LAST week we shared some revealing information about OLPC (see the OLPC index). A few days ago we showed that OLPC was coming up with a new design whose architecture probably excludes Windows (ARM/MIPS). OLPC News opines that Windows got its way, but see the comments on this post (GNU/Linux was never a problem for OLPC). Evidence has actually been suggesting that OLPC lost interest in Microsoft and Microsoft lost interest in OLPC, which was never valuable to its shareholders in the first place.
“The main perpetrators were Intel and Microsoft, which systematically dealt blows to this charity.”Over at Groklaw, there is a pointer to the article "Skeptics Question OLPC's Focus With $75 Tablet"
"Because they always do," adds Pamela Jones, "Perhaps some monopolies need to stop trying to make it an unachievable goal? That is, from my perspective, what happened to the first XO. So it's a bit rich to accuse OLPC of not reaching a goal that certain monopolies tried to crush so as to make it not achievable. Shame on them, and go OLPC! I love the new design, which once again shows what vendors could give us if they only wanted to. It's unrealistic only if you define realistic as making a huge profit on each device, n'est-ce pas?"
OLPC was a good case study in corporate corruption. The main perpetrators were Intel and Microsoft, which systematically dealt blows to this charity. Last year the London Times launched an investigation and published an exposé about it. Its verdict was that Intel and Microsoft indeed attacked the project. They harmed its reputation, too. ⬆
"Ideally, use of the competing technology becomes associated with mental deficiency, as in, "he believes in Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, and OS/2." Just keep rubbing it in, via the press, analysts, newsgroups, whatever. Make the complete failure of the competition's technology part of the mythology of the computer industry. We want to place selection pressure on those companies and individuals that show a genetic weakness for competitors' technologies, to make the industry increasingly resistant to such unhealthy strains, over time."
--Microsoft, internal document [PDF]
Comments
David Gerard
2009-12-27 16:54:12
Roy Schestowitz
2009-12-27 21:37:28
Are faces a form of art?
NotZed
2009-12-27 23:54:18
It needs a real keyboard. Otherwise these kids will only be taught how to use other people's software and 'content', not make their own - or even realise they could make their own. Imagine an IPhone in all of their pockets instead for example.
The XO-1 even had an emphasis on field maintenance using FRU's a child could work with. Where in these newer designs is that hands on learning aspect? It shows you a computer is just a machine like any other, rather than a magic electrical box you mustn't look inside of for fear of letting the magic out.
Roy Schestowitz
2009-12-28 01:55:43