Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 21st May 2007 13:40 UTC, submitted by Laurence
Hardware, Embedded Systems Chip-maker Intel "should be ashamed of itself" for efforts to undermine the USD 100 laptop initiative, according to its founder Nicholas Negroponte. He accused Intel of selling its own cut-price laptop - the Classmate - below cost to drive him out of markets. Professor Negroponte, who aims to distribute millions of laptops to kids in developing countries, said Intel had hurt his mission "enormously".
Thread beginning with comment 241956
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Intel is safer
by brewmastre on Mon 21st May 2007 14:16 UTC
brewmastre
Member since:
2006-08-01

I would imagine that a country investing money into Intel would be a safer bet. Nothing against OLPC, but do they really have to support and funding to keep up. What if they just fold and close their doors one day, then what, are they going to refund the advance money to all these countries? I doubt it. I also think it is very dangerous to sell PC's to kids that don't even have a standard interface. They will have no idea how to use anything else in the real world. At least the Classmate will come with either Windows or Linux, which are both using the standard 'Desktop metaphor' and not some TeletubbyOS interface.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Intel is safer
by Laurence on Mon 21st May 2007 14:39 in reply to "Intel is safer"
Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26

"

I also think it is very dangerous to sell PC's to kids that don't even have a standard interface. They will have no idea how to use anything else in the real world. At least the Classmate will come with either Windows or Linux, which are both using the standard 'Desktop metaphor' and not some TeletubbyOS interface.


The OLPC /does/ run Windows and Linux (though granted the defualt OS is a custom build of Red Hat)

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[2]: Intel is safer
by brewmastre on Mon 21st May 2007 14:58 in reply to "RE: Intel is safer"
brewmastre Member since:
2006-08-01

The OLPC /does/ run Windows and Linux (though granted the defualt OS is a custom build of Red Hat)


I understand that OLPC /does/ run Windows and Linux, my toaster can run BSD ;) Still doesn't change the fact that OLPC doesn't come with a standard Linux GUI. Granted the box is a little light on the performance side, but they could have at least run Xfce or something else small and powerful that at least resembles a computer interface. To me, its like giving all of the kids bicycles and then when they hopefully one day go into the workforce, expect that they should be able to drive a forklift. I'm sorry if I sound cynical about OLPC, but it just seems like a fly-by-night operation that if everything falls apart, oh well, pack up and move on to the next project to save the world. If it does work, then yeah! Nobel Peace Prize. Would you pay Dell $100 for a notebook, then a year later have them say, 'well, turns out it's gonna cost $170. No seriously, I promise the laptops are almost done'. I honestly do hope that it works out, I'm just saying that I personally trust a company who's motives are monetary more than some good-will project.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: Intel is safer
by DigitalAxis on Mon 21st May 2007 15:27 in reply to "RE: Intel is safer"
DigitalAxis Member since:
2005-08-28

Having seen the specs on the Classmate PC in its Windows configuration (requires 2 GB hard drive space versus 1 GB for the Linux offerings, and the Classmate PC starts out with a 900 MHz processor instead of 500 MHz) I doubt the OLPC would be powerful enough to do it.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: Intel is safer
by Excel Hearts Choi on Mon 21st May 2007 15:05 in reply to "Intel is safer"
Excel Hearts Choi Member since:
2006-07-08

As far as support goes, it seemed that the OLPC project was still working on that in February (when I spoke to the at FUDCon Boston). I suggested that if they train people within the Peace Corps, this would greatly help with support. These volunteers are selected with a previous knowledge of the subject. So the "OLPC IT" people would already have a good understanding (degree or work experience) of computers. Also, volunteers stay in country for 24 months; so, you have somebody "on call" for an extended period of time. Best of all, the OLPC project won't have to worry about funding this support staff. This, however, is the reason presented to me as to why using the Peace Corps is a bad idea. Lybia, for example, is interested in the project, but hates the US. If the OLPC is closely tied to a US funded program, they might have second thoughts. The OLPC project wants to help kids regardless of political sentiment between two countries. Oh well... I thought it was a pretty good idea.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE: Intel is safer
by sbergman27 on Mon 21st May 2007 16:11 in reply to "Intel is safer"
sbergman27 Member since:
2005-07-24

"""
I also think it is very dangerous to sell PC's to kids that don't even have a standard interface. They will have no idea how to use anything else in the real world.
"""

Seems to me that what millions and millions and millions of kids learn will *become* the standard tomorrow. Or something like it will.

It's you and I that are in danger of being left behind. Not the kids.

We oldsters are at their mercy, not the other way around.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE: Intel is safer
by SomeGuy on Mon 21st May 2007 23:20 in reply to "Intel is safer"
SomeGuy Member since:
2006-03-20

Just like I have no clue how to use current desktop computers because I grew up using MS-Dos, which doesn't use the standard 'Desktop metaphor'?

Reply Parent Score: 1