<div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 12:13 PM, <<a href="mailto:msevior@physics.unimelb.edu.au">msevior@physics.unimelb.edu.au</a>> wrote:<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"> This lack of transperency is *exactly* the sort of behaviour that kills free software and other volunteer projects. People are not going to donate their own precious time to a project that may ultimately shaft them. The community that OLPC has built up is global, outstanding  and committed on many, many levels. It would be almost impossible to find the people, let alone the money, to do what has been delivered by the community already, let alone what could be delivered in the future. You can't buy this community. You can only create it with an inspiring vision and outstanding people living the vision. It is not the least bit inspiring to be the spearhead of the latest MS and DELL sales pitch. Management would do everyone a grand favour by sticking with the original vision come what may because they have no hope without the community. Martin Sevior</blockquote><div> I'm new around here, but it seems like this whole conversation is based on a bunch of what-ifs surrounding that AP article.  People generally seem on the same page that switching to Windows and non-free software would be a Bad Thing.  Maybe we could take a break from talking about the sky falling until we hear something from Negroponte or someone else at 1CC regarding Windows? Just my 2¢. yours, Bobby Powers </div></div>