Why should this even be necessary?
On a related note I got to see one of the OLPC’s XO laptops at
LUGRadio Live 2007, and they are even more impressive in the flesh. If
anyone out there still believes that the ‘choice’ argument between the
XO and the Classmate is valid then they need to actually do some
research about the topic. The XO laptop is a means to an end, that end
being the advancement of education around the globe, especially in areas
without enough schools and teachers, and certainly without enough money
to buy sufficient textbooks for every subject for their children, and
then keep replacing them as they are damaged or made obsolete. It was
designed to fit the goals of the project, and every area where current
technology is not yet advanced enough to meet these lofty goals they set
about inventing it themselves (the screens themselves are a really
remarkable achievement, and whichever consumer laptop manufacturer gets
its hands on that technology first is going to sell a LOT of laptops,
not to mention the 802.11s standard Wifi mesh networking, the lithium
ferrous phosphate battery technology and power management abilities (the
whole system can go into and out of full suspend mode within
milliseconds, ie. between key presses for a touch-typist, the processor
and graphics chips can shut down to leave the display running, for
instance if the laptop is being used in its high-resolution ebook mode
where no computation needs to be done until pages are turned, etc.)).
What is the goal of the Classmate PC? To sell Intel processors. How does
it do this? It takes a modern PC (when I say modern I mean without any
of the OLPC advances), then they rip stuff out of it until it costs
$200, then sell it for $100 to make sure they beat the XO. The result is
an extremely under-powered machine (the machines are slightly more
powerful than the XOs, but they run off-the-shelf software like Windows
and Mandriva Linux, which the machine is too slow to run comfortably,
rather than the XO’s completely custom Fedora spin, which is designed
specifically for the low power environment), the batteries last 2 hours
rather than the XO’s 8, they can only be charged from an electrical
socket (there are loads of those in the villages of developing
countries), they don’t have any kind of hermetic sealing (probably due
to heat issues from the clocked-up Intel processors) so they can’t even
run underwater for the rainy season and will clog with dust in the dry
season, the screens become completely unreadable in any kind of outdoor
sunlight (the issue with current laptops that the XO solved), but this
is arguing on technical merits. The biggest problem with the Classmate
is that it exists. The OLPC project is working in the kind of space
where the precise technical merits of the solution don’t matter as much
as the standardisation does. For instance, the World Wide Web
standardised on the HTML. There are problems with HTML (which is why
XHTML and things have come about), but if multiple systems were used
from the beginning then the whole Internet thing would have been stalled
by politics, developer complaints, attempts at producing even more
standards, many proprietary, and generally everything would be a hell of
a lot worse than it is now by only using one standard, even though it is
obviously not perfect (nothing is). The very fact that there is a
Classmate PC seriously damages the efforts of anyone in that area. This
is of course making no mention of the fact that the OLPC project is
completely independent of any ties within those industries it may
effect, and so are in a perfect position to pick and choose the best
technologies for the job, whilst Intel is at the very core of the
industry and thus should be the last choice as sole designer of a
standard, since they’d end up making it favour themselves over their
competitors despite the technical merits of their systems, and it would
end up being proprietary, closed and unchangeable. Well guess what
happened with the Classmate?
I think I’ll end my rant here, but the essence of it is this:
Choice may be put on a golden pedestal in the USA, but such capitalism
is not suitable for every issue in the world. For a person who’s only
tool is a hammer, everything looks like a nail. I don’t hear anyone in
the UK complaining that they don’t have a choice of NHSs, because in
that area it is better to have one standard and gradually hack away its
problems, rather than making competing systems. Another example would be
the train service compared to the bus service, train tickets can be
bought anywhere and will work on any train regardless of the company
running it, whereas I never buy a return bus ticket because I never know
whether the bus I want to return on will accept it. As long as the
standard is fully open then anyone can come along and improve it (by
starting a new train company, for example), and we are not stuck with a
certain company’s marketing strategy rather than a way to fix a problem
in the world. Remember, competition is a clever way to encourage people
towards a goal (making the world a better place in the case of
capitalism), but it is easy to focus on the system and break the legs of
every other competitor to become the winner by default, whilst the whole
point of the system (approaching the finishing line, Utopia) has been
thrown out of the window.
PS: Yes this applies to the MicrosoftXML format too.