Like many who follow the technology scene, I was excited about the prospect of a "$100 laptop" (now called the XO), one that could be used by kids in developing countries as a substitute for textbooks, school supplies, and perhaps even teachers.
If the software was all open-source, then the only cost would be a one-time purchase of the computer itself. A whole classroom could be equipped with all the educational supplies it needs for less than the cost of furniture. Now the computer is ready, but promises from nations to actually buy the machines have fallen through. Was the entire project a bust? Slate's Cyrus Farivar thinks so. He slams the concept in Slate:
Today, the One Laptop per Child foundation has announced that its cheapo device (now officially dubbed the "XO laptop") will be made available to the American and Canadian consumer market for a two-week period in November. For $400, you can participate in the "Give One, Get One" program--your purchase gets you one laptop for yourself and another that will be sent to a student in the developing world.This announcement is a fundamental shift for the project, and it's the latest signal that the $100 laptop project will never work as it's been conceived. In 2005, the OLPC team stipulated that only governments could buy the devices and that each country had to buy a minimum quantity of 1 million laptops. Not a single nation went for the deal, so earlier this year, OLPC reduced the minimum buying quantity to 250,000. More recently, that minimum quantity has dropped to 100,000. How many countries have signed up now? Still zero.
It now appears that the machine which was originally going to be produced millions at a time will now be sold in increments of two. There are plenty of nerds who'd love to get their hands on the machine, which post some impressive features, most notably a screen that can be viewed in direct sunlight -- but somehow I doubt that a few technophiles will boost sales of the device sufficiently to make a real impact.
Farivar says that private industry may do almost as well as Negroponte's public efforts:
While the One Laptop per Child program has been spinning its wheels, other companies have started developing competing products. Not long after OLPC started building its machine, Intel came out with its $249 to $549 Classmate PC, which is currently being tested around the globe. A company called Asus has also announced the $250 to $300 Eee PC, a laptop that's due to ship stateside later this month. So, how about we eliminate the middlemen and simply unleash OLPC's laptops on people who want to buy them? Maybe the XO will hold its own, and maybe it will flop. Let the best computer win.
I still have hope for the XO, but whatever its fate, it's looking like the computer's advocates going to have a difficult battle as they try to spread the gospel about their impressive little device.
- Log in to post comments
I don't think Give One Get One means they're going to ship off an individual laptop to a child in a developing country when I send in the money for two.
I'm uninterested in the Classmate PC or Eee PC. I'm excited about the XO (more in my blog entries yesterday and today). I like a lot more about OLPC than just the hardware -- but the hardware will be far ahead of other laptops, as far as I'm concerned (I don't care about CPU-intensive games).
This should be called SLANT not SLATE. This article is hardly a fair criticism of the XO. What the XO has that the others (Intel's Classmate and Asus' Eee PC) don't is software geared specifically towards developing countries, mesh networking to make up for sparse internet connections, and an extremely rugged design. Furthermore, the author cites lack of electricity in developing countries as a problem...does he realize the VERY WELL MARKETED existence of a foot pedal charger?
And the price? The author is actually vaguely inconsistent in his criticism--in the beginning he expresses doubt that it will cost only $100 by 2010, and right at the end he says it will be "a few years yet" before the price comes down. Hmm, so which is--2010, or "a few years from now"? Same thing, right?
What really pisses me off is how he downplays and shrugs off the academic theory behind all of this. The whole idea of the project is to put these children online and have them start communicating with the world. The education value is not simply the computer's ability to teach a kid "1+1=2", but rather its ability to connect them to each other and to others. Giving these children a voice in the world will do more than giving them a blackboard and Slate.
PS: For better coverage of the OLPC, see articles at arstechnica.com/journals/science.ars
MIT's TechnologyReview.com also has good stuff, but they obviously will be coming from Negroponte's side.
The "Give One, Get One" program is to help get the XO into the hands of US and Canadian citizens. Governments buy shipments by the thousands. If the XO was not available at all in the US or Canada, I'm sure those that would be jealous could go to great lengths to get their hands on one. This provides a way so that those who want one in the US (which is better off economically) to get one as well as helping a child in another country and supporting the effort.
I've actually gotten to see one and mess around with it. It is very durable, easy to use and understand, and provides a way for people in less developed countries get their hands on technology. "It's an education project, not a laptop project".
--MathStuf
Cyrus did go a little over the top on his article, but one sometimes has to be a little biting to cut through the blind fanboy ravings. And to its credit, Jonathan, the MIT Review has been pretty balanced, giving OLPC credit but not being blind fanboy.
Over at OLPC News http://www.olpcnews.com which I obviously think is the best discussion on One Laptop Per Child, we've been debating the good and bad merits of the project for over a year now.
One laptop per child seems a little over the top. One laptop per classroom (or per family) might be a little more realistic.
But damn, that foot-pedal charger thing sounds great! As does the view-in-bright-sunlight feature. I wish someone would turn them out for my power-hungry HP/Compaq beastie! Too many flights are far too long for my batteries to cope when playing power-intensive games.
Or maybe a bike-pedal dynamo sort of thing, so I could get my exercise in as I websurf.
Whatever the merits, the goodwill behind this surely has to be appreciated.
I find it interesting that it is the so-called cultural inteligencia of the web that snipes at the attempt to make a difference but a business guru of Fortune Magazine provides both encouragement and kudos.
The $100 (well, almost) laptop is here
Despite multiple roadblocks, the team behind the One Laptop Per Child initiative is ready to deliver. Fortune's David Kirkpatrick profiles the innovative approach to both product and marketing.
http://money.cnn.com/2007/10/05/magazines/fortune/fastforward_xo.fortun…
Professor Steve Steve checked it out and said he liked it very much!