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".
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2007-02-11
OLPC is a non profit, why would they be thinking of "Market" They are thinking of helping people. But helping people is not free.
Intel is ONLY thinking in terms of market share (Since they will loose money at first to keep OLPC from growing)
OLPC is non-profit, but I doubt AMD is also non-profit. AMD will probably get *some* revenue -- just like everyone else involved in OLPC (no chip maker will do charity acts that involve hundreds of millions of chips without some profit).
Anyone else selling cheap laptops means less revenue for anyone behind OLPC and a good chance of dumping the whole deal.
Even if the purpose is noble and all, there's still a hefty marketing behind it. No company, let alone AMD or Intel or Microsoft, does any acts of charity without a good profit.
Member since:2005-11-10
Member since:2005-07-24
"""
That is the problem here. If OLPC was a for profit business and this was straight compitition then that is fine.
"""
I just want to emphasize that the issue is dumping and not nonprofit vs for-profit.
Sure, I like OLPC better because they are non-profit. Not to mention the fact that they were the ones with the vision to do all this in the first place.
But the problem here is that Intel plans to use its deep pockets to dump product at well below cost with the intent of eliminating competition, in order to benefit big time in the absence of that competition by raising prices later. (Even a non-profit needs revenue or they go under.) These pilot markets that OLPC so desperately needs are just the tip of the iceberg.
Intel wants to sell the tip at below cost so that they can sell the rest of it at retail, even if the kids have to share the one-laptop-per-three-children product they plan to sell in the future, once OLPC is out of the way.
Member since:2005-07-24
I'm replying to myself, but a related issue occurs to me. I was just doing research on what new MB and processor I would like to buy, and was focusing upon Intel processors and chipsets due to how well they are supporting OSS and Linux these days, when I flipped over here and read about what Intel is up to WRT poor children and 3rd world governments.
It's hard enough to decide who I want to send my money to in a world where profit is everything. But it is downright impossible in a world of large corps with multiple personality disorder so profound that it would astonish even "Sybil". ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sybil_%28film%29 )
Member since:2005-11-10
Right. That is what I said in my other posts. They are going to countries and selling the $250 laptop at $150 which is lower then OLPC and subsidizing other things like dishes for internet connections etc.
All to keep AMD's Market share down. No matter that OLPC is doing this for a noble reason.
Member since:2007-01-20
Member since:
2005-11-10
OLPC is a non profit, why would they be thinking of "Market" They are thinking of helping people. But helping people is not free.
Intel is ONLY thinking in terms of market share (Since they will loose money at first to keep OLPC from growing)
That is the problem here. If OLPC was a for profit business and this was straight compitition then that is fine.
But OLPC is non profit and Intel is just doing this for market share. And we know this because as shown on the show last night Intel's marketing documentation compares their product to the OLPC to show their product it better.
If Intel was doing it for the same reason that OLPC was then why put down OLPC?
Edited 2007-05-21 17:40