OLPC is dead: design now "open source"

Alex Kidman10 February 2009, 8:15 AM

PC makers are blamed for the "tragedy", but OLPC would still like them to make millions of laptops, please.


It would be fair to say that things haven't gone exactly to plan for the One Laptop Per Child (OLPC) initiative recently. From an auspicious beginning that hyped the idea of a "$100 laptop", recent months have seen the organisation lay off half of its staff and throw the development of its "Sugar"  GUI to the Open Source world.

Just days ago, according to a leaked email referenced on Morgan Collett's Feeding The Penguins blog, even the option to strategically give hundreds (or even thousands) of XO laptops to a third world school of your choice has been discontinued in favour of larger, more cost-effective deployments.

Now OLPC chairman Nicholas Negroponte has announced at the TED 2009 conference, according to blogger Ethan Zuckerman, that even the design of the OLPC will be going open source in an effort to increase production by getting existing PC companies to produce OLPC laptops for the organisation. Not that Negroponte's a big fan of big PC companies; he's reported as bemoaning the fact that the original OLPC design was seen as "silly" but now Netbooks make up 50% of the world's market. "Commercial markets will go to no end to stop you. It’s sort of a tragedy."

The solution, according to comments attributed to Negroponte, is to go “from uppercase to lower case" by building "something that everyone copies.” Negroponte hopes that by releasing and open sourcing the hardware design, within three years big manufacturers will be pumping out five to six million machines per month.

Most estimates suggest that around half a million OLPC "XO" laptops have been produced so far, but it's not exactly clear how (or why) big manufacturers would cut their already razor-sharp margins even further on netbooks by producing an even lower-cost alternative. Or if they'll still come in lurid green.

Post your comment



Comments

RSS feed Email alert

Halcon (Advanced member):

Given the was very noble and a good start, this is not feasible to produce computers for the amount of $100 each.
The big companies have git the upper hand by producing the so called "Netbooks" tiny hand-held computers, the ultimate joy in toys for the IT aficionados ready to spend large amounts of money in what many may consider "the big thing".
Lets see what will happen next, (I doubt the price will shrink more to satisfy the appetites of the IT nerds) These product should be available in the toy stores instead of the known retailer chains like Harvey Norman.
Anyway it will be a big Beep, Beep. ;-)

10 February 2009, 2:53 PM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Nato (User):

yeah 3 years sounds right for the price to drop to $100 for the tech out right now. You can never have enough education in those 3rd world country's. What baffles me is how there is no food over there and they (kids) have to collect rubbish all day to buy one bowl of rice for the day while the parents breed like rabbits.

10 February 2009, 5:11 PM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Tin (Senior Forumologist):

Quoting Nato:
What baffles me is how there is no food over there




I kind of thought the same thing with this OLPC project... Surely food and classic education would have been a higher priority. $100 buys a heck of a lot of rice...

10 February 2009, 9:08 PM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Ausman (Regular user):

That's why India didn't buy the OLPC and said they would rather have have teachers in their classrooms as a priority. Maybe we could learn from them rather than having technology as school status symbols and for technology sake (Do kids really need to do their reports in Powerpoint to show what they have learnt about a topic?!). How many tech gadgets do kids here have but we still feel we have to give money to all families (not means tested) to buy a (another?) laptop - Yeah right we know where that money goes and it's often not to the kids benefit.

Nato said: "What baffles me is how there is no food over there and they (kids) have to collect rubbish all day to buy one bowl of rice for the day while the parents breed like rabbits."

There is food there but it is not distributed fairly due to war, greed, corruption, etc. The same things that could affect our (or any) society if it allowed to creep in over time. Over here we pay families on the dole with "baby bonuses" to breed like rabbits and create our next generation full of Epponee's and Tyson's (http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20081019171811AAEEb5z). Why? Because the people that don't think society "owes" them anything are too busy studying and working long hours to get a better job and miss out on a (bigger) family because they often settle down late. Who's to say which society is "better"? We shouldn't cast stones too quickly...

12 February 2009, 1:45 AM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

anonymous user Anonymous user


Tags