RE: Your Mission (should you choose to accept it)

[Doug Loss <dloss@csrlink.net>]

On Tue, 20 Jul 1999 15:50:51 +0100, "Marshal Anderson" <marshal@marshal.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> To those I'll add that Linux can
>> often be made to run acceptably on hardware that can no longer support
>> the various commercial OSs.
>
> This is interesting and could be important. The question it begs is; what
> happens as Linux develops as an OS with more facilities that we might want
> to use - will it slowly require more and more powerful machines?
>
That's one of the beauties of Linux.  When you say more facilities, I suspect 
you're thinking of MS Windows adding lots of stuff to the OS with each release 
and bloating up.  Linux doesn't work that way.  The only things that make it 
into the kernel are the things that _need_ to be in the kernel; the rest are 
run as processes as needed.  This means the graphic user interface, the printer 
drivers, etc.  And you can even customize the kernel to have only the bits that 
you need.  Linux has been ported to the 3Com PalmPilot, the Psion 5, and any 
number of small systems.  There are a number of Linux distributions for 
Macintosh PPCs, and at least one or two for 68K Macs.  The ELKS project is even 
trying to fit Linux onto old 80286 and 8088 PCs.

>> The real point I want to make is that we're not looking for an
>> educational reason to choose Linux over the other OSs, but for
>> applications for Linux that will allow it to be considered at the same
>> level as the others.
>
> OK - there's two methods of approaching this - they're not exclusive. On the
> one hand producing materials that are the same as on other OSs means that
> Linux machines can be seamlessly integrated with existing systems - this is
> our experience with the drift from RISC OS to Windoze.

That's what we're looking at at the moment in this discussion, I think.

> On the other hand
> there's the enthusiast/evangelist route. Here you kind of make a huge
> assumption about Linux users (stop me when I get too wrong here). That they
> are the kind of free-wheeling can-do creative types who will also be
> interested in a more creative approach to education. It was interesting that
> the Topologika packages mentioned elsewhere as suitable for porting were
> verymuch along the didactic/rehearsal line - whereas there might be more
> mileage in going down the MusicBox, ScreenTurtle, Tiny Art line as they are
> content-free packages encouraging exploration, thought and a more
> consructivist approach to learning.
>
I'm the one who mentioned those packages :-).  I picked them precisely because 
they're something that's lacking in Linux in any form.  The other programs you 
mention all have Linux cognates, except that the Linux programs aren't aimed 
at children.  It may be possible to put simplified user interfaces on some of 
them and make them suitable for childrens' use in school, and then gradually 
enrich the UI until the kids are using the full-blown package.  What I had in 
mind was a front-end for the GIMP (GNU Image Manipulation Program, a 
PhotoShop-like app) that would approximate Broderbund's Kid Pix Studio.  As 
the kids mastered what was available to them the front-end could be gradually 
changed to allow more and more of the GIMP's functionality to be used.  We had 
a discussion a bit ago about using simplified versions of standard programs in 
various fields rather than specifically children's programs of those types.  
We thought there might be a benefit to having the kids using the same programs 
as everyone else, only somewhat limited and easier to use.

Doug Loss            Always acknowledge a fault.  This will throw
dloss@csrlink.net    those in authority off their guard and give
(570) 326-3987       you the opportunity to commit more.
                        Mark Twain