 The XO2 looks and acts like an electronic book. |
The wraps have been taken off the new version of the XO laptop designed for schoolchildren in developing countries.
The revamped machine created by the One Laptop Per Child (OLPC) project looks like an e-book and has had its price slashed to $75 per device.
OLPC founder Nicholas Negroponte gave a glimpse of the "book like" device at an unveiling event at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
The first XO2 machines should be ready to deliver to children in 2010.
Mr Negroponte said he hoped the design would also be used by other manufacturers.
Dual use
"This laptop comes from a different point of view." he said.
The new version loses the green rubbery keyboard, sporting instead a single square display hinged at its centre.
This allows the device to be split into two touch screens that can either mimic a laptop with keyboard or the pages of a book.
"Over the last couple of years we've learned the book experience is key," he said.
The idea is for several children to use the device at once, combining the functions of a laptop, electronic book and electronic board.
"It is a totally new concept for learning devices." said Prof Negroponte.
 It has taken a year to make XP compatible with the XO |
The new machine will also be more energy efficient, half the size of the first generation device and lighter to carry.
It will continue to sport the XO logo in a multitude of colours so that children can personalise them.
"The XO2 will be a bit of a Trojan horse," said Prof Negroponte. Initially it will be promoted as an e-book reader with the capacity to store more than 500 e-books.
"Currently developing nations such as China and Brazil are spending $19 per student per year on books," he said.
Dual boot
The launch of the XO2 is being seen as an effort by OLPC to revitalise adoption of its machines. Initially, Prof Negroponte set a target of selling 100 million machines by 2008.
So far OLPC has only sold about 600,000 machines. Prof Negroponte said he expected a further 400,000 orders in the next "60 to 90 days".
Many countries have been reluctant to buy the machines because they did not run Microsoft's Windows operating system.
In mid-May OLPC announced a deal with Microsoft to make Windows available on the XO machine.
Previously the machines used a version of open source Linux operating system.
"There is no question that demand goes up when you offer dual boot," said Professor Negroponte.
The laptops which originally had a target price of $100 now cost $188 each.
The OLPC project believes the price tag for the new devices will be achieved thanks to falling prices for flat panel screens, the most costly of all laptop components.
At the MIT event, Prof Negroponte announced the resumption of the Get-One-Give-One programme to allow people in wealthy nations to buy two XO laptops and donate one to a child in a developing country.
The programme will be open to people in North America and Europe and start in August or September.
Prof Negroponte said the previous programme enabled OLPC to distribute 30,000 additional laptops to children in Rwanda, Mongolia and Haiti.
from: BBC.co.uk
I need to find out where to get one of these. It would be great for traveling when I usually just need internet and document storage. At one point Matt had told me about the organization that sells them, and how one could "purchase" one of the XOs for the price of two, the other of which would be donated. Not a bad deal at all. Get a laptop, give a laptop to a student in the developing world. Win-win.
5 comments:
Well, I think Bill Gates put it best when he pointed out that a free/cheap computer is of little consequence to a child that has nothing to eat, nor electricity to actually operate it or charge the batteries. While I applaud the concept of the XO and XO2, I can't help but think that our money would be better spent donated to charitable organizations that actually feed those in "developing" nations, rather than a means to surf Al Gore's interweb.
Now, on the purely geeky side of things, I love the idea of the smaller, book-like XO2, and I think it has hundreds of potential uses, especially considering how versitile the interface can be. It's another step closer to Star Trek data pads. :)
While I see the Monkey Lord's point - my gut tends to side with Reed more on this issue. Mainly because persons receiving or in need of one of these devices in a developing nation would not be the same group in the most dire of straits where food, electricity and the basic necessities of life.
As with our own country, the nations we look upon as "third-word" also have differing levels of poverty. While the XO or XO2 would not be useful to persons on the lowest level - those in the middle higher range would be able to benefit from this by advancing their education and communication skills thus increasing the chances that they could find more gainful employment and move up out of the poverty range.
I love the idea that they are donated in responses to purchases. I wish that more companies did this sort of thing. They would certainly get my business for it.
I can see John's point...sort of. But there is no reason it has to be a trade off, bread or laptop. Some NGOs provide food, some provide medicine or health care, some do dentistry. Look at the Peace Corps, USAID, and other development oriented governmental programs. They focus on multiple avenues of development because food relief alone won't help people overcome the poverty trap. People also need education, and education requires a certain level of resources. At the least people need writing utensils and paper, a book might be nice, maybe a couple of teachers, some access to information, etc, etc. And one of the virtues of this type of device is that particularly in the upper crust of the poorest countries (those the Frayedone mentioned), they are able to produce some resources for education, but not enough to go around. If you look at the article, one of these babies can hold some 500 books. Given the cost of publishing. So in lots of ways this is actually a cheaper alternative to traditional paper and pen learning...that is, of course, considering that the text is freely available (I am sure this is a fight to be had elsewhere though) or at a minimal cost.
At any rate, people need the tools of education in addition to food and other medicine. Certainly their immediate needs must be met, but after that people need to be educate if there is going to be any real improvement in the developing world.
Oh, and what's with the quotes on developing?
Lastly, while I am all for humanitarian assistance, the darker economic side of food aid might come as a surprise to many (it surprised me). A couple of recent reports an articles have suggested that food aid from the US and other wealthier agriculture exporting states actually hurts developing countries by driving down the price of locally produced goods. While this might seem like a good thing for consumers, it is awful for food producers. That is, local farmers can't make a go of raising crops in countries where the US sends its surplus as aid. In countries where the comparative advantage is in export agriculture, this has the potential to virtually undermine the economy. Also, a part of the reason the US can afford to give away foodstuffs as aid is because of the massive farm subsidies given to US producers.
Hahah...the US strikes again.
I say "developing" because it's largely a euphamistic, feel-good, word for "crumbling shit-hole" that we use it because it doesn't hurt liberals' feelings. :)
And no, Reed, before you shit yourself in disgust, I'm (mostly) not serious. :P
Anyway: I'm not taking a huge dump on the whole OX and OX2 projects. If anything, I think they are definately worth while for [i]somebody[/i]. But you can achieve a reasonable education through pencils and paper, books, and good teachers. You don't [i]need[/i] a handheld computer to learn mathematics, humanities, language, social studuies, etc. And if you don't live in a country laced with wireless broadcasting stations, these XOs are little more than a portable version of Minesweeper.
I'm just saying that in some parts of the world, the cost of one of these computers, cheap though they may be by our standards, can go a long, long way in local economies.
I'm generally as computer savvy as one gets without actually designing and manufacturing the components (though I could probably design a computer that will flush your toilet... long story). So don't think I don't appreciate the novelty of the endeavor. I want EVERYONE to have access to the internet, exchange ideas, so on and so forth. It serves to make the world a smaller place, and builds communities.
But If I had a choice between donating one of these things and writing a $100 check to UNICEF, I'll choose the latter every time. (And, as a matter off fact, do just that every year. It's a pittance in the grand scheme of things, I know... but it does make me feel better)
@Reed: Hey, I did read something about the Food Aid issue a few weeks ago... pretty crazy. But, what do you do in the meantime? If people are starving, local agriculture is obviously not feeding the people anyway... so what to do?
In answer to the last question, yeah I am all for giving people food aid when they face starvation. The poorest of the poor need help now as do those suffering from natural disasters (e.g. Burma). But focusing on domestic production, sustainability, and independence has to be long term goal is there is to be any real "development." :). The thing is, I am not sure that the US is really all that interested in helping these countries achieve that. Sure, the US is glad to extend credits and aid and food stuffs...it's good PR and it often provides legal kickbacks to US industry. For instance, often the grants given as aid can only be used to purchase equipment and supplies and consulting from US firms. So, even in charity the US is out to make some profit. From an economic standpoint that is great for the US...and totally rational. But it kind of goes against the spirit of helping people for the sake of helping them better their lives. It is kind of tantamount to the rich giving huge amounts of money just to get the tax write off. And while the motive is irrelevant so long as good is being done, the fact is more good could be done if people did it for the right reasons. But if they won't, then the way it is done now is probably better than nothing. I just think we can do better. But maybe I for some reason have a rosier view of human nature than I should. Silly me for expecting people are actually every just good for the sake of being good.
Post a Comment