Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Education

Walter Bender — Taking Sugar Beyond the XO Laptop 84

waderoush writes "While the One Laptop Per Child Foundation tries to reboot after drastic staff cuts, Sugar, the original open-source graphical interface for OLPC's XO Laptop, is rapidly evolving into a stand-alone learning platform that can run on any PC. Walter Bender, who left OLPC last year to start the non-profit Sugar Labs, has given a detailed interview about 'Sugar on a Stick' — the USB drive that allows any machine to boot into the Sugar environment. Bender also describes the Sugar upgrades coming in March — including better tools for file management, portfolio presentations, and Python code hacking — and talks about his hopes for expanding Sugar Labs and getting Sugar into more classrooms than OLPC can reach through its hardware."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Walter Bender — Taking Sugar Beyond the XO Laptop

Comments Filter:
  • Schoolkey (Score:2, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 05, 2009 @02:38PM (#26741467)

    I think that schoolkey project also uses a sugar-like interface, and there is always edu-nix.org's education-oriented distro, which many say is better - but it just uses regular old KDE.

  • Re:Water Bender? (Score:1, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 05, 2009 @03:00PM (#26741827)

    Bite my shiny metal ass.

    There, fixed that for ya.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 05, 2009 @03:19PM (#26742085)

    Wooosh [wikipedia.org]

  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 05, 2009 @06:34PM (#26745193)

    Sugar isn't derived from Squeak, although it certainly aspires to some Squeak-like qualities. You may be confusing Sugar with Etoys, a Squeak-based activity/platform that the OLPC ships on all its computers, which runs on top of Sugar. (If Sugar were Squeak-derived, Etoys wouldn't be necessary.)

  • Re:View Source (Score:1, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 06, 2009 @03:01AM (#26748963)

    What he meant was quite clear. He meant that writing in Python doesn't automatically mean slow software, and writing in C doesn't automatically mean fast software.

    As he said:

    [making performant, robust software] requires work, work, and work.

    He was responding to a post that claimed Python is a poor language for making performant, robust software. To which I can only say: pfui. Python is incredibly robust, and good Python programs are too. As for performance, they might be slow, and they might not; it depends on how much of the work is being done by C modules. You can do serious math in Python fast because of some C modules, for example.

"But what we need to know is, do people want nasally-insertable computers?"

Working...