Spending time over on the OLPC forums
I have not blogged much this week because I’ve spend most of my free time reading and writing over on the OLPC Forums. Some of it has been a learning exercise while a lot of it has been an education exercise. Here is the difference …
The O-L-P-C is a “dream” - to provide one laptop for every child. The laptop we call “OLPC” is really the XO (not sure what it stands for). There are others - such as Intel’s ClassMate PC - that are part of the same dream. The differences between these PCs are slight and huge at the same time. The ClassMate PC is pretty much what developed countries think of when we say “build a computer we can use for education”.
The XO is different. It is what you need when we say “build a computer that children in undeveloped countries and remote areas can use for education”. The XO has a sealed membrane keyboard; has been baked to 140 degrees *while* still running; has an advanced display that is both color and sunlight readable; has a system board that can actually be powered off while the display maintains its image; has lithium iron phosphate battery which is much safer; runs on a wide voltage range; and has a strong exterior case that withstands sand and rain. In short, the hardware is extraordinary.
The challenge to most industrialized people is the software. It is so different from typical PC software. If you have grown up with files and directories and programs you launch and them open files, etc. then the Sugar interface and journal storage is about as foreign as could be imagined.
OLPC espouses five core principles [1]:
- Child ownership
- Low ages. The hardware and software are designed for elementary school children aged 6-12.
- Saturation
- Connection
- Free and open source
Two core principles have contributed to the software developed for the XO - “free and open source” and “designed for children ages 6-12″. Couple that with the target audience of undeveloped countries and remote regions and it makes for a very different set of rules from what industrialized countries operate with.
There is also the restrictions that come from the XO being developed by a not-for-profit organization. Developing, testing, and manufacturing the XO had to be done with the monies available. They could not draw on profit generating products with the hope/expectation of generating revenue down the road to offset costs. It could not defer software licensing costs in the beginning and try to make up for it later. Another point is that much of the work is volunteer based. This has hit the software pretty hard.
The XO software does not have $100,000,000 development budgets. There is a lot of code that needs to be developed. The XO needs everything - operating system, user interface, lots of education software, and everything needs to support collaborating between children, parents, families, and teachers. Large corporations are spending millions of dollars to do this in the commercial sector and not even to the level the XO supports. Add to that the special features of the XO hardware like a rotating screen and extra input controls, and even preexisting software needs engineers to make it work well. So, it is understandable that the pre-release software that is on the Internet today still has bugs. But some consumers don’t seem to recognize this fact.
The OLPC project decided to make the XO available to people in the Unites States and Canada thru a donation program. Having seen how it has played out in the press and blogs and forums, I can understand why the OLPC foundation resisted this for so long. Selling 10 million computers to governments 250,000 at a time comes out to 40 sales. Tough sales as you can imagine and long discussions too. But just 40 sales. That requires a very different skill set and staff compared to selling 10 thousand XO’s to individuals one at a time - 40 sales vs 10,000 sales; 40 shipments vs 10,000 shipments; custom delivery vs courier delivery; 800 numbers / emails / tracking codes vs personnel assigned to each of the 40 orders. It’s a logistical disparity on a cosmic scale.
Last (for this blog post) is the question I get more than any other from my non-computer friends.
Don’t they need food and water more than computers ?
Yes, children around the world need food and clean water. They need lots of things. So why one-laptop-per-child ? I found a great response to this question on OLPCNews …
I agree about the problem of starvation and malnutrition. And about the problems of war, disease, oppression, land mines, slavery, and all the others that deny our children livelihoods, health and even life. They are not in question.
Someone needs to focus on immediate survival issues of food, health, water, war, and other troubles of the poor. If that’s you, thank you. We need more of you. And somebody needs to focus on education in order to break the cycle of poverty.
As to what you and I should do, computer scientist Edsger Dijkstra has a suggestion that I find helps to clarify matters for me: “Only do what only you can do.” Most of us in the laptop project wouldn’t be very effective at direct food aid. We find, however, that we are very effective at what we are doing, and nobody else comes close.
by Edward Cherlin in Use Cases: Education
So, I have my XO. I have been spending a lot of time trying things out and testing the software and making notes of what works and what does not. I have spent time on the forums reading what others write and answering when I know the answers. I have also registered with the software developers site and am posting bugs I find and adding comments to help the developers fix bugs. I wish I could do more. I hope I can do more.
December 22nd, 2007 at 18:02
Thanks for posting this discussion here. (And for your comments on RTTC! )
The only developing country I know first-hand is Brazil, and it would be a mistake for me to claim any expertise. But what I observed first-hand among the poorer people that I got to know over five and a half months was a wealth of intelligence and ability and a scarcity of outlets. In many parts of the country the manufacturing jobs had dried up and there were people with the ability to work and the will to work, but nothing to do. Any time there was something positive to do, they would do it - whether that meant arts-and-crafts work, music, theater, or gardening. Most of the poor people I met craved positive outlets.
The problem with providing only the basics is that it assumes that people need only be brought up to the level of survival. Once that basic goal is achieved, however, people need additional support for creating a life and perpetuating their culture.
December 22nd, 2007 at 18:04
P.S. It’s a shame that OLPC is being held up with bureaucratic red tape right now. Thanks also for the helpful links.
December 23rd, 2007 at 07:56
Mary - thanks for the “first person” perspective. The only places I have been, that would seem to be the focus of the OLPC Foundation would be China. Not the China of Beijing or Shanghai, but the remote regions along the “three rivers”. It has been a long time since I visited those villages - places like Fengdu and the villages along the Danang River - and what I remember is the vast potential of all of those people.
January 3rd, 2008 at 05:58
As an IT person. I agree with what you wrote. The XO has limitations for adults, but for kids no. I got one for me. to replace my palm lifedrive, so far it does. My college son, has played hours with simcity on it. I like to take pictures, so I use the camera a lot, works out in the snow fine. Have tested many usb devices with it, most work. Under the hood the linux is great. And just maybe the one that was give to a child some where will make a difference in his or her life.