Slashdot Mirror
Negroponte Hints At Paper-Like Design For XO-3
waderoush writes "In May 2008, Nicholas Negroponte, chairman of the One Laptop Per Child Foundation, unveiled an e-book like design for the second-generation XO Laptop, consisting of a pair of facing touchscreens. In a new e-mail interview, Negroponte says that design has been thrown out, and that instead the foundation is working on version '1.75' of the existing green-and-white laptop with a more powerful processor, as well as a '3.0' version that would look 'more like a sheet of paper.' Negroponte also addressed a range of other questions about the OLPC project, including the significance of the project to make 1.6 million e-books readable on the XO laptop and the organization's push to reach more children in Latin America, Africa, Afghanistan, and Pakistan."
I think that in any third-world country access to "open source" text books on any subject at zero extra cost would be more important than the actual "educational computer" functionality. It makes sense that the primary design goal should be that it is a good ebook reader. It looks neat and at $75 it is a fraction of the cost of current readers ... I want one!
From the OLPC website:
They even go on to say that this is about education, not laptops. So why are they working on building these devices when if all they want is a cheap Panasonic Toughbook? It seems that instead of trying to build cheaper devices, they could partner with a company (like Panasonic) to provide this kind of technology on the cheap.
By focusing so much on the technology, we are forgetting that the purpose of these devices is to enable kids around the world to become more connected. This can be done with an old Toshiba Satellite laptop from 2001, you don't need the latest and greatest software to access the Internet.
At the time the last OLPC came to everyone's attention, it was a fairly revolutionary idea. Then Asus released the Eee range and others quickly followed suit. Nearly all of them make the OLPC look like last year's trash and for not much price difference.
Exactly. The lesson here is that if you really want private enterprise to do something, you have to set up a nonprofit to do it first and give it away to poor people. That way, the for-profit companies will think you're threatening their turf (even if they had no intention of doing whatever it is you're doing in the first place), and they'll go out of their way to compete with you (and crush you).
So, I suggest we form a non-profit company called "one trip to Mars for every child" and announce we're going to be designing a spacecraft to take poor children on trips to Mars. I predict Boeing and Lockheed will have competing Martian colonies with twice-daily commuter service within a year.
> I suggest we form a non-profit company called "one trip to Mars for every child"
> and announce we're going to be designing a spacecraft to take poor children on trips
> to Mars. I predict Boeing and Lockheed will have competing Martian colonies with
> twice-daily commuter service within a year.
As a counter-example, I'd point out that your scheme hasn't been a huge success for the plethora of "three square meals a day, clean water and some clothing for every child" non-profits. It could just be they need a snappier name...
c.
Log in or piss off.
I just can't help thinking that sorting out such basic problems as hunger and poverty...
The only real solution to these problems is education. Everything else is just a temporary fix.
"I just can't help thinking that sorting out such basic problems as hunger and poverty should be slightly higher on the list than whether they can play Facebook and post on Twitter."
Shouldn't it also be more important than you posting on /. then? How many orphans have YOU fed today?