Talk:OLPC XO

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Talk:OLPC XO-1)
Jump to: navigation, search
Former good article nominee OLPC XO was a good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There are suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
Date Process Result
August 19, 2006 Peer review Reviewed
September 9, 2008 Good article nominee Not listed
Current status: Former good article nominee

Ethernet port?[edit]

Several review articles - for example, [1] - say that the current version of the the XO laptop has an Ethernet port. However, this is not listed in the specs in the Wikipedia article. Are the specs wrong, or is this port not included on production versions of the XO? 216.254.13.92 01:25, 4 December 2007 (UTC)David in Seattle

The machine has an integrated Wireless networking interface and appropriate software. It does not need an Ethernet port.

77.97.161.230 (talk) 23:10, 16 December 2007 (UTC) mikeL

There is no Ethernet port on the XQ laptop. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.51.183.147 (talk) 14:37, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Please see http://laptop.org/laptop/hardware/specs.shtml —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.51.183.147 (talk) 14:41, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

There are three USB ports; a USB Ethernet dongle works with the XO laptop, if for some reason you don't want to use wireless. --Walter.bender (talk) 03:10, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Language[edit]

I can't see any mention of language or localisation.

Is Negroponte pushing his own language (the American dialect of English) onto the world? Or are these machines going to be localised in Swahili, Spanish, seTwana, etc? — Chameleon 00:19, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Yes, they are going to be localized. Keyboards here. It may even be localized to languages that even Microsoft does not support, because it will be distributed to very poor countries. --IanOsgood (talk) 04:11, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

The new touch-screen keyboard on the XO 2.0 will not only be software-switchable to other languages, but also to skill levels. I.e., a 6-year old can have a simpler keyboard than a 12-year old 70.176.187.35 (talk) 17:14, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

At the current time, L10n efforts are underway in about 130 languages/dialects at http://translate.sugarlabs.org/ 98.204.202.184 (talk) 06:25, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

Purpose[edit]

According to the its originators "Our goal: To provide children around the world with new opportunities to explore, experiment and express themselves"

This is much mors educationally significant than simply "to provide them with access to knowledge" as the article states.

77.97.161.230 (talk) 10:16, 20 December 2007 (UTC)mikeL

I noticed this too. I've put part of this quote into the text as well as a link to Constructionism (learning theory). I believe there used to be some mention of it there before. I don't know why it was removed. —Pengo 06:15, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Use by adults[edit]

Are they usable by adults? Does the keyboard work comfortably with adult hands? --Error (talk) 01:22, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

The keyboard is a bit squishy (in more ways than one). ie. they're rubber keys as well as being close together. You can get used to it after a while and type at a reasonable rate. Your fingers probably wont rest neatly with one finger above each key though. It also has 3 USB ports, so you can plug in an ordinary keyboard if you need to do a lot of typing (which I have tried, and works fine). I've only used the English layout though and I don't know if other languages will have the same sized keys. I'd assume so. I can't give a source, only my own experience, so you might have to look elsewhere for something to add to the article. —Pengo 06:03, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Uh, this computer is NOT practical for adults. I'm typing on mine right now. I'm 12 year old, and it's not hard to typ on it. But imagine how it would be for an adult! The keys are really soft,which is really awesome for someone my age (it's easy). And, the mouse-thing is very, very tiny. And besides! You might not like it, because it looks like a toy (it's intentional).--Listen to your Princess, dear Wikipedians. (talk) 16:45, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

What does that have to do with anything? Looks dont matter for how a adult could use one. 68.197.141.28 (talk) 17:47, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

What is "Dual RAM" ?[edit]

In OLPC_XO-1#Hardware some dual RAM is mentioned. What is that ? Dual channel RAM ? I know of no other "dual" RAM term. Please clarify. --Xerces8 (talk) 11:15, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm guessing this refers to double data rate (see also DDR2 SDRAM). —Pengo 11:36, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
Since when is guessing good enough for wikipedia ? ;) I've seen text removed for smaller reasons. --Xerces8 (talk) 12:38, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
Dual RAM may also refer to a memory bus that allows interleaving when matching sized DIMMs are used in matching socket pairs. Again this is more guessing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.76.236.130 (talk) 03:25, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Cleaner breaks between OLPC and this article?[edit]

This article and the OLPC article name each other as the primary articles. Somehow, that strikes me as inconsistent. Charles Merriam (talk) 14:51, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Software[edit]

The entire software section could probably be overhauled in light of recent changes at OLPC, including the announcement to offer MS Windows as an option. Sugar, originally developed for the XO laptop, now has a life independent of OLPC. --Walter.bender (talk) 20:16, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

rrr[edit]

can these things run Crysis? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gnetin (talkcontribs) 23:11, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

contested statement removed[edit]

  • Negroponte has said at the Technology Review’s Fifth Annual Emerging Technologies Conference that the monochrome display has four times the resolution of the color display.

{{Fact|date=December 2006}}

Please do not return this informaiton to the article without a citation--BirgitteSB 21:25, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

snake oil?[edit]

There are no machines in the developed world for hands on purposes. Rumors start to spread that all is a fake. It seems that the OLPC is not rugged at all. Can anybody confirm that the OLPC is rugged. I do not talk about beefed up prototypes. Max from Stuttgart —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.1.89.8 (talk) 07:09, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

I got my G1G1 XO when I was stateside last year, and I have it with me here in Hessen now. If you want you can come visit and I'll beat you over the head with it. It's rugged enough for that, at least. The screen itself isn't extremely though though. It's not nearly as fragile as a traditional LCD screen, but it will probably not survive, say, a crossbow bolt to the screen like some of the ruggedized sapphire/glass LCDs. ^_^
Furthermore, we're not changing anything based on "rumors". Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 13:39, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:OLPC XO-1/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
  • In the "History" section, "The first early prototype " paragraph requires a reference
  • "On May 20th, 2008, OLPC announced the next generation of XO, OLPC XO-2." needs a ref
  • " Design" needs a reference
  • "n color mode, the display does" needs one
  • No external links in the text please, such as in "×738 a 984 x 738 perceptual resolution.[24] A conventional "

Gary King (talk) 17:35, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Note: just a remindal to move this article to "XO-1 (OLPC)" once the GAN is over. Nergaal (talk) 00:49, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

  • Actually withdrawn nom since it needs waaay more refs than I thought initially and would take too much time. Nergaal (talk) 01:02, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

B.A.T.M.A.N. protocol[edit]

goes great with the XO's "ears" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.180.210.137 (talk) 02:01, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Production Display does not use diffraction grating[edit]

The diffraction grating idea did not get into production. Therefore it is not the main innovation in the display as alluded to in the article (whereas power consumption and sunlight-readability are). From http://www.olpctalks.com/mary_lou_jepsen/mary_lou_jepsen_tech_rising.html "So, there's a whole [sic] in the center of the pixel with a color filter over it. The rest of the pixel just is a mirror with no color filter over it."

I did not write this, moving from Talk:One Laptop per Child. But this claim should be checked against published sources. -- Beland (talk) 16:58, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
A diffraction grating can be considered one type of color filter. In Dr. Jepsen's interview with Jim Rapoza, she maintains a fairly high-level overview of the technology instead of a detail technical description because of the audience for the interview. I'm not convinced that a diffraction was not used in the XO-1 laptop's screen. Mary Lou Jepsen's patent application describes the use of a diffraction grating or a micro-optical film. Are there additional references about the final manufacturing of the screen? sn‾uǝɹɹɐʍɯ (talk) 01:49, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

XO Display[edit]

Please take this into account :

Ignore talk of "mono and color modes", and of screen resolutions other than 1200x900. We named things poorly, and immense confusion has resulted. We called two very different things mono/color. Which combined with the unusual screen hardware, has generated immense confusion,and consequent misinformation.
From : http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Display
There has never been another resolution usable in Sugar OS other than 1200x900. In color mode, it's weird looking 1200x900 but it's still 1200x900.
All occurences of 588×441, 882×662, 984×738 and 693×520 are plain wrong.
57.66.138.14 (talk) 13:42, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

It is true that the displays in the XOs are highly innovative, but we can still describe them correctly. They do have the capability of displaying color in low resolution or mono in high resolution. To get color they use 4 mono pixels, which have the capability of specializing in one color, each, makign 1 combined color pixel. For mono, they use each pixel independently. When traditional color displays are described, the separate red, blue, and green pixels are not counted as separate pixels, either, but rather counted as one, the same as we can do with the XO in color mode 70.176.187.35 (talk) 17:17, 8 March 2010 (UTC).

Originator of the netbook market[edit]

Since this device single handedly kickstarted the netbook market, shouldn't there be a larger focus on that point in the article? --68.81.70.65 (talk) 17:40, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

[citation needed] as in hardly. 85.131.30.197 (talk) 21:02, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Power Consumption[edit]

Does the use of the open Operating System, LINUX, have any positive effect on reducing the power consumption to .8W?

JP Childs Reasearcher BCRM Corp. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.15.85.3 (talk) 19:05, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Motherboard?[edit]

The picture that displays the computer's logic board is described as "Motherboard". Is Motherboard actually still a term used in modern day computing. For some reason, since the past 10 years everyone I had ever spoken to about computers refers to this main circuit board that houses the processor as a Logic Board and not a motherboard, shouldn't it be updated on this article? Or are we still using 386 computers and tie-dying our shirts? Dual64bit (talk) 19:58, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Per the named articles, logic board is the Apple term for what the industry still generally refers to as a motherboard. John Darrow (talk) 22:12, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Outdated[edit]

This article is seriously outdated. Many of the listed features/specs are pre-release speculatation, and these are mixed throughout the article with the actual release features/specs; this makes reading the article a nightmare because you read about whatever innovative feature that "will" be released with the product and then find out it never happened. Some features, such as eBook and MANET, are described as if they are implemented in some parts of the article and listed as nonfunctional/unincluded in other parts of the article. 192.189.46.30 (talk) 04:36, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

This entire article is one big {{citation needed}} tag. It is as much ambitious speculation as the OLPC itself. Is there even a working model anywhere outside the borders of Uqbar? Clarknova (talk) 20:44, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
The XO-1 does exist and is production. The original poster was talking about the specs, not the product itself. 121.209.162.26 (talk) 22:30, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
There are over 1*10^6 units deployed in the field in a variety of countries (including the United States). ffm is now LFaraone 05:03, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

You are right, the article is impossible to read when it mixes versions, builds, and proposals. The format with other computer articles seems to be to describe the latest released model, only, pushing all other models onto their own pages or into a history section. With the XO, it is likely that old models will continue to be used for some time. Perpaps it would be wise (and much less confusing) to have an article for each model (XO 1.0, XO 1.5, and XO 2.0), with separate sections for each major build. We have a separate article for the One Laptop Per Child organization and its movement. We should have separate sections or separate articles for the history of the product line, and for announced, proposed, or documented needs for future changes. Call it XO Development. 70.176.187.35 (talk) 17:21, 8 March 2010 (UTC).

Laptop Specs[edit]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on OLPC XO. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:40, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 9 external links on OLPC XO. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:18, 22 September 2017 (UTC)