Slashdot Log In
Intel Laptop Competes With One Laptop Per Child
Posted by
ScuttleMonkey
on Mon May 21, 2007 03:34 PM
from the highest-form-of-flattery-still-doesn't-pay-the-bills dept.
from the highest-form-of-flattery-still-doesn't-pay-the-bills dept.
Tracy Reed writes "According to the BBC, Intel has designed and begun marketing it's own low-cost laptop targeted at education in developing countries. 'Professor Negroponte, who aims to distribute millions of laptops to kids in developing countries, said Intel had hurt his mission "enormously". Speaking to US broadcaster CBS, Intel's chairman denied the claims. "We're not trying to drive him out of business," said Craig Barrett. "We're trying to bring capability to young people." Mr Barrett has previously dismissed the $100 laptop as a "gadget".'"
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
Can I buy either one of these? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Can I buy either one of these? (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
Re:Can I buy either one of these? (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
Re:It is absolutely amazing... (Score:5, Insightful)
1) pass on all distribution, shipping, marketing costs to the government.
2) likewise no warrantee or after sales service.
3) only volume pre-orders. so their is no risk to the manfacturer on scale of production. All ecnomoies of scale are achieved on the first order.
4) Other than the software there's no expensive cutting edge components.
5) no retail stores, no middlemen, no warehouses.
6) no sales floor packaging.
Presumably those costs account for the majority of costs in the sales price of your MP3, which if it lacked any of those you would not buy it.
Parent
Just rename the project to TLPC (Score:5, Funny)
OLPC review (Score:5, Informative)
<tinfoil> (Score:5, Informative)
From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classmate_PC [wikipedia.org]:
Classmate has low resolution screen. (Score:5, Insightful)
Which would you rather use?
Re:Isn't this a good thing? (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Isn't this a good thing? (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Isn't this a good thing? (Score:5, Interesting)
Parent
Re:Isn't this a good thing? (Score:5, Insightful)
Intel joins the fray, OLPC can no longer get enough countries to sign on for the project (due to worries about the new intel machine), making the mass production price of $100 unattainable, OLPC drops out when they run out of money.
Intel, in using Windows and their massive R&D team finally concludes that $100 is too cheap, and decides it's not worth it to their "stockholders" to continue the project, and they drop out also. Everyone loses.
Parent
Re:Isn't this a good thing? (Score:5, Insightful)
No. Intel and Microsoft are interested in replacing the OLPC (small, light, huge battery life, open, safe) with little shrunken down normal laptops. With the OLPC you get the great battery life, all the programs (and programming languages) designed to encourage learning. With the Classmate you get... Windows. And Windows software.
As I see it, the OLPC is about learning about computers and getting kids interested in learning. There is a ton to like about it. The Classmate is about getting kids used to Wintel computers, and locked into the status quo. Sure, they are both "computers", but they are targeted very differently.
But OLPC is not for profit but Intel can dump classmate PCs cheaper than they can be made. They can call this "philanthropy". They can kill a better (in many ways, but not hardware speed wise) computer and get more people who come up on their system and used to that. But they are cheaper (or could be)! They are more powerful! They run Windows (read: it's a "real" computer).
The OLPC is a revolution in many ways. If Intel really wanted to just help people, they would donate free CPUs or memory to the OLPC project, or at least sell them undercutting AMD. Instead of doing that and helping, they shrunk a normal laptop, made a few little changes, and have decided their way is better.
Negroponte came off a little paranoid in the 60 minutes interview, but I agree with him. They are scared. If Intel subsidized the OLPC maybe they would be willing to put the little Intel stickers on every one.
I'd gladly buy an OLPC today if I could. I find the little computer fascinating (both hardware, software, and principal). The other groups (MS and Intel, mostly) just seem to be trying to make a low cost laptop that is otherwise what everyone else uses, with the same problems.
Parent
Re:Isn't this a good thing? (Score:5, Insightful)
How about these:
Parent
Re:Isn't this a good thing? (Score:5, Informative)
Here's the 60 minutes clip: http://olpc.tv/2007/05/21/60-minutes/ [olpc.tv]
Parent
Meanwhile, back in reality... (Score:5, Insightful)
Again, Intel is just trying to generate press, "Look at us! Look at how great we are! We are trying to help the poor!"
And AMD wasn't when they inked a deal with OLPC?
Intel would be more advise to give money to the OLPC project so the per-system cost could be lowered. Team work is needed here, not competition.
That would be completely stupid of Intel. First, it would be putting money in the pockets of AMD. Second, AMD press would have an absolute field day -- "If Intel trusts us for the hard stuff, shouldn't you?" The reality is that Intel's choices were roll their own, or stay out completely.
Parent
Re:Meanwhile, back in reality... (Score:5, Interesting)
Parent
Re:Jeebus (Score:5, Interesting)
Parent
Re:Jeebus (Score:5, Insightful)
I guess it's sort of like taking a school history curriculum, desgined by educators to teach kids and comparing that to learning about history by watching the History channel.
Both will work towards the same goals, but are not equal or comparable.
Parent
Re:Jeebus (Score:5, Funny)
Hey now, the History channel has taught me more about ghosts, biblical history, major disasters, and true crime than my stuffy old history professor ever did.
Parent
OLPC is a grave threat to intel (Score:5, Insightful)
1) Like apple they could choose to change processors at any time. Thus they could move away from X86 if they wished.
2) they will establish a huge software market that does not use intel specific advancements.
3) It will use graphics other then Intel graphics
In short by creating an enourmous consumer market for generic lowest common demoninator software, it removes a tremendous amount of product differentiation the INtel sells. To see this think back about 8 years ago when you had a choice of buying an intel P4 or P3 or buying whatever AMD was selling. You were not really sure if all your code optimizers would work on AMD, not sure if certain drivers would fail on AMD. It was a gamble. The answer was in most cases there was no problems at all. But we all had seen examples of problems. Intel was the safe bet. Plus when optimizations using SSE or analogs came out they were written for intel first. And lord save you if you bought Via or god forbid, transmeta.
With a giant market in non-intel optimizations out there this advantage will be nullified. Software will respect the generic CPU needs. That hurts intel's premium price advantage.
Parent
Re:OLPC is starting to sound hollow (Score:5, Insightful)
1. If Intel were really interested in "trying to bring capability to young people" then why didn't they sign on with the OLPC project in the first place? By having Intel generate a separate project, resources are inherently divided. According to TFA, Intel originally laughed at the idea of OLPC. Now they are copying it. Why didn't they just agree to help OLPC?
2. In TFA, Negroponte reportedly is accusing Intel of selling their Classmate PC below production cost. Such a tactic is used, of course, to driver others out of the market, so as to establish monopoly. If OLPC and Intel both try to sell their laptops to various countries, and the Intel one has "more bang for the buck" (because they are subsidizing it), then obviously countries will pick the Intel one. Then OLPC dies and suddenly the Intel ones start mysteriously costing more.
The OLPC project has the aim to create extremely inexpensive educational laptops in a cost-effective way. They want a sustainable solution to education. Intel, according to Negroponte, is not working towards that goal.
Parent
Re:OLPC is starting to sound hollow (Score:5, Informative)
Just like how Microsoft started giving out Microsoft Windows for far far below market costs to Taiwan when those HP and Dell notebooks running Linux were selling very well, they both( Intel and Microsoft ) are subsidizing their product to keep the "competition" from gaining ground.
If I was seeing Linux on the ClassMatePC instead of MS Windows, I might be able to believe that Intel could be motivated by charity but with Microsoft involved and how BOTH companies blasted OLPC in the press, it's all about business and their sole purpose here is to get OLPC to fail. The ClassMatePC would be pulled from the market later since cheap hardware and software is NOT what Intel or Microsoft want. IMO.
LoB
Parent
Re:What's he worred about? (Score:5, Insightful)
Intel with $$$ vs. a non-profit group with no $$$... that's just poor sportsmanship. Intel needs to back off.
Parent
Re:Who cares? (Score:5, Insightful)
This is not the main goal of the Microsoft/Intel project. They will say this to the public but their intentions are to stop the competitions products from gaining a significant market share. Both Microsoft and Intel had been offered opportunities to be part of the OLPC project and most likely pricing was their main issue. Negroponte knows this and it is likey why he said what he did in the 60Minutes piece.
If Intel can pull it off cheaper, should I feel bad for Negroponte?
They can't but they can get Microsoft involved and split the loss so they can compete with a small group who have researched and invested a few years into making it work and have no licensing issues/expenses by using Linux and OSS. Again, Negroponte knows this because they've already tried to negotiate with Microsoft and Intel along with know what such hardware is going to cost to manufacture in quantity.
If this is truly altruistic work, then he should embrace Intel's commitment, and try to work together.
Microsoft and Intel have no purpose doing what they are doing but to protect their marketshare and their brand names. Both of which help them keep their prices and market pricing at fat profit levels. The OLPC does not appear to be driven by profits and what Negroponte has done in the past shows he has an altruistic foundation. Microsoft nor Intel can show this and history shows quite the opposite.
If this is for-profit capitalism, merely disguised as charity, then may the best man win.
One side is business profit driven( Microsoft/Intel-ClassMatePC ) while the other is charity driven( OLPC ). They are crossing paths and we already know that the billions behind the Microsoft/Intel project is hurting the OLPC project since Negroponte has already said this.
And it just blows me away that Intel would fall for this level when there has been nothing said in the press or otherwise which would have locked Intel out of future designs. AMD is not giving their CPU's away for free. Now Microsoft, that's another story since they absolutely can not allow Linux and OSS to gain traction anywhere. Once you've stopped cleaning Windows, you don't go back and with the open nature of the OLPC, the closed box of Microsoft Windows/software would be painful and constraining.
LoB
Parent