Heise.de has an in-depth review of the OLPC laptop after testing the laptop. Their conclusion: “The XO laptops already shipped out are a clear sign of what can be done when visionaries, global firms, and international political organizations work together.”
http://www.heise.de/mobil/artikel/88916/0 is the actual link to the review.
Isn’t it the $175 laptop now or did that rumor turn out to be false?
I think on Ebay it is probably going to be called the $399 Buy-it-Now computer.
That is easily the best overview of the OLPC project and XO computer that I have seen to date. Actual hardware and software were reviewed with intelligent comments about where OLPC has been and where it is going.
There are four major points that make the XO appealing for educational use. The cost, UI, display, and networking capabilities are all unique to the XO. Each seems ideal for the target audience, and even the attempts by Microsoft and Intel to compete with the XO don’t come close to matching the XO in those areas.
Power management should also be an advantage, but that remains to be seen until further optimizations have been made. Even without the optimizations though, the XO is showing battery life comparable to many normal laptops with a much smaller battery.
I hope that the OLPC project is able to overcome future and current challenges in a successful manner.
>>Even without the optimizations though, the XO is showing battery life comparable to many normal laptops with a much smaller battery.<<
Well those ‘normal laptops’ use much more powerful CPUs, bigger screens, have an HDD, etc, so that’s quite normal that the OLPC have a power usage advantage.
Agreed for the rest, I wish them luck but IMHO the challenge is high: the OLPC is a very ambitious project reinventing many things so the amount of software needed is huge, both for the infrastructure part and for the education part (after all, it’s supposed to replace the books used in the school).
“””
I hope that the OLPC project is able to overcome future and current challenges in a successful manner.
“””
I’m confident that they will be able to overcome any *real world* obstacles. By “real world” I mean anything short of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation hinting around that they would be much more willing to spend money on your impoverished country if you weren’t giving your children those XO things with Linux on them.
Edited 2007-05-12 13:55
It seemed more like a summary of the various media releases and uploaded operation videos than an actual user review. A good summary, but it didn’t appear to be written by someone who had hands-on experience with one of the prototype machines.
The design again… So all of the photos in that “test” show the lime-green early prototype, which looks nothing at all like the machine shown recently in a news conference release. I wonder if the design is finalized?
Price increased by 75% from $100 to $175. Minimum build order reduced by 70% from 10 million to 3 million. I wonder if the entire project will end up as well-intentioned vapor?
Best Wishes,
-Bob
They say they have one of the prototypes. But they also say it is one of the earlier ones..
The OLPC won’t be any more effective in helping developing nations than Biogas (http://igadrhep.energyprojects.net/Links/Profiles/Biogas/Kenya.htm) or the windup radio (http://www.windupradio.com/trevor.htm) did.
However, I’m sure that hemp wearing, off the grid types (http://www.treehugger.com/files/2005/01/iiluminator_win.php) will love it.
Sounds like another Nattering Nabob of Negativism to me!
Sounds like another Nattering Nabob of Negativism to me!
[off-topic reply]
Well, whaddya know! The spirit of Spiro T. Agnew lives on! [grin]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spiro_T._Agnew
[/off-topic reply]
Sounds like another Nattering Nabob of Negativism to me!
Whatever. These types of gadgets aimed at the developing world have a proven track record of failure. Techies just like it because it runs Linux.
At the UN conference in Tunisia, several African officials, most notably Marthe Dansokho of Cameroon and Mohammed Diop of Mali were suspicious of the motives of the project, and claimed that the project was using an overly American mindset that presented solutions not applicable to specifically African problems. Dansokho said the project demonstrated misplaced priorities, stating that clean water and schools were more important for African women
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/$100_laptop#Good_use_of_money)
There is an obvious response to that which the OLPC provide on the same page –
However, I can (as a child of the 80s) remember that schools had a knee jerk reaction where they threw IT at pupils because it was the “fashion” of the time. Let’s hope the OLPC turns out to be much more than a technological fad.
While it is true there are many people in the world who definitely need food and shelter, there are multitudes of people who live in rural or sub-urban areas and have plenty to eat and reasonable accommodations. What these people don’t have is a decent shot at a good education.
However, I can (as a child of the 80s) remember that schools had a knee jerk reaction where they threw IT at pupils because it was the “fashion” of the time. Let’s hope the OLPC turns out to be much more than a technological fad.
Did you also see this on the same page?
“John Wood, founder of Room to Read, has emphasized what is affordable and can scale over high-tech solutions. While in favor of the One Laptop Per Child initiative for providing education to children in the developing world at a cheaper rate, he has pointed out that a $2000 library can serve 400 children, costing just $5 a child to bring access to a wide range of books in the local languages (such as Khmer or Nepali) and English; also a $10,000 school can serve 400–500 children ($20–$25 a child)”
While I believe that these laptops may be good in certain situations (where children already have access to schools and libraries), most children would be better off getting the basics first (which is much cheaper to provide as well!).
WHY are people convinced that there’s a tiny amount of money to go around in the world?
Yes, resources and man hours are somewhat limited. First world countries and their inhabitants are greedy as Hell.
I don’t understand why people believe that Children will somehow get these INSTEAD of new pens/clean water/paper/shelter?
Seriously…what’s wrong with people. The world is not binary! Deal with it!
If you think an African child’s allotment of aid will be wasted on a laptop, then send a few poor schools a few hundred bucks (or donate to a charity that works specifically with a need you care about).
But for God’s Sake people STOP JUST BITCHING ON A FORUM.
Gets old, and it’s childish. Do something about it if you see a problem. Some people like to try different solutions to the world’s problems. Obviously a massive infusion of money doesn’t really work…so let’s try something creative. That’s what we humans are supposed to be good at.
WHY are people convinced that there’s a tiny amount of money to go around in the world?
Sure, there’s a lot of money floating around the world, but the gov’t budget of your average African country is rather small. And they are the ones being asked to purchase these laptops.
I don’t understand why people believe that Children will somehow get these INSTEAD of new pens/clean water/paper/shelter?
Through observing how aid to Africa has been conducted during the past 50 years. Western aid to Africa has largely been largely tied to conditions which force African governments to buy western goods with the aid money that is offered to them (Norway may be the only country that does NOT engage in this practice). A good example of this is food aid. When Canada offers money to a gov’t during a famine, that gov’t cannot use the money to buy food from a neighbouring country, they must use it to buy grain from Canada, or else no money.
… send a few poor schools a few hundred bucks … STOP JUST BITCHING ON A FORUM
Sure, toss a few buck to some feel good charity which may or may not be getting results (measuring the performance of charities is difficult!), but NO, FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, don’t discuss the issues!!
Moron.
Between the display, the mesh networking, and the UI, the OLPC folks have really developed some cool technology. I’m still a bit skeptical, because I don’t think that the internet availability in all parts of the world is sufficient to support the educational goals of the OLPC, but I’m coming around to the idea that even with some reference materials on the machine itself, it could be tremendously useful.
“””
I’m still a bit skeptical, because I don’t think that the internet availability in all parts of the world is sufficient to support the educational goals of the OLPC
“””
In areas in which this is a problem, millions of these machines will:
1. Directly help resolve that problem with their “last mile” mesh networking.
2. Create a demand (read: business opportunity) for service.
If Internet availability is a problem at first, it won’t be for long.
From the article:
The OLPC says that production will begin when governments have ordered a total of 5 to 10 million units. After recent difficulties in reaching this goal, OLPC set the order minimum to 3 million and plans to sell XO to U.S. schools.
If OLPC would offer the laptop for retail sale over the Internet for $250, I’d buy one. So would many others. Then they wouldn’t have any trouble meeting their goal of 10 million units.
OLPC is counting on Third World governments (and now US schools) to come up with the cash. That is probably a doomed business model. It’s a misconception that poverty only exists in poor Third World countries, and it’s also a misconception that US schools have the budget to buy these things.
If I could buy XO for $250, I would, and OLPC could keep the change. If their production cost is $175, they could take the $75 they’d earn on the retail sale of each laptop and use it to subsidize school purchases, or to give free laptops to children in poor countries. That’s a business model that has a fair chance of succeeding.
Edited 2007-05-12 14:19
They did have the option to start from zero: no backwards compatiblity needed, no high-end hardware needed, low energy consumption preferred…and they had to go for x86, jesus! The result: 30$ for a 366 Mhz CPU which needs several watts to run.
ARM has what they needed at ridiculous prices, and fabricated by hundreds of millions each year.
These CPUs are cheap, you just pay a core license to ARM which is quite low if you are going to produce millions of chips!
And they cover all the range, from 100 Mhz (only integer) cores to Ghz monsters with excellent floating point performance. All of them quite easy to manufacture and all them consuming less than one watt!
God, the computer world is rotten, is totally infected by Wintel (and now AMD).
“””
The result: 30$ for a 366 Mhz CPU which needs several watts to run.
“””
Well, 3.5 watts peak. *far* less in normal use. The difference in power consumption would not have been noticeable.
And even in the Linux world, there are advantages to x86 compatibility, whether you like it or not. There’s lots of stuff that is only available for x86.
Also, it doesn’t seem to have hurt them much. From the article:
“”
Negroponte has a very optimistic target for the XO’s power consumption: two watts. Compared to around 10 watts for even the thriftiest laptops, that would be an excellent performance, giving the machine of runtime of more than 10 hours despite the small battery capacity. The prototypes are nowhere near this performance because power management does not yet work. At present, the laptop runs for 2.5 hours with and 3.5 hours without display illumination, consuming 9.1 and 6.5 watts, respectively.
“”
and
“”
Originally, the XO was designed with a crank inside the case. It turned out that the mechanical load was too great, so that this type of power supply has been taken off the drawing board. Now, a type of yo-yo is being discussed: the generator has a windup string and provides enough power for 10 minutes of XO operation from one minute of winding.
“”
That’s just 18 minutes of pulling for 3 hours of operation.
People can say what they will about what these machines will or will not do regarding education in developing countries, but it looks like right triceps in the 3rd world are about to get a huge boost. The crank would have helped the biceps, too, though.
Ironic that the one area of education in which the devices are *guaranteed* to help is PE.
Edited 2007-05-12 16:29
“””
Well, 3.5 watts peak. *far* less in normal use.
“””
As an addendum, Wikipedia has the Geode GX 500 listed at just 1 watt.
The new Geode LX 700 that will equip the B3 and final
version of XO uses only 0.8 watt.
What children in emergent nations need is laptop computers, not basic sanitation, irrigation, farm equipment, or a decent meal in their bellies.
The OLPC thing always reminds me of the episode of MASH where Winchester gets the fancy chocolate for the orphans, and the guy running the orphanage sells it on the black market for rice and cabbage.
“It is a crime to give dessert to a child that has not had a meal.”
Then maybe education is needed, rather than JUST handouts (I’m not saying aid isn’t desperately needed…)
Teach someone to fish etc.
Hopefully the laptop can be a tool – disseminating knowledge and information freely.
That is exactly that kind of statement the OLPC anticipated. Don’t you think it is ignorant for your part there are countries that have sufficient resources you listed but cannot afford to pay for educations and computer because of several factors like unstable electricity?
It is very clear to your statement you have no ideas about the amazing creativity of people in developing countries with few resources at their disposal.
The XO machine is designed to be a tool to relearn to learn. For example, Uruguay recently opened the first laptop school where teachers, children have reported a bug that was fixed despite the fact none of them have experience of computing. Pakistan is building a Qur’anic Studies for the XO. Its low power consumptions allow a Nepal team to recharge it with a bicycle.
BTW, I am writing with the OLPC B2 in a sunny weather.
The problem with “giving children basic sanitation, irrigation, etc” is not building that infrastructure. They *CAN* do it themselves, for free (since the right people to do this don’t want to be paid for their trouble).
They just don’t know how, and they don’t know why.
If they don’t do it themselves the systems last 1/10th of their expected lifetime and die prematurely from lack of maintenance or simply wrong maintenance or, from plain sabotage (of *evil* western decadent … irrigation systems).
Yes this way it will take 10-20 years for those systems to be built. But they’ll STAY built.
basic sanitation, irrigation, farm equipment, or a decent meal in their bellies.
You do realize that many poor children in emerging nations actually do have all these things and what they need now is a an education and shot at getting a real job and not be stuck working a small plot of land just to feed themselves for the rest of their lives.
You do realize that many poor children in emerging nations actually do have all these things and what they need now is a an education and shot at getting a real job and not be stuck working a small plot of land just to feed themselves for the rest of their lives.
You do realize that toy laptops are not the most cost effective way to provide an education, don’t you?
You do realize that toy laptops are not the most cost effective way to provide an education, don’t you?
THANK YOU, that was my point after all. A laptop is a LUXURY, even for education compared to well paid well educated teachers, well equipped classrooms, and a half dozen other REAL teaching methods.
But of course, all that is harder to do as a one shot feel good handout.
do you realize it is hypocrite to call the XO a “toy laptop” while you and me are using the “toy” that is a PC to post on OSAlert? Why not give a fair chance to the kids from developing countries to use a technologies that will be useful in a future?
Addendum
Please get informations instead of speculating:
http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Ask_OLPC_a_Question
Edited 2007-05-14 08:50
do you realize it is hypocrite to call the XO a “toy laptop” while you and me are using the “toy” that is a PC to post on OSAlert?
I don’t see how this makes me a hypocrite at all. This laptop is a tool for my job. I could not use an OLPC to do my job. It’s a toy.
Please get informations instead of speculating:
http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Ask_OLPC_a_Question
Oh, wow, now that’s a totally unbiased source, now isn’t it?
First of all since nothing like this has been tried before, no I don’t realize how cost efficient it will or will not be. I can only speculate.
And anyway, why the worry of cost efficiency? If it can educate quicker and better, why care that it costs twice as much as another solution. It’s not like money is the main problem for western aid agencies. Oh and you do realize that these things aren’t meant to replace teachers don’t you?
And by the way, nice use of that dismissive ‘toy’. It really did lift your argument.
And anyway, why the worry of cost efficiency?
Because cash strapped gov’ts will be paying for it. While it may be subsidized, it certainly won’t be free.
It’s not like money is the main problem for western aid agencies
Sure it is. The money gets redirected to western pet projects like the OLPC, rather than to boring, basic things that would produce results. This isn’t the first time that this has happened, and it won’t be the last.
Really, I have no problem with the technology, it’s cool. I’m sure that off-the-grid, hemp wearing hippies in rural New Hampshire will love it.
Don’t you think a second hand laptop is much better alternative?
RareViolet,
http://www.vistaarticles.com
This kind of laptop has to be durable, and I don’t think ordinary laptops (even worse for second hand laptops) can be considered durable enough in an environment where power is not always available and there is no internet infrastructure.
I read also about the matter that ordinary laptops would be stolen or redirected to black market sales instead of going to schools, and how the 100$ laptop would be so easy to recognize, because it’s meant to be used for children, thus a bad item to steal. I don’t know if that’s true.
There are many reasons for the 100$ laptop, but I wish that companies in general would work more toward such devices, rather than generic Windows laptops. Everyone seems to be building Windows laptops. We’re drowning in them. Build something else, please.
What if the 100$ laptop is so damn easy to use that my parents could use one? I’ve only seen bits of the user interface, but it’s different enough to be interesting. I’d be interested.
This would be a good alternative to getting a second hand Mac, if you want a very cheap and easy to use machine that you probably only will use for mail, surfing and the occasional letter writing, if the 100$ laptop can handle that.
No, for two big reasons. First most laptops don’t have the networking hardware for setting up the type of wireless ad-hoc mesh networks these laptops support. Secondly most secondhand laptops use way too much power. Theses things may have to be powered off a hand cranked generator or some other very limited power source. So you want something uses as little power as possible.
There is also a huge reliability problem with secondhand laptops.
Translation: It’s a total piece of crap.