next »

[Freemor]

This is not directed at "GregYohn" his post just happened to be the one that finally pushed my frustration button too far. Since I received my XO and thus have been following forum.laptop.org and this forum  and looking at other places, I'm continually frustrated by the complaint that "since the XO can't do flash" (which almost universally refers to "Flash Video") "it's not a good computer".

Even here in the so called developed world viewing youtube,etc during school is disallowed. YouTube and.. oh lets say 90% of the flash video content on the Web has 0 educational value.

The XO is a laptop intended to be used by children for education (not recreation). If a provider of educational content wanted their content to be available to the OLPC community it is easily done. Simply take it out of the proprietary, resource hungry, Flash format and put in into Ogg/Theora. Dailymotion has a nice (tho limited) XO compatible portal. (http://olpc.dailymotion.com) I watch news from the net regularly on my XO after transcoding it to Ogg/Theora. Heck much of the problem with Flash isn't even the Codecs. it's that Flash is a huge resource hog when trying to play video as compared to say VLC, Mplayer, etc. Even just Playing the FLV's directly would work better (provided people wanted to pollute their XO with the patent encumbered codecs)

All that aside, dismissing a computer simply because it can't feed the media/distraction hungry brains of the teen/adult populous of the developed world is extremely short sighted. The computers I learned to program on had none of the rich content that a modern computer does. I still managed to learn to: use a computer, program in several languages, learn how and why computers work (which makes it much easier for me to be computer centric instead OS/environment centric.), diagnose, debug and repair computers. I can assure you I didn't need one bit Flash to learn any of that.

You want to see the value of the XO? Give it to an appropriately aged child. Every time I have done so with my XO I've lost it for hours and the children zoomed around learning and exploring.

The XO is not, nor was it ever intended to be a "Cafe Cuiser" type Netbook for the developed world. It is wonderfully designed. Not just for it's intended use, but in general. Once unlocked (which is easy) it is an incredibly flexible and open system. It is a real breath of fresh air for computer hobbyists like myself that abhor the fact that computers are becoming not only appliances but appliances that the users are locked out of.

I am saddened by the poor performance of this years G1G1 program. But for me the problem is not the XO. Its a combination of the current economy and sadly the fact that the "netbook" phenomenon did steal attention and resources away from G1G1. Not because the XO is a poor computer, but because people decided to put their needs first. To get their little "Cafe Cruiser" and let someone else worry about developing countries, needy kids, and grand educational ideals.  

I love my XO. I have used it constantly since I got it. Once I get a usb-to-ethernet adapter for it, it will become my primary computer for taking on support call-outs. I love not only the machine but what it stands for. I grew up with a computer and that gave me a huge leg up. I, and others like me still have fond memories of our C64s, Ti99/4As, Atari 800s, etc. Which so many people would now condemn as junk. But give me a class room of C64's and I can teach people to use computers and program. Give me a dial-up connection and I'll have them on the net too (they won't do flash, and will probably use a browser akin to lynx.. but they'd be able to read wikipedia and other useful sites)

[mavrothal]

Freemor, your points are excellent and well taken but they do not consider the fact that the XOs are not bought by kids and not donated by computer educators. They are bought by "committees" and donated by "cafe cruisers".
So the question at hand is: would a more capable XO, even with 10% cost increase, fare better in G1G1 2008 or not? Would such a machine would make program/activity development easier for both linux experts and garden variety programmers or not?

[BeckyJ]

So the question at hand is: would a more capable XO, even with 10% cost increase, fare better in G1G1 2008 or not? Would such a machine would make program/activity development easier for both linux experts and garden variety programmers or not?

I don't know of any significant computers makers who fail to update their systems at least minimally each year.

This is especially important given the XO's limitations in memory, file management, browser, bookmarking issues, lack of flash, etc.

How many potential buyers or school/country decision makers took a look at this forum (and others) and decided those of us who bought in 2007 have had way too many problems/issues with the XO for them to buy essentially the same machine in 2008?

Yet given that, I don't regret doing G1G1 in 2007. I've learned some things and had much more fun than pain!

Moreover, the field studies show the kids gain from their work with XOs. And that's what this is all about.

[BeckyJ]

Even here in the so called developed world viewing youtube,etc during school is disallowed. YouTube and.. oh lets say 90% of the flash video content on the Web has 0 educational value.

Freemor, I suspect if someone offered you $100 for each video on the web (YouTube, etc.) you can find with significant educational content (as rated by a panel of educators) you'd have yourself a very fine second job!

Kids don't want flash video until they see it one or more times. And these days there are often opportunities to see it somewhere on someone's computer. I suspect that even happens now and then in developing countries.

[Sheepster]

I am saddened by the poor performance of this years G1G1 program. But for me the problem is not the XO. Its a combination of the current economy and sadly the fact that the "netbook" phenomenon did steal attention and resources away from G1G1. Not because the XO is a poor computer, but because people decided to put their needs first. To get their little "Cafe Cruiser" and let someone else worry about developing countries, needy kids, and grand educational ideals. 

So the question at hand is: would a more capable XO, even with 10% cost increase, fare better in G1G1 2008 or not?

I agree with Freemore.  I am a 2008 G1G1 participant.  The previous year I didn't even think about it because my economic situation was so uncertain - $200 computers no matter what the specs were just not in the budget.   Fortunately this year things are better for me but obviously not for many in this country - no one buys a luxury item when they don't know whether they will be employed in the future, or whether they can pay their mortgage.   I'm not sure a 10% improvement would make the XO competitive with a netbook.   I think one has to think about the XO as a $200 computer to make the getting one seem worth it - the minute one starts thinking of it as a $400 computer it's just not competitive and I really can't imagine a 10% improving making it so. But, I saw a lot of review articles  that did exactly that - compare the XO to $400 computers and not surprising most went with the netbook.  It raises the question whether requiring something less than the full "give one" donation would have helped sales.

 From my perspective,  I give regularly to donorschoose.org so the give one portion - is basically being taken from what I would otherwise be giving to a different organization   - so the only extra cost is the $200 which was hard to justify (especially with no children)  but still felt reasonable compared to the current price of e-book readers and netbooks.  I was very aware through reading user experiences what to expect and defined my expectations accordingly. (The fact that olpc went with amazon this year and reports of promptly received XOs by early 2008 donors, allayed fears of a repeat of last years delivery disaster).  I figured I could always give the XO to a more appropriate person (ie child) if things didn't work out. 

The XO has actually exceeded my expectations  to date, particularly once I installed Ubuntu/Adobe Acrobat reader, and I'm quite happy, despite my inability to maximize the utility of the XO because of my unfamiliarity with linux (need more time to play ). No Flash is not a problem.  But I still don't think it's for the adult who can barely use Windows much less experiment with linux.  And I'm not sure it should be - I think that's why there was reluctance to market the XO in the US in the first place - that's a totally different aim for a computer than the educational one of the XO.  There should be more of a focus on functional "meshing"  (which is useless to the isolated adult US user - but obviously not to children in developing countries) than on Flash which  I don't think is necessary.   Given limited resources I think it's more important to focus them on what is best for one's target user group (children in developing countries) - focusing on donor needs would make this a different project. 

I don't know the answer to olpc survival - but I really don't think that not improving the design had much to do with 2008 G1G1 "failure"/poor performance.

[sracer]

@ sracer

There is no point of getting in heated argument... Please avoid characterizations. They simple derail from the real issues.

I’m looking ahead and I’m saying that the hardware must be updated if possible. I have the feeling that you are trying to “defend” the hardware as the “reason of the failure”.

Let’s not mix the two. I really do not want to get into the blame and fault game. I’m sure that this game will be played over and again for some time.

I’m saying that IF an XO-1x2 with minimal price and power increase is feasible it should be done IMMEDIATELY. Do you disagree with this or not?

PS: Hardware-OS-Applications is the physical order of approach, not an hierarchical one. What I think is more important for the future of OLPC, I hope I made clear in the original post.

There is nothing "heated" in what I wrote.  You believe that the XO-1 hardware is inadequate and make the claim that the poor G1G12K8 turnout was because of inadequate hardware.  I simply asked what evidence do you have that indicates that "inadequate hardware" is the reason.  You either have data to support that claim or you don't.  There's no heat in that.

I disagree with your belief that the hardware is inadequate.  I have briefly described why I believe that the hardware is fine.  So I ask again, specifically why do you believe that the XO-1 hardware is not adequate for its intended tasks? 

[mavrothal]

Just for the record:
@ sracer
Look at post #13 previous page
@ Sheepster
10% cost, not performance. Double performance at least. See original post.

[Sheepster]

I don't think doubling everything would really change the results. It still wouldn't be competitive with the specs on most netbooks (which keep dropping in price.) It goes back to the target user and what they want to use it for.  

I really don't see why would any one who actually needed a computer and was not motivated by any sense of philanthropy would go for a machine designed for children in the developing world with OS/Software geared towards that use when you could buy a machine that is designed for the US user, with software geared towards a US environment that works right out of the box for a cost that was less than G1G1.

The things that I really like about the XO are the durability and the screen,  existed on the original XO  (easier to read than my lenovo tablet and I could actually read outdoors)  For $25 I added the  16gb sd card and created a 512kb swap file which gave more more than double the storage and greater speed.    And my entire e-book/article collection comprises of pdfs - which the XO actually deals with better than other e-book readers. And I like to tinker and experiment.  I got excited about the possibility of  figuring out how to power the XO through rowing on my erg.   But, ultimately though the philanthropic nature was a major driving factor.

BUT,  I showed my mother my adapted XO and she thought it was cute  - but was surprised it was so heavy.  Then I mentioned that it couldn't print yet...  Then I thought about the work needed to do to get the XO to a point where she could comfortably use it - (and the fact that she needed me to restore her explorer toolbars - how would she deal with linux if somthing wasn't working and I wasn't there... ) and I ended up saying well actually if you want a little computer like this,  a netbook would probably be the better way to go.   512k of ram and 2GB of storage would not have solved these problems...You have to like experimenting at least a little with computers to deal with a new interface like sugar (much less do the ubuntu install)  But I did also say, of course the good thing about the XO is that you are supporting the program to get laptops to children in developing countries.

I'm not aware of whether there were other fundraising efforts by olpc - but many organizations have tiered giving options. Which start MUCH lower (of course you don't get a laptop - maybe a bag...)  Donate $200 to give a child a laptop  or $400 and get a laptop yourself  is an extremely steep entry point for many people - particularly in today's economy.  Even for people who donate regularly - multiple smaller amounts can be much easier to budget than a large donation.  Beyond the tiered donation concept there's the "personal connection" technique.   I think donorschoose.org is successful not just because the donors get to choose the projects - but also because there is some connection with the classroom being helped. At the very least everyone gets an email from the teacher.  And  if you complete a project or donate $100 or more  - they send you thank you notes from the children and photographs of the donation being used in the classroom.   I'm not an expert on  the best techniques to elicit donations - but it does seem that OLPC needed a broader range.  

I just don't think designing a better computer for donors would be (or would have been) the right way to go when the whole goal of the project is to design a computer that will benefit the education of children in developing countries.