BF2S Forums The £99 laptop - Elonex

mikkel wrote:

Freezer7Pro wrote:

mikkel wrote:

If this had been a £1000 laptop, choice would've mattered. When you pay £100, though, you aren't buying a "Windows" machine - you're buying a machine for a purpose that you know it will handle. Architecture in this case is largely irrelevant.

Given the averege computer understanding-level of the averege european/american family, I think not.

Heh, then you think wrong. This is really time-proven to the point where your speculation isn't going to raise any doubts regarding the feasibility of non-Windows embedded operating systems.

GC_PaNzerFIN wrote:

even Africans get a laptop but I don't have one.... *snifff*
but seriously... give them food and water, not these laptops... If I were African and someone gave me that laptop, I would sell the laptop for food....

mikkel wrote:

GC_PaNzerFIN wrote:

even Africans get a laptop but I don't have one.... *snifff*
but seriously... give them food and water, not these laptops... If I were African and someone gave me that laptop, I would sell the laptop for food....

What's with everyone thinking that all Africans are starving?

Last edited by Freezer7Pro (2008-03-08 10:16:26)

mikkel wrote:

GC_PaNzerFIN wrote:

even Africans get a laptop but I don't have one.... *snifff*
but seriously... give them food and water, not these laptops... If I were African and someone gave me that laptop, I would sell the laptop for food....

What's with everyone thinking that all Africans are starving? The best thing you can do for Africa isn't sending more food - It's teaching them how to be prosperous on their own. Especially the kids who are better off and have a better chance of impacting the future positively. Eternal subsidy is an unnecessary cruelty.

mikkel wrote:

Freezer7Pro wrote:

mikkel wrote:

Freezer7Pro wrote:

Given the averege computer understanding-level of the averege european/american family, I think not.

Heh, then you think wrong. This is really time-proven to the point where your speculation isn't going to raise any doubts regarding the feasibility of non-Windows embedded operating systems.

?

SymbianOS, PalmOS, and endless fields of successfully implemented embedded operating systems have made it clear that computers made to serve specific purposes don't need desktop operating systems. When you have a big button that says "Internet", that's really all you need to browse it.

Freezer7Pro wrote:

I think they should spend their resources at buying food for those who are, instead of computers for those who don't.

I bet you'd rather give them a fish than teach them how to catch it themselves, too.

mikkel wrote:

GC_PaNzerFIN wrote:

mikkel wrote:

What's with everyone thinking that all Africans are starving? The best thing you can do for Africa isn't sending more food - It's teaching them how to be prosperous on their own. Especially the kids who are better off and have a better chance of impacting the future positively. Eternal subsidy is an unnecessary cruelty.

hey... so you are saying that all starving kids that die/are dying is.... are you a monster? sure, it is better to teach them how but right now they need the food and water too.

They've been needing food and water for decades. A $100 OLPC XO-1 and a Wikipedia distribution along with educational videos is going to be more beneficial to a needy community than $100 worth of food.

Freezer7Pro wrote:

mikkel wrote:

Freezer7Pro wrote:

?

SymbianOS, PalmOS, and endless fields of successfully implemented embedded operating systems have made it clear that computers made to serve specific purposes don't need desktop operating systems. When you have a big button that says "Internet", that's really all you need to browse it.

Freezer7Pro wrote:

I think they should spend their resources at buying food for those who are, instead of computers for those who don't.

I bet you'd rather give them a fish than teach them how to catch it themselves, too.

Symbian and Palm OS are used in phones and other pheripherals like that, that are a lot more limited, and not intended for the use that a laptop is. People who have a PDA with Palm os or a phone with Symbian, most likely has a "real" computer too, with the Symbian/Palm-based device as a little extra mobile extension.

Freezer7Pro wrote:

mikkel wrote:

GC_PaNzerFIN wrote:

hey... so you are saying that all starving kids that die/are dying is.... are you a monster? sure, it is better to teach them how but right now they need the food and water too.

They've been needing food and water for decades. A $100 OLPC XO-1 and a Wikipedia distribution along with educational videos is going to be more beneficial to a needy community than $100 worth of food.

Do you have any idea of how much food you can get for $100? $100 worth of food could feed several families for a month. And not everywhere in Africa/Asia do they have access to a school/place that can provide them with access to the internet, rendering their machines completely useless for learning.

And where they have schools with internet access, they've already got enough food and supplies to make it. That's not the case everywhere. If everyone would have food to live, it'd be time to give them technology, but right now, there are people starving, people who would much rather take a bowl of rice than a little thing with buttons and a moving picture.

mikkel wrote:

Freezer7Pro wrote:

mikkel wrote:

Freezer7Pro wrote:

?

SymbianOS, PalmOS, and endless fields of successfully implemented embedded operating systems have made it clear that computers made to serve specific purposes don't need desktop operating systems. When you have a big button that says "Internet", that's really all you need to browse it.

Freezer7Pro wrote:

I think they should spend their resources at buying food for those who are, instead of computers for those who don't.

I bet you'd rather give them a fish than teach them how to catch it themselves, too.

Symbian and Palm OS are used in phones and other pheripherals like that, that are a lot more limited, and not intended for the use that a laptop is. People who have a PDA with Palm os or a phone with Symbian, most likely has a "real" computer too, with the Symbian/Palm-based device as a little extra mobile extension.

Most people in the UK would have a "real" computer, too. What's your point? This isn't a productivity computer. You can't hold it to the same standards.

Freezer7Pro wrote:

mikkel wrote:

They've been needing food and water for decades. A $100 OLPC XO-1 and a Wikipedia distribution along with educational videos is going to be more beneficial to a needy community than $100 worth of food.

Do you have any idea of how much food you can get for $100? $100 worth of food could feed several families for a month. And not everywhere in Africa/Asia do they have access to a school/place that can provide them with access to the internet, rendering their machines completely useless for learning.

And where they have schools with internet access, they've already got enough food and supplies to make it. That's not the case everywhere. If everyone would have food to live, it'd be time to give them technology, but right now, there are people starving, people who would much rather take a bowl of rice than a little thing with buttons and a moving picture.

You don't need the Internet for learning. As I said in my post, a Wikipedia distribution and educational videos is worth more than $100 of food for a needy community.

People aren't starving "right now". People have been starving for decades. Decades of subsidy and foreign aid. Why do you think they're still starving? It's because they don't have the possibility of bettering themselves. People would much rather want a bowl of rice or fresh fruit, and that's exactly what they'll get when farmers and foragers learn how to get more out of their crops and vegetation. These people need to learn how to sustain themselves rather than relying on unreliable food subsidy.

Programmes have gone on for years in Southeast Asia and sub-Saharan Africa with e-/laptop based learning, with Internet learning centers built in mud huts in Ghana and Kenya, teaching the population how to get the best out of what they have, and these programmes have been successful beyond all expectation.

Thinking that impoverished people would prefer sporadic subsidy of basic needs to self-sustenance and independent prosperity is foolish. It's as simple as that.

Freezer7Pro wrote:

mikkel wrote:

Freezer7Pro wrote:

mikkel wrote:

Freezer7Pro wrote:

?

SymbianOS, PalmOS, and endless fields of successfully implemented embedded operating systems have made it clear that computers made to serve specific purposes don't need desktop operating systems. When you have a big button that says "Internet", that's really all you need to browse it.

Freezer7Pro wrote:

I think they should spend their resources at buying food for those who are, instead of computers for those who don't.

I bet you'd rather give them a fish than teach them how to catch it themselves, too.

Symbian and Palm OS are used in phones and other pheripherals like that, that are a lot more limited, and not intended for the use that a laptop is. People who have a PDA with Palm os or a phone with Symbian, most likely has a "real" computer too, with the Symbian/Palm-based device as a little extra mobile extension.

Most people in the UK would have a "real" computer, too. What's your point? This isn't a productivity computer. You can't hold it to the same standards.

Freezer7Pro wrote:

Do you have any idea of how much food you can get for $100? $100 worth of food could feed several families for a month. And not everywhere in Africa/Asia do they have access to a school/place that can provide them with access to the internet, rendering their machines completely useless for learning.

And where they have schools with internet access, they've already got enough food and supplies to make it. That's not the case everywhere. If everyone would have food to live, it'd be time to give them technology, but right now, there are people starving, people who would much rather take a bowl of rice than a little thing with buttons and a moving picture.

You don't need the Internet for learning. As I said in my post, a Wikipedia distribution and educational videos is worth more than $100 of food for a needy community.

People aren't starving "right now". People have been starving for decades. Decades of subsidy and foreign aid. Why do you think they're still starving? It's because they don't have the possibility of bettering themselves. People would much rather want a bowl of rice or fresh fruit, and that's exactly what they'll get when farmers and foragers learn how to get more out of their crops and vegetation. These people need to learn how to sustain themselves rather than relying on unreliable food subsidy.

Programmes have gone on for years in Southeast Asia and sub-Saharan Africa with e-/laptop based learning, with Internet learning centers built in mud huts in Ghana and Kenya, teaching the population how to get the best out of what they have, and these programmes have been successful beyond all expectation.

Thinking that impoverished people would prefer sporadic subsidy of basic needs to self-sustenance and independent prosperity is foolish. It's as simple as that.

Still, learning by computer is completely unneccesary. Not even rich countries give computers to every child. Why get a computer per child, when they can get the exact same information on one computer/TV and papers and get more food with it? I'm not saying that they shouldn't be learning - they should, but digitalizing that learning is so increadibly unneccesary, and a big waste of resources.

Last edited by Gawwad (2008-03-08 12:56:50)

Freezer7Pro wrote:

mikkel wrote:

Freezer7Pro wrote:

Still, learning by computer is completely unneccesary. Not even rich countries give computers to every child. Why get a computer per child, when they can get the exact same information on one computer/TV and papers and get more food with it? I'm not saying that they shouldn't be learning - they should, but digitalizing that learning is so increadibly unneccesary, and a big waste of resources.

There's successful precedent, successfully implemented programmes running, and continued endorsement, both political and economical, by third world governments. Do you really think you know better than all of these what impoverished African communities really need?

Seeing what the goverments of the world tend to accomplish, yes.

EDIT: Hmm, are quote pyramids supposed to become this large?

GC_PaNzerFIN wrote:

I think freezer is trying to point out that it is not worth it giving every child a laptop. There so many areas without electricity at all that it would be best to give one with all that knowledge (teh wiki-thing) for a school or village for example. And think about the food aid from this point of view: Because poor can get some water and food, they don't have to work all the time trying to get the food they and their family need. They can go to the school to get the knowledge that one day will help more than just the one family. Without the food aid this would be impossible. It just isn't worth it spending so much money that evevyone has a laptop. I doubt something like playing minesweeper really helps them. But when those laptops are given to the ppl that can make difference, it is great and will, eventually, improve the economy and quality of life overall.

edit: anyway I think we should continue this discussion elsewhere. After all, this is tech forum and about hardware and software.

GC_PaNzerFIN wrote:

I think freezer is trying to point out that it is not worth it giving every child a laptop. There so many areas without electricity at all that it would be best to give one with all that knowledge (teh wiki-thing) for a school or village for example. And think about the food aid from this point of view: Because poor can get some water and food, they don't have to work all the time trying to get the food they and their family need. They can go to the school to get the knowledge that one day will help more than just the one family. Without the food aid this would be impossible. It just isn't worth it spending so much money that evevyone has a laptop. I doubt something like playing minesweeper really helps them. But when those laptops are given to the ppl that can make difference, it is great and will, eventually, improve the economy and quality of life overall.

edit: anyway I think we should continue this discussion elsewhere. After all, this is tech forum and about hardware and software.

GC_PaNzerFIN wrote:

mikkel wrote:

GC_PaNzerFIN wrote:

I think freezer is trying to point out that it is not worth it giving every child a laptop. There so many areas without electricity at all that it would be best to give one with all that knowledge (teh wiki-thing) for a school or village for example. And think about the food aid from this point of view: Because poor can get some water and food, they don't have to work all the time trying to get the food they and their family need. They can go to the school to get the knowledge that one day will help more than just the one family. Without the food aid this would be impossible. It just isn't worth it spending so much money that evevyone has a laptop. I doubt something like playing minesweeper really helps them. But when those laptops are given to the ppl that can make difference, it is great and will, eventually, improve the economy and quality of life overall.

edit: anyway I think we should continue this discussion elsewhere. After all, this is tech forum and about hardware and software.

You have endless empirical evidence, so many endorsements and obviously brilliant applications of this all around you if you'd bother looking, but you're adament in your opinion that you know better than all of these people how to spend their money? Are you really sure that you have anything credible to back your opinion?

what? you are saying it is not worth it giving laptops and the knowledge to schools and ppl who actually can make the difference? Do you really think a laptop can make difference if your parents are starving and need help at work? Food aid is ment to help kids go to school and get education. Without that education there won't be any long term differences. Thats what you said before so what's the problem here? Not wasting few billion $ should be good thing.

edit: when the economy is improved a lot, then it is time to give these laptops for everyone.

mikkel wrote:

GC_PaNzerFIN wrote:

mikkel wrote:

You have endless empirical evidence, so many endorsements and obviously brilliant applications of this all around you if you'd bother looking, but you're adament in your opinion that you know better than all of these people how to spend their money? Are you really sure that you have anything credible to back your opinion?

what? you are saying it is not worth it giving laptops and the knowledge to schools and ppl who actually can make the difference? Do you really think a laptop can make difference if your parents are starving and need help at work? Food aid is ment to help kids go to school and get education. Without that education there won't be any long term differences. Thats what you said before so what's the problem here? Not wasting few billion $ should be good thing.

edit: when the economy is improved a lot, then it is time to give these laptops for everyone.

Anyone can make a difference. That's why programmes that give laptops to pupils in developing nations do more good than simply donating the equivalent resources in food distribution. Food programmes exist to feed the starving, and they're having a hard time accomplishing it. For decades, this subsidy has shown not to be the answer. You call it wasting "billions of dollars". The people who know and deal with these problems call it an immensely successful endeavour. The economy is not going to improve through subsidy. You cannot sit around and wait for change by shooting down projects that aim to bring it.

You completely fail to understand the benefit of these programmes when you suggest that the pupils will be "playing minesweeper" whilst starving.

mikkel wrote:

So what you hinge your argument on is saying that these children won't be using their laptops, seemingly ignoring that the programmes that are running are very successful, and that the children use their laptops in class every day.

The children who get the laptops use the laptops. These laptops are driven by hand crank, solar power and diesel generator where electrical grids are not available. If you had even bothered investigating what it is that you seem so confident in, you would not be arguing against the feasibility of provenly feasible projects by citing obstacles which have already been overcome.

The food aid is needed to sustain the starving. I am not saying that anyone is wrong in aiding the starving with food. It's an obvious necessity. Subsidising sustenance, however, does not promote academical advancement. The point of food subsidy is sustenance, not growth or development. You cannot have advancement without sustenance, and you cannot have self-sustenance without advancement. Nutritional subsidy is needed for the starving, and academical potential is needed for the able.

You seem to characterise the continent as a place where all children starve, where everyone are dependent on food subsidy, and where electical power is not available. This is disturbingly far from the truth. When you fail to realise not only the realities of the programmes that you criticise, but even the geographical realities of where these programmes are instituted, and still feel that your opinion bears more weight than the people who live around and deal with these problems every day, it's difficult to weigh your opinion against the mounting evidence to the contrary.