Comments on: One Laptop Per Child: XO Phase 2 Progress

By: John

John — Mon, 04 Jun 2007 09:00:09 +0000

Is it like the flashlights that you shake for power?

By: michuk

michuk — Wed, 11 Apr 2007 20:20:18 +0000

Does anyone know how this laptop is powered?

It can be powered by electricity (almost any voltage) or by a yoyo-like toy.
An extract from the highlights:

XO is fully compliant with the European Union’s RoHS Directive. It contains no hazardous materials. Its NiMH batteries contain no toxic heavy metals, plus it features enhanced battery management for an extended recharge-cycle lifetime. It will also tolerate alternate power-charging sources, such as car batteries.

In addition, —for use at home and where power is not available—the XO can be hand powered. It will come with at least two of three options: a crank, a pedal, or a pull-cord. It is also possible that children could have a second battery for group charging at school while they are using their laptop in class.

By: V. Lintell

V. Lintell — Fri, 23 Mar 2007 12:27:36 +0000

Does anyone know how this laptop is powered? I understand that it is human powered but I can’t find out any more information than that? I know early concepts used a hand crank but that that wasn’t considered practical… any thoughts would be appreciated.

By: A. Bevil

A. Bevil — Mon, 12 Mar 2007 13:14:17 +0000

I hope they decide not to run microsoft on them. It would be nice if a generation of children in developing economies could grow up without having the Microsoft monopoly enforced on them.

By: J. Prigot

J. Prigot — Tue, 06 Feb 2007 16:05:02 +0000

Jack, if I read the statement properly. “Buy 2. get 1″ is exactly what you want. I buy one for $200 and I get 1 OLPC. The one that I’ve subsidized goes to a student.

By: G Fernandes

G Fernandes — Tue, 06 Feb 2007 13:18:13 +0000

Jack Williamson:
The buy 2, get 1 scheme is targetted at affluent sections of the world population. It is meant to provide an OLPC to exactly those poor students you mention.

The strategy of delivering the OLPC via governments is very good. In the end, it is the world governments who need to participate more to mitigate this problem.

The tax collected by all governments - believe it or not - is sufficient to achieve this. The sad truth is really the corruption in third world countries that will hinder this. Sadly, it is the third-world countries that would benefit the most - if only they can overcome their corruption.

By: Jack Williamson

Jack Williamson — Tue, 06 Feb 2007 00:25:49 +0000

The buy 2, get 1 marketing concept is just great as far as I’m concerned.
However there will be many in the world, poor students not provided with one of these wonderful gizmos perhaps, who would barely even be able to afford 1. For these, buy 1 or 1.1 and get 1 might be a more reasonable sort of ratio.

How to tell the diff? An honour system would be the simplest solution.

By: Bob Lee

Bob Lee — Sun, 04 Feb 2007 11:47:28 +0000

I have truly enjoyed the articles about the OLPC and the progress being made. This article was no exception until the last paragraph about MS wanting to get involved, I almost puked it got me sick to just think of it.

What is his motivation for them trying to do this? Is it altruism or is it greed? He has never shown any true altruism when it comes to business. He could have funded this whole project very easily by opening his wallet a little. What’s a billion or two to him, the richest man in the world.

Keep him out.

Robert E. Lee