Problems with the $100 laptop

Problems with the OLPC approach

Lee Felsenstein

Fonly Institute

lee@fonlyinstitute.com

10 Nov. 2005

 

Top down structure

 

The One Laptop Per Child (OLPC) project (http://laptop.media.mit.edu/) rests upon a fundamental assumption that the creation and widespread distribution of a single type of computer will solve the problem of the “digital divide” in the developing world. By creating a laptop computer priced at $100 each (when sold in quantities of millions), the thinking goes, schoolchildren throughout the developing world will all be equipped with powerful tools for learning and exploration.

 

The educational theories behind this approach were developed by Alan Kay and Seymour Papert starting in the 1970's, and gave us both the LOGO language (Papert) and the concept of the laptop computer (Kay's Dynabook). While their work led to important advances in the shape and use of computers, it has not been generally validated as bringing about new paradigms of child learning. Children do not go out to play bringing along their laptops, and have not been generally observed to create LOGO programs spontaneously.

 

By marketing the idea to governments and large corporations, the OLPC project adopts a top-down structure. So far as can be seen, no studies are being done among the target user populations to verify the concepts of the hardware, software and cultural constructs.  Despite the fact that neither the children, their schools nor their parents will have anything to say in the creation of the design, large orders of multi-million units are planned.

 

Distribution problems

 

This represents a particularly striking form of a command economy where a market economy is an absolute necessity. The history of command industrial economies, like that of the former Soviet Union, shows that informal mechanisms of distribution develop unbidden. Gray markets (for items legally obtained) and black markets (for illegally obtained merchandise) come into operation. For this reason, among others,  we can expect the OLPC laptops to gravitate toward other segments of the population, where money and influence may be available but where budgets are still tight enough to place standard laptops out of reach.

 

The truth of  the assertion that through distinctive design the OLPC laptops will be rendered safe from theft or misappropriation depends upon the moral calculus of the appropriators. So long as they are capable of browser access, the laptops will have value in commercial use. If they can be had, competitive forces will create pressure for businesses to avail themselves of the new tool, as has so far happened with pirated software.

 

It is also reasonable to predict a reaction against the concept in recipient families. In developing societies children are perceived to have a place in helping the family advance, not in racing ahead and leaving the family behind. Unless it is evident that the laptop will improve the prospects of the family then support within the family may not be forthcoming, and the laptop will more likely be converted to cash.

 

It would seem apparent that serious social research must be done to determine family, village and societal attitudes before proceeding with a program like OLPC.

 

Hardware issues – power generation

 

But what of the absence of reliable electrical power? OLPC statements refer to the hand-cranked generator included in each unit, having a ratio of 100:1 for operating time to crank time. For an optimistically low power drain of 1 watt this implies a 100 watt generator.

 

A hand crank of 6 inch (15.24 cm) length operating at 2 turns per second would require a tangential force of 11.8 pounds (5.3 kg), assuming 100% efficiency of generation and storage. This would tire a strong adult quite rapidly. It would seem apparent that the figure of 100:1 was arrived at by means other than calculation.

 

Hardware issues – mesh networking

 

Questions about connectivity of the OLPC laptop are answered by referring to the wireless mesh networking capability to be built into the device. Each one will link to others nearby, which in turn will link to others until finally one links to something connected to the Internet, whereupon all of the other laptops pass their data through the final link.

 

This is a nice idea where the “Internet cloud” is reasonably pervasive and only the final 100 meters remain to be bridged. It will not work so well where the distance to the cloud is in the region of tens of kilometers and where that link is not a broadband connection and not reliable due to power outages.

 

Also, mesh networking depends upon most of the links being operational whenever connectivity is needed. Are we to assume that all of the OLPC laptops will be left running, especially when the effort of battery charging is considerable? Much more likely is that the laptops will have connectivity only in districts of cities where power is reliable and where higher-bandwidth channels are available through wireless access.

 

Infrastructure and alternatives

 

It is not advisable to implement technological systems with inadequate infrastructural support. In the case of the OLPC laptop, the lack of power and Internet backhaul capability will present a serious impediment. This problem can be addressed by the large-scale implementation of community ICT systems, which bring immediate economic benefits in terms of extending telecommunications, agricultural information, telemedicine and e-government functions.

 

In the literature of the OLPC project such suggestions have been brushed aside with the comment that “one does not normally think of community pencils”. Of course, one does not normally think of pencils costing $100 each, and which soak up money needed for traditional pencils. Dr. Theogene Rudasingwa tells of how in Rwanda his schoolteacher had the pupils write on their legs using thorns. Pencils can be quite precious, and in poor schools are indeed treated as community resources.

 

Once stationary community systems become widespread, bringing the Internet (with attendant local wireless access) and reliable low-wattage electrical power capabilities, the ground will be ready for the kinds of laptops described by OLPC. But in that case a diverse marketplace involving a range of types and uses, forms and allocation of the laptops should be in operation.

 

The OLPC methodology is far too rigid to succeed at its stated goals. If it goes forward as currently described, the laptops will most likely wind up in other than students' hands, in areas where infrastructure is more likely to be adequate. The content of material available through the laptop is likely to involve advertising merchandise to audiences more likely to have discretionary money.

 

It is sufficiently discomfiting to consider that the outcome of a massive project like OLPC may be a different form of commercial television for the developing countries. Worse yet would be the preemption of funding for many other projects designed under a community model. Future talk of computer systems for the developing world would meet the dismissive response that “it's been tried and it failed”.

 

Conclusion

 

The time will certainly come when the appropriate tool to promote economic development will be a laptop produced very inexpensively in large volume. Before that point it will be necessary to implement systems that provide infrastructure which the laptop will need, in addition to producing tangible economic benefits for their users. OLPC is to be commended for raising issues and focusing attention, and for posing some technological challenges in a highly visible way.

 

However, the “can do” approach taken by OLPC points in the wrong direction. The solution is not proven to be appropriate, and the distribution model is open to challenge.  Despite this, large sums of money are to be committed to the project in advance to fund manufacturing in deals where the customers are government ministries and not the end users.

 

It is important to begin discussions now that question assumptions and that are open to alternate approaches, lest the outcome be one that diminishes equitable development and that poisons the public trust in ICT as applied in pursuit of the Millennium Development Goals to reduce poverty.

(This is the first of a series of posts on this topic.)

Comments

[That Stefan Kid]

"In developing societies children are perceived to have a place in helping the family advance..."

yes they are perceived to be like this. yet how can we know, unless we have actually witnessed this/lived among them. Do you have any experience with their society and culture? (Not an accusation there, just an honest question)
And would a parent not be proud/happy for their child to exceed? their living conditions not necessarily being the best, I'm sure they would love to see their child be able to excel and be given a better opportunity. This laptop may provide that. (I stress 'may')

Still, a very well thought out argument. :)

[PBX Phone System]

Excellent comments and article about the problems with the $100 laptop. As far as infrastructure from phone companies, a PBX Phone System should be used because it offers cost savings on internal phone calls.
http://www.1-satellite-tv-facts.com/Phone-Systems.ht

[tony]

YOUR STUFF Sucks

(OK, that's a start, now could you tell us why it sucks? I've never had any response from OLPC, and this might be it, so I'm very interested to see your arguments - LF)

[Cheap laptops]

I have been thinking about upgrading my computer the last few weeks but there is so much choice that it is hard to tell if youre making the right descission. Its nice to be able to search around the internet myself for the informaiton I need rather than being force fed by a salesman!

(Good luck, gedgec! But I doubt that this site can be of much help to you - Lee)

[Steve]

Well, looks like you were right. We now have two OLPC XO models at our school and they are a mess.

Children everywhere need to learn to read and write the language of their culture. There is nothing on the XO that helps with that.

The browser doesn't work well and the word processor doesn't either. And these are the only two programs out of over a dozen that ship with the XO that might help with literacy education.

Why in the world would you include a terminal app Python programming language interpreter and ADSR envelope tone module apps with a child's laptop, for example?

There won't be studies of the XO's effectiveness in learning sponsored by the OLPC, unless they are willing to admit... This thing is DOA!

[Bill Clawson]

Does anybody have an opinion on the Solo computer concept from explan in the UK? Its market driven to build low cost, low power consumption, solar PC's in the target countries.

http://www.explan.co.uk/solo/index.shtml

[lanzdale]

Lucky children of the third world to have such a spokesperson. The silly little urchins shouldn't even try to be on the internet because many cases can be thought up where it won't work.

This is PR writing by someone working for someone who fears competition. It follows the form “not guilty and even so ... list follows. Fine in law but not when used between friends arguing in order to understand.

Two names are left out of this big project, Microsoft and Intel (and who knows who else in infrastructure, the phone companies?).

For me this article sheds more light on any tax-free charitable work these big corporations might be doing than anything about the OLPC project. (Although my suspicions are now aroused about there motives as well!)

I think they (and we in the USA) should have the $100 laptops now AND as soon as it's ready the $75 PC plus (unlike in the USA) low priced infrastructure. Competition is needed, not spin and fake charity.

Lee Felsenstein replies:

If lanzdale is saying that I am in the pay of Intel or Microsoft I challenge him to provide evidence of this charge.

I suggest that lanzdale read the rest of the posts in this sequence - the links exist at the top of each posting. He will see that my motivation is not to prevent children from getting computers or from linking to the Internet, but to prevent a disastrous iplementation program from being put into effect, with the result that the whole idea of computers for people in developing countries would be discredited and defunded.

Fortunately, two years has made a great deal of difference. The original implementation program lies in ruins, and OLPC has had to accept the idea that teachers and even parents will have a significant say in the deployment of the XO computer. See also http://www.olpcnews.com for details.

[Spider Griffin]

Whoops, my mistake, I am referring to the article by BitWize posted September 28. Apologies there...;)

[Spider Griffin]

I agree that "Problems with a $100 Laptop" is a well-written and logically sound article.

I would like to underline the words in the post from Dan on October 21. It echoes my sentiments precisely; written better than I could, I think his words need drawing attention to.

[Blogger Jotman]

I blog from Thailand. And I've reported on the OLC program. To read the perspective of someone familiar with life in several developing countries of SE Asia, check out these posts at Jotman.com -

http://jotman.blogspot.com/search/label/-%20Education%20-%20One%20Laptop%20Per%20Child%20%28OLC%29

[Dan]

magnetic power has been done.

(Dan - please give a reference - Lee)

[Bitwize]

Great article. As an IT professional myself I have to say that the OLPC project does seem to hinge on a few misguided assumptions
1. That computers and internet technologies are positively beneficial, and work for the good of humanity. One look at the net will show that at least 90% of internet traffic is useless, mindless, pointless, somewhat depraved etc etc.
2. Computers enhance rather than inhibit learning. Again this has not been proved, indeed this question is a point of serious contention in educational circles. Surely a programme to give all children access to a teacher, some chalk and a blackboard would be more effective.
I fail to see what use this project will be. This just goes to reinforce the view that techies/geeks/nerds, call them what you will, are completely out of touch with the world around them. What next? one child one iPod?
There are a lot more burning issues that need top be addressed. What about one child one fresh water tap, one child no guns, one child at least one living parent who can earn enough to feed their kids after working 20 hours a day.

[Tom Lee]

Dear Lee,

I only now happened across your thoughtful essay on the OLPC project. I've been deeply concerned by many of the same points you've raised. And as the target cost creeps up to the $200 mark, the danger of creating a very different sort of "digital divide" within the OLPC-target communities only grows more acute. I am disheartened whenever I think how far that $200 could go in the third world if properly spent. Teaching basic reasoning can be done for far less. And it is certainly true that merely possessing a computer does not automatically confer an ability to think. The poster who did not understand -- and was rather obnoxiously stubborn about it -- that an N:1 operating time ratio necessarily implies a power ratio of that same magnitude is a case in point.

The seductive lure of a technological quick fix to society's problems is an ever-present danger, and therefore any proposal along those lines needs to be studied carefully beforehand. In my never humble opinion (I attended MIT with these folks, and humility is not a virtue there), the OLPC project is a well-intentioned, but fundamentally misdirected effort.

Thanks for providing a forum for this exchange of ideas. [And thanks also for having donated some of your hardware bits to me off of craigslist -- it was a great pleasure and honor to meet you.]

-Tom Lee, Stanford University

[ian amor]

Hello Lee ,
I have found you !Purely by chance
I have been in the process of trying to find a computer to realise my dream of redistributing
the worlds wealth ( a small problem ! )
You are working on this? May i contact you about my project which is starting in Mian Channu Pakistan
..from March 2008...
We are going to need cheap simple computers...
It's wonderful to see the work you are doing ..
regards ian amor

[Lee Felsenstein]

I thank Marshall Lentini for his comments, which are in line with my thinking. The first paragraph was in no way intended to be a comprehensive analysis of sociological consequences of the OLPC project. It was intended, rather, to be a thumbnail representation of the position of OLPC.

[Marshall Lentini]

Technics aside, the introduction of the laptop into rural communities has sociological consequences which are not, of course, fully addressed by the one-paragraph nod at the beginning of your critique. Let us take Villa Cardal in Uruguay as an example. The issue of resale and theft is moot: Florida department as a whole has a very low crime rate, and the people in the area are not known for criminality. Rural Uruguayans are on the whole decent people not given to crime of any kind. On the other hand, the laptop will "spoil" the rural cultural environment, and probably lead to increased future migration to Montevideo, thus impoverishing rural areas. Far more important than cranking the cord is the fact that among Latin American youth, computer technology is used for little more than video games and social networking sites. A handful of these students will go on to become programmers, some others will learn about the world through the internet, but the majority will use it for petty amusement, and petty amusement will more and more define the culture of Latin America. One of the nice things about Uruguay is the absence of "globalism"; these laptops will of course serve to "plug in" rural kids and eventually create another copy of a copy of narcissistic American anti-culture. What exactly is the goal of OLPC?

"Our goal: To provide children around the world with new opportunities to explore, experiment and express themselves."

But what does all that mean? Explore and experiment with what -- electronic music? social networking sites? One must consider how many young people will actually gain a broader worldview from personal, portable access to the internet, as opposed to those will just use it as a toy. This criticism applies to internet use as a whole, of course. The problem is its artificial injection into a small, rural culture, which makes of it a miniature copy of "global" culture. "Expression" is one of those cheap, characteristically vapid words used by marketers, which really means: the chance to become more narcissistic and wrapped up in a virtual world.

The whole thing is a gimmick with all the typical trappings of the slick, white-background "One World" tech pushers, which will see every last village in the world smiling and holding up its product for the camera to exercise the West's obsession with condescension and pity toward those who are not of it.

[McDade]

My Question is why are the children and students of the United States being left out. It seems everyone is very concerned about other nations, when our children need the help just as bad.

[Lee Felsenstein]

Michael Burns is the first person to claim that 100:1 was never mentioned as the power conversion goal. In fact, Nick Negroponte gave an interview to the Wall Street Journal in October or early November 2005 making this extreme claim. I had watched the number creep upward until it reached that high point.

I had thought that I finally had gottten some response from the OLPC crew, but Googling Mr. Burns' name and OLPC told a different story.

Congratulations on earning your Summer of Code at OLPC, Michael. Perhaps while you're there you can access archives of the OLPC website pages on power generation, which were removed following this post.

For my own account, I will visit the local library to look up the article in question so that I can post a definitive citation here. I should have done so long ago. It used to be posted on the OLPC website, as I recall.

Mr. Burns chides many unnamed people to clean up their facts. The other quotes he references are from comments, which I refuse to edit away from their author's original words.

[Michael Burns]

Please, author and commentors, read the FAQ at laptop.org. These concerns are largely based on inaccurate assumptions.

"100:1 ratio"
I have never heard this quoted. There target has *always* been 10:1. That is, 1 minute of power generation will give the laptop 10 minutes of battery.

(see http://www.worldchanging.com/archives/003707.html for an article by OLPC enthusiast Ethan Zuckerman in which he talks about the 100:1 ratio - LF)

"GBs of OS space"
The operating system currently takes about 100MB.

"Why not donate computers?"
Too power consuming, not portable, not environmentally friendly, extremely difficult to support technically.

"Harddisks"
There are no moving parts. They use flash memory.

Debate is good. Criticism is good. But please be so kind as to catch up with the current information about the project.

[JK]

Wouldn't they be better off with real PCs? I think it is an interesting project, but why spending so many resources on a 100 USD laptop, instead of just moving say, our discarded PCs to Africa?

I don't see how giving a laptop to each child changes anything. They would still need clean drinking water, and spending resources on that may be more intelligent. Or, is the idea that the kids will look up "water drill" on their laptops and then start drilling one? Hardly very realistic, is it?

[J.]

Good points. People have to start somewhere when creating a useful tool for developing nations. It's good that they started a while back with this initiative because nothing would get accomplished if perfect conditions are required.

[Cynthia Anne Womack]

I'm cynical enough to think all qualms about this project should be respected and investigated even as my hopeful side applauds all efforts to aid the children
most in need of education and its benefits.

While the culture is being trained,the
infrastructure is being worked out,the
technology is being perfected and the
villains are being identified and curtailed,let's test drive these machines on our own underclass.

Let's let the green and other adventurous types use the handcranked laptops in their earth-sheltered,off-
the-grid homes or the boondocking
recreational vehicles they've got parked
at Wal-Mart.

By the time the machines have proven
themselves in our neediest communities
and our priviledged citizens have adopted them as efficient and convenient,they may be ready for use in
some better thought out versions of the
third world programs.

Otherwise,I fear that better communications systems,better access to electricity,better technology and better
education will just give us a fancier
grade of terrorist and slicker Internet
charlatans.

Let's think well before we act and let
us act without delay.

[N. Rajeaswar]

OLPC should be built on the cell phone platform ( and not on the down sizing of the laptop platform ). It just needs a OS from a SSD of about a few MB ( as opposed to the current O.S in GB's ). It should have support for 10/100MBps + Modem support all are on board.

Hard disk ( even though it is a great invention) is a limiting factor for the life of any computer. So, this machine should not have a Hard Disk.

OLPC should have a Ram Disk built on "cell phone like memory" which are always backed up by battery ( when not in use ). Only the memory should be protected. On demand the user should have the facility to copy the contents ( may be on a daily basis ) to the SSD. Currently the SDD has a life of 1M ( 1 Million times ). So, it can last for 1 million days which is good for a lifetime of a person.

The RAM disk should be used for normal operation ( only on demand it should copy files / contents to the SSD ) thereby increasing the life of the system.

It should have provision to accept DC source from any standard battery.

[crystal]

i think its ok but make them cooler looking. there ugly.

[g-indian]

Hi all,
I will only tell which i have realized. In India Arround 4 years ago government decided to make its Member of Parliaments computer literate started a plan to introduce LAPTOPS(actual, not $100). Most of The members are unaware of such a thing. so they FUNNYly asked what it is and what to do with it? And to be surprising they are all never went to a senior school. So the laptos were used as toys for their todlers. (They thought it as a modified electric Harmonium a musical instrument). after a year or so one of my friend went to such an MP's hose and found out the child is playing with a laptop, and told the MP about that. He exclamed is it of any use of you? then take it.

The very next year again some company to attaract the governmet orders distributed laptops to all the MPs. To avoid misuse and if the MP can give it again to my friend, I asked my friend to approach the same MP. To our surprise he told that he has sold it and if needed he can arrange one from his parlamentarian coligue.

If this is the scenario what can be expected fro remote village schools?

I dout the school teachers here in India are aware of computer. It would be better to give nice books, slates, chalks,pencils and pens in the hands of school children then only they can develop.

[spongebath]

What I find amazing is the fact that no-one has mentioned the problem of content and support. Does it really matter what the hardware or os consists of? You are talking about distributing these laptops to hundreds, if not thousands of communities, each with their own concepts of "proper" education, i.e. what is acceptable and unacceptable for their children to learn. Who is going to modify this content for them? You will have to educate at least one person per community on how to modify this content. How much is that gonna cost? And what about maintainence? Warranty? Repair? If you flood the market with these, some bright entrepreneur is going to figure out how to subvert the os into actions not intended by it's owner. Who's going to protect from that? And who's paying? I agree with the concept, I really believe that we need to help where we can, but owning a laptop assumes a much larger support structure than is currently available in 3rd world countries.

[Lee Felsenstein]

Replying to DDHokia's latest objection:

In the posting I said:
"...a ratio of 100:1 for operating time to crank time. For a ...power drain of 1 watt this implies a 100 watt generator". To object, as DDHokia does, that "energy isn't mentioned at all" is to ignore the fact that the whole point is to generate, store and use energy, and that to set a ratio of times is to set a ratio of watts per watt of power consumed.

By "Operating time" I mean time during which the computer operates. "Crank time" should be self-explanatory - the time during which the generator is to be cranked.

100 percent efficiency is, of course, never achieved, but it is a concession to the proponents of crank power because it yields figures more in their favor than mine, and it removes any arguments about efficiancy assumptions.

Thus:
joules = watts * seconds
joules in = joules out (@ 100% eff.)
watts in (crank) * time (crank) = watts out (run) * time (run)
cross-multiply to find:
watts(crank)/watts(run) = time(run)/time(crank) (100 or 40 or 3 - your choice)

Thus the ratio of watts required from the generator to watts drawn by the computer is exactly the ratio of running time to cranking time, and the number of watts required from the generator under ideal conditions is the number of watts drawn by the computer times the ratio of operating time to crank time.

For efficiencies of less than 100%,
joules in = joules out / efficiency.
which means that watts (run) must be divided by the efficiency factor in the above equations. This in turn means that, in order to maintain the same ratio of run time to crank time (100 or 40 or 3) the wattage of the generator must also be divided by the efficiency factor, which is always less than 1, and thereby increased.

Engineers make these calculations all the time - I have been doing so for 35 years - and I marvel that they seem so difficult for some people. Those who put their trust in OLPC due to its connection with M.I.T. should reconsider this trust in light of the fact that no one connected with the project apparently did such simple calculations (a point which is now acknowledged - see my post "rolling right along").

[DDHokia]

(pps it would be ridiculous to think that cranking a handle for 40 minutes would allow 1 minute of use as opposed to the 1 minute cranking for 40 minutes. don't you trust the wired.com article)

[DDHokia]

can't you understand plain english? the ratio they give is for the time cranking it up against the amount of time that the laptop can be used as a result. Energy isn't mentioned at all.

you have no idea about how much energy can be generated or is used so how you can construct absurd calculations based on nothing is beyond me.

You have many valid points in your argument but this isn't one of them.

(ps if there was 100% efficiency from generation to output then 80 joules generated should be converted into 80 joules of output, but of course nothing is remotely near 100%)

[Lee Felsenstein]

OLPC has given many different ratios - the highest was 100:1 in an interview with, I believe, the Wall Street Journal. Now they have said 10:1, 40:1, 30:1, and 3:1. As I point out in my most recent post, OLPC has given up on the hand crank idea, as no matter what the ergonomics don't work out.

No, I did not get the ratio "the wrong way round" and I cannot understand why you say this "has nothing to do with power". It has everything to do with power. The calculations I made were on a per-watt basis. Now OLPC is estimating that their drain will be 2 watts. If the ratio is 40:1 (and if there is 100% efficiency) then the generator has to provide 80 watts. Do you dispute that?

[DDHokia]

You misinterpreted the ratio.

OLPC statements refer to the hand-cranked generator included in each unit, having a ratio of 100:1 for operating time to crank time.

As I hope you can see this ratio has nothing to do power consumption or generation and you're calculations are unnecessary. The ratio 100:1 for operating time to crank time means that for one minute of cranking the laptop can run for one hundred minutes. You got this the wrong way round and mistakenly thought it corresponded to power.

Lookind at http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,69615-0.html?tw=wn_politics_5

it says:

It boasts a 7-inch screen that swivels like a tablet PC, and an electricity-generating crank that provides 40 minutes of power from a minute of grinding.

a ratio of 40:1 as opposed to 100:1.

[L.A.]

The sea change of on-demand everything, delivered through the internet, is upon us. Individual ownership of PC's is no longer a prerequisite to entering the digital age. Why laptops? Why not cell phones with a TV hookup? Or, for that matter, a pipeline of recycled PC's build school labs all over the developing world?

It seems that the real issue at hand is simply how to give large populations of people the personal, relevant, *regular* ability to get involved in the digital world. It's proven through reams of research that access to technology has an effect on opportunities for young people. There is compelling research that small businesses are more profitable and more productive when they use technology for day to day activities.

In this on-demand age, one would hope that no single effort could be the lever for success or failure in bringing technology to the 5.5 billion people in this world who don't have it today...

But the scale of the required purchases is so large that it could literally derail useful projects for years to come if deemed a failure. One could wish that OLPC would put as much thought into answering the hard questions as they have into their PR program. Alas, their answers (make them green to avoid a black market) are at best, naive.

[Deiv]

It's kind of paradox but, let's the people decide by themselves what to take or not in their culture, any advantage could bring a desadvantage, depending on the use of it. If the 100 laptop works or not for the people is matter of them to say it.

[johnny]

The 100$ laptops are already in manufacturing , i think they dont have any problems with laptop cost and google is supporting them.
for more info about laptops visit:
http://laptops.gadioc.com and http://www.gadioc.com

[gschoep]

Yes, technical problems.
Yes, cultural problems.
Yes, infrastructure problems.

These same problems plague every attempt to bring the poverty of the third world to an end. And everyone seems to have a criticism of the attempt and the perception is that every attempt is an inefficient boondoggle. But some people are helped, some food is distributed, some kids learn to read and the world is a little brighter for it.

I believe that each person should find what they can do to make the world a better place based on their talents. AMD, MIT, Red Hat, etc make COMPUTERS and software. Computers are a wonderful tool for education. With a computer and one software title my daughter knew her alphabet at 2 and now at 13 reads at a college level. I believe that if only 1% of the $100 laptops are used by children it will not make a great change in an impoverished area.

So I say let the $100 laptop happen with all the problems and all the criticism. And if you feel that immunizations or house building or new farming techniques are more important, get off your tail and make it happen just like the $100 laptop will.

[BoB]

I'm going to discount your entire article based on a quick analysis of your physics. SI units for force are Newtons, not kilograms. Your analysis of the force required to power the laptop is meaningless.

Lee responds:

I performed my calculations in English units and converted to metric at the end. While it is true that I converted to the wrong units (mass instead of force), that does not render my calculations "meaningless". Your objection could be met by dividing the kg number by 9.80665.

For the record, here are my numbers:

1 HP = 550 ft-lb/sec
746 W = 1 HP
1 W = 550/746 = 0.7373 ft-lb/sec
100W = 73.73 ft-lb/sec
(tangential) ft / rotation = 2*pi*r = 6.283 * r
r = 0.5 ft
ft / rotation = 3.14159
rotation / sec = 2
ft/sec = ft/rotation * (rotation/sec) = 6.283
(tangential) lb. = ft-lb/sec * (ft/sec)^-1
lb. = 73.73 / 6.283 = 11.73 --> QED (convert to any units you wish)

Since you discounted all of my arguments based upon the suppposed error in my calculations, I will now assume that you accept all of my arguments. - LF

[Alberto]

A $100 phone?!?!?
Today's technology can give us $10 phones!!
You don't know about the real production cost of these devices?
But in this case: who pay for calling costs?!
You really think africans children need phones? Why not give it $20 Play Stations?
THEY NEED LEARN TO WORK AND SUSSIST THEMSELVES!!

[Andrew Chambers]

Why did they get it so wrong. They need the $100 mobile phone. People need to COMMUNICATE!!!! A $100 mobile is technology here now! Imagine all the possibilities for learning and communication between the peoples of the world. Sigh...

[johnny]

yes there are many problems for 100$ laptop project. hardware and software cost will be major problem.
my blog http://cheap-laptop-review.blogspot.com

[Jake]

An interesting post, but you should also take a look at this alternative opinion too.

http://www.openfree.org/opinion/?p=37

[Vinnie]

Slap Windows on it, put a big hard drive on it and sell it for 200 dollars a pop to raise more cash for the $100 version of the laptop - I don't really need a CD rom drive and all the garbage that comes with my own laptop, the only thing I'd really need is a way to access my company's network and my own at home - if I wanna burn a CD I can connect the burner through USB, plus the most awesome thing this laptop's got going is that a 500 Mhz processor and 512 of ram is enough to run most applications today in a home/office environment, it won't run autocad, but it will run word and excel and the most important thing about it is that if you deploy this laptop in a business environment, every employee can be issued a laptop that will withstand some abuse, is light and overall, is cheap. Perfect business sense.

[dbaker6165]

The author of this post would rather just "give up" on developing nations when it comes to improving the technology divide. Technology moves forward - no matter what direction it moves does not matter because its the only way to improve on past achivements.

[Matthew Sederberg]

This initiative reminds me of Mohammad Yunus's Grameen Bank in Bangladesh. I applaud these academics at MIT for being willing to leave their ivory towers and attempt to bless lives while too many of the rest of us are content to merely theorize.

[muvaffak gozaydin]

It is the greatest project I have ever known. Good things are always critisized in order to be on the agenda.
I wish it would use windows so that it would get the support of Bill Gates as well. Now he is somebody to be challenged. Which is good I do not know. Regards.

[Jon Georg Berentsen]

The author of this article raises a few but vital questions about the $100 dollar laptop: the design prosess, the power supply problem, black marked, internett connections, infrastructure etc. and I agree. There are problems. Actually a lot of problems, endless to be onest. But this article has a very black and white viewpoint. It's us and them. It assumes that the developing countries all are alike. Yes, if you give a computer to a member of a very poor family it will most likely be sold. But will this be the case for every family in Tureky, Pakistan, Iraq, Marokko, Thailand and so on ? No, because all these counties are diffrent. They are not a singel type of contry. And to belive that Mr. Negroponte, MIT and the UN will not try to work out solutions to prevent problems is just silly.

Take the problem of design. How do you design something that 100 million people are going to use ? You ask all of them ? No, you generalise. That is what every major company does. Microsoft never called me when the made Windows XP, and I'm an software engineer.
Do all peolpe in africa live in th e bush ?
No, most of them live in huge cities.
How much does an antenna for a WiFi nett cost ? One dollar (made from a waterbottle).

To say that since this can not be done everywere than it can not be done at all is premature and lacks understanding.

[Bob Quinn]

Our Haiti Mission has installed 21 refurbished computers in the rural Southeastern mountain community of Les Palmes, Haiti. Another 18 are ready to be shipped. Other charity organizations have simular programs. Key points are:
1. The US is awash in huge numbers of good computers that are on-the-way to land fills rather than taken to 3rd world countries. Children that have not even experienced electricity can master computers without major problems! Immediate results are achieveable while the $100 laptop development and cost problems are being solved. My 50 years experience in the Semiconductor Industry tells me it can be done!
2. 3rd world countries do not have the infrastructure in place to utalize a $100 computer. Competient Education Ministries do not exist or cannot be depended upon to create such a program! The laptops will be stolen,sold,given to the wrong children or remain in storage. Only "faith based", other charities or the Peace Corp have the nessary mindset, training and caring staff in place. These people are not living in 3rd world countries to make a buck or because the government paid them. WE HAVE DONE IT IN A POOR HAITIAN SCHOOL!

Bob Quinn
Haiti Mission Holy Name of Jesus Catholic Church-Indialantic,Fl. Life Member Institute of Electrical & Electronic Engineers

[kevin lyda, co. galway]

I think the first comment in this thread summed up the intelligence demonstrated here.

for the incredibly clueless, the internet started out as a government subsidized scheme. and even to this day it gets some of its funding from a variety of governments around the world.

they're using free software so any group can modify and reuse what they release. so the comments about studies completely ignore that aspect.

the $100 laptop folks are trying. maybe they'll fail, but at least they're trying.

[MLS]

This experiment will end in failure as do all government subsidized schemes.

[Lanre Suleiman]

i saw the $100 laptops on CNN News and i thought it a very good initiative to help build up the lesser developed countries especially African countries

[Anthony Ziba]

It appears that there is a strong assumption that $100 is quite affordable by the intended recipients of these laptops i.e. developing countries. However, the majority of these countries are reported to be living on less than a dollar a day. This means that buying a single laptop is equivalent to starving 100 people on a single day. In that case I am not sure if a purchase of say 10,000 laptops will leave anybody alive to use them by the end of say two weeks.

[Eduardo]

This post has some interesting points, but it is also quite patronizing.

Give a bunch of developing-world schoolchildren laptops, and I guarantee you they will figure out all sorts of valuable uses for them that we can't imagine. Just because you, Lee, can't come up with good uses doesn't mean they can't.

I get really uncomfortable when a Westerner, even one who has spent a lot of time in the developing world, proclaims that the people there are not ready yet for a particular, very powerful tool.

[rote]

Interesting post. i agree on some points: it smell Vaporware BUT these people at MIT are ACTING instead of the blah blah like people is doing here. i guess it s better try and fail that dont even try. who said that he, who s never failed, never tried?
regrds

[IP]

Would John Negroponte allow his browser to distribuite $100 laptop also to iraqi partisans to better fight american invaders?

[Tim Newman]

How many years can a textbook be used?

About 25, judging by the one I used to be taught Pure Maths from.

[pond]

I would rather see Negroponte try and fail, than for a host of skeptics give up for lack of 'studies' on the topic.

As for resource allocation, if these laptops can function solely as digital textbook readers, doing away with the costs and needs of physical books, they would be worth considering.

On the other hand, the SimPuter model, in which the cheap computer is purchased by a school, town, or group of people, each member of whom then buys in addition a memory card containing his personal files, would provide access at far lower costs per user. (The problem then is who gets to use the host computer, when, how long.)

[Lee Felsenstein]

Yes, I read the statement about the Cambodian village experience. I was puzzled because I'm acquainted with Bernie Krisher, the man who set up what I thought were all the Cambodian villages with laptops (where they used the ingenious "Motoman" motorbike packet relay system and kept the laptops in the schools), but he said it wasn't one of his systems.

Some web research shows that Nick's son Dmitri set up one or more village systems in Cambodia, that Nick was on the board of the 2B1 foundation established by Dmitri and was a funder. It is reasonable to deduce that this is the village in question.

If you look for 2B1 on the web you'll find that its website no longer exists, that Dmitri is elsewere, and that no reference exists to any report on the village experience. All we have is the statement quoted. Is this adequate research?

Lesson - when you see claims that enough is known about a problem, ask to see the raw data, don't just assume the statement is true.

[Matt Brubeck]

You write, "So far as can be seen, no studies are being done among the target user populations to verify the concepts of the hardware, software and cultural constructs."

Did you actually research or ask anyone about this assumption? If you just go to the OLPC web site and read the FAQ, it says things like:

"In one Cambodian village where we have been working, there is no electricity, thus the laptop is, among other things, the brightest light source in the home."

-- http://laptop.media.mit.edu/faq.html

[Steve Cisler]

A friend of mine from Peru sent me this critique some days ago before we knew about this forum.

I think it addresses a lot of non-technical (but even more important) issues:

http://macareo.pucp.edu.pe/evillan/shdf.htm

[Steve Cisler]

In June a group attending a conference in Amsterdam where many were critiqueing the current ways ICT (networks/computers) projects are undertaken, met to talk about projects in India, China, and Brazil.

At that time NN was saying that the $100 price would be for a quantity of one million. the people from India and Brazil felt that differences in ego, agenda, competition, and politics would prevent such large orders being aggregated in those three countries. I doubt any foundation or the impoverished UN agencies would spring for that many units, so I'll be the price will be higher.

And I have not seen anything about total cost of ownership, something that has spiraled out of control on the tech projects I have worked on in developing countries.

a fellow at the U. Washington is doing some work on this interesting topic: "the cost of a free computer" partly because their group has been doing evaluations of the massive Gates foundation computer projects in a number of national library systems.

[paolo]

I'm not an expert at all so I might be wrong.
But I think that the mesh networking would be used primarily for connections from my computer to the computer of my schoolmate in class, so to create a network of all the computers in the class. The teacher might say "receive the homework" and send it to students' computers. The teacher might say "let's start working on the page (on the local wiki) where we are writing the history of our village" ...

[debashis sinha]

hello

it is with great alarm that i read about this project in boingboing. i was glad to find that this critique was linked there as well.

i find it incredible that these people feel no problem with tying up huge amounts of money with a "solution" that is unrealistic and poorly planned. it is quite typical of the condescending "first world", top down type of fixes that serve us alone and reduce our guilt, keeping us from looking at the real problems of over consumption and social, political, and economic bullying.

[Juan]

This is typical Media Lab vaporware and is completley out of touch with the realities on the ground in most third world countries.

[adsf]

Jaya Kumar wrote: "Based on the fact that AMD is the only processor company listed as a partner, one may wish to guess that the 500MHz cpu would correspond to the AMD Geode GX2 cpu."

Why are we assuming their plans are to use the Geode, or even an X86 compatible processor. Seems more likely to be something like AMDs Alchemy line of MIPS processors.

http://www.amd.com/us-en/ConnectivitySolutions/ProductInformation/0,,50_2330_6625_6012%5E6654,00.html

From the AMD site...

" The Au1100 processor delivers a complete SOC based on the MIPS32™ instruction set. Designed for optimal performance at a very low power, the Au1100 processor is available up to 500MHz. Power dissipation measures less than 0.25 watt for the 400MHz version. It features highly-integrated technology including on-chip SDRAM, SRAM/Flash EPROM memory controllers, an LCD controller, 10/100 Ethernet Controller, USB Host and Device, UARTs (3), and GPIOs (up to 48, 13 dedicated). In addition, the incorporation of peripherals with this very high-performance, MIPS-compatible core can provide lower system costs, smaller form factors, lower system power requirements, simpler designs at multiple performance points, and shorter design cycles."

[Lee Felsenstein]

I'm currently at the World Summit on the Information Society where the OLPC was introduced by Kofi Annan at a media event. I couldn't get into the media center, and was giving an interview at the time, but I actually felt no need to get close to that event. I have reason to believe that there will be ample opportunity to engage in dialogue around this issue and the others that it raises.

There appears to be a thread developing here to the effect that "having laptops is better than not having laptops, ergo, this is a good project". But the choice is not such a binary choice. My main point is that meeting the stated goals of OLPC will claim huge financial resources for a project having very poor efficiency (due to ignoring the infrastructure requirements). This efficiency will become worse with time, as the general understanding solidifies that "distributing cheap computers doesn't work". The resources consumed will not be available for alternate approaches.

A much smaller proportion of resources invested in stationary community systems with power supplies and connectivity will, in my opinion, not only pay off with immediate economic benefits, but will allow the successful introduction of one-per-child computers which we now conceptualize as laptops but which will probably take a form closer to PDAs - the design work and the research necessary to allow it remain to be done.

[kentsin]

That software side and sufficient information supply will be a BIGGER problem.

As most data on-line is probably not equal in quality compare to what off-line data, as we have been seeing these days in our daily life. If we educated our children with these low quality information, that will be a bigger issue than without the computer.

[zippy]

I imagine the device will have a power draw comparable to a Palm handheld (the cell phone comparison earlier would be reasonable - cell phones are portable computers - however, cell phones draw far more power than one would expect because they then transmit most of that power).

--Pat

[Jaya Kumar]

Lee,

There is an opportunity to make an educated guess at the processor. The following:
http://laptop.media.mit.edu/faq.html
says:
Its current specifications are: 500MHz, 1GB, 1 Megapixel.

Based on the fact that AMD is the only processor company listed as a partner, one may wish to guess that the 500MHz cpu would correspond to the AMD Geode GX2 cpu. This is the same CPU used in the AMD Personal Internet Communicator (also targeted at the under $200 market) and part of AMD's 50x15 program for massputers. This cpu actually runs at 400MHz, and has a Linux 2.6.14 bogomips of 800. It's typical power consumption is stated to be 2.0W in it's datasheet. Although there is a mention of 3.3W max @ 333MHz as well in the datasheet. There are a variety of speedgrades, as per the datasheet, 466MHz@0.9,500@1.0W,533@1.1W. Let's assume the spec means the 500@1.0W. There are 3 power states mentioned, S0/C0 , S0/C1 and S1. S0/C0 is normal use. There is no speedstep style cpu clockdown technology as far as I can tell. So my belief is that you can assume that the power consumption of the 100DL is not going to be under 1 Watt. Further, you have to combine this with the most likely bridge chip which you need for reasonable IO functionality such as audio support, the CS5535 or CS5536, the power for the DDR SDRAM, the display controller, and the E-Ink display (although it may have ~0 static pwr consumption).

I agree with concerns about why the 100DL project does not chose to release more information about their project to the public. It would make analysis easier. I have not read any explainations why they have chosen to keep information so limited.

[Scott Kirkwood]

Actually, Colin, they don't have a hard drive. If they aren't connected to a network they may in fact draw less than a modern cellphone when talking.
And about this article - it's just firehosing, which is way too easy to do. Why not try some constructive criticisms? I just bought a textbook which cost almost $100.00 dollars US. I think these things will pay for themselves solely reducing the printing and distribution of textbooks. I have a laptop which I still use on occasion which which more than 5 years old. How many years can a textbook be used? How much benefit does a textbook produce in comparison to this?
I live in Brazil and even in the favelas nearly every home has a TV. I hope to see the $100 laptop to be as ubiquitus as the TV today. These days I'm far more infront of the computer on my free time than I am in front of the TV (and I have the Tivo like Sky TV). Kids and families will be infront of their laptop instead of the TV, what do you think is better? Sure, some laptops will be stolen, just like TVs are sometimes stolen but that's life.
I wonder if Lee wrote something about the cellphone in the 80's: "It's too expensive, the coverage is terrible, it costs too much per minute, I can't use it in the car, it'll never work".
Thanks, that's not really helpful.

[Colin Hill]

1 watt is very optimistic. The average cell phone draws at least 500mW...and these things are going to have screens and hard drives.

I agree with the questions raised about the $100 laptop. I thought it was especially disturbing that they turned down Apple's offer of free Mac OS licenses. Why not give people a choice?

These things are going to be sold off for far less than $100 by third world families, just so they can put food on the table.

[okok]

Yes, the laptops are likely to be sold, and used in areas where power and internet is available. But this is NOT a bad thing. Each poor family who gets a laptop and sells it will be getting desperately needed money, and there will be millions more computers functioning in that country, improving the efficiency of business in that country. Even if a child only sees one of these computers when they are working for the local business, it still is a benefit to the country and the people who are exposed to the computers.

[asdf]

"For an optimistically low power drain of 1 watt..."

Why is this optimistic? Can you show us the specs for the machine? Sure modern laptops with 3GHz processors, and hard disks, and DVD players, and back-lit 17inch screens, and 1GB of RAM consume upwards of 50 Watts. But I was under the impression that the $100 laptop wasn't having any of this stuff. I wouldn't be surprised if this machine only consumed 100mW. Anyone have hard data?

[Nyarlathotep]

Your complaining about long term problems, which have no bearing on the immediate program. There is a big diffrence between OLPC's talk and their short term goals. At $100 per machine, OLPC puts one laptop on the desks of almost all first world children, which I expect is enough people to pay for the program. Third world children only get them if a charity descides to run smalll pilots of the same program, which is kinda like the kind of research your calling for. Such things have been tried, and families generally liked the laptops, because they were a great source of light. :) Anyway, just look at the "pre-orders", its all rich U.S. states or European nations.

It would be wonderful if OLPC abandoned the heavy third world hand crank to built a true first world machine, but still at $100 per laptop.

[Lisa]

This is really disturbing if it's true that "no studies are being done among the target user populations to verify the concepts of the hardware, software and cultural construct" and there doesn't seem to be any indication there are any.

It reminds me of the case of the Irish town of Ennis in Warschauer's "Reconceptualizing the Digital Divide", where the town got all the cool infrastructure they required but due to a lack of research about the target community and the lack of education to go with the computers, the experiment failed pretty badly.

Thanks so much for posting this for us through B4A, Fred. And, Lee, thanks and a trackback from our blog: http://digital-inclusion.blogspot.com/2005/11/100-laptop-risks-being-too-cool-for.html

[Frederick Noronha]

Very interesting post. Great points. Like your perspective. -FN (Frederick Noronha, Co-founder, BytesForAll)