1. Mass-purchased hardware: costs money. Even if the per-unit cost of the OLPC is less, I agree with commenters here that having a government buy up a whole bunch of XO laptops costs taxpayer money, and that it could be spent elsewhere. As for whether that’s damaging or not, to me it would depend on the government buying the laptop and the specific case of that country, but I also have reservations. The obvious flipside of this, though, is that you can erase the divide between those with money to buy a laptop on their own and those who can’t. And it’s not a zero sum game, either; computer investment could be a part of investment in other essential infrastructure, like classroom facilities (which, again, are an issue right here in NYC — so this is not an elite US vs. the rest of the world situation; everyone has needs, the US just happens to have more means at its disposal).

2. Cheaper commodity laptops: save money — for those who can afford buying them. We’re seeing lower-power, lower-cost computers all over the planet. And, incidentally, you don’t have to have an imaginary distinction about the “third world” or “developing world.” Have you ever been to the rural US? Or poorer urban communities? Talked to Aboriginal communities in Australia? These are supposedly “first world” countries, and we face a lot of the same challenges. (ironically, the difference is that our “first world” governments have the money to spend on these problems and often don’t.) It’s a global question. And, for better or worse, electronics makers see this as an opportunity. It’ll be up to consumers in these markets whether or not to buy them. I’m not necessarily saying this is better or worse than the OLPC model, but it’s out there, and we’ll see what the benefit of this is. But the decision, at least, is in the hands of the consumer rather than the government. (Railing against capitalism to me misses some of the real damage of the lending regime of the past decades. It’s involved the so-called “developed” world funding massive socialist projects like dams and such, ultimately to the detriment of the people affected and the finances of the country “we” loaned the money to. I’m all for a discussion of economic ideology, but in this case it’s just plain abuse by certain world powers, and in the long run has hurt everyone.)

3. Open source software: costs nothing. So, as far as Sugar, Python, all the software that we’re discussing, it’s simply NOT stealing resources from, say, water programs. It’s quite the opposite — open source software is replacing either pirated software, or expensive licenses. In other words, it’s saving money. (I don’t encourage throwing eggs at Microsoft, because I don’t like getting things thrown at me, but this was the point of a Hungarian student angry about money spent on Microsoft licenses in the education system there.)

To me, #3 is a no-brainer. It costs nothing. It’s volunteer sweat going into these projects, and the reason is that the people involved with work on Linux, OpenOffice, open source software, etc. believe there’s benefit for them and others. Anyway, since every country in the world has *some* computer infrastructure, saying that open source, you can’t say the *software* side of this project is stealing money from other places.

As far as whether the government-purchase model of the OLPC or the free-market model of the independent electronics companies is better, we’ll see. But ironically, I think a lot of the “free-market” companies may go Linux and not Windows.

Oh, and I didn’t say the Linux vs. Windows question was unimportant — I said it was tragic to me that the discussion was OS and not education. If you follow the education argument, then there are terrific reasons to use Linux over Windows in this case (not least being, Windows appears to *break* the OLPC and make it harder for kids to use).

But that’s my whole point: the end should be learning. And speaking as a teacher and someone who works with a lot of teachers, that’s not an academic question.

i totally agree.

Microsoft fight for sustaining mindshare, one big problem for them is when people recognize that they could do their stuff like browsing, writing a letter or a casual game not only with free open source but also on alternative operating systems.
And I fear the day when Windows with its endless security problems is out there on millions laptops. With XP soon to be ceased don’t expect them to do any support. Say hello to the next big botnet.

I never trusted negroponte. Great article Peter, as always.

it’s crazy. for me: this project is made by nerds who hide themselves behind the education and learning thing to realize their technological fantasies.

by the way: learning with/on a computer is good … when you end up in science, business or working for the “computer nerds using” industry: IT, games, software,… if not: it most of the time makes you only a consumer, eating western imperialist culture.