

Can a £15 computer solve the programming gap? - Peteris
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/click_online/9504208.stm

======
dkersten
I think its an interesting project, and if they can actually produce it as
inexpensively as they hope (or even twice that - $50 is still a good price
point!), I think it will be useful in schools simply because kids will be able
to own one themselves, bring it home etc, which I think will inspire (at least
some of) them to learn more and do more interesting things with them outside
of the classroom. As somebody in another HN post about this said: "get
technology into as many hands as possible" - this is certainly a great thing!

However, I think the statements in the video about how computers have become
much more complex and that is why people aren't learning to program them at a
young age is incorrect. BBC Micros and ZX Spectrums (and Commodore's and
Amigas and all the rest) were, IMHO, _not_ easier to learn with compared to
todays computers. They were actually much less accessible and therefore
attracted the type of people who were able to learn. Smaller audiences of more
capable people (because the less capable people were never attracted to them
in the first place) gives the illusion that they were simpler and easier, even
when they weren't.

Todays computers are usable by just about anyone and most people are exposed
to them in some way through games, social networking, websites.. whatever. The
amount of people learning to program is probably a lot higher today than it
ever was as the barrier to entry is so much lower (going from something as
simple as Scratch, to web development with Javascript, to Ruby and Python and
Processing - a lot of simple, yet powerful, tools (with instant feedback) are
now available), its just that the percentage of people learning to program out
of all the people using computers is now a lot lot lower.

I don't see how this device would be able to make it any easier than a full
blown computer (once somebody found and installed the software for the kids)
except that 1) it will have the tools preinstalled and 2) it will be
inexpensive enough that each kid can be given their own one creating a sense
of ownership and hopefully inspiring and encouraging them to do cool stuff
with them (which in turn means they learn more).

TL;DR: This thing does have potential, but I think they (at least the people
who made the video) are focusing on the wrong thing (bringing back the 80's of
computers and programming because they feel it was simpler back then, while I
believe it is a lot lot simpler _now_ ).

~~~
hsmyers
Having been there and having done that and still being involved, I
respectively disagree. It was simpler in virtually all respects. I watched
people of all different levels of interest and education (house wives, grad
students, math majors, art majors and so on [notice no comp sci---there wasn't
such a program]) learn to program in a subset of IBM BAL---this before any of
the various micros you mention existed. Later when such things became
available I was lucky enough to watch a very much larger audience teach
themselves what they needed to know in order to accomplish what they wanted to
do. And all of this before the internet had escaped the clutches of DARPA. In
most cases, all that was available was the machine and the documentation that
came with. In sum, I know what it takes to be creative now and I know what it
took then. I would suggest that at best, it might be a draw. My bias would
like to say that the good old days were better, but given the richness of
today's environment, in fairness I have to come down squarely in the middle.

~~~
dkersten
As I said in my other reply[1], I suspect it _seemed_ easier out of necessity.
Today, you can turn on a computer and it can be useful and provide value
without needing to learn to program or how the machine works. Back then, you
more or less had to learn about the machine or about programming to really get
much value from the computer. Necessity is the mother of invention. I think I
was much more inventive and creative with my programming when I first started
out because I didn't know what was possible, so to do the crazy advanced
things I wanted to do, I was forced to be creative and try weird and wonderful
things and use my computer or programs in ways they weren't really designed
for. I learnt a lot because of this. Now I can just reach for an existing
solution and not learn a thing, because I now know where to look or what to
try. I'm not sure the raspberry pi can hope to achieve this. In fact, besides
the low price point and the fact that they have solder points for general
purpose I/O (which I think could be a huge selling point and benefit to
learning - physically connecting things to it should help motivate and inspire
kids), it is still a complex modern processor running a complex operating
system (Ubuntu) and doesn't really have anything other modern computers don't
have.

Either way, I'll ask this: Why do _you_ think people found it easier to learn
to program back then than it is now?

[1] <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2622880>

~~~
zokier
I think you both raise valid points.

I think the 80's home computers were objectively much simpler than modern
computers. And therefore it was easier to gain deep understanding how it
worked and then how stuff can be accomplished with it. On the other hand,
modern computers are almost impossible to understand at the same level, but
then it is not necessary to do so. We have operating systems and compilers
that take care of lots of stuff, and therefore modern computers are easier to
use, and probably have gentler learning curve.

The necessity and motivation are also a important factor. If you are doing
small stuff (like hello world etc) then the work feels much more compelling
when it transforms a "useless piece of plastic" into a "magical box that does
awesome stuff". With full featured linux distro, you already have "magical box
that does awesome stuff" and your own work doesn't really add anything to it.

~~~
zephyrfalcon
The problem is that kids today don't think of a computer as a "magical box
that does awesome stuff". Nowadays, computers are just tools. They're not
special; they're everywhere, and they can be used to do boring stuff, or
useful stuff, but they're definitely not regarded as "magical", any more than
a car is, or a TV. This is probably a depressing thought to those of us who
remember a different time, but it was inevitable.

------
zokier
I think Raspberry Pi is missing the point by running "normal" Ubuntu Desktop
on it, and having such limited connectivity.

Stuff that I'd add:

* (Ethernet) networking. Or at least some serial ports. Or some way to plug two or more of these together (something over USB maybe?)

* USB hub. First of all, using male USB connector as host port is just plain ugly. Secondly, if USB hub is a requirement to actually use the computer (as it seems to be currently), why not have it built-in?

* Analog video and sound output. Doesn't need to be HiFi, composite video and builtin DAC will be fine.

What I would change/remove:

* Ubuntu. Instead run some minimalistic system that boots directly to simple REPL, and allow more powerful programming somehow (inline ASM?).

* The SoC is huge overkill. And imho way too complex for a beginner to understand. Of course if you plan to teach just some high level language that hides all the hardware from you then it doesn't matter, but then the hardware wouldn't matter at all, and just using some off-the shelf x86-box would yield same results.

* Few GPIO pins are good. Arduino shield compatibility would be great.

tl;dr. I would make the computer more like self-hosting arduino and less like
gimped generic ubuntu box.

------
bodski
OK David this is cool and all, graphical Linux desktop on a USB stick, but
please keep working on Elite 4 [1] , it's been a long wait so far...

[1] <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elite_4>

~~~
iuguy
With Duke Nukem going gold, it can only be a little longer _.

_ for values of little not exceeding Braben's lifetime.

~~~
bodski
yes, DNF going gold is definitely a good omen, apparently Frontier are
committed to getting 'The Outsider' out of the door before they can focus on
Elite 4 full time though. So I'm not holding my breath...

(sounds like a really promising game though) ref:
<http://frontier.co.uk/games/outsider/>

------
dimitar
The company that employs me has a Linux-based product that allows you to
connect extra monitors and keyboards to single computer and have multiple
logins on the same computer. We have equipped a computer lab with this
configuration and the students use it write applications with Eclipse, browse
Facebook. It is not too complicated for them.

This is the page (its in Bulgarian, but Google translator does an excellent
job):

[http://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?hl=bg&...](http://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?hl=bg&ie=UTF8&prev=_t&rurl=translate.google.com&sl=auto&tl=en&u=http://otb.bg/sumu&usg=ALkJrhh9ukAZbQLBelQERLVYV4jm1838gw)

Feel free to ask away if you are interested, we have contacts on the website
:-).

------
benblack86
A £15 computer sounds cool, but programming can be done in your web browser.
Just write some javascript and let the whole world instantly see your
creation.

~~~
chrisjsmith
Yeah but you only need to spend £15 on the computer to fire the web browser up
on now.

~~~
linker3000
The misleading thing about the '£15' Raspberry Pi is that the main peripheral
I/O is via USB, so to get this device on the 'net you must factor in at least
another £17 minimum for a powered USB hub and USB network adaptor - and then
we have a £32 USEABLE computer. It would have cost about £2 to add an RJ45
Ethernet adaptor to the basic design so I hope this will be considered in due
course (I have contacted the developers about this)

------
Peteris
The official website is <http://raspberrypi.org/>.

------
lukejduncan
Fair warning, auto-starting multimedia ad.

~~~
andyking
Where's the ad? It's the BBC website.

~~~
jdietrich
Users of the BBC website outside the UK get served ads.

~~~
bcaulf
Not if they are using Adblock Plus with Easylist.

------
chrisjsmith
A history lesson for those either too young to know, or not from the UK. This
will explain a few gaps.

Back in the day (i.e. around the late 80's) we used to have PROPER computers
in schools in the UK that everyone had free access to. My particular school
had a large network of BBC Master[1] and Acorn Archimedes[2] machines - all
proprietary platforms but OPEN with respect to documentation and doing what
the hell you liked with them. In fact, Acorn, the manufacturer would tend to
shove all the hardware reference and programmers guides in the box with the
machines (you could not break the software on them). They ALL had BBC BASIC
(very advanced variant of structured BASIC) with an inline 6502 or ARM
assembler and most of the earlier machines had analogue and digital IO you
could just stuff things into. They were all networked together as well and
could talk to each other.

We were ACTIVELY ENCOURAGED to build stuff that plugged into these (rather
than the recent policies and AUPs that students have to live with) and write
software to control things and even modify the operating system at will. We
built a massive transit shuttle system based on Lego, we build automated
cranes, we build light sequencers, we built anything we damn wanted and were
applauded for it.

Most of the software devs I know in the UK (other than the young and really
old ones) tend to have cut their teeth on this kit.

Then there was the introduction of the PC which destroyed all this in favour
of "security", "acceptable use policies", "black boxes", "no documentation"
and "vendor lock in".

Mr Braben was a pioneer of these machines [3] [4] and is held close to the
heart of many people. He wants the education sector to go back to these days
(rather than the utter corruption that Research Machines, BECTA and Microsoft
have destroyed everything with recently) because he truly KNOWS what is good
for the industry i.e. people who know how stuff works and are free to
understand.

Ironically, on a slight tangent, my children have Linux machines in their
school these days rather than Windows, which is used for administrative
functions only. It'll only be a few years before my eldest discovers gcc.

[1] <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BBC_Master>

[2] <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acorn_Archimedes>

[3] <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zarch>

[4] <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elite_(video_game)>

~~~
jdietrich
The BBC micros were one side of the coin, perhaps the more respectable and
middle-class side.

Round my way, it was Sinclair all the way, because they were cheap. The ZX81
is perhaps the archetype - they sold 1.5 million units, mainly to people who
had no idea what they would do with a computer. At £69.95, it was cheap enough
to be an impulse buy for most people, cheap enough that kids saved up their
paper-round money.

A lot of early buyers ended up building their ZX81s from a kit (because it was
£20 cheaper) and learned a lot. Even for those that bought it pre-assembled,
there wasn't much to do but learn. The unexpanded ZX81 came with just 1kb of
RAM and no bundled software, but it did come with a spiral-bound "Teach
Yourself BASIC" book. The keyboard was covered in markings for BASIC
shortcuts.

At the time, several magazines consisted of little more than printed source
code, mainly for games, that you could type in yourself. These programs were
invariably rubbish, but a mag was at least a quid cheaper than the cheapest of
games on cassette so they sold shedloads. You'd spend an hour typing it all in
and fixing all your typos, only to realise that it was a hopelessly boring
game. Fiddling about with the source code was the most interesting thing to
do.

The more enterprising kids realised that they could do better and earned a bit
of pocket money selling programs to the magazines. The really enterprising
kids knuckled down and wrote a retail-quality game, which in the mid-eighties
you could do during the summer holidays. The origins of a large proportion of
the British video games industry can be traced directly to a teenager, a
Speccy, a blank tape and a particularly gloomy August.

~~~
Joeboy
> At £69.95, it was cheap enough to be an impulse buy for most people

Not to detract from the rest of what you say, but I think you might have a
skewed idea about how much spare cash "most people" had in 1981.

~~~
jdietrich
We could argue endlessly over that, so I won't. The point stands that relative
to other micros, Sinclairs were _really_ cheap. The BBC model B launched at
£335 but was sold at £399. The 'cheap' Acorn Electron launched in 1983 at
£199, by which time you could get a ZX81 for under £40 or a 16k spectrum for
£99.

~~~
chrisjsmith
And they sucked.

Which is why we did all our playing at school on the BBC's :)

------
smoove
Offtopic: I just noticed that the bbs' videoplayers volume goes UP TO 11!

~~~
elliottkember
It's... one louder, innit?

------
mseebach
No.

The first generation of kids that never knew a time without Internet access,
much less computer access, has recently cleared university, and they don't
know programming. Thinking they'd have learned to program had they had a £15
computer (rather than the £500-£1000 one they/their family did have) doesn't
seem likely.

~~~
idonthack
Those are first-world kids, with rich parents.

A $15 computer is obviously not targeted at that market.

~~~
archgoon
A very reasonable statement. This is not, however, the argument made in the
video. They are explicitly talking about the UK's future.

