<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On 20 April 2016 at 16:46, James Cameron <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:quozl@laptop.org" target="_blank">quozl@laptop.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div id=":5tw" class=""> the performance ratio between our low-cost<br>
low-power hardware and the competition was already evident on Fedora<br>
Linux; it didn't need Windows to expose it</div></blockquote></div><br>Sorry if this is an obvious question, but, can anything done to make Sugar feel faster on XO-1s today?
</div><div class="gmail_extra"><br></div><div class="gmail_extra">I understood 8 years ago when I got an XO-1 in early 2008 that it was slow, and I guessed the hardware would - like 80s/90s games console - become better understood and optimized for over time. </div><div class="gmail_extra"><br></div><div class="gmail_extra">The arguments that "There's no slow software, only slow programmers" and "Kids who have never seen a computer before won't know its slow" seemed kind of silly to me :) I wondered at the time that shipping it with some 1990s-grade stuff would make it _seem_ fast, and that being perceived as fast is a key to being delightful. </div><div class="gmail_extra"><br></div><div class="gmail_extra">I was reminded of the importance of that over the weekend reading <a href="http://www.wheels.org/spacewar/stone/rolling_stone.html">http://www.wheels.org/spacewar/stone/rolling_stone.html</a> - Stewart Brand writing in 1972 about the super early hackers, including Alan Kay:</div><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_extra"><br></div></div><blockquote style="margin:0 0 0 40px;border:none;padding:0px"><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_extra">Spacewar as a parable is almost too pat. It was the illegitimate child of the marrying of computers and graphic displays. It was part of no one's grand scheme. It served no grand theory. It was the enthusiasm of irresponsible youngsters. It was disreputably competitive ("You killed me, Tovar!"). It was an administrative headache. It was merely delightful.</div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_extra"><br></div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_extra">Yet Spacewar, if anyone cared to notice, was a flawless crystal ball of things to come in computer science and computer use:</div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_extra"><br></div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_extra">It was intensely interactive in real time with the computer.</div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_extra"><br>It encouraged new programming by the user.</div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_extra"><br>It bonded human and machine through a responsive broadband interface of live graphics display.</div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_extra"><br>It served primarily as a communication device between humans.</div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_extra"><br>It was a game.</div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_extra"><br>It functioned best on, stand-alone equipment (and diarupted multiple-user equipment).</div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_extra"><br>It served human interest, not machine. (Spacewar is trivial to a computer.)</div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_extra"><br>It was delightful.</div><div class="gmail_extra"><br></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>Cheers</div><div>Dave</div></div>