately
> > my personal favourite desktop, GNOME, won't quite run satisfactorily, but
> > XFce will, I have used it on a 48MB machine, and it's still easy to use
> > set up); for instance Ubuntu is a very easy to install distribution and
> > has plenty of flavours, including Xubuntu for which XFce is the primary
> > desktop.
>
> Thanks for replying.
>
> There are several problems that we are facing here:
>
> A) Everything we have are donated stuffs. All the computers are
> donated, actually, they are computers that people throw away. We got
> them for free, fix them up as well as we could, and we can only find
> 256MB of RAM for each of them.
video processing or something like that. I bought my P4 in 2002 with
256 MB and upgraded year ago to 768MB
>
> B) Due to the limited RAM, we can't run any other OS than Win98SE or
> WinME.
> Plus, we do not want to infringe on any copyright issue. We got
> a pile of old Win98SE genuine MS CDs, so we kinda like like have no
> other choice but to use Win98SE.
to use and all of the software needed is free as well. It's a very
polished distro. If you can't have an internet connection maybe it's
better to stick with 98, linux needs little tweaking now and then to
become *usable*. Most of it's applications are rather spartan but they
usually do the job.
>
> C) This entire operation runs on a very very tight budget. These are
> the children that people don't care about. They all come from poverty
> stricken families, and they are at the edge of becoming street kids.
> What we do there is to keep them in school, provide them with some
> incentives to keep learning, keep exploring, etc.
>
> D) We do not have any license to run Win2000 or WinXP, and we do not
> have the money to buy them either. On the Linux side, so far I am
> still trying to learn Linux, I can set up a system, just a base
> system. Installing packages, on the other hand, is still too much for
> me.
almost immediately.
>
> E) As I mention earlier, these are the kids people don't care about,
> therefore, our operation is facing the same fate - people just do not
> care about us, period. No funding, no help, no nada. We all do it out
> of our own time, our own pocket, our own everything. In other words,
> we have absolutely NO leeway to get fancy stuffs. That is why I'm
> looking for freeware, abandonedware, and/or open-sourced softwares to
> get the whole thing going.
them common lisp, there is many free implementations both commercial
and opensource
>
> Yes, it's like a chop-chop thing, nothing fancy. But we are doing it.
> That is why I need the help from all the Gurus here. Please share with
> us any of your suggestion, opinion, point, tip, etc. I thank you for
> it.
connection go for linux, most of the software over there is free. In
the windows world there's a lot of shareware or limited versions but
people still expect to pay most of the time.
>
> > I wonder if OLPC's Sugar is currently portable to anything besides XOs,
> > it's designed exactly for the type of usage you have, so it'd be a
> > perfect fit.
>
> See, even OLPC is a luxury for us. Do you know what USD100 can buy
> here? Remember that this is a third world country, and our conversion
> rate is 3.3 to 1. USD100 is 330 of our local currency here, and this
> can buy A LOT OF STUFFS !
>
> In fact, if I purchase 2 OLPC for USD100 each, the USD200 can get me a
> NEW PC with Intel Duo-Core CPU, and 1GB of DDR2 RAM and a 120GB SATA
> hard disk. Of course, it doesn't have any software, nor any OS.
>
> And in our situation, all our PC are FREE - yeah, NO CHARGE. Yes, they
> are OLD PCs, Pentium III, ranges from 500MHz to 900MHz. But they do
> run, and that's the important thing here.
games or image/video processing they will do just fine
>
> > As for programming environment, I can't really help with Logos, I have no
> > idea about them. I don't think there's any pre-packaged CL distro that
> > you could just give to kids for them to play with, especially the
> > graphical part is lacking. As Rainer suggests, there are several schemes
> > that concentrate on rich feedback,http://www.pawfal.org/fluxus/isone
> > of the new things it seems. A Smalltalk would also do, they're all big on
> > the "play with things on the screen" side.
> > Cheers,
> > Maciej
>
> I'll check with the Scheme people, thank you very much for sharing the
> info (and thanks to Rainer as well!). My initial pick was Logo because
> it was made with the original intention of giving kids a start in
> programming, at least, conceptually. Perhaps you're right, there are
> other things out there, like Scheme. But I'll check with them.
answer your questions when you got stuck
tons of free to download ebooks
http://www-cgi.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs.cmu.edu/user/dst/www/LispBook/index
http://www.gigamonkeys.com/book/
http://www.psg.com/~dlamkins/sl/contents.html
http://www.markwatson.com/opencontent/
http://www.cse.buffalo.edu/~shapiro/Commonlisp/
http://www.franz.com/resources/educational_resources/cooper.book.pdf
free videos from Franz certification courses:
http://www.franz.com/services/classes/download.lhtml
A lot of high quality implementation both free as in beer or open
source:
(free commercial software)
http://www.franz.com/downloads/allegrodownload.lhtml
http://www.lispworks.com/downloads/index.html
http://www.cormanlisp.com/download.html
opensource
http://www.gigamonkeys.com/lispbox/#download
http://sbcl.sourceforge.net/platform-table.html
http://clisp.cons.org/
http://ecls.sourceforge.net/
Not to mention countless tutorials & open source libraries.
>
> Thanks again for everything.
>
> Hope that other Gurus here, if you have anything to share, please do
> so.
I'm far from guru, but good luck with your program.
cheers
Slobodan
krw
says...
> On Sun, 27 Jan 2008 14:54:25 +0000 (UTC), Maciej Katafiasz <math...@gmail.com>
> tried to confuse everyone with this message:
>
> >Den Sun, 27 Jan 2008 04:42:40 -0800 skrev pg:
> >
> >> The computers will be Windows 98SE based
> >
> >Please don't. It's the worst possible OS to install for such a scenario.
> >It'll be unmaintainable for you, and (what's even worse) will teach the
> >kids that computers are inherently unreliable and not to be trusted.
>
> What a bunch of FUD. Win98 is easily the best OS Microsoft has ever created. Too
> bad they don't support it anymore.
Troll.
--
Keith
kkt
> On Sun, 27 Jan 2008 14:54:25 +0000 (UTC), Maciej Katafiasz <math...@gmail.com>
> tried to confuse everyone with this message:
>
> >Den Sun, 27 Jan 2008 04:42:40 -0800 skrev pg:
> >
> >> The computers will be Windows 98SE based
> >
> >Please don't. It's the worst possible OS to install for such a scenario.
> >It'll be unmaintainable for you, and (what's even worse) will teach the
> >kids that computers are inherently unreliable and not to be trusted.
>
> What a bunch of FUD. Win98 is easily the best OS Microsoft has ever
> created.
Which is like being the best waterskier in Antarctica.
-- Patrick
rpl
depends on your POV; win98se does have alot of supporters. I (continue
to) use XP because it hasn't crashed since I installed it; if it wasn't
for that I'd probably still be using win98se or winme; *much* lighter,
more user-comprehensible, full command line; get infected and just
reinstall in a couple minutes.
rpl
winston19842005
On 1/27/08 6:52 PM, in article fnj5f7$2qf$1...@registered.motzarella.org, "rpl"
<plin...@yahoo.com.invalid> wrote:
The biggest issues I had with Win98SE/Me was with memory usage/release. I
used a program that would free up memory, with a user-selectable threshold
(Rambooster). It became a very stable system after that.
I went from, on average, rebooting once or twice a day (depending on usage)
to going a week between reboots.
I'm sure your mileage may vary - one of our XP machines at work needs
rebooting at least once per shift. Application issues still create havoc
with the rest of the OS.
krw
@yahoo.com.invalid says...
All Win9x variants are a pile of shite. I've been having a lot of
trouble with XP lately too. In the five or six years I used Win2K I
never had any problems that I could pin on M$. Win2K was by far the
most stable Windows. (let's just forget Vista ever happened)
--
Keith
Lon
> On Sun, 27 Jan 2008 14:54:25 +0000 (UTC), Maciej Katafiasz <math...@gmail.com>
> tried to confuse everyone with this message:
>
>> Den Sun, 27 Jan 2008 04:42:40 -0800 skrev pg:
>>
>>> The computers will be Windows 98SE based
>> Please don't. It's the worst possible OS to install for such a scenario.
>> It'll be unmaintainable for you, and (what's even worse) will teach the
>> kids that computers are inherently unreliable and not to be trusted.
>
> What a bunch of FUD. Win98 is easily the best OS Microsoft has ever created. Too
> bad they don't support it anymore.
>
too much more advanced than Win/95b with TCP/IP 1.2 other than some USB
support. Not even in the same ballpark stability wise as the NT
kernels. Somewhat difficult to run even 98SE for long periods of time
without a reboot to clear the GDI leaks and memory cruft. NT variants
can run for weeks or longer without going unstable.
pg
Thanks a lot for the info !
How come the development for Window Poplog had stopped ?
Lon
krw
lon.s...@comcast.net says...
In this case, I'm quite sure it's device driver injected. I have
the damned thing working again (reboot-reinstall) but it still can't
rememberer screen modes across power mode changes worth a damn.
Suspend is useless.
--
Keith
Lon
wasnt a model of stability.
krw
I didn't have it in 2K either, which was. Win2K couldn't undock
without rebooting, XP can't anymore either. :-(
--
Keith
rpl
> In article <fnj5f7$2qf$1...@registered.motzarella.org>, plinnane3
> @yahoo.com.invalid says...
<win9x>
>> depends on your POV; win98se does have alot of supporters. I (continue
>> to) use XP because it hasn't crashed since I installed it; if it wasn't
>> for that I'd probably still be using win98se or winme; *much* lighter,
>> more user-comprehensible, full command line; get infected and just
>> reinstall in a couple minutes.
>
> All Win9x variants are a pile of shite.
ain't; they work fine as a personal computer OS, if consistently working
isn't a big priority. For 95/98/98SE, the ability to drop down to DOS,
fiddle around then restart win.exe is a *very* nice thing to have for
maintenance chores.
>I've been having a lot of
> trouble with XP lately too. In the five or six years I used Win2K I
> never had any problems that I could pin on M$.
partially, I'm sure is because the system is more non-intuitively
complex and harder to trace through.
My WinME OS installation was 80MB.
>Win2K was by far the
> most stable Windows.
no argument there.
(let's just forget Vista ever happened)
(what is this "Vista" thing you talk about ?)
rpl
Gene Wirchenko
Given the water temperature, one would have to be good, or it
would be the Blue Scream of Death.
Sincerely,
Gene Wirchenko
Computerese Irregular Verb Conjugation:
I have preferences.
You have biases.
He/She has prejudices.
kkt
> krw wrote:
> > In article <fnj5f7$2qf$1...@registered.motzarella.org>, plinnane3
> > @yahoo.com.invalid says...
>
> <win9x>
> >> depends on your POV; win98se does have alot of supporters. I (continue
> >> to) use XP because it hasn't crashed since I installed it; if it wasn't
> >> for that I'd probably still be using win98se or winme; *much* lighter,
> >> more user-comprehensible, full command line; get infected and just
> >> reinstall in a couple minutes.
> >
> > All Win9x variants are a pile of shite.
>
> ain't; they work fine as a personal computer OS, if consistently working
> isn't a big priority.
Oh, sure, if you don't mind it crashing a lot. And corrupting files.
And 8.3 filenames. And only doing one application at a time.
Tolerable for games, where crashing can be considered a hazard of the
course. Intolerable for getting work done.
-- Patrick
CBFalconer
> Maciej Katafiasz <math...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Den Sun, skrev pg:
>>
>>> The computers will be Windows 98SE based
>>
>> Please don't. It's the worst possible OS to install for such a
>> scenario. It'll be unmaintainable for you, and (what's even
>> worse) will teach the kids that computers are inherently
>> unreliable and not to be trusted.
>
> What a bunch of FUD. Win98 is easily the best OS Microsoft has
> ever created. Too bad they don't support it anymore.
It depends on the objective. For the OP, and absolute beginners,
it is probably not good, and Ubuntu would be much better. But for
many W98 is quite adequate, and it doesn't get between you and the
machine.
--
[mail]: Chuck F (cbfalconer at maineline dot net)
[page]: <http://cbfalconer.home.att.net>
Try the download section.
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
CBFalconer
> rpl <plin...@yahoo.com.invalid> writes:
>> krw wrote:
>>> @yahoo.com.invalid says...
>>
>> <win9x>
>>>> depends on your POV; win98se does have alot of supporters. I
>>>> (continue to) use XP because it hasn't crashed since I installed
>>>> it; if it wasn't for that I'd probably still be using win98se or
>>>> winme; *much* lighter, more user-comprehensible, full command
>>>> line; get infected and just reinstall in a couple minutes.
>>>
>>> All Win9x variants are a pile of shite.
>>
>> ain't; they work fine as a personal computer OS, if consistently
>> working isn't a big priority.
>
> Oh, sure, if you don't mind it crashing a lot. And corrupting
> files. And 8.3 filenames. And only doing one application at a time.
Funny thing, I am running a W98 FE installation, which was
installed around 2000, and never reinstalled. It is protected by
ZoneAlarm 2.1.44. Never been invaded (but I don't do stupid
things). The filesystem handles horrible long filenames with
BLANKS embedded. Whenever an app is brought down for illegal
operations I reboot as soon as possible. Never corrupts files.
Never noticed any limitation of applications running.
Other places I have Ubuntu 6.06 and Mandrake 8.0. They work too.
Follow-ups set to reduce ridiculous cross-posting.
Josh Anderson
a Linux distribution that is much easier to install and maintain.
Automatic updates, point-and-click software installation, high
reliability: it's all there.
I would also recommend taking the time to look into the OLPC software,
though. I haven't used it myself, but from what I've read it looks
like an excellent choice, especially since there are language issues.
(The Sugar GUI is light on language and heavy on pictograms.) Of
course, I'd bet that any localized versions of Ubutuntu/Edbuntu you
need are available.
If you're still skeptical about going the Linux route, I suggest
downloading Damn Small Linux and giving it a try one of the machines.
At only 50MB, the time investment will be small, and it will give you
a good idea of how well Linux can perform on old hardware. (There is
no need to install the software--it will run entirely from the CD.)
As for languages, I think that Logo is a great idea. The graphical
component will keep kids interested. (It kept me interested, anyway.)
Lisp or Scheme could be a good choice for older children, but the lack
of an easy way to do graphical stuff limits its appeal.
There *is* Lush (http://lush.sourceforge.net/), which hooks into the
Standard Development Library for multimedia stuff. They have a simple
lunar lander game in 60 lines of code on their site, but that requires
learning quite a bit about the SDL. I'm sorry I don't have a better
suggestion from the Lisp/Scheme realm. Even with out the graphics, it
would be good for network programming and/or text-based games.
Finally, please try to avoid Windows 98. I know that it's easy for you
to get started with, but it's also really, really fragile. Believe me,
I lived with it for about two years. Preventing users from modifying
the software on the machines or "breaking" them (intentionally or
unintentionally) will be difficult or impossible without third-party
software like DeepFreeze. You'll also have to mess with virus scanner
and firewall software.
I wish you the best of luck with this project!
-Josh
winston...@yahoo.com
> rpl <plinna...@yahoo.com.invalid> writes:
> > krw wrote:
> > > @yahoo.com.invalid says...
>
> > <win9x>
> > >> depends on your POV; win98se does have alot of supporters. I (continue
> > >> to) use XP because it hasn't crashed since I installed it; if it wasn't
> > >> for that I'd probably still be using win98se or winme; *much* lighter,
> > >> more user-comprehensible, full command line; get infected and just
> > >> reinstall in a couple minutes.
>
> > > All Win9x variants are a pile of shite.
>
> > ain't; they work fine as a personal computer OS, if consistently working
> > isn't a big priority.
>
> Oh, sure, if you don't mind it crashing a lot. And corrupting files.
> And 8.3 filenames. And only doing one application at a time.
>
> Tolerable for games, where crashing can be considered a hazard of the
> course. Intolerable for getting work done.
>
Showing our ignorance? Did you ever use Win98?
Long filenames were introduced with Win95.
Corrupted files? When/where?
One application at a time? That went away with Win3.1!
The OP may have limitations. We may not agree with them, but if they
are limitations, we should at least provide the info requested without
hitting the OP over the head with our insistence that the OP is
running the wrong OS.
Quite frankly, all PCs should run VMS!
rpl
If you have an Itanium or an Alpha based machine (or of course an
original DEC box) then go right ahead. Open-VMS is a free license for
hobbyists.
I'm all for the OP using '98, but it occurs to me that they might be
able to get $40-50 for each win98se cd/license on e-bay or something.
rpl
pg
We got a whole stack of Win98SE CD, all genuine Microsoft issue! That
enables us to use Win98SE without fear that the government will raid
us with flimsy "copyright violation" or even "multimedia piracy"
excuses.
Not that we do anything illegal (we are trying to do the right thing
in a crime infested slum area), but the government the rule Malaysia
does not like our religion (hint, hint) nor the race of our
volunteers / target audience. (but that's politics, dirty and ugly
politics, offtopic here, sorry!) But it happened elsewhere to other
Catholic run operations ! We just have to be careful, that's all.
pg
Thanks, Josh, for your wonderful suggestions ! I will look into every
single one of them.
Thanks again !
Alan Crowe
> pg wrote:
> > The computers will be Windows 98SE based, with Pentium III or better
> > CPU, 256MB of RAM each. Graphic is VGA, mostly S3-powered graphic
> > cards.
>
> Pentium III are already pretty fast.
> I have developed a few years on an Pentium II 300MHz,
> before I got my Pentium IV.
Strangely enough I've reading this using a 166MHz Pentium
with 168MB of RAM.
FreeBSD 4.1-RELEASE #0: Fri Jul 28 14:30:31 GMT 2000
j...@ref4.freebsd.org:/usr/src/sys/compile/GENERIC
Timecounter "i8254" frequency 1193182 Hz
CPU: Pentium/P55C (165.79-MHz 586-class CPU)
Origin = "GenuineIntel" Id = 0x544 Stepping = 4
Features=0x8001bf<FPU,VME,DE,PSE,TSC,MSR,MCE,CX8,MMX>
real memory = 167772160 (163840K bytes)
avail memory = 158842880 (155120K bytes)
I've not got round to upgrading the operating system due to
incompetence and ill health.
Is that enough to run lisp?
Well, I installed an up to date operating system on a more
powerful machine during a window of good health
FreeBSD 5.4-RELEASE #0: Sun May 8 10:21:06 UTC 2005
ro...@harlow.cse.buffalo.edu:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC
Timecounter "i8254" frequency 1193182 Hz quality 0
CPU: Pentium II/Pentium II Xeon/Celeron (350.80-MHz 686-class CPU)
Origin = "GenuineIntel" Id = 0x652 Stepping = 2
Features=0x183f9ff<FPU,VME,DE,PSE,TSC,MSR,PAE,MCE,CX8,SEP,MTRR,PGE,MCA,CMOV,PAT,PSE36,MMX,FXSR>
real memory = 268369920 (255 MB)
avail memory = 252964864 (241 MB)
and installed Firefox, emacs, slime, CMUCL, and SBCL.
350MHZ Pentium II with 256MB
It seems plenty fast enough. I wrote some code for music
synthesis, direct algorithmic synthesis, with each sample
computed by Lisp code, and it runs in real time.
Also, my crude 3D viewer code rotates simple wire frames in
real time.
http://www.cawtech.demon.co.uk/clx/3D-viewer/index.html
(and could work much better, I've a X event backlog problem
that I now know how to fix.)
Unfortunately I cannot tell whether my comments are really
helpful to the original poster because I'm using fvwm2 as my
window manager. I've not burdened my old machines with a
``desk top''. If a modern desk top is essential for 7 to 12
year olds then I don't know.
For older children, who can type commands into an xterm,
crappy old machines, even worse than Pentium III, are
perfectly usable. They are much more powerful than people
now-a-days realise, it is just a matter of dodging those
particular programs that throw it all away.
Alan Crowe
Edinburgh
Scotland
Waldek Hebisch
Well, I would say to Windows and free software does not go well
together. For example I like to share may work with other
-- I feel good allowing others use my work. But to really well
support program on Windows I would have to pay for Windows
first. That is too much for me.
--
Waldek Hebisch
heb...@math.uni.wroc.pl
Peter Flass
> På Sun, 27 Jan 2008 13:42:40 +0100, skrev pg <pen...@catholic.org>:
>
>> Hello to all the gurus here !
>>
>> I am in the process of setting up computers for a group of children,
>> in the age between 7 to 12, who have never operate a PC before, with
>> the intention to install educational / entertaining freewares for
>> them.
>>
>> The computers will be Windows 98SE based, with Pentium III or better
>> CPU, 256MB of RAM each. Graphic is VGA, mostly S3-powered graphic
>> cards.
>>
>> I am thinking of installing Logo for them, but before I do that, I do
>> need to ask the Gurus here for help.
>>
>> Before I continue, some background. I'm from Malaysia, a third world
>> country, and the children that our computers are for are from poverty
>> stricken families. The computers will be placed in a "after school
>> hang out place" operated by a Catholic Charity organization. The
>> children can understand the Chinese language but not very familiar
>> with the English language.
>>
>> Okay, now .. which flavor of Logo do you think best suit the children,
>> as well as the computers? Or if you know of any offering from Lisp and/
>> or Dylan that suit this task, kindly please share.
Logos for Linux:
http://freshmeat.net/browse/171/
Peter Flass
>
> depends on your POV; win98se does have alot of supporters. I (continue
> to) use XP because it hasn't crashed since I installed it; if it wasn't
> for that I'd probably still be using win98se or winme; *much* lighter,
> more user-comprehensible, full command line;
get infected and just reinstall in a couple minutes.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I guess this is a virtue for windoze.
>
>
> rpl
Peter Flass
> NT variants can run for weeks or longer without going unstable.
^^^^^
>
Another rousing recommendation!
Peter Flass
> krw wrote:
>
> ain't; they work fine as a personal computer OS, if consistently working
> isn't a big priority.
Keep 'em coming folks. Sounds like an OS I'd really want to run.
For 95/98/98SE, the ability to drop down to DOS,
> fiddle around then restart win.exe is a *very* nice thing to have for
> maintenance chores.
OS/2 does this just fine. It's really a great OS, it's just too bad IBM
doesn't support it anymore;-)
krw
@s12g2000prg.googlegroups.com>, winston...@yahoo.com says...
> On Jan 28, 12:45 am, kkt <k...@zipcon.net> wrote:
> > rpl <plinna...@yahoo.com.invalid> writes:
> > > krw wrote:
> > > > In article <fnj5f7$2q...@registered.motzarella.org>, plinnane3
> > > > @yahoo.com.invalid says...
> >
> > > <win9x>
> > > >> depends on your POV; win98se does have alot of supporters. I (continue
> > > >> to) use XP because it hasn't crashed since I installed it; if it wasn't
> > > >> for that I'd probably still be using win98se or winme; *much* lighter,
> > > >> more user-comprehensible, full command line; get infected and just
> > > >> reinstall in a couple minutes.
> >
> > > > All Win9x variants are a pile of shite.
> >
> > > ain't; they work fine as a personal computer OS, if consistently working
> > > isn't a big priority.
> >
> > Oh, sure, if you don't mind it crashing a lot. And corrupting files.
> > And 8.3 filenames. And only doing one application at a time.
> >
> > Tolerable for games, where crashing can be considered a hazard of the
> > course. Intolerable for getting work done.
> >
>
> Showing our ignorance? Did you ever use Win98?
No, I'm a lot smarter than that.
> Long filenames were introduced with Win95.
Yes, and never done correctly.
> Corrupted files? When/where?
Diskcopy was notorious for fucking up LFN->SFN mapping and then
corresponding registry entries.
> One application at a time? That went away with Win3.1!
No, it certainly did not.
> The OP may have limitations. We may not agree with them, but if they
> are limitations, we should at least provide the info requested without
> hitting the OP over the head with our insistence that the OP is
> running the wrong OS.
Even if he is? Bullshit.
> Quite frankly, all PCs should run VMS!
There goes any credibility you might have had.
--
Keith
winston19842005
On 1/28/08 6:35 PM, in article
MPG.2207920a9...@news.individual.net, "krw" <k...@kkk.kkk> wrote:
> In article <43686d40-7c4f-4a94-a7d4-0eaf554f8b96
> @s12g2000prg.googlegroups.com>, winston...@yahoo.com says...
>> On Jan 28, 12:45 am, kkt <k...@zipcon.net> wrote:
>>> rpl <plinna...@yahoo.com.invalid> writes:
>>>> krw wrote:
>>>>> In article <fnj5f7$2q...@registered.motzarella.org>, plinnane3
>>>>> @yahoo.com.invalid says...
>>>
>>>> <win9x>
>>>>>> depends on your POV; win98se does have alot of supporters. I (continue
>>>>>> to) use XP because it hasn't crashed since I installed it; if it wasn't
>>>>>> for that I'd probably still be using win98se or winme; *much* lighter,
>>>>>> more user-comprehensible, full command line; get infected and just
>>>>>> reinstall in a couple minutes.
>>>
>>>>> All Win9x variants are a pile of shite.
>>>
>>>> ain't; they work fine as a personal computer OS, if consistently working
>>>> isn't a big priority.
>>>
>>> Oh, sure, if you don't mind it crashing a lot. And corrupting files.
>>> And 8.3 filenames. And only doing one application at a time.
>>>
>>> Tolerable for games, where crashing can be considered a hazard of the
>>> course. Intolerable for getting work done.
>>>
>>
>> Showing our ignorance? Did you ever use Win98?
>
> No, I'm a lot smarter than that.
You'd have to prove it, with all your silly arguments.
>
>> Long filenames were introduced with Win95.
>
> Yes, and never done correctly.
>
How would you have them done? Win95 had a real DOS that Windows ran on top
of, not this "silly emulation" we have with the later products. DOSBox does
a better job of emulating DOS than the shell XP provides.
>> Corrupted files? When/where?
>
> Diskcopy was notorious for fucking up LFN->SFN mapping and then
> corresponding registry entries.
You were using Diskcopy? Did you by any chance look at the system tools that
included utilities to save/restore LFNs?
>
>> One application at a time? That went away with Win3.1!
>
> No, it certainly did not.
I ran multiple applications out of Win3.1 and later Win for workgroups.
>
>> The OP may have limitations. We may not agree with them, but if they
>> are limitations, we should at least provide the info requested without
>> hitting the OP over the head with our insistence that the OP is
>> running the wrong OS.
>
> Even if he is? Bullshit.
The reply I expect from an asshole. Forget the problem definition &
requirements - you know better.
>
>> Quite frankly, all PCs should run VMS!
>
> There goes any credibility you might have had.
It was part tongue in cheek - not enough to rate an emoticon. But VMS was a
much better OS than DOS, Windows or Linux. Perhaps we should be running
TOPS-20.
krw
Peter...@Yahoo.com says...
I guess! I'd still be using it if at all possible.
--
Keith
krw
Peter...@Yahoo.com says...
Windows was never as easy to install as OS/2. Windows loves that
stinking registry. With OS/2 one just keeps all applications on a
separate partition. If a reinstall is wanted, just blow away the OS
partition, install, and drag the apps back to the desktop. Done.
It takes me weeks to do the same with XP (just went through it).
--
Keith
rpl
yup, when in Rome, shoot Roman candles; note that my system has never
been infected, but I used to reinstall 2-3 times a year just to clean
things up.
rpl
Ties Stuij
really nice book about using computers to teach concepts. It's from
the (co?) You can download it for free by signing up for a free, no-
strings attached web account. Which is written by the way by Seymour
Papert, co-developer of Logo. More on acquiring the Mindstorms pdf is
to be found here: http://lambda-the-ultimate.org/node/2609
Concerning programming languages there is something to say for Etoys.
Not just for it's easy scripting, but also because of the momentum the
OLPC is giving it. Different groups around the world are implementing
Etoys activities for for example maths and learning English. And I
know for example OLE Nepal and OLPC Austria/a group of European based
OLPC hackers are right now looking for ways to collaborate and
internationalize those activities. You could benefit directly from
that. They would only require translating and if stuff pans out as
planned that would require not much more than the translating itself.
Note that this isn't OLPC specific, just Etoys specific. And Etoys,
through Squeak (a Smalltalk implementation) runs on any of the major
operating systems. At the moment OLE Nepal is also looking at ways to
integrate this with server-based performance tracking, something that
the Sugar devs mmare also working on. I'd say you should really drop
the OLE Nepal team a line and see where they're heading
(olenepal.org).
In line with that I'd also suggest using Sugar. You would be able to
leverage a lot of development power for exactly the purpose you're
aiming at. But with not so much linux knowledge i can see how that can
be a bit difficult to set up. But it's very much worth a try. And you
definetely want to give Linux a try. You're gonna feel a bit uncertain
in the beginning but it will pay off in the end. Also I suspect you'd
get lots of support from the Linux community.
Also try Malaysian linux groups for help. I know The OLE Nepal guys
have gotten nice local support for for example Devanagari encoding in
Linux.
/Ties
pg
account, and am in the process to download the MindStorms book. Will
read it offline when I got the time.
Thanks again ! !
George Neuner
<vesa.k...@cs.helsinki.fi> wrote:
>In comp.lang.lisp Rainer Joswig <jos...@lisp.de> wrote:
>> In article
>> <e67cd980-fdd3-4565...@s8g2000prg.googlegroups.com>,
>> pg <pen...@catholic.org> wrote:
>[...]
>> > The computers are all donated stuffs, so they are not really fast, nor
>> > powerful. With 256MB of RAM each, I doubt they can run any fancy
>> > programs.
>[...]
>> You might also want to ask comp.lang.scheme . There are
>> useful Scheme systems (like DrScheme) for education that will run on
>> smaller computers quite well.
>
>Not to critique the DrScheme environment on other grounds, but a few years
>ago, on my old Linux laptop, which had only 128MB of memory, the DrScheme
>environment was pretty much unusable (swapped like crazy). The DrScheme
>web site (http://www.drscheme.org/) says:
>
> "The latest version of DrScheme is useful with at least 256MB of RAM in
> your computer, and installing requires roughly 60MB of disk space."
>
>Who knows, maybe it runs perfectly with just 256MB, but I know that it
>certainly didn't run nicely with 128MB. I would recommend trying it on a
>256MB machine having 1-2 memory hog applications like a browser running in
>the background (which is what many would probably be doing anyway) before
>going with DrScheme.
>
>-Vesa Karvonen
Text mode MzScheme doesn't need a whole lot, but programs that use
MrEd (the GUI framework) seem to beat the hell out of the system.
That, unfortunately includes the DrScheme IDE and debugger.
Under DrScheme you can restrict the heap down to 100MB which gives an
image about ~145MB total. But it runs like a pig in 256MB on Windows
(I don't have a small Linux handy to check it there).
George
--
for email reply remove "/" from address
George Neuner
<bjjl...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>On 1/27/08 6:52 PM, in article fnj5f7$2qf$1...@registered.motzarella.org, "rpl"
><plin...@yahoo.com.invalid> wrote:
>
>> krw wrote:
>>> In article <479cecd0....@news.motzarella.org>, gr...@mail.ru
>>> says...
>>>> On Sun, 27 Jan 2008 14:54:25 +0000 (UTC), Maciej Katafiasz
>>>> <math...@gmail.com>
>>>> tried to confuse everyone with this message:
>>>>
>>>>> Den Sun, 27 Jan 2008 04:42:40 -0800 skrev pg:
>>>>>
>>>>>> The computers will be Windows 98SE based
>>>>> Please don't. It's the worst possible OS to install for such a scenario.
>>>>> It'll be unmaintainable for you, and (what's even worse) will teach the
>>>>> kids that computers are inherently unreliable and not to be trusted.
>>>> What a bunch of FUD. Win98 is easily the best OS Microsoft has ever created.
>>>> Too
>>>> bad they don't support it anymore.
>>>
>>> Troll.
>>>
>>
>> depends on your POV; win98se does have alot of supporters. I (continue
>> to) use XP because it hasn't crashed since I installed it; if it wasn't
>> for that I'd probably still be using win98se or winme; *much* lighter,
>> more user-comprehensible, full command line; get infected and just
>> reinstall in a couple minutes.
>>
>
>The biggest issues I had with Win98SE/Me was with memory usage/release. I
>used a program that would free up memory, with a user-selectable threshold
>(Rambooster). It became a very stable system after that.
>
>I went from, on average, rebooting once or twice a day (depending on usage)
>to going a week between reboots.
>
>I'm sure your mileage may vary - one of our XP machines at work needs
>rebooting at least once per shift. Application issues still create havoc
>with the rest of the OS.
I did application development on 98SE for almost a year. The machine
needed a reboot every couple of days.
It's the extras (themes, multimedia, etc.) that are the problem with
Windows - the core OS and GUI are very stable and have been for many
years. The company I worked for delivered kiosk and embedded apps on
Windows (95/98/NT4/2K) that were extremely stable because we
controlled the environment. I've seen NT4 servers stay up for over a
year (don't run IIS, Exchange Server, or Oracle 9 on them though).
I'm currently still doing development on XPpro (though it's waning)
and I reboot the development machine on average less than once a
month.
George Neuner
wrote:
But the previous poster had a point. You could sell the Windows CDs
and use Linux for free. Obviously I don't know the local politics,
but I don't think the authorities would bust you for using free
software. It's more likely they'll bust you for letting the children
access forbidden web sites.
George Neuner
wrote:
>Timofei Shatrov wrote:
>> On Sun, 27 Jan 2008 14:54:25 +0000 (UTC), Maciej Katafiasz <math...@gmail.com>
>> tried to confuse everyone with this message:
>>
>>> Den Sun, 27 Jan 2008 04:42:40 -0800 skrev pg:
>>>
>>>> The computers will be Windows 98SE based
>>> Please don't. It's the worst possible OS to install for such a scenario.
>>> It'll be unmaintainable for you, and (what's even worse) will teach the
>>> kids that computers are inherently unreliable and not to be trusted.
>>
>> What a bunch of FUD. Win98 is easily the best OS Microsoft has ever created. Too
>> bad they don't support it anymore.
>>
>Yeah, almost as good as Win/98SE with the 64K GDI limit and still not
>too much more advanced than Win/95b with TCP/IP 1.2 other than some USB
>support. Not even in the same ballpark stability wise as the NT
>kernels. Somewhat difficult to run even 98SE for long periods of time
>without a reboot to clear the GDI leaks and memory cruft. NT variants
>can run for weeks or longer without going unstable.
98 (all versions) had 128KB GDI and much better recycling than 95.
The only people I know who had problems with Winsock were those who
tried to use the incompetant MFC CSocket implementations. Raw Winsock
worked flawlessly from version 1.1 (95b) onward.
winston19842005
On 1/29/08 2:16 PM, in article 2vtup35n6aoogl2bo...@4ax.com,
"George Neuner" <gneuner2/@/comcast.net> wrote:
We run IIS at work - those servers are pretty unstable, yes. Always having
to restart the service, or reboot...
pg
decide to use it because of several factors as listed below :
1. We don't have money.
No money, no new and fancy computers with BIG RAM for Windows
XP.
No money, no Windows XP. (It does cost money!)
2. We got a stack of old but genuine Microsoft issue Win98SE CDs.
3. Our target is kids, and our mission is to help them to find "fun",
"excitement" and "self-confidence" using computer, minus the violence,
sex, etc.
Rebooting many times in this case is tolerable because we do not
require long period of uptime in between reboots. After all, kids are
kids. They play with something for 2 hours and they get tired. Then we
shut the machine down. Another kid wants to use it, we power it back
up.
About Linux, while I can set up a basic Linux system, I am not very
good at installing packages, especially if I need to re-compile the
source, do the Make and so on. Therefore, we will stick with Win98SE
for the time being, until I can do the re-compile, Make, get source
from sub-version etc with ease.
Thank you all !
On Jan 29, 11:16 am, George Neuner <gneuner2/@/comcast.net> wrote:
> On Sun, 27 Jan 2008 18:58:11 -0500, winston19842005
> >The biggest issues I had with Win98SE/Me was with memory usage/release. I
Maciej Katafiasz
> About Linux, while I can set up a basic Linux system, I am not very good
> at installing packages, especially if I need to re-compile the source,
> do the Make and so on. Therefore, we will stick with Win98SE for the
> time being, until I can do the re-compile, Make, get source from
> sub-version etc with ease.
Why would you need that? We're not in 1991 anymore, you can install
packages for your distribution. In fact, it's way easier than on windows
for a wide array of software, as it's all gathered in one place and all
installs in the same way.
Just foolproofing Win98SE to make it reasonably safe against *accidental*
breakage is gonna take way more resources and skill than learning how to
use Ubuntu.
Cheers,
Maciej
pg
People have been arrested of having Linux CDs, for the authority
doesn't differentiate what programs are in the CDs. As long as the CD
has computer programs, and if it's not "official release" with
"official license" like what Microsoft offers (stickers and such), the
authority here will charge you for "PIRACY".
The penalty is heavy - RM20,000 (about 6,800USD) for each "pirate" CD.
That's Malaysia, and I kid you not !
John Thingstad
>
>
> People have been arrested of having Linux CDs, for the authority
> doesn't differentiate what programs are in the CDs. As long as the CD
> has computer programs, and if it's not "official release" with
> "official license" like what Microsoft offers (stickers and such), the
> authority here will charge you for "PIRACY".
>
> The penalty is heavy - RM20,000 (about 6,800USD) for each "pirate" CD.
>
> That's Malaysia, and I kid you not !
But Linux DOES have official releases and a official licence.
(A GNU Protected License http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html)
You can also purchase the Linux CD's with Logo's etc. if it makes you feel
better. They will only charge you with the price of the CD, delivery and
processing though, not the product itself.
They are also allowed to charge for installation, support and development
of custom solutions.
But these services are optional.
You could prosecute someone for SELLING Linux or for producing commercial
software extending GPL'ed products.
Even then it would be a case for a civil suit not a crime. I don't know
what the laws are in Malaysia are, but this sounds to weird to be true. If
I were you I'd check again.
--------------
John Thingstad
Maciej Katafiasz
> You could prosecute someone for SELLING Linux or for producing
> commercial software extending GPL'ed products.
This is complete bullshit, you have no idea what you're talking about.
Maciej
Maciej Katafiasz
> People have been arrested of having Linux CDs, for the authority doesn't
> differentiate what programs are in the CDs. As long as the CD has
> computer programs, and if it's not "official release" with "official
> license" like what Microsoft offers (stickers and such), the authority
> here will charge you for "PIRACY".
If you order Ubuntu CDs, they will be shipped to you factory-pressed,
with prints on them and printed sleeves. They look very official, and you
won't have to pay a dime for them.
Cheers,
Maciej
Morten Reistad
John Thingstad <jpt...@online.no> wrote:
>På Wed, 30 Jan 2008 10:42:21 +0100, skrev pg <pen...@catholic.org>:
>
>>
>>
>> People have been arrested of having Linux CDs, for the authority
>> doesn't differentiate what programs are in the CDs. As long as the CD
>> has computer programs, and if it's not "official release" with
>> "official license" like what Microsoft offers (stickers and such), the
>> authority here will charge you for "PIRACY".
>>
>> The penalty is heavy - RM20,000 (about 6,800USD) for each "pirate" CD.
>>
>> That's Malaysia, and I kid you not !
A fertile ground for counter-suits for defamation, illegal searches
and seisures, illegal arrests etc. Even after Malaysian laws they
may do arrests etc to harras, but they will eventually have to bring
forth proof, or be hit with the provisions of a counter-suit.
You can have your OWN content on CD's, and Malaysia, as a signatory
or the Berne convention is bound to defend this content. You trade
places with Microsoft, so to speak. The Berne convention also has
drag-provisions to other jurisdictions; so it is easy to get e.g.
a suit against your Malaysian opponents accepted by e.g. a US court.
That is what has kept Pirate bay alive for so long.
From the authorities and the MPAA's it can be described as
"sh*t hitting the fan".
>But Linux DOES have official releases and a official licence.
>(A GNU Protected License http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html)
>You can also purchase the Linux CD's with Logo's etc. if it makes you feel
>better. They will only charge you with the price of the CD, delivery and
>processing though, not the product itself.
Try www.ubuntu.org for _very_ cheap, and _very_ good, cd's for
Linux installations.
>They are also allowed to charge for installation, support and development
>of custom solutions.
>But these services are optional.
>You could prosecute someone for SELLING Linux or for producing commercial
>software extending GPL'ed products.
>Even then it would be a case for a civil suit not a crime. I don't know
>what the laws are in Malaysia are, but this sounds to weird to be true. If
>I were you I'd check again.
You misunderstand the GPL. There is nothing in the GPL that stops me
from taking the code, wrap it and ship it as MR_Linux, charge $50000 for
the package and sell a $15k yearly support contract. I am obliged, under
the GPL, to provide source code for it, and the toolchain to build it, asn
well as updates. It also have to do so in a timely fashion. The language
in the GPL is usually taken as "within 6 months" by courts, although there
is differing practice. It has to be available without any specific fees
for download, but I can cover the direct expenses. If I make quarterly
postings to a web site, and state so in the initial contract, I would
be off that hook according to all lawyers I have heard opinions from.
I can ship this as a DVD attached to the contract as well.
I can then hold media and catalogue copyright to that Linux distro,
which means that noone can outright copy it, but they can rebuild it
from source code. You can add you own, proprietary software; e.g.
an installer, and as long as it is clearly deliminated and tagged
is perfectly OK.
Making such a distro is _dead easy_.
I have actually participated in doing exactly this.
A special _tiny_ linux+phone stuff distro with installer and
some licensed stuff included. The full source was on the CD.
There is nothing stopping a customer from rebuilding and ripping
out the catalogue parts.
-- mrr
pg
> På Wed, 30 Jan 2008 10:42:21 +0100, skrev pg <pen...@catholic.org>:
>
>
>
> > People have been arrested of having Linux CDs, for the authority
> > doesn't differentiate what programs are in the CDs. As long as the CD
> > has computer programs, and if it's not "official release" with
> > "official license" like what Microsoft offers (stickers and such), the
> > authority here will charge you for "PIRACY".
>
> > The penalty is heavy - RM20,000 (about 6,800USD) for each "pirate" CD.
>
> > That's Malaysia, and I kid you not !
>
> But Linux DOES have official releases and a official licence.
> You can also purchase the Linux CD's with Logo's etc. if it makes you feel
> better. They will only charge you with the price of the CD, delivery and
> processing though, not the product itself.
> They are also allowed to charge for installation, support and development
> of custom solutions.
> But these services are optional.
> You could prosecute someone for SELLING Linux or for producing commercial
> software extending GPL'ed products.
> Even then it would be a case for a civil suit not a crime. I don't know
> what the laws are in Malaysia are, but this sounds to weird to be true. If
> I were you I'd check again.
*****Sorry to all, for this message is filled with off-topic
stuffs*****
You and I know about the legal things, of GPL, of GNU and all the
stuffs.
But the problem isn't you and me. It's the Malaysian authority that I
have to deal with, everyday.
The Malaysian police don't know, or pretend to not knowing, or just
plain don't care, I have no idea.
The thing is, they do bust people (largely Christian-run
organizations) for really flimsy excuses, and when they do the bust,
they confiscate ALL the computers (whether the computer got pirated
softwares is not important), and close down the entire facility.
Of course, we can go to trial. We can hire lawyers and go to court. We
may even win. We may even get back our computers, and re-open our
operation, but in the meantime, where the children are supposed to go?
Back to the streets?
Malaysia is a "funny" place, to say the least. While it's supposed to
be a "democratic" country, it ain't so. It has a national policy which
the government termed it "affirmative action", but the policy actually
works the opposite the Affirmative Action of the United States
(beware, lots of ugly politics here) ...
In the US, Affirmative Action means provision to help the under-
privileged minority. Over hear, it means that the privilege MUST be
given to the already over-privileged majority.
None of the Christians in Malaysia belongs to the "over-privileged
majority".
That is why, Christian-run operations got raided all the time, for no-
reason. They even raid book stores, confiscating Christian children
story books, for, and I quote: "The books contain stories of
prophets" ... but the funny thing is those prophets are CHRISTIAN and
JEWISH prophets (such as Isaiah, Moses) but the authority, being from
a religion I rather not name (suffice to say they pray 5 times a day),
claim that those prophets belong to THEIR religion ... that no
Christian children story books are permitted to mention Moses or
Isaiah or whoever.
This is Malaysia that I am talking about !
That's why I need to be extra-ordinarily careful.
It's not about technology. It's not about my ability to do things in
Linux. No.
It's about what the authority could do, and what will happen to the
children we want to help.
We must be careful, very, very careful. We won't give them _ANY_
reason whatsoever to raid us. That doesn't mean they won't raid us (I
mean, if they want to do it, they can do it anytime) but we try to
minimize the risk.
Sorry for being so timid. But the reality here is that everything we
do, we do it as if we walk on egg-shells. Our aim is to help the
children, and that's what we are doing.
One day if we got the money, we will purchase REGISTERED COPIES of RED-
HAT Linux (yes, they got an office in Malaysia) and I will install
them into the computers, and we will be as legal as we are using
Windows 98se now.
Sorry again to all, for this totally off-topic message.
pg
> In article <op.t5qnumxiut4...@pandora.alfanett.no>,
>
> John Thingstad <jpth...@online.no> wrote:
> >På Wed, 30 Jan 2008 10:42:21 +0100, skrev pg <pen...@catholic.org>:
>
> >> People have been arrested of having Linux CDs, for the authority
> >> doesn't differentiate what programs are in the CDs. As long as the CD
> >> has computer programs, and if it's not "official release" with
> >> "official license" like what Microsoft offers (stickers and such), the
> >> authority here will charge you for "PIRACY".
>
> >> The penalty is heavy - RM20,000 (about 6,800USD) for each "pirate" CD.
>
> >> That's Malaysia, and I kid you not !
>
> A fertile ground for counter-suits for defamation, illegal searches
> and seisures, illegal arrests etc. Even after Malaysian laws they
> may do arrests etc to harras, but they will eventually have to bring
> forth proof, or be hit with the provisions of a counter-suit.
>
> You can have your OWN content on CD's, and Malaysia, as a signatory
> or the Berne convention is bound to defend this content. You trade
> places with Microsoft, so to speak. The Berne convention also has
> drag-provisions to other jurisdictions; so it is easy to get e.g.
> a suit against your Malaysian opponents accepted by e.g. a US court.
>
> That is what has kept Pirate bay alive for so long.
>
> From the authorities and the MPAA's it can be described as
> "sh*t hitting the fan".
>
> >But Linux DOES have official releases and a official licence.
> >You can also purchase the Linux CD's with Logo's etc. if it makes you feel
> >better. They will only charge you with the price of the CD, delivery and
> >processing though, not the product itself.
>
***** SORRY AGAIN ! OFF-TOPIC MESSAGE *****
Once you come to stay in Malaysia you will know what I mean.
What you said "counter-suits for defamation, illegal searches and
seisures, illegal arrests etc" do work in the United States, Europe or
even in China, but it won't work in Malaysia.
You see, the authority has ALL the power. They even have the laws to
protect them.
There is a law in Malaysia, it's called the "Internal Security Act",
we call it ISA.
Under ISA, the government can arrest ANYONE, for NO REASON, and can
KEEP HIM LOCKED UP INDEFINITELY, and that guy has NO RIGHT TO GO TO
COURT !
That's a true fact in Malaysia.
You say it's impossible? Then come to stay here. You'd know.
Of course we aren't talking about the authority would use ISA against
us. We're simply too small, and too weak for them to use that
draconian law against us.
But the potential is always there.
There is just NO WAY to fight that monster, oooops, our government.
They got the law, they got their judges (those judges aren't
independent, they MUST listen to the government or they'd be sacked!),
they got the police, the military, and their secret services.
We? We are just a bunch of naive Catholics trying to do something.
That's all.
End of my drivel.
Sorry folks, for the totally off-topic post !
George Neuner
It isn't bullshit ... the authors have retained for themselves the
right to *sell* Linux, therefore the act of selling it is a criminal
offense under copyright law in many countries. WIPO signatory
countries reciprocally enforce each other's laws even if their own
laws on the matter are less stringent.
The Linux license (aka. GPL) requires provision of the software at no
charge and permits only recovery of duplication expense. That is: you
can sell a CD that happens to contain a Linux distro, but you cannot
"sell Linux".
Whether you think this is a distinction without a difference is
immaterial ... laws are frequently stupid. Stupidity doesn't mean you
can ignore it.
George Neuner
wrote:
>You misunderstand the GPL. There is nothing in the GPL that stops me
>from taking the code, wrap it and ship it as MR_Linux, charge $50000 for
>the package
Actually there is. The GPL permits only recovery of duplication cost.
It would be extremely hard to justify $50,000 unless you are engraving
the CD bits by hand.
You probably could get away with it, but if someone complained, the
authors very well might revoke your right to redistribute.
>and sell a $15k yearly support contract. I am obliged, under
>the GPL, to provide source code for it, and the toolchain to build it, asn
>well as updates. It also have to do so in a timely fashion.
>
>The language
>in the GPL is usually taken as "within 6 months" by courts, although there
>is differing practice. It has to be available without any specific fees
>for download, but I can cover the direct expenses. If I make quarterly
>postings to a web site, and state so in the initial contract, I would
>be off that hook according to all lawyers I have heard opinions from.
>
>I can ship this as a DVD attached to the contract as well.
>
>I can then hold media and catalogue copyright to that Linux distro,
>which means that noone can outright copy it, but they can rebuild it
>from source code. You can add you own, proprietary software; e.g.
>an installer, and as long as it is clearly deliminated and tagged
>is perfectly OK.
>
>Making such a distro is _dead easy_.
>
>I have actually participated in doing exactly this.
>
>A special _tiny_ linux+phone stuff distro with installer and
>some licensed stuff included. The full source was on the CD.
>
>There is nothing stopping a customer from rebuilding and ripping
>out the catalogue parts.
Yes. You can do all of this you just said.
gavino
> On Jan 27, 6:54 am, Maciej Katafiasz <mathr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Den Sun, 27 Jan 2008 04:42:40 -0800 skrev pg:
>
> > > The computers will be Windows 98SE based
>
> > Please don't. It's the worst possible OS to install for such a scenario.
> > It'll be unmaintainable for you, and (what's even worse) will teach the
> > it has to be windows, try to get win2k licenses, it'll run on 256MB just
> > fine. If you don't have to stick to windows, try a linux (unfortunately
> > my personal favourite desktop, GNOME, won't quite run satisfactorily, but
> > XFce will, I have used it on a 48MB machine, and it's still easy to use
> > set up); for instance Ubuntu is a very easy to install distribution and
> > has plenty of flavours, including Xubuntu for which XFce is the primary
> > desktop.
>
> Thanks for replying.
>
> There are several problems that we are facing here:
>
> A) Everything we have are donated stuffs. All the computers are
> donated, actually, they are computers that people throw away. We got
> them for free, fix them up as well as we could, and we can only find
> 256MB of RAM for each of them.
>
> B) Due to the limited RAM, we can't run any other OS than Win98SE or
> WinME. Plus, we do not want to infringe on any copyright issue. We got
> a pile of old Win98SE genuine MS CDs, so we kinda like like have no
> other choice but to use Win98SE.
>
> C) This entire operation runs on a very very tight budget. These are
> the children that people don't care about. They all come from poverty
> stricken families, and they are at the edge of becoming street kids.
> What we do there is to keep them in school, provide them with some
> incentives to keep learning, keep exploring, etc.
>
> D) We do not have any license to run Win2000 or WinXP, and we do not
> have the money to buy them either. On the Linux side, so far I am
> still trying to learn Linux, I can set up a system, just a base
> system. Installing packages, on the other hand, is still too much for
> me.
>
> E) As I mention earlier, these are the kids people don't care about,
> therefore, our operation is facing the same fate - people just do not
> care about us, period. No funding, no help, no nada. We all do it out
> of our own time, our own pocket, our own everything. In other words,
> we have absolutely NO leeway to get fancy stuffs. That is why I'm
> looking for freeware, abandonedware, and/or open-sourced softwares to
> get the whole thing going.
>
> Yes, it's like a chop-chop thing, nothing fancy. But we are doing it.
> That is why I need the help from all the Gurus here. Please share with
> us any of your suggestion, opinion, point, tip, etc. I thank you for
> it.
>
> > I wonder if OLPC's Sugar is currently portable to anything besides XOs,
> > it's designed exactly for the type of usage you have, so it'd be a
> > perfect fit.
>
> See, even OLPC is a luxury for us. Do you know what USD100 can buy
> here? Remember that this is a third world country, and our conversion
> rate is 3.3 to 1. USD100 is 330 of our local currency here, and this
> can buy A LOT OF STUFFS !
>
> In fact, if I purchase 2 OLPC for USD100 each, the USD200 can get me a
> NEW PC with Intel Duo-Core CPU, and 1GB of DDR2 RAM and a 120GB SATA
> hard disk. Of course, it doesn't have any software, nor any OS.
>
> And in our situation, all our PC are FREE - yeah, NO CHARGE. Yes, they
> are OLD PCs, Pentium III, ranges from 500MHz to 900MHz. But they do
> run, and that's the important thing here.
>
> > As for programming environment, I can't really help with Logos, I have no
> > idea about them. I don't think there's any pre-packaged CL distro that
> > you could just give to kids for them to play with, especially the
> > graphical part is lacking. As Rainer suggests, there are several schemes
> > that concentrate on rich feedback,http://www.pawfal.org/fluxus/isone
> > of the new things it seems. A Smalltalk would also do, they're all big on
> > the "play with things on the screen" side.
> > Cheers,
> > Maciej
>
> I'll check with the Scheme people, thank you very much for sharing the
> info (and thanks to Rainer as well!). My initial pick was Logo because
> it was made with the original intention of giving kids a start in
> programming, at least, conceptually. Perhaps you're right, there are
> other things out there, like Scheme. But I'll check with them.
>
> Thanks again for everything.
>
> Hope that other Gurus here, if you have anything to share, please do
> so.
I suggest www.archlinux.org
a 30MB cd can be burned, and that will allow you to setup each
computer by downloading the rest frmo the internet.
gavino
> You have my utmost sympathies. I grew up with similar situation.
>
> Many people here (of comp.lang.lisp) are fat, tech geeking assholes
> here, they wouldn't have the faintist idea of what pain is. They are
> the type that tells you to eat meet when you say you don't have rice.
> And the technical recommendations from most of them are worthless,
> trust me on this. (in particular i refer to the recommendations made
> by Maciej Katafiasz. They usually have political agendas.)
>
> As to what language, i'd recommend to keep thinking Logo. It is a lang
> designed for this purpose, with a lot existing literature. Dont bother
> at all with Scheme. It is completely useless and good for nothing for
> the your kids.
>
> If you don't know already, there's Wikipedia article:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logo_(programming_language)
>
> which should provide you many resources. There are many free
> implementations, as well as many now freely downloadable books that
> was published in the 1980s and 1990s.
>
> Am not sure how familiar you are with computer languages. A useful
> alternative, is Visual Basic. Personally i don't know Visual Basic,
> but it is a easy language, and one of the top 5 deployed language
> today and actually valuable as a skill. I think there are variant
> versions out there that are free.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visual_Basic
> (also check Real Basic)
>
> Am not exactly sure for this kinda situation you would need to teach
> them computer programing in the first place. Isn't using a computer,
> such as browsing the web, the text editing with Notepad, and the
> bundled basic paint program sufficient?
>
> For programing, how about teaching them basic HTML? That would be
> useful. PHP is also a good candidate, as it is also one of the most
> easy to learn, as well one of the top 5 deployed language, highly
> demanded skill in the market.
>
> So far, Logo, Visual Basic, PHP... i think are good candidates, as
> they require little hardware resource, easy to learn, and the latter 2
> are highly valuable skills...
>
> Just noticed that the ages are 7 to 12... adding the fact they don't
> speak English, i'd say just consider Logo and HTML.
>
> (just noticed that you also posted to comp.lang.dylan. Dylan is a very
> advanced, industrial, and also dead language. It is not a language for
> kids. Even a professional programer would have hard time learning
> Dylan.)
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Xah
> x...@xahlee.org
> ∑http://xahlee.org/
>
> ☄
uh no
archlinux+clisp is fine the book LISP by winston+horn may help too and
there is always practical common lisp.
Maciej Katafiasz
>>> You could prosecute someone for SELLING Linux or for producing
>>> commercial software extending GPL'ed products.
>>
>>This is complete bullshit, you have no idea what you're talking about.
> It isn't bullshit ... the authors have retained for themselves the right
> to *sell* Linux, therefore the act of selling it is a criminal offense
> under copyright law in many countries. WIPO signatory countries
> reciprocally enforce each other's laws even if their own laws on the
> matter are less stringent.
>
> The Linux license (aka. GPL) requires provision of the software at no
> charge and permits only recovery of duplication expense. That is: you
> can sell a CD that happens to contain a Linux distro, but you cannot
> "sell Linux".
Nope. GPL requires me to provide you with *source* if I distribute binary
versions, it says absolutely nothing about other forms. Of course I don't
have rights to "sell Linux" in a way that involves cartain kinds of
transfer of rights, but then, you can't "sell Unix" as a licensee this
way either, yet there are several companies who'd be quite correctly
described as Unix vendors.
The same goes for the claims about inability to produce commercial GPL
software, and is really GPL 101. Which is why I called bullshit.
Cheers,
Maciej
Maciej Katafiasz
>>You misunderstand the GPL. There is nothing in the GPL that stops me
>>from taking the code, wrap it and ship it as MR_Linux, charge $50000 for
>>the package
>
> Actually there is. The GPL permits only recovery of duplication cost.
> It would be extremely hard to justify $50,000 unless you are engraving
> the CD bits by hand.
That is untrue. I could make a distro CD and sell it for $50,000 and
there's absolutely nothing to stop me from doing that. What you mean is
that I'd be required to distribute source I used to build it, but that's
an entirely different matter.
> You probably could get away with it, but if someone complained, the
> authors very well might revoke your right to redistribute.
Of course they mightn't. GPL provides explicit provisions that prohibit
anyone from making exactly that kind of restrictions, you cannot legally
restrict distribution rights of GPL'd code and claim it's still GPL. I
don't think you have a very good idea about GPL.
Cheers,
Maciej
John Thingstad
<math...@gmail.com>:
> Den Wed, 30 Jan 2008 13:28:39 -0500 skrev George Neuner:
>
>>> You misunderstand the GPL. There is nothing in the GPL that stops me
>>> from taking the code, wrap it and ship it as MR_Linux, charge $50000
>>> for
>>> the package
>>
>> Actually there is. The GPL permits only recovery of duplication cost.
>> It would be extremely hard to justify $50,000 unless you are engraving
>> the CD bits by hand.
>
> That is untrue. I could make a distro CD and sell it for $50,000 and
> there's absolutely nothing to stop me from doing that. What you mean is
> that I'd be required to distribute source I used to build it, but that's
> an entirely different matter.
This is not an entirely other matter. You have to release the changes to
the person who GPL'ed it who has full right to make it public. Thus if you
charge 10 000$ for it and a potential customer finds he can get the source
and compile (and then distribute) it himself no one would buy it.
That is why in practice it works more along the lines I said. (When did
you last pay 1000$ for a Linux distribution?)
--------------
John Thingstad
Maciej Katafiasz
>>> Actually there is. The GPL permits only recovery of duplication cost.
>>> It would be extremely hard to justify $50,000 unless you are engraving
>>> the CD bits by hand.
>>
>> That is untrue. I could make a distro CD and sell it for $50,000 and
>> there's absolutely nothing to stop me from doing that. What you mean is
>> that I'd be required to distribute source I used to build it, but
>> that's an entirely different matter.
>
> This is not an entirely other matter. You have to release the changes to
> the person who GPL'ed it who has full right to make it public. Thus if
> you charge 10 000$ for it and a potential customer finds he can get the
> source and compile (and then distribute) it himself no one would buy it.
> That is why in practice it works more along the lines I said. (When did
> you last pay 1000$ for a Linux distribution?)
We're talking about legality, not feasibility of such an endeavour.
Whether you'd find customers is absolutely irrelevant to the fact you can
do that. And let me remind you that RMS used to make a living by selling
GNU Emacs for $150, a programme he encouraged everyone to share freely.
Cheers,
Maciej
Rostyslaw J. Lewyckyj
Does that mean that you can't back up the programs and data from your
hard disk to CD?
pg
wrote:
If someone filed a complaint to the government, then you're right,
you'd be busted. In Malaysia, it's "Guilty until proven innocent". So
you'd be hauled into jail, hauled into the court, et cetera, before
you even got the chance to prove that you're innocent.
In everyday life, people do backups. As long as nobody file any
complaints, you're okay.
But in our case, the operation is run by Catholic people - and the
government really doesn't like Christians of any kind, except that
they do not have the law yet to ban Christianity. So all it takes if
someone, even an anonymous tip, to the authority and next thing you
know you are facing a judge, hiring a lawyer, and the case will linger
up to 8 years. (Justice system here is really corrupted)
Meanwhile, what the children are going to do? Back to the street
selling drugs and/or selling their bodies?
cgay
On Jan 27, 11:07 am, Xah Lee <x...@xahlee.org> wrote:
> (just noticed that you also posted to comp.lang.dylan. Dylan is a very
> advanced, industrial, and also dead language.
There are very few users, and you can call it dead if you like, but
we are still improving it.
There's been a lot of work done recently, such as getting much of
DUIM working with the GTK back-end, getting the C back-end working
again for Open Dylan (nee Functional Developer, nee Harlequin Dylan)
thus improving its portability, improvements to the standard
libraries,
Network Night Vision (http://www.networknightvision.com), etc.
> It is not a language for
> kids. Even a professional programer would have hard time learning
> Dylan.)
Certainly no more so than Common Lisp. On par with Java, I would
guess,
and probably much easier than C++. But you were probably just
trolling.
-cg
Xah Lee
«But you were probably just trolling.»
LOL. You Dylan and Logo people needs to read comp.lang.lisp more.
There are huge amount of bad mouthing of Dylan on comp.lang.lisp by
the Common Lisp fuckheads.
Try to read comp.lang.lisp and respond to them.
Xah
x...@xahlee.org
∑ http://xahlee.org/
☄
John
As opposed to bad mouthing of Lisp on comp.lang.lisp by Xah Lee
fuckheads. The difference is that while Common Lisp fuckheads know
their asshole from a hole in the ground, Xah Lee is a semi-literate
low-grade troll with a penchant for making up insults (geeker?) and a
fetish for a mathematically-oriented scripting language.
John
krw
@e4g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>, pen...@catholic.org says...
If it's really that bad, it seems there is no hope for one in your
position. CYA with M$ isn't going to help if someone is out to get
you.
> Meanwhile, what the children are going to do? Back to the street
> selling drugs and/or selling their bodies?
>
Indeed that sounds like what the government wants.
--
Keith
cgay
> LOL. You Dylan and Logo people needs to read comp.lang.lisp more.
>
That's their prerogative. I like both languages myself.
-cg
George Neuner
wrote:
>? http://xahlee.org/
>
>?
More Xah bullshit.
Dylan is hardly ever mentioned in c.l.l and in more than 10 years
reading I don't recall anyone ever having bad-mouthed it. Dylan is
mentioned far more often in comp.lang.scheme and even there it is
relatively rare.
tortoise
> We understand that Win98SE isn't the most robust OS there is, but we
> decide to use it because of several factors as listed below :
>
> 1. We don't have money.
>
> No money, no new and fancy computers with BIG RAM for Windows
> XP.
>
> No money, no Windows XP. (It does cost money!)
>
> 2. We got a stack of old but genuine Microsoft issue Win98SE CDs.
doesn't this lead to xp ? where else can it lead ?
in linux circles they call this "free beer". are you interested
in giving kids free beer ? its better than those other things, is
it ?
please think about it. if you do what they did you will get what
they got its as simple as that.
Morten Reistad
George Neuner <gneuner2/@/comcast.net> wrote:
>On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 12:55:07 +0100, Morten Reistad <fi...@last.name>
>wrote:
>
>>You misunderstand the GPL. There is nothing in the GPL that stops me
>>from taking the code, wrap it and ship it as MR_Linux, charge $50000 for
>>the package
>
>Actually there is. The GPL permits only recovery of duplication cost.
>It would be extremely hard to justify $50,000 unless you are engraving
>the CD bits by hand.
>
>You probably could get away with it, but if someone complained, the
>authors very well might revoke your right to redistribute.
As long as you contribute _something_ in addition to Linux, and
otherwise comply with the GPL, you are in compliance. There is
ample precedence that "catalogue-products" are intellectual property
in their own right. Yes, they have a weaker protection, and the
catalogue IP rights are viewed completely separate from the
underlying IP you are cataloguing.
A Linux distro is an excellent example of such a catalogue. It
can have a copyright explicitly different from the underlying
intellectual property. Which is exactly what we are looking for
in this case.
Putting the source and toolchain up on a website for free download,
and including it in the CD set for installation would satisfy the
GPL. I could not stop anyone from reconstructing a distro very
similar to mine; but I could stop an outright copy.
>>and sell a $15k yearly support contract. I am obliged, under
>>the GPL, to provide source code for it, and the toolchain to build it, asn
>>well as updates. It also have to do so in a timely fashion.
>>
>>The language
>>in the GPL is usually taken as "within 6 months" by courts, although there
>>is differing practice. It has to be available without any specific fees
>>for download, but I can cover the direct expenses. If I make quarterly
>>postings to a web site, and state so in the initial contract, I would
>>be off that hook according to all lawyers I have heard opinions from.
>>
>>I can ship this as a DVD attached to the contract as well.
>>
>>I can then hold media and catalogue copyright to that Linux distro,
>>which means that noone can outright copy it, but they can rebuild it
>>from source code. You can add you own, proprietary software; e.g.
>>an installer, and as long as it is clearly deliminated and tagged
>>is perfectly OK.
>>
>>Making such a distro is _dead easy_.
>>
>>I have actually participated in doing exactly this.
>>
>>A special _tiny_ linux+phone stuff distro with installer and
>>some licensed stuff included. The full source was on the CD.
>>
>>There is nothing stopping a customer from rebuilding and ripping
>>out the catalogue parts.
>
>Yes. You can do all of this you just said.
I know. This is exactly what Redhat and Novell are doing.
-- mrr
Morten Reistad
Actually, I have sold Linux distros for far more. They DID contain a
lot of other software too, and was part of a package. You really don't
have a clue to how the process control industry operates. They like
Linux, because they can have a standard platform to build products
inside without bleeding to death in licensing.
I know two examples I can tell about. One is the BMW engine control
computers. You can buy a production line for those for a few hundred
million dollars. It includes a tailored Linux distro as the platform
for all the other software. Winstron/WNC, the little mobile gadget
maker in Taiwan also sell production lines for such gadgets. They
also build everything on their own targeted Linux distro. Their
production line is a lot simpler, probably only a few million dollars.
-- mrr
Morten Reistad
If this is important to the Catholic church I am sure we could
make a "Canonic Linux" distro? After all, why should the Devil have
all the good software ?
Seriously. I know the Catholic church is struggling with
language support and networking issues, as well as cost. A
dedicated Linux distro could change this.
>> Meanwhile, what the children are going to do? Back to the street
>> selling drugs and/or selling their bodies?
>>
>Indeed that sounds like what the government wants.
Hmmm. What about making your own Linux distro and sell it ?
The beautiful part about the Berne convention is that you
can drag your own government to court in another jurisdiction
very easily. This is the nature of the IP property law; it is
almost exclusively codified common law.
-- mrr
Peter Flass
>
> Actually, I have sold Linux distros for far more. They DID contain a
> lot of other software too, and was part of a package. You really don't
> have a clue to how the process control industry operates. They like
> Linux, because they can have a standard platform to build products
> inside without bleeding to death in licensing.
>
Your contribution is integration and testing. This is not a trivial job.