Cracks in the $100 laptop

Should the primary motivation of providing mini-laptops to poor children be philanthropy or profit? 

MIT Professor Nicholas Negroponte's One Laptop Per Child (OLPC) social welfare organisation is hoping to ship 5 million to 10 million cheap laptops to developing countries this year. But the nonprofit organisation will struggle to lower the actual cost and increase the sales of its so-called '$100 laptop' in the face of competition.

Negroponte's original plan was based upon economies of scale. He expected the governments of developing countries to order millions of his cheap XO-1 laptops in order to cut manufacturing costs. The '$100 laptop' currently costs $180 to buy, but almost $200 to make. But major electronics companies -- such as Intel and Taiwan's Asus Computer -- befog the professor's worthy vision: they are introducing similarly-priced rival laptops that will also deliver cheap computing to poor children, and turn a profit: 

• Only Uruguay has signed onto the OLPC plan, and for just 100,000 laptops - a fraction of the 3 million machines the OLPC hoped foreign governments would order.  Negroponte has admitted that verbal expressions of interest from developing countries are not quite the same as firm orders.
• Libya and Nigeria have purchased nearly 170,000 of Intel's Classmate PC mini-laptops, priced at $200 to $300. Earlier this year, Negroponte denounced Intel for undermining the One Laptop Per Child device.
• Asus has seen good sales of the Eee PC, which is being sold for $399 in the United States, but also will be sold for as little as $199 to school systems abroad.

Different goals? 

Cost is the not the only consideration for developing countries.The XO-1 and Classmate have similar specs, but differing technological goals. The Classmate aims to provide technology that fits into the larger, primarily Windows-based computing environment. Users in this environment run the risk of vendor lock-in and lose flexibility by using closed-source software.

XO aims to provide children with a free and open-source software environment they can modify for themselves at no additional cost. Negroponte's strong emphasis on bringing internet connectivity to areas that currently lack telecommunications infrastructure will also play well with developing countries. The educational benefits of this kind of initiative are obvious: in Africa, where expanding mobile phone provision is fundamentally changing communications, they will have a major role in facilitating improved communications, and could drive positive changes in other areas, such as how remittances are sent and received.

Philanthropy may yet win the day, but some will still argue that providing computers for children whose levels of basic literacy are low is a waste of precious social spending budgets and foreign aid. Several African leaders have suggested that there may be other more fundamental problems, such as lack of potable water, which need to be addressed. 

However, realpolitik trumps ethics and idealism every time. "(Technology) does not respect morality or motive. The good thing is that, one way or another, even the world's poorest people are now on the verge of access to computing and the wonders of the internet," writes the SMH's Graeme Philipson.

Ultimately the low cost of conventional laptops, along with growing internet connectivity via mobile telecommunications infrastructure, could undermine Negroponte's initiative -- but realise some of his goals.