My last comment and response to him so far was
Michail,
Thank you for taking the time to respond to my comment. I truly do appreciate what the OLPC project set out to do, and the fantastic work that you and others in the project contributed. But, I and many others in the FLOSS community can't help but feel that working with Microsoft to increase the use of a non-free OS is a betrayal of the original goals and spirit of the project.
Richard Stallman had said...
"If the XO turns out to be a platform for spreading the use of proprietary software, its overall effect on the world will be negative. It is also superfluous. The OLPC has already inspired other cheap computers; if the goal is only to make cheap computers available, the OLPC project has succeeded whether or not more XOs are built. So why build more XOs? Delivering freedom would be a good reason."
http://www.fsf.org/blogs/rms/can-we-res ... logentry_v...
Also, when OLPC states in its core principles...
"... we need a free and open framework that supports and encourages the very basic human need to express. Give me a free and open environment and I will learn and teach with joy."
http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Core_principles
Many of us believed that a "free and open framework" included the operating system that ran on the device.
While it is true that it also says...
"A world of great software and content is necessary to make this project succeed, both open and proprietary. Children need to be able to choose from all of it."
Many of us in the FLOSS community were stunned to find that this meant that the project would one day take the direction of pushing a proprietary OPERATING SYSTEM, and not merely allowing for the flexibility to run non-free apps.
My comment followed what he wrote
Gregg,
OLPC has not abandoned its principles given that it spends most of its operating budget on FOSS development and no money whatsoever on non-FOSS development. Many people at OLPC (including myself) felt that having the option to run Windows XP on the XO enhances the value of the XO as a computing platform (which is what it is very often solely judged as).
Regards,
Michail Bletsas