Weekly Edition
Return to the Press page
| |||||||||||||
Low-cost laptop program sees a key leadership defection (AP)
Here's an
AP article about Walter Bender's departure from OLPC with a number of
discouraging statements. "One current hang-up is whether the
necessary hardware would add $7 to $12 to an XO's cost, taking the project
even further away from its eventual goal of producing the machines for less
than $100. Eventually, Negroponte added, Windows might be the sole
operating system, and Sugar would be educational software running on top of
it."
(Log in to post comments)
Low-cost laptop program sees a key leadership defection (AP) Posted Apr 22, 2008 23:55 UTC (Tue) by rahvin (subscriber, #16953) [Link] A terrible revolution in the case for the XO. What was once a prime product for technology enabling the poorest of countries where a single machine valued at the cost of a couple of textbooks could provide access to an unlimited number of homegrown textbooks written in country is going to be consumed and destroyed by windows monopoly and the founder of the program is complicit in the destruction. The strength of the XO was the fact the software didn't add to the cost, and the throwing away of the conventional PC model allowed the device to be many different things other than just a general PC that can play minesweeper. Personally, an XO loaded with windows isn't the same machine and is frankly doomed to failure. Had the XO continued to trudge on showing the value of the open source software, in time the world would have seen the value as Peru and the other first deployment nations exposed the value of a system controlled in house by the country in question. In just a few short years Peru could demonstrate the real value of a system where the entire software loadout is controlled locally, and the beauty of the ebook capabilities were exploited with the maximum power efficiency. Bound to software developed in the US the system has lost all the advantages the open source software brought, and destroys all the value in the system. Will students still be able to hit a button and see the code? Certainly not in windows. It seems everyone, and in particular Negroponte has forgotten the original purpose of the machine. The departures of these key staff while they search for a high priced CEO to run the program speaks volumes about how the once great ideals of the program have been warped into the extension of the Microsoft monopoly.
Low-cost laptop program sees a key leadership defection (AP) Posted Apr 23, 2008 1:34 UTC (Wed) by uravanbob (subscriber, #4050) [Link] The devel-list archives at wiki.laptop.org has an interesting thread pertaining to this. It is not clear that MS has won - OLPC is more than NN and many of the OLPC people are not on-board with the laptops vs education redirection. I think that NN discounted how much people involved in Sugar feel the need to have an open source base, and Walter B, discounts NN's statement that the project has been held up by open source fundamentalism.
Low-cost laptop program sees a key leadership defection (AP) Posted Apr 23, 2008 7:46 UTC (Wed) by rsidd (subscriber, #2582) [Link] Whatever. The point is NOBODY in OLPC seems to be in it for the kids. Negroponte is in it for self-aggrandisement. Some others are in it to spread open-source evangelism. Some others are in it because it seems a cool hacking project. The manufacturers are in it for the money. And what part of OLPC, precisely, benefits the kids -- at any rate, benefits them more than buying them $100 worth of textbooks, or even $10 worth? I'm in India and $10 here will get you two or three years worth of textbooks, which is more than the average life of a laptop -- particularly one as prone to abuse as the XO is likely to be. I rarely applaud decisions the Indian government makes, but the decision not to join what was, at best, a misguided egotrip of Negroponte and, at worst, an active scam, was absolutely spot-on.
Low-cost laptop program sees a key leadership defection (AP) Posted Apr 23, 2008 8:46 UTC (Wed) by danieldk (guest, #27876) [Link] While I do think the OLPC could be great for textbooks, the question is who is going to write high-quality textbooks and provide them cheaper than the prices that you already mentioned. Of course, existing publishers could provide electronic books at a low price per pop (and make a profit on the quantities). Suppose that these non-free textbooks are half the price of on-paper textbooks for third world countries, you'll still many textbooks to cover the cost of an XO machine. Not to mention that dead tree books work better for extreme climates. I think many people involved have noble intentions. And as a side effect, the XO has pushed down prices for other laptops. But I am not sure whether an XO is a better investment than text books, and maybe normal computers in a more protected environment (e.g. a classroom), where they have a longer lifetime, and you don't need one machine per kid.
Low-cost laptop program sees a key leadership defection (AP) Posted Apr 23, 2008 10:49 UTC (Wed) by jamesh (guest, #1159) [Link] Who do you think currently writes the text books? What do you think makes a text book sell? If the education department for a country or state proscribes a text book that is available in an electronic form, why would it sell any worse than if they proscribed a paper text book? As the curriculum differs from country to country (or even state to state within a country), the text books are often written by teachers from that region. If electronic texts are being proscribed, why wouldn't these same people write electronic text books?
Low-cost laptop program sees a key leadership defection (AP) Posted Apr 23, 2008 15:48 UTC (Wed) by danieldk (guest, #27876) [Link] Who do you think currently writes the text books? What do you think makes a text book sell? Sure, as I said, existing publishers. But they want good money for it, and even if the price is only half the ~$10 mentioned, you need to buy many textbooks to compensate the cost of an XO. So, why not buy dead-tree textbooks. (I was kinda aiming at, who is going to write Creative Commons-licensed textbooks ;).)
Low-cost laptop program sees a key leadership defection (AP) Posted Apr 23, 2008 16:48 UTC (Wed) by macc (subscriber, #510) [Link] commercial textbook creators are in for the margin. just like with the overpriced dead tree educational merchandise. A pdf version ( or other format) will be milked for the last <smallest monetary unit> that can be extracted from the state. G! MACC
Low-cost laptop program sees a key leadership defection (AP) Posted Apr 24, 2008 15:46 UTC (Thu) by BenHutchings (subscriber, #37955) [Link] Spelling flame: there's a big difference between "prescribe" and "proscribe".
Low-cost laptop program sees a key leadership defection (AP) Posted Apr 23, 2008 12:54 UTC (Wed) by shapr (guest, #9077) [Link] I disagree. I spent some social time with two of the OLPC people at the end of January. The two OLPC people I am aquainted with, Chris Ball and Michael Stone, are two of the most intelligent and hardworking people I know. They really are in it for the kids.I also got a short tour of the OLPC offices, and took some nifty pictures . I don't believe the OLPC effort is either an egotrip or a scam. I think it's a good idea, and I hope it continues.
Low-cost laptop program sees a key leadership defection (AP) Posted Apr 24, 2008 21:14 UTC (Thu) by Cato (subscriber, #7643) [Link] Although I haven't met OLPC people myself, this is the same impression I've got. I'm really astonished by the amount of negativity coming out - as soon as the project starts running into trouble, people seem to jump on the bandwagon to knock it. I wonder how much of this bad press is due to companies such as Intel and Microsoft who are threatened by the OLPC... Part of this is because OLPC set such astonishingly high goals that it was almost bound to fail - but even if it misses some goals it has done amazing things to the design of laptops (very low power wireless mesh networks, dual-mode screens that work in intense sunlight and also at very low power, etc), and even created a new ultra low end laptop market segment (with the eee PC as the first commercially available example).
Low-cost laptop program sees a key leadership defection (AP) Posted Apr 25, 2008 1:09 UTC (Fri) by bronson (subscriber, #4806) [Link] It's probably because most people, myself included, don't care if OLPC does truly amazing things. We (allow myself to speak for everybody ;) only care that the XO works well. Frankly, I think most of this bad press has been due to Negroponte himself. The guy changes his position every 3 months and explains himself only in vaguest non-statements (the most recent ones about fundamentalist open source guys were particularly awesome). His position on just about everything practical is unclear. Except on selling the XO in the first world, the only market that's shown solid, organic success: he's against that! OLPC needs to hire a good PR team to clean up NN's message and the company's positioning. The press coverage has just been getting worse and worse and I really don't think it's due to some sort of Asus/Intel consipiracy.
Low-cost laptop program sees a key leadership defection (AP) Posted Apr 23, 2008 15:55 UTC (Wed) by donbarry (guest, #10485) [Link] Unfortunately, in a hierarchical organization like OLPC, the direction *is* set from above. Salaried people on a team have their golden chains and the price of the gold is to take direction, or leave. We're seeing some courageous people making that choice. Of course, *volunteer* work is entirely another matter. But there is an enormous hurdle in trying to overcome an opposing direction set monolithically from above. When leadership sells out to Microsoft it shouldn't be any surprise when the people making the project wake up to find the big fat attractive wooden horse their bosses have invited into the castle overnight has more than a few unwelcome surprises waiting for them. Shame on Nicholas Negroponte. Shame! Shame! Don Barry, Cornell University
Not really that surprising Posted Apr 23, 2008 20:23 UTC (Wed) by man_ls (subscriber, #15091) [Link] Negroponte has created or estimulated a lot of fads, and not one which has come out right. Just look at virtual reality: we are still not wearing that ridiculous helmet and gloves all the time. Reading over his Wired column 15 years later it all sounds hollow and dated.
Low-cost laptop program sees a key leadership defection (AP) Posted Apr 23, 2008 21:50 UTC (Wed) by mitchskin (subscriber, #32405) [Link] I particularly liked this post from Bender:http://lists.laptop.org/pipermail/devel/2008-April/013067.html About the idea that "open-source fundamentalism" has impeded the progress of the XO: Ironically, the majority of the system-level problems we had experienced are directly tied to the two proprietary code bases on the laptop: the wireless firmware and the embedded controller firmware. While there are efforts to replace these, OLPC itself has been diligently working with both Marvell and Quanta to make the best of the situation. To suggest that fundamentalism has impeded progress on those two subsystems is not correct.
Low-cost laptop program sees a key leadership defection (AP) Posted Apr 23, 2008 5:03 UTC (Wed) by jengelh (subscriber, #33263) [Link] Mind the falling dollar.
Bad marketing? Posted Apr 23, 2008 5:24 UTC (Wed) by proski (subscriber, #104) [Link] I think OLPC has some issues with the marketing. It should have used catchy names for the project and the first product, rather than acronyms. "XO" is particular associates more with good old wines and "xoxo" (hugs and kisses). Neither is what we want to be near children when they are in school.It's not a coincidence that many news outlets were referring to XO as a "$100 laptop". And when the price had to be increased, every article had to mention that it's the former "$100 laptop" that got more expensive. Tyeing the device to a price in US dollars was risky by itself. We don't hear of a "$300 SLR camera" or a "$8,000,000 rocket". The prices have to change to reflect inflation and changing costs. Promising a price in the name and not meeting the goal was destroying the whole identity of the device. Besides, not everyone uses US dollars. Certainly not the developing countries. Finally, the 100% "charity tax" was too steep. XO got quickly outcompeted on the US market before it had a chance to define the unique niche of inexpensive ultra-portable laptops. Few people want to pay $400 for something they were told is going to be worth $100, even if they know that the extra money is helping a good cause. I'm not a marketing specialist, but the problem seems obvious to me, and I'm surprised that others are looking for the evil hand of Microsoft when an easier explanation is available.
One Laptop Per Child (OLPC) generates stillborn Posted Apr 23, 2008 12:29 UTC (Wed) by stock (guest, #5849) [Link] Yet Another "Top OLPC Executive Resigns After Restructuring " http://news.yahoo.com/s/pcworld/20080421/tc_pcworld/144911 "... ... OLPC has lost three top executives in the past few months. In January, OLPC lost Chief Technology Officer Mary Lou Jepsen, who started an organization to commercialize parts of OLPC's technology, including the screen and battery. In February, Director of Security Ivan Krstiç resigned from OLPC to protest the organization's restructuring and "radical" change in goals. ... ..." Seems like the OLPC lappie's are either stillborns, or not enough children ("left behind") can be found for the OLPC, in effect generating a cash flow problem. Negroponte however has the solution : "OLPC Chairman Negroponte said OLPC was "doing almost impossible things," and that the organization needed to be managed "more like Microsoft." Robert
One Politician Per Project [is way too much already] Posted Apr 23, 2008 12:54 UTC (Wed) by gvy (guest, #11981) [Link] Well, Nigroponte is a politician. For the rest of us it's yet another lesson of "Microsoft collaboration".
So, uh... Posted Apr 23, 2008 14:01 UTC (Wed) by mattdm (subscriber, #18) [Link] Sounds like good news for Sugar, right? I mean, it's unfortunate that the OLPC is beset with troubles, but it's good that rather than ditching all of that UI work someone is working on bringing it to a wider audience.
Low-cost laptop program sees a key leadership defection (AP) Posted Apr 23, 2008 16:08 UTC (Wed) by jpritikin (guest, #51591) [Link] Here's my spin on it: http://lists.laptop.org/pipermail/devel/2008-April/013064... Enjoy.
Scrutiny Avoidance Posted Apr 23, 2008 16:37 UTC (Wed) by pboddie (subscriber, #50784) [Link] He lamented that an overriding insistence on open-source had hampered the XOs For a lot of people, the principal means of helping recipients in the developing world, once you get past the engineering of robustness into the hardware, was precisely the freedom of software and content that Free (and open source) Software and the free content communities provide. And although people can argue that the Sugar interface hasn't come along as well as it might, the whole thing has very little to do with an insistence on open source. Sprinkling proprietary stuff onto a software project doesn't magically make things better unless Negroponte has some hitherto concealed insight on software project management that contradicts the experiences of most other people. For instance, the laptops do not support Flash animation, widely used on the Web. So, the laptops can't show animated adverts targeted at western consumers? Flash is mostly a consume-only medium which is non-free and should be avoided as much as possible - it's a bandwidth-hogging parasite whose most important function for most people could be subsumed by a YouTube downloading script and VLC. However, the OLPC people certainly did underestimate the importance of decent Web support, from what I've read, with the browser being more of an appendage than a central aspect of the user experience. Besides rethinking the laptop's technology, Negroponte wants to get OLPC moving more efficiently. Having major figures resign is hardly the way to do it. Looking for a bail-out from people with lots of money certainly gives Negroponte a route to glory without the bother of actually accounting for the management of the operation to date, and pointing the finger is a great way of deflecting scrutiny about numerous management issues. A number of key people were close to burn-out realising the OLPC vision - that's just one instance of failed management which Negroponte should be more forthcoming about.
Everyone seems to make the same error here Posted Apr 23, 2008 16:48 UTC (Wed) by jd (guest, #26381) [Link] We're all assuming that NN and OLPC are the same thing. They are not. Patents may exist on specific hardware aspects, but Europe won't honor the software patents and since the hardware seems to be FUBAR, you wouldn't want to clone the hardware exactly anyway.Now, this all depends on how open Sugar and other OLPC-specific components are and how complex they are. As I see it, there are two main options:
There is also the matter of hardware being different. Have a pseudo device driver that delivers information in an expected format with expected characteristics and takes information in either:
If NN wants to go to bed with a homocidal, chairocidal maniac then that is always his choice. If an Open Source choice is seen to exist, most of his staff will defect within a week and many managers who resigned rather than be burdened with Microsoft may well come knocking on the door. We need only fear a Microsoft Laptop Per Child if we do nothing. This isn't a disaster, this is an opportunity for the true cruft to be kicked out and the truly passionate to shine. Doing nothing is the only way we can fail to stop the corruption of this innovative, ingenious system.
Everyone seems to make the same error here Posted Apr 23, 2008 23:23 UTC (Wed) by pboddie (subscriber, #50784) [Link] We're all assuming that NN and OLPC are the same thing. They are not. Patents may exist on specific hardware aspects, but Europe won't honor the software patents and since the hardware seems to be FUBAR, you wouldn't want to clone the hardware exactly anyway. Firstly, if the 101 Things To Do list is to be believed, I'd hope that OLPC doesn't have software patents, especially since there's no mention of any kind of patent covenant to protect other parties from patent aggression by future, potentially nasty custodians of the technology (and it'd be a betrayal of the community to seek patents, too). As for the hardware, I think that people who believe that any old low-cost laptop is virtually the same thing as the XO are mistaken: the XO not only has new screen technology, but it's also fairly radical about power-saving, and the mesh networking is still relatively novel. As for alternative solutions, there seem to be a number of interesting open hardware projects, with Openmoko being particularly exciting. Meanwhile, I can't see how the software wouldn't be portable to numerous other platforms, since only Bitfrost and the mesh networking stuff are specific to the OLPC software stack.
Everyone seems to make the same error here Posted Apr 24, 2008 2:09 UTC (Thu) by dlang (✭ supporter ✭, #313) [Link] actually, I think the hardware is the shining star of the project right now. it's the software that I think is the problem.
Everyone seems to make the same error here Posted Apr 24, 2008 3:28 UTC (Thu) by lysse (guest, #3190) [Link] I think there's always room for more than one contributory explanation of failure.
Everyone seems to make the same error here Posted Apr 24, 2008 3:41 UTC (Thu) by dlang (✭ supporter ✭, #313) [Link] what is it about the hardware that you think is so messed up? I've got a pair of them and the only hardware 'design problem' that I've had is that the keyboard is designed for small hands and I have large ones, but I knew that going in ;-) as a big fan of the old IBM 'clicky' keyboards, I don't really like the feel of any laptop keyboard, this isn't significantly worse for me (although I see how others could dislike it), but that doesn't seem to rate the FUBAR rating that was given above. some people are having problems with their trakpads, most people are not (which is part of the problem in fixing it, trying to find a machine that reliably has a problem). the three I have access to do not have this problem. so, what is it that causes you to give the hardware a FUBAR rating?
Everyone seems to make the same error here Posted Apr 24, 2008 14:31 UTC (Thu) by lysse (guest, #3190) [Link] > what is it about the hardware that you think is so messed up? Where did I indicate that I even bought into your false hardware/software bifurcation, let alone decided to choose the other prong?
Everyone seems to make the same error here Posted Apr 24, 2008 17:28 UTC (Thu) by dlang (✭ supporter ✭, #313) [Link] I didn't notice that you weren't the person I was responding to. That person claimed that the OLPC hardware is FUBAR and that if only we could dump it and take the software and put it on the other cheap laptops out there all would be good with the world (Ok, I'm paraphrasing more then a bit :-) I'm saying that I think the hardware design is the one thing in the project that has worked out extremely well. you responded that there can be more then one cause of failure, and I'm questioning why you think the hardware is a failure.
Everyone seems to make the same error here Posted Apr 25, 2008 3:17 UTC (Fri) by lysse (guest, #3190) [Link] *shakes head in despair* I give up.
Everyone seems to make the same error here Posted Apr 25, 2008 7:45 UTC (Fri) by bronson (subscriber, #4806) [Link] Why? You made a very clear statement, it would be nice to hear why you said it. FWIW, I agree with dlang. My G1G1 has convinced me that the hardware is great: phenomenal screen, great battery, excellent size, folds into tablet mode. The only thing I dislike is the keyboard but I can't complain about that because it wasn't made for my large hands. They *nailed* the hardware. The software, on the other hand, is pretty bad. I feel like even XFCE would be easier for kids to learn to use and collaborate than the perpetually half-baked Sugar.
Everyone seems to make the same error here Posted Apr 26, 2008 0:49 UTC (Sat) by lysse (guest, #3190) [Link] Given that at least two people have managed to misunderstand it so far, it doesn't appear to have been that clear after all. Hence the giving up.
|
|||||||||||||