Laptop Program to Intel: Good RiddanceContinued from page 1
TR: What was the purpose of the Give 1 Get 1 program? WB: Our purpose was twofold: one was to enable us to jump-start laptop programs in places that couldn't afford to start them themselves. So we're trying to jump-start Haiti, Rwanda, Mongolia, Afghanistan, Ethiopia, Cambodia. The second point is that we want to broaden the base of participation. There are a lot of people who want to participate in this program, who want to be part of this global-learning movement. So the number of people who are engaged in our mission has increased dramatically over the last month. We're finding that the community is really jumping in in ways that are beyond our expectations. So for example, now we've got 40 volunteers manning a phone bank, around the world. TR: It's customer support? WB: It is customer support. But it's customer support from the community instead of from us. Part of the reason we can make the laptop inexpensive is that we're not building those kinds of things into the cost structure. We're cutting all those corners. And the way that we can cut them is to design this so that people can have local ownership of the problem. And so, for example, quite literally--you can go to YouTube and see this in action--a nine-year-old can replace the motherboard on the laptop. When the backlight in my Lenovo laptop dies, I have to send it back for factory repair, and they replace the whole display. And if it wasn't done through warranty--and the warranty costs me more than one of our laptops--I'd probably toss the laptop and buy a new one, because it wouldn't be worth it. If the backlight dies on our laptop, it is ten screws and a two-dollar part. And not only is it ten screws and a two-dollar part--that a nine-year-old can do the field repair on--but even without the backlight, the laptop still works. TR: With natural illumination? WB: Yeah. And that broken display that someone's going to toss in a landfill somewhere--the one I have from Lenovo has mercury in it. The one that we make doesn't. So we've thought about this stuff. This is not a hack. It's not an academic exercise. It's serious stuff, and it's stuff that we're doing better than anybody else right now. And we hope that the rest of the world learns from what we're doing and does better than us. But right now they aren't. But they will. And that's part of the plan. TR: Does that mean you plan to license your technology to other manufacturers? WB: That's something we've been struggling with. We need an economist to help us figure this one out. It's not clear to me that we wouldn't be better serving kids to make everything we've done be available to anybody for any purpose. And that might get more laptops to more kids faster. |
$100 Laptop Program's New President
05/02/2008









Comments
Wildgorilla
01/11/2008
Posts:2
gabrielg01
01/11/2008
Posts:402
zzyzzy
01/11/2008
Posts:6
rbulcao
01/11/2008
Posts:1
Several such experts on the economics of the poor on the OLPC board may help. One such resource could be 2006 Nobel Peace Prize winner Muhammad Yunus (microloans). His new book out on social business, “Creating a World Without Poverty: Social Business and the Future of Capitalism” was recently featured on public TV.
See the Charlie Rose PBS interview: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1986204406774837194
novakar
01/11/2008
Posts:1
The thinking always went along the lines of "If we can only bring them some 'railways', many of their problems will be solved, and then they will be able to take care of themselves."
As time has gone by, the 'railways' in this scheme have been changed to 'telephone lines', 'highways', 'schools', 'hospitals'...and lately to the 'Internet', 'cell phones'...and now to 'laptops'.
What people miss is this: most Americans in the 1950s had a much better quality of life, than most 3rd worlders have today. And the America of the '50s had a lot less technology than the 3rd world has today.
The idealists are missing the 'cause and effect' connection here. It is not the technology that makes a society advanced. It is its values. The technology development is only the result, or the effect, of good civilizational values.
And if you put this in reverse: you can deliver a lot of technology to a bantustan...it will still remain a bantustan.
gabrielg01
01/13/2008
Posts:402
Lupa
01/14/2008
Posts:1
Whatever your views on the OLPC one cannot question the organisations motivation and vision; more than can be said of the likes of Intel and others involved in spoiling manoeuvres.
weee
01/16/2008
Posts:34
Sawatdwehba
11/18/2008
Posts:1