I never even seem to be able to get to the point where I say, "and look, I since I just mk-sbuild'd a raspbian ARM chroot on my x86-64 laptop now `sbuild -c raspbian' builds natively for a raspberry pi on my x86-64 without even needing a cross compiler—I just chroot into a completely different ISA".
When I ask people who develop on #MacOS how they put up with that crap, they never even understand the question. And when I say "look, this is what I do on Debian" and show them APT, debootstrap, schroot, sbuild…, half the time their reaction is actually to deny reality entirely and insist that what I'm showing them isn't actually happening—like I'm putting on some very elaborate ruse.
Compare/contrast: "I have no idea why, I got up, came over here, and peed on your floor… and I remember being careful to hit only the carpet and not the video game or the printer" https://www.jwz.org/gruntle/leaky.html #jwz #friends #urine
The idea of `travel kit #raspi' does lend a certain appeal to the #Pi-Top #hardware, similarly to realization from #OLPC that kids really do need to be able to take their !education tools with them. Wondering why nobody seems to be talking about that.
The few actual reviews that I see of the #Pi-Top edugame software (+ the bug-reports in their issue-tracker) seem to indicate `it doesn't actually work all that well, the team isn't doing a great job developing/maintaining it, and it's not #open-source so nobody else can fix the bugs when their kids run into them'. "curriculum that can't be adapted or fixed" has always seemed like !education #fail....
Descriptions of the curricular material varies between "21 projects!", "20+ projects!", "these 3 projects!", and "a video game that teaches you things!". But there's never any actual description of the "20+", just the 3.
It sounds like a big part of the draw to the #Pi-Top is supposed to be the curricular material + custom OS + other software that comes with it, but after further research it also sounds like `we'd end up throwing most of that crap away'...