[IAEP] sugar numbers

[Dan Tenason]

Friday, June  5, 2015 10:35 PM -06:00 from Caryl Bigenho <cbigenho at hotmail.com>:
>Don't read into my comments things that aren't there. I assumed, as I am certain many others have, that you were talking about OLPC and the use of the XO machines. Read through your posts and I think you will see why this is the case.
>
>As for Sugar, there are many reasons why it is as good as, or even better than, any other learning platforms for children. I am a retired teacher with 30+ years experience so I know where-of I speak. The problem with Sugar has been that, until very recently, it was only practical on the XO laptops and the numbers you have seen refer mostly to that use. Sugar-on-a-Stick was an option as was running it in a virtual machine, but there were many problems, mostly with the virtual machines not with Sugar.
>
>A new initiative has been undertaken by OLPC France called "Sugarizer" that aims to bring Sugar to "any device." It is in its infancy but shows great promise of bringing some of the creative, cooperative, project based, learning experiences Sugar has to offer. 
>
>There are many ways one can help with the development of Sugarizer. If you are truly interested in using technology to help bring quality learning experiences to children everywhere, I suggest that you see if you can find yourself a niche where you can help expand and perfect Sugarizer. You can get more information here:  http://sugarizer.org    To use your expression. Sugar != technology to bring quality learning experiences to children everywhere. Just as criticism is only one component of critical thinking, Sugar is just one example of an educational technology. At this point I feel my time and energy is better spent leveling the playing field among competing projects.

BTW, please notice the second sentence of  http://sugarizer.org .     "used every day by nearly 3 million children around the world." The marketing quote from the sugarlabs site is repeated. Pretty soon it is accepted as simple fact rather then a rough assumption of all XO sales + all Sugar downloads.

Dan.
>
>Caryl
>
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>From: dan.tenason at mail.ru
>To: cbigenho at hotmail.com
>CC: iaep at lists.sugarlabs.org
>Subject: Re[2]: [IAEP] sugar numbers
>Date: Sat, 6 Jun 2015 06:04:29 +0300
>
>
>
>
>Wednesday, June  3, 2015 5:24 PM -06:00 from Caryl Bigenho <cbigenho at hotmail.com>:
>>Criticism !=  Critical Thinking.  This whole discussion is pointless! You are arguing about the current use of laptops that are as much as 8 years old. Yes, many of them, maybe even most of them, are still usable and in use. What other platform can say that? Tell me and I'll buy stock in the company.
>If I understand correctly, you are saying that Sugar is above reproach because so many people benefit because the XO's last so long and so many are still in use. Ironically, the issue being challenged is how Sugar Labs calculates and communicates how many people use Sugar.
>
>Dan
>
>_______________________________________________
>IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
>IAEP at lists.sugarlabs.org
>http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/iaep/attachments/20150611/e4f0fd6b/attachment.html>