OLPC's XO-3 Prototype Tablet Coming In 2010

What's the problem with keyboards? by Anonymous Coward · 2010-05-27 05:11 · Score: 2, Insightful

What's the problem with keyboards? Since tablets seem to be very consumer-ey, isn't removing the keyboard from the OLPC contrary to the aims of the project?

Re:What's the problem with keyboards? by WillDraven · 2010-05-27 05:22 · Score: 5, Insightful

I can't say for sure that this is their thinking, but using an on screen keyboard allows for all of your localization to be done in software instead of having to make different keys for areas that use different character sets.

--
This is my sig. There are many like it but this one is mine.
Re:What's the problem with keyboards? by jekewa · 2010-05-27 05:31 · Score: 3, Informative

If you want a keyboard, plug it in the USB port or connect it with Bluetooth, tablet willing...

--
End the FUD
Re:What's the problem with keyboards? by Locutus · 2010-05-27 05:31 · Score: 3, Insightful

along with eliminating all the areas where dirt and water can muck things up. A tablet has all the same sealing issues as the top portion of the existing XO and eliminates all the sealing areas of the lower keyboard, touchpad, and hinge areas.

What it may be missing is a screen protector and in harsh outdoors environments, the lower keyboard area makes a great screen protector. So I hope they include a screen protector as an integral part of the tablet device.

LoB

--
"Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
Re:What's the problem with keyboards? by timothy · 2010-05-27 05:47 · Score: 2, Insightful

I like keyboards, too, but ...
- a lot easier to add a keyboard (wireless via bluetooth, either with a dongle or internal; wireless w/ IR, if IR is available; wired via USB) than to turn a laptop into a tablet.
- Even w/ the OLPC XO's sealed keyboard, it's one point of failure avoided in a tablet-style computer.
- Tablet shape is more versatile in using a computer for (who knows?) virtual music stand, or impromptu video camera (note: offer void in Pennsylvania), or drawing device.
- Better shape, IMO, as a reading device, too. Reading on a laptop is pretty awkward, IMO, and I do it more than I should.
timothy

--
jrnl: http://tinyurl.com/c2l8yr / foes: http://tinyurl.com/ckjno5
Re:What's the problem with keyboards? by gmuslera · 2010-05-27 05:57 · Score: 2, Insightful

Touchscreens is good for children, at least this is targetted at them, And keyboards and touchscreens in traditional notebook schemes adds fragility to it if you have to continually push the screen. Foldable keyboards, netvertibles and similar schemes enables you to have touchscreen having the keyboard available but not forced to stay in the middle.

Anyway, they add cost, moving parts, and complexity. If doing right the keyboards put costs too high maybe would be better to not add them at all, leaving open the possibility of using external ones.
Re:What's the problem with keyboards? by SydShamino · 2010-05-27 06:00 · Score: 5, Funny

Obviously they should keep the keyboard and eliminate the screen then, right?

--
It doesn't hurt to be nice.
Re:What's the problem with keyboards? by jedidiah · 2010-05-27 06:29 · Score: 2, Funny

> Obviously they should keep the keyboard and eliminate the screen then, right?
Actually use an iPad for awhile and get back to us.
Those screens quickly get mucked up.
Even the drones at the Apple store will freely admit this while they tell you that they don't have any screen covers. ...makes you wonder if Starfleet is like Monk when it comes to hand washing.

--
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
Re:What's the problem with keyboards? by neorush · 2010-05-27 06:59 · Score: 2, Insightful

I use a $2.99 hard plastic screen cover on my iPod Touch, it gets scratched after 2 or 3 months and I replace it, the underlying screen is still flawless, and I throw it around pretty carelessly. It would be pretty trivial to design a protection scheme for a screen like this, much easier than replacing worn keys.

--
neorush
Re:What's the problem with keyboards? by joh · 2010-05-27 10:40 · Score: 2, Insightful

It also finally allows to make a device with no moving parts at all, which is much easier to seal and less prone to break. I have no doubt that a tablet is much better suited to what the OLPC project wants to do.

Sell outs by spire3661 · 2010-05-27 05:13 · Score: 3, Insightful

I realize they had lofty goals, but to see them fail so utterly in their mission takes away most of their credibility. The whole point was to bring computers to the developing world and break vendor lock in.

--
Good-bye

Re:Sell outs by Abcd1234 · 2010-05-27 05:15 · Score: 3, Insightful

The project definitely seems to be lacking in focused leadership, but... how, exactly, does that make them "sell outs", as opposed to just incompetent?
Re:Sell outs by TheRaven64 · 2010-05-27 05:21 · Score: 2, Insightful

What has changed? The software stack is still entirely open, as are the designs. This time, they're using an ARM chip, which they should have done from the start, rather than trying to keep the possibility of running Windows open.

--
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Re:Sell outs by spire3661 · 2010-05-27 05:21 · Score: 4, Insightful

They changed the machines to include windows and partnered with Intel. Once they started discussions with MS, i lost all respect for the project as that was what the whole idea was supposed to be against. The way OLPC was billed in the beginning was a rugged linux computer with all open sourced software to avoid software vendor lock in. AT least thats what i took away from the initial OLPC discussions.

--
Good-bye
Re:Sell outs by foxharp · 2010-05-27 05:49 · Score: 2, Informative

while there have been trials of Windows-based XO laptops, there are zero major deployments using windows. there are 1.5 miliion laptops being used, today, somewhere in the world. and they all run linux.
Re:Sell outs by Locutus · 2010-05-27 05:49 · Score: 4, Interesting

but like so many muggles out there, Negroponte believed the crap Microsoft was telling him. He, and others, also believed that Intel would be interested in helping with the project when in fact, technologically they had nothing to help him with. Intel processors are not the most energy efficient and even after years of "new" mobile processor work, they still are no where near what the RISC designs for power and performance.

Negroponte was sucked into thinking his technical people were Linux and open source fanatics by the very people who were out to stop the project because it gutted their profit margins for existing products.

So it sounds like he's now seen the light but at what cost? Years have been lost and many who were behind the project left it because of the ignorance of yet another 'business' type guy believing the crap Microsoft tells them. He couldn't even figure it out that there was only one or two Microsoft guys working on Windows on the XO and not much of anything like a team and just the memory footprint Windows required should have been enough to know it was a joke.

But who knows, maybe a <$100 tablet with all the Sugar and spice of the original XO but running on a cool ARM Cortex a8 or even a9 processor might get things moving again. I'm not sure about Android though since Sugar has lots going for it as a platform for educational software.

LoB

--
"Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
Re:Sell outs by John+Hasler · 2010-05-27 06:09 · Score: 2, Insightful

> Negroponte said it would be running Linux.
He said that once before.

--
Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
Re:Sell outs by Warbothong · 2010-05-27 08:24 · Score: 2, Insightful

They changed the machines to include windows and partnered with Intel. Once they started discussions with MS, i lost all respect for the project as that was what the whole idea was supposed to be against. The way OLPC was billed in the beginning was a rugged linux computer with all open sourced software to avoid software vendor lock in. AT least thats what i took away from the initial OLPC discussions.
The OLPC project is not about a rugged Linux computer with all open source software: it's about education and empowerment through the use of technology. Essentially it's Alan Kay's Dynabook: a project which predates Linux, Open Source, the Free Software Foundation and indeed Laptops. Open Source technology made OLPC possible (by empowering the devs to strip and rejig down the whole OS themselves), the Free Software ideology was a snug fit to the project's aims and Linux was the most sensible choice for OS since it kept down the amount of work that was needed to get it up and running. Being rugged was obviously a requirement, but in fact the idea of a laptop seems to have held back adoption: as a laptop the XO-1 looks like a low horsepower model with a few fancy bits on the side (sunlit screen, Wifi mesh, fancy battery, etc.). However it's actual usage is meant to resemble that of a book, which it beats in many respects (storage, interactivity, Internet/mesh updates, long-distance collaboration, etc.). That's why the XO-2 designs were meant to resemble a book, since electronic books had fewer preconceptions (in the days when One Laptop Per Child and the $100 laptop were named, before the Kindle et al). This tablet idea is (probably) a more realistic design which eliminates the complications of a hinge and (cynically) trying to jump on the iPad bandwagon.
As far as I understand it, Windows was offered due to requests from countries that were approached. The small size, bright colours, rubber keyboard and "ear" antennas apparently make the XO-1 look like a toy (which is bad for children how?) and 'therefore not a real computer' in the opinion of many government people who were in charge of buying into the program or not. The test of whether something is a 'real' computer seemed to be (in the eyes of those government types) whether it runs Microsoft Office, which requires Windows and thus without Windows support many countries refused to commit. Of course, as others have said, nobody seems to have bought any with Windows anyway.
As far as the "selling out" goes, as far as I'm concerned it's an x86 architecture, potential customers created a demand for Windows, Microsoft got their developers to implement it, so to *not* offer Windows would be a questionable position. The spec was supposedly upped to support Windows (RAM doubled to 256MB) but I've read from those involved that actually Sugar was becoming rather fatter than they initially thought. Since it's the "Children's Laptop 1", not the "What the Government Thinks 1" there has been a port of Sugar to Windows so that the educational value of that interface won't be lost to any kids who are unfortunately given Windows. By living in Sugar, which is *very* self-contained (doesn't even allow access to the filesystem) the ideology and "view sourceness" can be kept for as much of the stuff that can be interacted with as possible, which is making the most of a tough choice rather than "selling out" IMHO.
Partnering with Intel was also not so much a sell out action, as a survival tactic. Intel were absolute c*nts to the project, most likely simply because it uses (AMD) Geode processors and not Intel's. Not only did Intel try to undercut the OLPC charity by selling a (technically inferior) rival product for below cost, but there are reports of Intel representatives shadowing those from OLPC so that each government the latter contacted about joining the scheme would, a couple of weeks later, be contacted by Intel and told to ditch it either in favour of Classmate or even just altogether. This was done via FUD, spreading the "not a
Re:Sell outs by TheRaven64 · 2010-05-27 10:14 · Score: 3, Informative

The OLPC project is not about a rugged Linux computer with all open source software
I heard Alan Kay talk about OLPC a few years ago, and you're not quite right. It was about those things, but it wasn't exclusively about those things. One of the goals was to help bootstrap local high-tech industry. The OLPC had to be an entirely open design in the hardware and open source in the software, because one goal was for their customers to start making their own.
He was hoping that countries like India and China, with an established manufacturing base, would take their designs, improve them, mass produce their own, and undercut them. As he said, the nice thing about being a non-profit is that you can be happy when someone manages to undercut you, because the goal is getting the machines to children, not making money.
The open source side was vital, because it meant that the customers could build their own local software industry around it. They could modify any aspect of the machine - hardware or software - and sell improved versions. The children could study every aspect of how the machine worked, could modify it, and could become the first generation of software (and hardware) developers in some of the target countries.
From what I saw, the project started to go downhill as it shifted from Kay's vision to Negroponte's. Mind you, that's typical Alan Kay - he has a way of being right that makes people want to disagree with him.

--
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Re:Sell outs by Abcd1234 · 2010-05-27 12:22 · Score: 2, Insightful

The big problem isn't that it was capable of running Windows- it was that the machine was MODIFIED to be able to use XP
Oh *come on*, please! What did they do to "be able to use XP" exactly? They added an SD card reader. OHNOES! And that's certainly not be useful for anyone else but Windows (like, say, someone who wants to run an alternative OS on it without modifying the onboard flash)... nope, not at all.

dual-mode display by by+(1706743) · 2010-05-27 05:16 · Score: 2, Informative

This seems like a wonderful idea. My handheld GPS has one of these -- it can function with a backlight in the dark just fine, but turn the backlight off, take it outside, and it's a perfectly readable, color display which draws hardly any power.

Re:dual-mode display by sznupi · 2010-05-27 06:38 · Score: 2, Informative

While your device has probably quite "ordinary" transflective screen (which is good at what it does, don't get me wrong) - this new screen is most likely very noticeably better.
Check out pics from the blog of its manufacturer (essentially they also made the screen for XO-1). Or look up videos on Youtube - a lot of them depicting early, still unoptimised prototypes from a year ago; shot by very visibly amateur 3rd party videographers during trade shows (yes, outside), and the screen still looks fabulous. One tablet announced some time ago ("Adam"?...) also uses it IIRC; and we should see quite a bit of new products at Computex soon.

--
One that hath name thou can not otter

Thanks OLPC! by Tei · 2010-05-27 05:17 · Score: 3, Insightful

I remenber the first time that idea was show here on slashdot, I (and lots of other geeks) where salivating about the idea of a "portable laptop". I even remenber people talking about "100$? I would pay 300$ for that!". The OLPC has made this dream real, and now we have our 200$ and 300$ cheap and very usefull "netbooks". I call this a huge succes (:

--

-Woof woof woof!

Re:Thanks OLPC! by GNUALMAFUERTE · 2010-05-27 05:43 · Score: 4, Interesting

And you truly think netbooks developed from there?
Subnetbooks have been around for ages. What started the netbook revolution was the new availability of very cheap and small LCD displays, and the appearance of cheap and power-efficient x86 processors that could work well enough while being cheap and not requiring huge heat-sinks (like the Atom, some VIA chips, etc).
Do you think Apple, Dell, HP, or the damn OLPC project actually develop anything? They develop casings, at best. They just stay on top of whatever new crap is coming cheaply out of China. That's it. You can find cheap and small mobos with embedded ARM processors in China for under 30 dollars. Boards very similar in specs to the one Apple is using on the iPad can be found for ~70 dollars in China, including 900mhz ARM processors. Embedded Wifi and 3G for +20 dollars.
Things don't get to the market when they are invented, they come out when the Chinese have managed to produce the technology required to assemble them cheaply.

--
WTF am I doing replying to an AC at 5 A.M on a Friday night?

Cheap manufacturing by DeadDecoy · 2010-05-27 05:19 · Score: 3, Insightful

This is probably going to get me modded as troll, but I'm curious anyways. How much of the low price is dependant on our exploitation of cheap labor? One laptop per-child made by a child? (well, probably a young adult anyways) Even with markets of scale, 75$ is an impressive price tag.

Re:Cheap manufacturing by arth1 · 2010-05-27 05:25 · Score: 2, Insightful

Given their track record, $75 will turn into $150 by the time it's ready for sale.
Which isn't such a feat -- remember all the PDAs that cost less than that?

Eithyer he is going to be by geekoid · 2010-05-27 05:25 · Score: 2, Interesting

lockup up in the loony bin or change the industry in a huge way.

If he can deliver what the render is, or even close, it will basically make tablet/ebook reader like the digital watch. Mass produced, inexpensive and everywhere.

--
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect

Pixel Qi display? by niko9 · 2010-05-27 05:31 · Score: 2, Informative

Boy, I hope they're using Mary Lou Jepsen's Pixel Qi (http://www.pixelqi.com/) screens. I am far from a hardcore programming geek, but I could use something like this for a simple E-reader and Mutt email device.

She also has a blog: http://pixelqi.com/blog1/

Supposedly, hackers will be able to buy raw screens for DIY projects. Might be ideal for hooking up to a BeagleBoard.

Re:Pixel Qi display? by Anonymous Coward · 2010-05-27 05:41 · Score: 2, Informative

Wow, have people forgotten already? Mary Lou Jepsen developed the Pixel Qi display technology while working on the XO-1. She then created Pixel Qi to commercialize that technology. Why is everyone acting like these displays are something new? They were in the XO-1 and are one of the features that haven't been matched by netbooks. So yeah, these displays in the XO-3 are probably (definitely) using the same technology, and I wouldn't be surprised if they are somehow subcontracting to Pixel Qi.
Re:Pixel Qi display? by gnujoshua · 2010-05-27 06:05 · Score: 2, Informative

It seems likely that they will use the Pixel Qi display. See this story: "Breaking News: OLPC & Pixel Qi to Share XO Laptop Screen Patents AND All Current & Future Display IP" , http://www.olpcnews.com/hardware/screen/breaking_news_olpc_pixel_qi_to.html

At what price for non-target market? :) by timothy · 2010-05-27 05:34 · Score: 3, Insightful

9" transflective ARM tablet? I want one. Price $75? Well ... that price might have *some* basis, but I suspect that's not the out-the-door price.

The $100 laptop (and note, I'm not complaining, and I realize that the $100 figure was not promised to Moses on Mt. Sinai) turned out to be, realistically for me and many others, $400, through the Give One Get One program. (And I think $400 well spent; I like the idea, and the hardware is really cool, despite its limitations.)

Does that mean a 9" ARM tablet would be $300? :) Hey, $150 would be even better, and $75 would mean I could buy one apiece for several young relatives. (And I'd rather get them that way than, say, a big misguided, mismanaged government school Program.)

Tim

--
jrnl: http://tinyurl.com/c2l8yr / foes: http://tinyurl.com/ckjno5

Re:At what price for non-target market? :) by marcosdumay · 2010-05-27 06:29 · Score: 3, Informative

"Hopefully these devices will be a lot more idiot-proof than netbooks."

That thing is not idiot-proof. It is for children, and built in a way to survive them, but not idiot-proof. The designers even expect the children to learn Python.

--
Rethinking email
Re:At what price for non-target market? :) by BikeHelmet · 2010-05-27 09:42 · Score: 3, Informative

http://www.dealextreme.com/details.dx/sku.39169
There you go... Android tablet for $100 shipped.
I got a 7 inch netbook off eBay (from Hong Kong) for $60 shipped. It has crappy WinCE 5, though. :P

Comment removed by account_deleted · 2010-05-27 05:49 · Score: 4, Informative

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:Really? No, seriouslly? by Locutus · 2010-05-27 05:58 · Score: 3, Informative

have you tried reading much of anything in full sunlight outside using a netbook? And what about mesh networking, drop tests and all the other engineering which makes the XO more than just a little computer.

you've obviously never understood what the original requirements for the OLPC project was. Google for how Intel loaded up a classroom with their little ClassmatePC netbooks and then had to go back and drop a large diesel generator outside the classroom so the kids could use the devices throughout the day.

OLPC XO is not a netbook.

LoB

--
"Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus

Bound to fail by Anonymous Coward · 2010-05-27 05:58 · Score: 2, Funny

'You'll see from us, God willing, an Arm tablet,'

Jesus already created the iPad

Buisness model by currently_awake · 2010-05-27 06:20 · Score: 3, Interesting

Sell them at a profit (cost plus 10%) in the -first- world, use profit to subsidize (cost minus 25%) sales in the -third- world market. We're perfectly willing to help you out financially, just not buy 2 get one.

Re:Really? No, seriouslly? by foxharp · 2010-05-27 06:22 · Score: 2, Informative

there are 1.5 million kids out there using OLPC laptops. for example, every elementary school kid in uruguay has an XO. i'm having trouble seeing the failure in this.

Re:Really? No, seriouslly? by sznupi · 2010-05-27 06:25 · Score: 2, Insightful

Or describing some of the desing criteria shortly: OLPC XO is an inexpensive variant of...Toughbook.

BTW, screens essentially from the XO are perhaps finally coming also to some netbooks, via Pixel Qi (PQ also seems to start supplying them to tablets in general of course; and will do it for XO-3)

--
One that hath name thou can not otter

Reality check by westlake · 2010-05-27 06:57 · Score: 3, Informative

but like so many muggles out there, Negroponte believed the crap Microsoft was telling him.

OLPC was sold as a take-it-or-leave-it package deal to the third world education minister.

The hardware. The software. Linux, FOSS and SUGAR.

The constructivist philosophy of education - the classroom without a teacher, to simplify things drastically.

The education minister wasn't buying into any of this.

The push for Windows and Office came from him.

Deployment of the XO beyond Central and South America was and remains insignificant, with the sole exception of Rwanda - and that came a year after dual-booting XP and MS Office became an option.

Total confirmed deployment is about 1.3 million units. One Laptop Per Child [Summary of laptop orders}

Re:Reality check by Locutus · 2010-05-27 09:25 · Score: 2, Insightful

you forgot to mention how Gates and Ballmer went globe-trotting around the world to all the countries who knew what the OLPC was and required and still signed MOU's. Just look for the timing of a deal with Egypt and how they welcomed Negroponte when he came back knocking on their door. Hint: They asked 'does it run Windows' while they held a big fat check behind their back for millions of dollars and having Microsoft's signature on it.

I won't go into how much did or didn't have to do with a constructionist philosophy of education. From what I've seen of initial deployments, teachers were very much a part of it all but some where afraid the kids would learn more about the devices and software than the teachers. It's a sad world when educator are fearful of devices because the children will learn more about them than the adult educators.

And anyone tied to education who thinks that education must be tied to MS Windows and MS Office is lacking in his/her own education. Even Microsoft exec's will tell you 'it's the applications stupid'.

LoB

--
"Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus

Update: It's a drop-ship Marvel Pad by nani+popoki · 2010-05-27 07:31 · Score: 2, Informative

Apparently (according to this http://www.olpcnews.com/laptops/xo-3/new_xo-3_announced_just_a_marv.html posting), the XO-3 will be a re-branded Marvel Moby tablet. So much for rugged designed-for-kids. Several articles have appeared today on OLPC News about the deal.

Growing things by zooblethorpe · 2010-05-27 08:37 · Score: 3, Funny

keyboards can't grow with children's hands!

I dunno, if they can grow human ears on the backs of mice, I don't know why it wouldn't be possible to grow a keyboard together with a spare set of hands, or find a way to grow hands out of a keyboard.

Potentially kinda kinky, though. I'm not sure I want to think too much about where you'd go with that.

Cheers,

--
"What in the name of Fats Waller is that?"
"A four-foot prune."

Please, don't inflict this on the kids anywhere by cullenfluffyjennings · 2010-05-27 09:01 · Score: 2, Insightful

I did the buy one, donate one to a 3rd world kid program with the first OLPC. I could not believe what a piece of crap the OLPC was when I got it. I could not even IM from it. I felt so bad that I had inflicted that on some poor child somewhere. If I could find the poor kid that ended up with the OLPC I paid for, I would happily send them a MacBook Air as a way of apologizing and showing that not all computers sucked.

Slashdot Mirror

OLPC's XO-3 Prototype Tablet Coming In 2010

44 of 148 comments (clear)