Print 38 comment(s) - last by fox12789.. on Dec 30 at 9:33 AM

The XO-3 tablet concept promises a different vision of computing  (Source: OLPC)
Even poor kids need faster computing

Over the last five years, the OLPC (One Laptop Per Child) project has sought to develop and distribute a low-cost and rugged computer to children around the world in a bid to raise global standards of living. The non-profit organization successfully developed the XO-1, and has distributed over 1.4 million of the netbooks for less than $200 each.

“The first version of OLPC’s child-centric laptop, the XO, is a revolution in low-cost, low-power computing. The XO has been distributed to more than 1.4 million children in 35 countries and in 25 languages,” said Nicholas Negroponte, the founder and Chairman of One Laptop per Child.

Mass production of the XO-1 first started in November 2007. Computer technology has made significant advances over the last two years, and the XO-1 is getting long in the tooth. The XO-1 features an AMD Geode CPU running at 433MHz, 256MB of DDR DRAM, and 1GB of SLC NAND flash memory for storage. A 7.5-inch screen with a 1200x900 resolution is used. Wireless networking is enabled by a chip from Marvell, while a built-in camera, microphone, and speakers add functionality. A variety of battery choices are available. The XO-1 only uses 2W to run.

The OLPC project will introduce a new XO-1.5 in January 2010 using the same basic design. However, it will drop AMD in favor of a VIA C7-M Ultra Low Voltage CPU which will double operating speed. DRAM will be increased to 1GB, while 4GB of flash memory will be the standard, with an option for 8GB. It will be capable of running Windows and Linux, and is targeted for a $200 price.

Two other designs have been added to the OLPC roadmap. The XO-1.75 is currently targeted for the $150 mark and an early 2011 launch. The design will be updated, with rubber-bumpers on the outside for added shock protection. A new 8.9-inch touch-sensitive display will be used. The project is working with Marvell on integrating a new ARM processor that will double speeds while cutting power consumption by 75%. This ARM-based system will complement the x86-based XO-1.5, which will continue to remain in production to give deployments a choice of processor platform.

The XO-3.0 is being developed for 2012 at a target price of less than $100. It will feature a new tablet design using a single sheet of flexible plastic, and will supposedly be unbreakable. The XO 3.0 will leapfrog the XO-2.0, a concept approach that the OLPC project decide not to pursue.

“To fulfill our mission of reaching 500 million children in all remote corners of the planet, OLPC will continue to innovate in design and performance. Because we are a non-profit, we hope that industry will copy us,” Negroponte added.

The XO-1 helped to establish that low-cost netbooks could be functional and affordable, and helped push Intel into developing the Atom. Former OLPC CTO Mary Lou Jepsen left the project to form Pixel Qi, a fabless firm which designs and and markets energy-saving screens that are readable in daylight. There is no word yet on which OLPC netbooks will use the technology, but Pixel Qi just entered mass production of its first 10.1 screens for use with new Pine Trail netbooks, and its future screens  are rumored to be used in Apple's tablet computer.

Walter Bender's Sugar interface has also been spun off. Originally designed for the OLPC project,  it is now being developed by Sugar Labs and is available for free under a GNU General Public License.

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Why not everyone?
By chmilz on 12/23/2009 2:07:22 PM , Rating: 0
Why not give one of these to every kid in the world? Dirt farmers in Africa get free, indestructible tablet computers and our kids are still using archaic 15lb textbooks that cost over $100 each, and will need 50 or so through their grade-school career when instead they could get it in digital form on this thing for a minute fraction of the cost and environmental impact.


RE: Why not everyone?
By amanojaku on 12/23/2009 2:18:52 PM , Rating: 2
“To fulfill our mission of reaching 500 million children in all remote corners of the planet, OLPC will continue to innovate in design and performance. Because we are a non-profit , we hope that industry will copy us,”
There's your answer. A non-profit usually doesn't have enough money to reach its intended goals. In this case, that goal is to supply children in DEVELOPING nations with affordable education devices.

Are you proposing that US SCHOOLS pay to switch to this? In which case you'll find it's your taxes that will pay for the switch over. There are places in the US attempting this now, with mixed results.

RE: Why not everyone?
By Targon on 12/24/09, Rating: -1
RE: Why not everyone?
By UncleRufus on 12/24/2009 9:29:47 AM , Rating: 5 you live in an alternate universe where teachers aren't overworked, underpaid, pay for their own teaching supplies, work 60+ hours a week, and spend more time with your atrocious kids than you do?

RE: Why not everyone?
By fox12789 on 12/30/2009 9:33:39 AM , Rating: 1
sneaker: airmax 90, 95 etc $35-42 free shiping.
boots: UGG etc $60 free shiping.
Jeans : polo etc $35-49 free shipping
T-shirts : A&f etc $12-18 free shipping.
hoodies: 5ive etc $28-40 free shipping
handbags: Ed hardy etc $35-68 free shipping
Sunglasses: LV etc $17 free shipping
Belts: BOSS etc $15 free shipping
Caps: red bull etc $12-15 free shipping
Watches:rolex etc $80 free shipping

RE: Why not everyone?
By thehappyguy on 12/24/09, Rating: 0
RE: Why not everyone?
By richwenzel on 12/24/2009 10:47:16 AM , Rating: 5
Teachers' pay is much better on average than 28,000

Median annual wages of kindergarten, elementary, middle, and secondary school teachers ranged from $47,100 to $51,180 in May 2008; the lowest 10 percent earned $30,970 to $34,280; the top 10 percent earned $75,190 to $80,970.

Thats from (Bureau of Labor Statistics)

This also ignores the fact that they have incredible job security, one of the most powerful unions, and excellent benefits.

RE: Why not everyone?
By elgueroloco on 12/24/2009 6:13:35 PM , Rating: 3
I have a hard time feeling sorry for teachers who spend all their time correcting homework. If they didn't assign so much, they wouldn't have to spend so much time correcting it.

When I was going through school, most of the homework assigned was merely busy-work and didn't contribute at all to the education of the students. Also, many teachers use HW as a crutch to avoid actually having to teach their students anything.

When my dad was in school they had no more than an hour of homework each night. In order to get A's, kids had to spend 6-8 hours every night just to get all their homework and studying done.

There is a big problem with this. A standard school day is 7 academic hours of class time. A student taking a regular full-time course load should spend 40 to 45 hours per week on academics (including both class and study/HW time). That would be 12-15 credits at college. 45 hours per week is 9 hours, 5 days per week. With 7 spent in class, that leaves a maximum of 2 for HW. Maximum. IMO, children should not be working more than 45 hours per week under any circumstances, and really shouldn't have to work any more than 40. I believe 1 hour should be the maximum total homework a kid should have in a night unless they voluntarily take on extra course load, with parental consent. For kids, HW needs to be just a brief exercise at the end of class to give the kids an opportunity to practice what they just learned. It also gives the teacher a clue as to who needs help before the test comes up and what they need help on. I believe this is what HW was in the past, but now it has become the end rather than the means.

My personal experience has been that this trend of excessive HW has a horribly detrimental effect on both education and quality of life for Americans.

RE: Why not everyone?
By Jedi2155 on 12/25/2009 4:03:32 AM , Rating: 2
I hate homework with a passion. Especially essays and reports in courses where the professor does nothing except ask questions and repeats what the other students says adding very little of his own opinion/points across. Thank goodness I've just finished my engineering more of that liberal arts BS.

RE: Why not everyone?
By jdietz on 12/27/2009 12:02:45 PM , Rating: 2
Do teachers have a class every period? My impression was they didn't.

RE: Why not everyone?
By MrBlastman on 12/28/2009 11:20:49 AM , Rating: 2
Are you kidding me? My wife works her butt off every day teaching Kindergarten. Not only does she come home tired, exhausted and ready to go to bed, but she has to spend hours every evening outside of work to plan and prepare for her lessons.

Give me a break. A lot of teachers bust their tails and have to put up with snot-nosed brats whose parents don't give a darn about raising them properly and expect the teachers to do all their work for them... while the schools give the Teachers ZERO recourse to fight back and discipline these brats because the parents are so quick to sue for little things they don't like.

Before you trash teachers, spend some time in their shoes. It really would open your eyes.

RE: Why not everyone?
By Drag0nFire on 12/23/2009 2:27:24 PM , Rating: 2
If you want one for your kid, buy one. The point is the dirt farmer can't afford it for his kids, whereas you can.

RE: Why not everyone?
By Homerboy on 12/24/2009 12:37:25 AM , Rating: 5
No I can't afford it. Nor can 8%+ of America that is unemployed.

RE: Why not everyone?
By StevoLincolnite on 12/24/2009 3:39:50 AM , Rating: 2
Even some people who ARE employed would still be un-able to afford it, simply because of debt or low wages, and general living expenses, I think that number of 8% might be higher than we might actually expect.

RE: Why not everyone?
By inperfectdarkness on 12/24/2009 7:50:44 AM , Rating: 1
yet another program to give aid to 3rd world countries while our own country is in massive debt?


RE: Why not everyone?
By lagitup on 12/24/2009 12:47:16 PM , Rating: 2
Shut up.

This isn't costing you your tax dollars, your republic congressmen aren't being bought off. Go whine somewhere else.

RE: Why not everyone?
By LRonaldHubbs on 12/24/2009 1:06:28 PM , Rating: 2

RE: Why not everyone?
By albus on 12/24/2009 6:25:15 AM , Rating: 2
It is cheaper than the computer you are typing this on.

If you purchased this computer, you can surely afford the OLPC.

RE: Why not everyone?
By chick0n on 12/24/2009 11:01:38 AM , Rating: 2
what if Im typing this in a public library ?

I can't afford one. Where is my OLPC?

RE: Why not everyone?
By albus on 12/24/2009 12:34:51 PM , Rating: 2
You can afford to live in a first world country. You directly/indirectly pay for all your amenities. The infrastructure, roadways, utilities are funded by you. Yes, that includes the internet access in public libraries.

Public libraries are a rarity in poor countries. There is no "free" internet access. Internet cafes can be found in cities. But the rates are too high for the poor student who can barely afford to buy textbooks. In villages, you would be lucky to find anyone with a computer.

For them, it is a choice between sending their children to school or sending them off to earn bread for the family. Governments encourage the people by providing free meals, textbooks & uniforms.

RE: Why not everyone?
By lagitup on 12/24/2009 12:39:26 PM , Rating: 2
Where are my fries with that?

RE: Why not everyone?
By jdietz on 12/27/2009 12:04:28 PM , Rating: 2
You cannot afford internet access if you cannot afford OLPC.
Have fun at McDonalds.

RE: Why not everyone?
By LRonaldHubbs on 12/24/2009 1:06:08 PM , Rating: 2

RE: Why not everyone?
By elgueroloco on 12/24/2009 5:28:02 PM , Rating: 2
Actually, I think the point he was making is that adopting these devices with e-books would cost schools significantly less than using paper textbooks and also have way less environmental impact, and that schools should therefore adopt them. This would save the tax payers money and improve quality of education for kids.

I happen to agree. I think it's a good idea. The only big hitch would be in getting the crooked publishers of textbooks to agree to sell mass e-book licenses for an actually reasonable price, and also not to make new editions every year that mostly just re-word or re-order what's already in the book but then charge you for a whole new book (though I think that is much more of a problem in college than in K-12).

RE: Why not everyone?
By fox12789 on 12/30/2009 9:32:03 AM , Rating: 2
sneaker: airmax 90, 95 etc $35-42 free shiping.
boots: UGG etc $60 free shiping.
Jeans : polo etc $35-49 free shipping
T-shirts : A&f etc $12-18 free shipping.
hoodies: 5ive etc $28-40 free shipping
handbags: Ed hardy etc $35-68 free shipping
Sunglasses: LV etc $17 free shipping
Belts: BOSS etc $15 free shipping
Caps: red bull etc $12-15 free shipping
Watches:rolex etc $80 free shipping

"Google fired a shot heard 'round the world, and now a second American company has answered the call to defend the rights of the Chinese people." -- Rep. Christopher H. Smith (R-N.J.)

Latest Headlines
Inspiron Laptops & 2-in-1 PCs
September 25, 2016, 9:00 AM
The Samsung Galaxy S7
September 14, 2016, 6:00 AM
Apple Watch 2 – Coming September 7th
September 3, 2016, 6:30 AM
Apple says “See you on the 7th.”
September 1, 2016, 6:30 AM

Most Popular Articles5 Cases for iPhone 7 and 7 iPhone Plus
September 18, 2016, 10:08 AM
Laptop or Tablet - Which Do You Prefer?
September 20, 2016, 6:32 AM
Update: Samsung Exchange Program Now in Progress
September 20, 2016, 5:30 AM
Smartphone Screen Protectors – What To Look For
September 21, 2016, 9:33 AM
Walmart may get "Robot Shopping Carts?"
September 17, 2016, 6:01 AM

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki