Seeking help for learning system for absolute beginners

I will second the recommendation for Ubuntu or Edbuntu. You won't find
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

On Jan 28, 12:45 am, kkt <k...@zipcon.net> wrote:
> rpl <plinna...@yahoo.com.invalid> writes: 
> 
> 
> 
>
> 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!

winston19842005@yahoo.com wrote:
> On Jan 28, 12:45 am, kkt <k...@zipcon.net> wrote: 
>
> 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!

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

On Jan 28, 2:00 am, rpl <plinna...@yahoo.com.invalid> wrote:
> winston19842...@yahoo.com wrote: 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>
> 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.

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.

On Jan 27, 11:06 pm, Josh Anderson <jander...@csufresno.edu> wrote:
> I will second the recommendation for Ubuntu or Edbuntu. You won't find
> 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

Thanks, Josh, for your wonderful suggestions ! I will look into every
single one of them.

Thanks again !

Andreas Micheler <Andreas.Micheler@Student.Uni-Augsburg.de> writes:

> pg wrote: 
>
> 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
jkh@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
root@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,M
TRR,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

In comp.lang.logo pg <penang@catholic.org> wrote:
> On Jan 27, 8:55 am, Waldek Hebisch <hebi...@math.uni.wroc.pl> wrote: 
>
> Thanks a lot for the info !
>
> How come the development for Window Poplog had stopped ?

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
hebisch@math.uni.wroc.pl

John Thingstad wrote:

> På Sun, 27 Jan 2008 13:42:40 +0100, skrev pg <penang@catholic.org>:
> 

Logos for Linux:
http://freshmeat.net/browse/171/

rpl wrote:
>
> 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

In article <43686d40-7c4f-4a94-a7d4-0eaf554f8b96
@s12g2000prg.googlegroups.com>, winston19842005@yahoo.com says...
> On Jan 28, 12:45 am, kkt <k...@zipcon.net> wrote: 
>
> 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 XXXXing 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