Jump to content

Talk:One Laptop per Child/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3→Archive 5

Commercial Version

Why does no one answer the question WHY this laptop will not be available to US/EU-Countries or "normal" customers??? I added a short text "Restricted availability" to the article, but it was - of course (thanks to restrictive wikipedia...haha, free information, haha!) - deleted again.

There is no discussion forum on the net where i can find information about it - so, can PLEASE anyone tell me the REASON for the decision to restrict the $100-laptop only to third world countries??? I accepted this, but I will probably buy one on ebay for $150 from one of the thousands of third world kids whose families rather like $150 for food than a laptop they cannot eat...

the MIT guys don't do a favor to anyone by restricting the $100 laptop only to third world countries, but they still do so. I could accept this, if AT LEAST, there would be A REASON WHY!!!

Can ANYONE please give me an answer to this??? (Unsigned, Nov 18)

Acording to this article (go to page 2), a pricier one will be availible outside the target countries.
http://www.fortune.com/fortune/articles/0,15114,1129896,00.html?promoid=cnnmoney (Unsigned, Nov 20)
Yes in the Wired interview with Negroponte, he indicates OLPC is approaching manufacturers with the intent of licensing the design and having the manufacturers offer a commercial version. There are several benefits that he mentions in the interview.
http://www.wired.com/news/print/0,1294,69615,00.html (Unsigned, Nov 20)
In an Wallstreet Journal article:

At the same time, they say they are hoping to authorize a commercial version that would sell for around $200, with a share of the profits ideally used to subsidize the educational project. "We are in talks with large, brand-name companies," Mr. Negroponte says, noting it will be up to them to decide where and how to sell it. "I would not hold my breath for it to be in Best Buy," he says.

I believe they initially said that there would not be a commercial version as they didn't want the subsidies going to people who didn't needed it. Now it looks like they realize that the profits of a commercial version can go towards subsidizing more units for third-world countries. Other companies are sure to put out their own (say with Windows or Mac OS) laptops around this ballpark in a few years.
Also note that several articles note that Massachusetts (not in the third world) is one of the first places that the $100 subsidized version will be available in. The $100 subsidized version has to be bought in bulk by the various governments whether they are in the first world or third world. Chiok 12:38, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
Hmm.. I think North-americans have sufficient instruction to work and buy regular desktops. Leave 100 laptop for who relly needs that.
I beleive that the bulk buying is the sticking point. The way these are being marketed to potential customer countries is "one laptop per child." That's millions. The cost of distribution goes to the host government. On the other hand, a commercial version would have to be distributed... how much does it cost to move a few hundred throusand to a few million laptops to CompUSA's across the country (or bestbuys... whatever)? In addition, the first 5-10 million must be pre-paid before construction begins. I don't think there's that kind of market here in the US. On the other hand, this laptop shows what can be done for amazingly little money... it's full of common sense, as well. Hard drives are on their way out, in a way. We will begin to rely more and more on flash memory, with hard drives only in desktops that mostly idle, or in external hard drives, until hard drives become completely obsolete a few years down the line (I predict 2016.). Ditto with optical drives. This thing has no spinning parts, other than the wind-up power device ;)--AK7 02:58, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

"I think North-americans have sufficient instruction to work and buy regular desktops. Leave 100 laptop for who relly needs that."
Wrong. You forgot about the people in Nothern Canada and Alaska. The schools in the North cannot afford expensive computer equiptment, and very few electronics stores. Also, communication and connectivity is a big win for people in the Arctic. I plan on writing a letter to the Government of Canada, urging them to buy some of these laptops for students in the arctic. --Munchkinguy 04:54, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

Well, Canada is one of the richest countries of the world, I see no problem to a country that expense billion dollars with millitar budgets offer some basic ordinary computer equipments for ordinary schools.

criticism

there's also been a lot of criticism of the use of linux. os x was apparently offered for free. — Omegatron 20:22, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

Do you have a cite for that? OS X was definitely offered for free, but I think it was decided that the memory constraints of the machine, as well as the desire to run on open source software made linux the clear choice. I wasn't aware that there was any controversy surrounding that decision. — DDG 20:26, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
Well, lots of people on slashdot, really.  :-) Saying that Linux isn't suitable for end users, especially children, that open source and the ability to modify source code isn't relevant to education except for computer science, etc.
It's really only unsuitable for end users in a default installation. You've got to expect that anything that ends up on one of these machines is going to be incredibly tricked out to provide a smooth experience for a first time user. — DannoHung 19:32, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
Don't know of anyone "official" complaining about it. — Omegatron 20:53, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
It's a hoax. OSX wasn't offered for free.
Do you have any evidence that this is the case?
Yes, Apple never confirmed this. It's a pure hoax been born at Slashdot by people has fear of the popularization of the Linux in the developing countries.

Re: "...Saying that Linux isn't suitable for end users, especially children..." If an operating system can't be made "unusable" for regular people, there's a problem. However, I know for a fact that there are linux distributions made specifically for children. The positive things about free and open source (yes, I know they are different) are:

  1. They are vendor-neutral (the corporation that made it doesn't own it after you buy it)
  2. Free (gratuit) so it doesn't affect the price of the laptop
  3. Can be installed on multiple computers without extra licensing.
  4. Are updatable online, you don't need to buy a new version of the OS once it comes out.

There are exceptions to theese reasons, but I think you get the point. — Munchkinguy 02:57, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

The main reason OLPC went with Linux is that they really wanted an OS that they could change so that it suited their purposes better. Closed-source software makes this very difficult to do. From the WSJ article:
Mr. Negroponte discussed the project last week with Microsoft Chairman Bill Gates and Craig Mundie, chief technical officer of advanced strategies and policy. "We're in serious discussions to determine what the appropriate type of involvement is with us with their project," says Mr. Mundie.
Steve Jobs, Apple Computer Inc.'s chief executive, offered to provide free copies of the company's operating system, OS X, for the machine, according to Seymour Papert, a professor emeritus at MIT who is one of the initiative's founders. "We declined because it's not open source," says Dr. Papert, noting the designers want an operating system that can be tinkered with. An Apple spokesman declined to comment.
Under present plans, the first production version of the laptop will be powered by an AMD microprocessor and use an open-source Linux-based operating system supplied by Red Hat. Open-source software is not patent protected and can be copied for free. Jaco — plane 03:08, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

The Markham article does a nice job of articulating the merits of the OLPC open-source approach: "But it is mainly because it's vitally important that these children own the software as much as they own the hardware – so they can examine it, change and adapt it to their needs, and distribute those changes to their friends." — Walter Bender

Note that the biggest problem for 'end users' with linux, is installing new hardware, esp when that requires kernel or lib changes. As the HW will be set, and all drivers preinstalled, this should leave the system pretty usable. Besides, as an "80's kids", we learnt very quickly to be power users of C64's and DOS machines. In any class of kids there'll be a few who'll find their way round the system pretty quickly.

"A common critiscism is that developed countries are giving poorer children laptops before they give their own children laptops. It is claimed that many children in the United States and other developed countries would benefit much more from the use of a laptop than children in undeveloped countries." Are there some citations for these "common critiscisms"? The OLPC response has been that "our priority is to make the laptop available first where there is the greatest need." Walter.bender 21:25, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Anti-features section

I'm not sure what to make of the anti-features section. Personally, I don't think it's something this article should include. It's clear by looking at the features which features are missing. It would be better IMO to include a sentence that says that this laptop does not include features commonly found in other laptops. However, I didn't simply want to remove the entire section without discussing here first. Please comment. Jacoplane 20:25, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

The current "Intentionally omitted features" section looks very useful and informative to me. What to leave out is sometimes more important than what to include. ;-} sabre23t 01:53, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

jacoplane: I added the anti-features section (along with most of the other technical information in the hardware section). The point of this section is to highlight the deliberate negative design goals of the product -- the things that you deliberately design out of the system. A primary reason to include it is because this laptop is very different to the conventional laptop designs so people assume that the OLPC laptop must have this feature because that's what they expect. If you are familiar with Design pattern (computer science) in (software) design then you might be aware of Anti-pattern which highlight common mistakes in software design. This is a similar idea. As I wasn't logged in I should mention I'm Kevinpurcell 67.171.26.8 21:22, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Curl-up-in-a-bed mode

I don't know any kids who go to bed in broad daylight.

The use of the transmissive (backlight on) vs. reflective (backlight off) is independent of the mode (laptop vs. ebook), so a child could curl up in bed with the laptop day or night and still use it as an e-book. Walter.bender 01:32, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

A cranky old laptop from a cranky old yankee's mind

This handcrank thing is bullshit. Because it is a moving part, it will break down soon for dirt and worn bearing. Kids are very energetic, they will break the handle unless it is made of gun steel. The generator part will skyrocket the price, the coper wiring alone for the dinamo will cost arm and a leg.

In the USSR people in the remotest tundra used handcranked pocket radio recevers to be able to listen to communist party bullshit broadcast from Moscow. This is not the way to future, battery with tethered solar cell panel charger should be used or fuel cell.

Otherwise, if the laptop is on a desk, how do you turn the crankshaft, since he arm would hit the tabletop as you can see from the graphics. And I must agree a 100USD laptop is the last thing the third world needs. There is lack of potable water, there are colonial wars funded by imperialists who want to steal the mineral reserves of Africa, there is the global warming, etc. 195.70.32.136 15:04, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

I see your point about the durability issue. The crank, should be made in a durable non-breakable way. On othe other hand, I believe that the crank/battery tube is actually a removable/replaceable component in the design.

I believe that the design is supposed to allow for plug in power from a solar cell, wall outlet, or other source.

I am not really against the hand-crank though. I have a 2 handcrank radios and a handcrank flashlight made by some English outfit --- I hear that the UN uses handcrank radios and such in their relief operations because power can be brought to bare rain or shine, day or night.

And for enterprising types, these computers existing could create a market place for providing non-crank supported power.

OKAY continues using your Windows XP to download porn divx resources and leave $100 laptop for people that really needs that: for study, development, research.

Deja vu?

A cheap, portable, low-end laptop for students, running on flash memory? Didn't we already have that in '98 with the eMate 300? --Munchkinguy 13:44, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

That was, it's worth mentioning, 8 times the price. Tlogmer 15:36, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
Yes, well I bought one on eBay for $50.00 (including S&H). I'm not saying that a $100 laptop is bad, (far from it, I will be following this story closely) I'm just saying it's been done before. I think this will have a tremendous impact for people living in Northern Canada. Computers and the internet have collapsed space, and remote arctic communities deserve to be connected with the rest of the country. Also, schools in the North often cannot afford expensive computer equiptment. --Munchkinguy 19:55, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
Jesus, Canada is a developing country? It has one of the highest quality of life standards in the world. If there are people in the north of Canada who do not have access the computers, that is a problem for the Canadian government: this is local, regional, is not a mass problem, does not affect a generation, does not affect billions of people. So, why does a $100 laptop need to go to the North of a country that has one of the best living standards of the world? The preceding unsigned comment was posted by 201.58.83.61
As far as I know, selling laptops, even to developed countries, will allow more laptops to be built in total (economy of scale) and make it easier, not harder, for developing countries to get the computers. Tlogmer 04:41, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
I heard the plan is to sell them for 2 or 3 times the price to people in more economically developed countries. --Joe Llywelyn Griffith Blakesley talk contrib 17:13, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
Not quite. First, any country that is willing to go down the one laptop per child path will be able to purchase these laptops although there is a pretty good chance that they will not make the first roll-out which seems to be relatively stable now. IIRC, Massachusetts is on the list of venues that will, in all likelihood, get part of the first batch. My understanding is that these countries will not be charged more than developing world countries. While the plans are still unclear, there seems to be plans for a more expensive version. However, this will be commericially produced and distributed and will be different from than the educuational laptop. It will be something that one can buy in a store rather than only through school channels. The school laptops should all be the same -- minus software differences. —mako 17:41, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

To 201.58.83.61: Canada has some of the the best average living standards in the world. But in the underpopulated North, conditions are worse. Living in isolated communities means that supplies are expensive. Not to mention that all the supplies have to be flown in (often through snowstorms) in small amounts at a time (making them even more expensive). Not a lot of jobs either. Computers in schools = better modern education. Better modern education = better jobs. I'm not saying everyone in the arcitc is poor. I'm just saying there isn't as much opportunity there as in the rest of Canada. --Munchkinguy 04:11, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

criticism: how will these societies be affected?

MIT doesn't appear to have researched the entire range of possible affects of the $100 laptop project. Their FAQ is void of any in depth information.

As Mcluhan said, our technologies work us over completely ... they reshape every part of our lives. Injecting technology on this scale into the poorest countries in the world is nothing short of a huge anthropological experiment. Social, political, religious, and family structures are bound to be affected. MIT have a responsibility to research the entire range of effects (both good and bad) before implementing this project.

Once you start the questions about the $100 laptop project go on and on and on.

Looing for advice on how to add this criticism to the article.

Everythingisok 16:12, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Criticism: Intel criticism

The criticism from Intel was widely reported and I was surprised not to see it in the article. (I know, {{sofixit}}) - David Gerard 11:43, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Badmouthing from Corporate Bigwigs

It's funny that most of the people criticizing this project are involved in companies whose competitors were chosen to supply hardware/software. Do you think they're just bitter? --Munchkinguy 02:42, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

Maybe, but also, where else would you expect to see the criticisms? From the companies who are supplying the hardware/software? (Of course, there's Microsoft who bashes the project while simultaneously trying to force Windows onto the system.) 67.166.242.232 15:37, 3 June 2006 (UTC)


Rename Page OLPC?

The project itself is trying to distance itself from the $100 Laptop name. The idea being that the laptop may, in the future, be less than $100 dollars. The project's goals are not dictated by a magical price point and the dollar sign and number make that vision unclear to many.

There's also the issue of whether there should be a seperate page for the organization and the laptop. At this point (and until there is a second generation laptop being built), my sense is that one page is fine. That said, I think the page should be named OLPC. — mako 03:16, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Disagree: The offical website (laptop.media.mit.edu) uses the $100 laptop name extensively, and does not seem to present an official alternative model or product name. The latest news from the project "$100 Laptop News for the Community / OLPC News (2/12/06)" also uses the $100 laptop name in the text and presents no alternative. The only alternative name for the product itself is "The Green Machine prototype", mentioned on their wiki. [1]
You're correct. There is no other name for the laptop at this point. But there is also no other page for the organization. The organization has a name (OLPC). The laptop does not. In terms of OLPC communicating the fact that the laptop may be either more or less than $100, this is something I've heard Nicholas Negroponte do on at least two occcasions. —mako 03:25, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
I agree with your comments regarding the price tag blurring the vision, but that's something for OLPC to communicate, not Wikipedia. It's especially sad as the first generation is unlikely to meet its stated goal of a $100 laptop. I also agree that we may need a separate OLPC article in the future, but this article is about the laptop much more than the organisation. —Pengo 00:27, 13 February 2006 (UTC)]]
The laptop has overwhelmingly been referred to as the $100 laptop in the mainstream media. If and when this changes, a page move will be appropriate. Jacoplane 00:34, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
Fair enough. It's perhaps worth considering that an OLPC page may be appropriate at some point before then. —mako 03:25, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

I would suggest a diferent title such as Low Cost Laptop and to separate the article from OLPC.--tequendamia 03:21, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

The official name of the project is $100 laptop. So it's natural that the article should be named as such. There is an article on the One Laptop Per Child. --Vizcarra 00:23, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

I've made the bold move of redirecting to The Children's Machine, as this is the official title for the computer now ([2]) --Cumbiagermen 00:18, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

The working name for the laptop being built by OLPC is "The Children's Machine." However, it is a shame that Cumbiagermen chose to use the unaffliated olpcnews.com website instead of the primary source for the justification for changing the name of the Wikipedia entry. Please note that the name of final product is likely to change again. --Walter.bender 00:47, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
I have started getting rid of all references to "$100 Laptop" from the article, because at this point it almost certainly will not be called that 72.130.177.246 23:29, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
The current plan[3] is to call it 2B1. --Walter.bender 19:41, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Hardware_specification

In the wiki[4] they confirm the CPU will be a Geode. Pegua 22:48, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

Licensed Photos

The photos of the laptop at the bottom of the article have been marked for deletion as copyvios.

Perhaps, someone should ask the OLPC people if they will grant us a license to these? Or, maybe, including one would be considered fair use as it is picture of their product form advertising material.

We could also ask RMS (User:Rmstallman) if he will license the photo he took of the laptop under the GNU FDL.

Also, IMO, there should definitely be a photo in the infobox at the top.

--Joe Llywelyn Griffith Blakesley talk contrib 17:07, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

Sure. I'll ask. I suspect it will be fine. —mako 17:44, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

OLPC has released these images under a Creative Commons Attribution2.5 License. The original images, along with the license, can be found at the OLPC download page.

Walter.bender 23:48, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:One_Laptop_per_Child/Archive_1&oldid=1146676135"