OSNews

A few observations with comments.

1: Some posters seem to think poor countries don't need laptops (or at least it is not critical to them). The PC is one of the most flexible tools humanity has created. Wouldn't providing greater access to this tool LIKELY produce some tangible benefits. Additionally, Intel, Asus and Microsoft seem to think there is enough demand to create solutions for exactly this segment. That seems to indicate a demand for PCs for this segment.

2: There is likely little fairness to the Intel/Windows offerings. Microsoft selling a version of Windows/Office for $3 is selling it at a loss in an apparent means to drive out competition / gain market share. This is illegal in many countries and in the long run will likely reduce the availability of technology solutions to this segment (this is why anti-trust regulation exists in most countries).

3. There is a perception the cost has skyrocketed. It did not hit it's mark but missed by less than 15% when measured in Polish Zloty and Euro (2 currencies I am familiar with both now and then). The remaining price increase is caused by the weakened dollar. Had this been the 120 Euro ($100 equivalent when it started) laptop it would be much closer to hitting it's target than being the $100 dollar laptop.

4. Some posters have serious concerns about maintenance and support i.e. long term sustainability. It seems to me using a base of open source software and hardware with freely available specifications will give a better long term (5+ years) solution for the money than relying on Microsoft and Intel for support. Both companies charge a significant amount in the local currency for support whereas even a fairly small amount of local talent, that can learn to support their machines online, would provide much more cost efficient support.

5. A poster suggested regional computing centers which likely already exist in some fashion (internet cafe's, schools, etc). This solution will also likely give decent returns, however, due to the accessibility to computing resources and controls on "playing" with the technology those returns will probably be much smaller and slower than the OLPC approach.


When I first heard about the program I was skeptical as many posters are. In my opinion the benefit of increased computing skills and the development of sustainable self-supporting technology cultures in these places outweighs concerns about the very short term (1-2 years). The development of this culture will be MUCH quicker if the choice is open source and fully specified hardware.

I believe Microsoft and Intel realize that development of a culture that demands open source and detailed tech specs will decrease their profits. Their near monopolies in these segments are necessary to maintain the high profits. This is probably why they strongly compete with OLPC in the developing countries OLPC is most active in.