next »

[mavrothal]

I got 2 XO-1.75s last week (the 2 on the right) so I now have all the production XOs and an opportunity to put them side by side with my original XO-1 (left) still kicking after 4 years of almost daily use and the very reliable and capable XO-1.5 (second from left)
Such a setting though ask for comparisons. But lets start with the new kid on the block.

The ARM Admada610 based XO-1.75 is impressive!
You can hardly tell the difference from the others when closed (only the 0 vs 3 vs 7 dots on the hinge can tell them apart), but the impressive part for me is that you can hardly tell that the XO-1.75 is an ARM machine when you use it. Good job Fedora/OLPC people!

The second impressive thing about the XO-1.75 is its real-life power consumption. Even at full CPU use (compiling ) it can go 5 hours out of the same battery that hardly gives 2.5 hours on the XO-1, -1.5. At more normal use, 6+ hours is easily achievable and if you turn off the screen light  (is an XO after all ) or you are outdoors were the XO-1.75 turns off the backlight automatically, can you get through the full work day!

When you open up the XO-1.75 you immediately notice the different keyboard. The old XO staple, membrane keyboard is now under a plastic frame that should decrease keyboard tear, a usual problem with this keyboard (though my 4yearold XO-1 does not support this…). The downside is that if you are older than 12-years old you have a fairly hard time typing on this keyboard. In contrast, the other XO-1.75 keyboard is an almost full size keyboard and with the exception of some "non-conventional" key placement is a pleasure to use. Unfortunately this keyboard is not a "party animal" since it hates eating and drinking . Hopefully will do well on the hands of teenagers and older, that is aimed at.

Performance wise, although the software is not the same for the x86-based XO-1 and XO-1.5 with the ARM-based XO-1.75, it feels in par with the very adequate XO-1.5 and far better that the XO-1.

So overall the XO-1.75 is a big step forward and suggests that the upcoming XO-3 is not only going to be produced  but that will probably be a very nice tablet in many aspects.

My 6 XOs (2 of each kind) also provide a chance to test the different versions of the software side-by-side. The "stable" Fedora 14/Sugar 0.94 and the "development" Fedora 17/Sugar 0.96 (os9) OLPC builds.
On the XO-1 the F17/S96 is really straggling. From performance and power management to size and collaboration. Of course 12.1.0 builds are still in development but I'm afraid the F14/S94 will remain the best OLPC OS version for the XO-1. Considering that XO-1 is out of production more than a couple of years now and that F14/S94 are very nice builds, I do not think that this is a problem.
On the XO-1.75 the F17/S96 are better that the F13-14/S94 builds even if they are "development" builds. It only makes sense since this is the future and the  focus of the OLPC team is on these exact builds and hardware.  I'm sure that they are going to get better with each consecutive release.
On the XO-1.5 the jury is still out. The F17/S96 builds still have some bugs and regressions compared to the stable F14/S94 builds, are a bit heavier and a bit unpolished, specially on the Gnome site. But they are still development builds, so things are only going to improve and hopefully surpass the current stable builds.

[Dinky]

Is the second XO-1.75 keyboard (far right) the "high school" keyboard, i.e., not a membrane keyboard ?

What makes the 1.75 keyboard assembly not compatible with the XO-1 ?  The keyboard proper is physically different, but is the "upper base assembly" compatible.  This assembly includes the whole  lower section (including electronics) except for the battery compartment / bottom cover. The assembly is the only replacement "keyboard" available in U.S. for XO-1 and XO-1.5 (ilovemyxo.com) .  Since the physical dimensions appear to be the same, did they change the connector to the keyboard or are the software drivers different and not present in XO-1 builds ?  Might like to try out either the "grid" or the "high school" keyboard if they ever became available as replacement parts.

My XO-1 keyboard is still going strong after 4 years of routine daily use (like visiting this forum, especially since this recently revised site no longer works with my Windows 2000 / IE6  .)

[eden]

Hey, this is good news.  Thank you.  If you have any other photos of the newest XO I'd love to see them. 

Any word if they might do another GiveOneGetOne?

[kimtoufectis]

Since I'm lucky enough to have an XO 1.5 HS, I can respond to Dinky's question:  while all the other versions (1.75, 1.5, and 1.0) share a membrane keyboard (the 1.75 with hard plastic between keys, the 1.0 and 1.5 without), the 1.5 HS has a more traditional (if small) "clicky" keyboard.  Another distinguishing feature is the deep blue color.

I don't have a great picture of my own to share, so instead will point you at a website with still and video images of the 1.5 HS:  http://www.slashgear.com/olpc-xo-1-5-hs-physical-keyboard-gets-video-tested-0596615/

[mavrothal]

Is the second XO-1.75 keyboard (far right) the "high school" keyboard, i.e., not a membrane keyboard ?

What makes the 1.75 keyboard assembly not compatible with the XO-1 ?  

Yes this is the "high school" keyboard only in green and the layout is identical as the one shown in the link Kim suggested above.

I do not know if there is a different connection for this keyboard but dimension-wise is identical to the membrane one. I think this info may be available either on the wiki or in one of the developer's mailing lists.

Regarding G1G1, I have no idea. Maybe for the XO-3 tablet if ready by Christmas, though  I doubt will fly at the price of an iPad

[eden]

Fascinating, thank you, kimtoufectis. 

If an XO-3 is as durable as an XO-1, I'd get one