But then I don't think the Pi is really about teaching kids to code either.

The Pi Foundation has done a good job of persuading everyone otherwise, but I'm left with a nagging suspicion that a computer designed for kids from the ground up would look very different. It's just too damn complicated for most kids. The nerds get it, but expecting the average ten year old to learn Linux shell scripting or the fine points of Apache installation seems unrealistic to me.

Win 10 on the Pi is about two things. The first is about edging Linux out of the education market. Teachers will indeed prefer Win 10 to Linux, for reasons that others have mentioned - especially if it comes with a basic dev toolchain. Even if that toolchain is very easy to use.

The second is - I guess - selling Office 365 subscriptions on super-cheap hardware, and creating a whole new sub-PC market for Windows and Office.

If I'm right, it's a clever move. It will give Windows and Office access to many new markets worldwide.

Where MS hardware failed on price, the Pi version wins on price. It could be a very strong combination.

http://www.raspberrypi.org/about/ says that they designed it to enable kids to access a cheap platform on which it would be easy to code and that they considered the multimedia capabilities a good hook.

Price was clearly a major factor in making the RPi accessible to all [UK] kids. Their inspiration was in part the BBC Micro series - which were certainly not inexpensive.

RPi is cheaper than a second-hand Nintendo DS.

In short, as I understood it, the RPi was about removing the cost barrier to kids having their own system on which to code and hack both hardware and software.

I ran Linux for years and still use it today for my Pi only but I think the INITIAL learning curve to use a system is less steep with Windows than Linux, particularly if you are presented with a CLI Linux login. If you are presented with a GUI then it may be different for a 6 year old but I wouldn't say that the Linux vs Windows discussion really takes into account how easy it is to get into programming on the platforms.

(I know you can install gcc and get writing C/C++ really quickly but you can do the same with Visual Studio without understanding a package management system).

This is like complaining about how hard it is to get OS X up and running when installing on a Dell, but I see where you're coming from and realize this wasn't you whole point.

Anywho.. I would say it's easier to take skills learned from using Linux and apply them to the Windows OS than the other way around.

Admittedly, I did learn many skills with the command line but this DIDN'T translate to me being a wizard with the DOS prompt on Windows 98 back then - I didn't use the DOS prompt. Task manager didn't show a hierarchy of processes like pstree does now, and pstree didn't come (or even exist?) with RedHat 5.0 or 6.0. This was RedHat, not RHEL.

I got OSX up and running on my Acer Aspire :-)

You're right though, that was difficult.

I think the skills for the different OSes are only mainly applicable to their OS, despite how we think and how easily you and I can use the different platforms.

Using a keyboard and a mouse translates, but nothing else does really. Getting my wife to use OSX is frustrating for her, my brother gets angry using OSX too, my brother is lost under Linux, my mum gets lost under Windows (she's fine with iOS mostly now) and my dad is fine with Windows 7 and before but hates Windows 8. My wife gets lost under Android after using iOS for years.

Don't even think about programming for any of them on any of the platforms!

Jesus, Linux Circa 2000 is very very very different from linux 2015...

Seriously though, I use Linux every other day and my last job involved maintaining racks and racks of Linux servers. I also use a few Raspberry Pi s at home, and I appreciate that things change. The ditching of the normal windowing paradigm is the biggest recent change that made me use Linux less as a desktop OS. I didn't say that things don't change - where did you read that?

But it still stands that giving my mum a Raspberry Pi and an SD card, and she'll be none the wiser about runlevels, CLI, or the main point of the discussion, programming. She'll instead spend more time learning how to use Linux, surely?

Or are you saying that my mum will suddenly be able to start development or something?

Or are you just offended that I had some experiences in the past or something?

When you load this, the only thing that appears on the screen in a Cmd prompt, or powershell. If you think linux is hard to admin from the commend line, windows for people that do not know powershell is next to impossible

The average is not the only group that matters. If you have to spray the entire planet with RPis just to make sure you get one into the hands of the right ten year old, it would be worth it for the things they would be inspired to invent as they grew older.

Of course not. The target market is actually people like me, now in our late 30s/early 40s, who have a powerful nostalgia for the original "Model B".

But I think they missed the point of the Model B, a smart 10-year-old could grok the entire machine. You knew the memory map by heart, what went where, what happened in what order, and so on. The RPi has more in common with a PlayStation than it does with the Beeb. It would be like starting kids on calculus before they'd learnt addition. What we need is to re-start production of the real thing...

I think it's important we had a generation of instant-on machines that greeted a user with a command prompt and a programming environment. Even if you wanted to just play a game, you still found yourself LOADing, DIRing, SYSing, and maybe performing a soft-reset after a LOAD that triggered a system routine that now pointed somewhere else. There are things you'd learn after hours of playing and messing with games because, eventually, typing all this weird stuff at a command prompt made you wonder "how" or "what if". The metal and its registers and special calls were right there and you couldn't brick your machine in any way a cold boot couldn't fix, so next thing you know, your friend shows you if he POKEs this and then SYSes that, he could change the background color of the load screen. Cool. So now you need to one-up him so you spend a weekend messing around with NO TOOLS -- just a CLI -- and figure out if you POKE these other four places after LOADING and then SYS then you get unlimited lives. Of course the game crashing after a minute. And so it goes. But breaking things was encouraged because you'd instantly cold-boot and try again.

I think we owe a huge debt to instant-on machines with a command prompt and some environment (BASIC or a hex monitor or, today, bash with root on Linux and maybe Python or whatever). Any project that tries to put environments like that into kids hands again gets my vote. Windows... less so.

I think you mean commodore, or atari. Windows gaming came a long long time afterwards. It is more advanced in some ways but it does not beget OS programmers, like an open source OS does. If OS programmers die out, we're in very deep trouble.

The same could be said for understanding why "the ecosystem for multimedia weren't (and isn't) very good on Linux" and various rounds of the DRM wars.

Microsoft shouldn't be blamed forever for deficits in free software and that's not an argument I'm trying to advance, but it would also be a mistake to overlook their historical influence on when and where certain barriers to tinkering emerged or persisted.

I think that's part of why this triggers a disgust response for some commenters.

Even when Apple practically gave the Linux distributions an opportunity with the neglect of the Mac Pro. Here you had people who didn't like Windows, disgruntled with Apple, liked unix, wanted a powerful operating system and was overpaying for hardware.

OpenGL isn't that much harder on Linux than on Windows, so where the push for great OpenGL developer tools on Linux? Google and Mozilla gets a lot of credit for supporting open source, so why are there no decent bindings from their respective new languages to their respective 2d libraries (Go/Skia, Rust/Mozilla2d)?

There's kind of a macho attitude in open source that things should be hard. If you can't or don't want to fix it yourself it your own fault. It's great for the people that are happy with that and are invested in it, not so much for the rest of us.

I believe Valve is working on that.

Not as tiny as the PC industry was at the same moment in history.

>Since the mid nineties people have learned graphics programming and reverse engineering primarily on Windows.

Because Windows won the desktop. Graphics programming and reverse engineering would have been learned on whatever OS was in that role.

You know, when you obviously have no idea what you are talking about, the wise decision is just not to answer. Both the Commodore and Atari scenes were way bigger than the PC's in the mid 80s till the early 90s. Ask any demoparty goer if you don't believe me.

> The cracking scene, demoscene and games industry was almost exclusively built on Windows.

Which is blatantly false. Where do you think Team 17 come from ? A number of their members were recruited on the Amiga demo scene, and that was well before PC gaming was a thing.

And huh, the game industry existed way before PC Gaming. In 1985 the Amiga and the Atari could display animations on screens with 16 to 32 colors in relatively high resolutions, while PCs were stuck in monochrome (just like the first Apple). And oh yeah we had games. Tons of them. Are you trying to rewrite History ?

> Oh, and maybe you should read the site guidelines, second paragraph under "In Comments".

Nowhere did I call you names. I was merely saying you have no idea what you are talking about, it's OK, it happens to everyone. You know, I have been on HN for a while.

And that's where your problem lies, since the pre-90s era is far more important historically than the post-90s era (when the idea of a "demoscene" started to die entirely and game development shifted full-force toward massive companies - trends which have only recently begun to reverse beyond very tiny niches).

Audacity, Bitwig, QTractor and Ardour have made great strides - and that's merely stuff I know about. Userland software is quite beside the point I was making.

Closed-source single OS dominance without an open source alternative would mean much worse trouble than the trouble we are already in. To avoid this, you need OS programmers, many of whom never get to University.

That Microsoft is coercing people to use Windows is the favorite conspiracy among Linux evangelists. The reality is that Linux isn't and never was very approachable. You might not be able to dive into the source code of Windows, but at least your not stuck trying to understand yet another build system. At least there are decent learning material so you don't need read the source code or scavenge through mailings list trying to find something other than "why do you want to do that". Or a countless other examples like it.

I like Linux, I do. But you can't have your cake and it too. It's not as good as Windows if you want to have access to all areas of computing. Which is what you want when you teach computers to a wide verity of people.

Maybe you should be more concerned that most ARM devices doesn't have working graphics acceleration for Linux desktop systems.

Uhh, no they weren't. They were the focus of home computing during that time period. IBM-compatibles running DOS (or, previously, CP/M) were still the purview of businesses needing personal computers.

The reason why BASIC-oriented systems like those of Commodore and Atari are "nostalgic" is because they were ubiquitous in households during their heyday, and contributed heavily to the same memes and tropes of video game design that are being recycled to this day in big-budget games running on Windows 10 64-bat Supreme Home Edition Republic-of-Gamers PC-Master-Race monstrosities with Core i9 processors and NVodia GeFarce 96000000GTXXX 16TB 525600-CLUTA-core EXTREME-GRASS-RENDERING GPUs and all the other baloney that's dominated the thoughts of gamers nowadays.

> Since the mid nineties people have learned graphics programming and reverse engineering primarily on Windows.

By your logic, the concept of the automobile was invented by Toyota when they came out with the Prius.

There's a lot more to the history of video game development, demoscene, etc. than just the 90's; you're leaving out literally half of those subcultures' very nuanced histories chronologically-speaking - and, in fact, opting to leave out probably the most important half.

LOL on which planet did you live? The cracking and demoscene started way before MS DOS, with the C64, the Atari ST and the Amiga. Windows was super late to the game.

There was certainly a significant Windows (and DOS) demoscene, but to say it was exclusively built on Windows is about as far as the truth as one can get. Emphasis on Windows really only picked up in the late 90's; throughout the 70's, 80's, and early 90's, most of the demoscene, game development, etc. revolved around non-Windows platforms (particularly BASIC-running toasters in the 70's-80's, followed by Amigas and Macintoshes throughout the 80's and early 90's).

Windows 95 was the start of Windows becoming more popular for game development and multimedia production, but it took quite some time for Windows to displace the rest of the market (through Microsoft's monopolistic tactics, but that's another story). Until that point, there was DOS, but it was one of many contenders with relatively-equal footing only as far back as the late 80's at the earliest, before which DOS was more the purview of businesses buying IBM PCs alongside their IBM mainframes (in other words, about the most uncool computers one could possibly own). The reason DOS eventually caught on was very much because of how "open" (comparatively-speaking) it was compared to, say, Mac OS; the same subculture of BASIC programmers from the Commodore 64 days could make an easy transition to a similarly-minimalist environment requiring a lot of user intervention and therefore customization opportunity, much like how the world of GNU/Linux had been all the way up to the mainstream adoption of Android (and still is, though it's no longer an absolute necessity to be able to tinker with one's system like it was in the first half of the 2000's).

This isn't to mention that Windows didn't fully penetrate the educational market until well into the 2000's; most schools had a large quantity of Apple hardware still in use, thus influencing educational development. This was much stronger when the idea of a "demoscene" was still really relevant.

Now, the cracking world might have been different (I know DOS was a strong contender in the BBS subculture), but the latter two are very much not a product of Windows; far from it.