More on TechnologyTell: Gadget News | Apple News
Why I hate the OLPC laptop—and am delighted I couldn’t buy one
June 27, 2008 | 9:07 am
|
By Joanna
A tech guy I am working with this summer had caught up with an OLPC XO-1 laptop, and I played with one while at his office. And guess what? Now I am glad that OLPC was so stingy with making these available, because otherwise, I would have bought one.
First of all, the XO-1 weighs a ton. It felt as heavy as my MacBook, in spite of its petite form factor, and it is definitely heavier than my Eee.
Pokey
Secondly, I could not get the XO-1 to do very much. The programs were incredibly slow to load, and it was not intuitive to me at all with regards to accessing basic program functions like "quit" or "new." Maybe if you really were the target market here and you had never used computers before, you would adapt quite easily to this bizarre interface of theirs, but then you’d be at a real disadvantage when you got out there in the bigger world and everything was doing things like opening a file, quitting a program or printing a document!
Limited Paint program
The one program I did get running was the Paint program, and it was extremely limited in its options. It only had two or three paintbrushes, you could not change their shape or color or thickness, and it just was not very impressive-looking. Again, I think OLPC were limiting itself with this bizarre interface. Had the laptop used a standard Linux distro, it could have included the open-source Tux paint program that has about a hundred times the options in a kid-friendly and easy to use package.
I did like the swivel screen. Unfortunately, I can’t see its use in anything but reading, and if there was an e-book program, I didn’t spot it. Nor could I find a word processor, spreadsheet or music player. Perhaps these do come included and I just couldn’t find them because the OS on this is so terrible!
The pathetic bottom line
Bottom line for me is, the hardware (swivel screen, rugged build etc.) interests me, but the XO-1 would have to be about a pound and a half lighter, and come with a standard operating system. I know OLPC designed this for children in developing countries, but I don’t see why those children can’t learn just as well on a standard type of operating system.
Windows, Mac, Linux—they are similar enough once they are installed and running and are used by people all over the world. In fact, that would be better for them because then when they do get on-line, there would be more people out there developing programs, helping them on chat boards etc. The OLPC as it stands now has what seemed just too strange and different. I didn’t like it at all and I am glad I didn’t buy one.
|
Previous
SUBSCRIBE TO RSS
Comments:
This review was so amazingly narrow-minded that I can only assume you were intentionally trying to be provocative.
I was going to take some time and provide some counterpoint to many (if not all) of your comments but then I thought…eh, why bother.
Instead…Sorry you didn’t like it. Good thing you didn’t buy one.
HeavyG, I’d share your enthusiasm for the hardware. The software, however, could definitely be better for e-reading. Also remember that Ficbot is a teacher and is constantly around kids. So, whether we agree with her or not, she is definitely entitled to an opinion, and I’m very appreciative of the review. Thanks. David
Er, “it just was not very impressive-looking”? How old is the reviewer? 12?
For the record, Tux Paint is provided by OLPC as a user-installable paint program on the official wiki. This would have taken 60 seconds to find out (google “olpc tuxpaint”), but the “review” was written with the thoroughness high school freshmen bestow on papers that are due the following period. I expected more from TeleRead.
I’ve lost track of how many novels I’ve read on my XO, most of them thanks to FBReader, a standard Linux program that I installed in a standard Linux way, via rpm.
But Ron, how many schoolchildren start out as linux fans? Why isn’t FBReader standard on the XO? Seems to me you’re backing up my point that the XO could be better in the software department.
Reminder: I love the hardware.
And a very friendly suggestion: Perhaps you can lobby to get FBReader Sugarized. I really want the XO-1 to succeed!
Finally a message to all: Ficbot is traveling. When she returns, she’ll undoubtedly have some answers.
Thanks,
David
Opinions and noses have one thing in common – everybody should have at least one. Of course Ficbot is entitled to her opinion and I in no way intended to imply otherwise. My apologies if it came across that way.
Like David and many others I participated in the Give One Get One program. I believe in and wanted to support the ideals of the OLPC program and I also wanted a chance to play with an XO myself.
The hardware of the XO is a brilliant piece of kit. Given the financial constraints of the intended market, the environmental conditions in the intended market, the availability (or quite likely the lack thereof) of stable electrical supplies in the intended market the XO is one genius piece of design.
The display used in the market is another fabulous bit of invention that has itself spawned a spin-off corporation to spread the use of that technology into other devices.
Is it perfect? Of course not. Again the financial constraints were the major factor driving the hardware implementation.
Yes it is heavier than an Asus Eee pc – almost twice as much (2 pounds vs. 3.5 pounds – hardly a backbreaking difference). However, the smallest and cheapest Eee pc costs twice as much as the XO – the newer larger Eee pc’s can easily cost three times as much as the XO.
Are the Eee pc’s waterproof? Spill a cup of coffee on the keyboards of an XO and an Eee pc – which one will continue working? I know the XO will – not sure about the Eee.
Throw in the pivoting screen, the mesh network, the fantastic WiFi reception (much better than a $2500 MacBook Pro)…well…enough about the hardware. There are much better in-depth reviews available elsewhere.
Ficbot tells us she could not get the XO to do very much. I think that tells us more about her than it does about the interface.
To be honest when I first got my XO I stumbled around in Sugar for awhile mainly because my prior decades of computer use and my expectations and perceptions of “intuitiveness” got in the way. To be totally honest I had to actually read the printed instructions to see how to even open up the XO. Learning how was my first encounter with the cleverness of the hardware design.
My learning curve with Sugar was about 15 minutes and after a few “duh” moments life was good.
Put anyone that has never used a pc in front of ANY operating system and chances are they would not be able to do very much. In that regard Sugar is not any different from XP, OS X, Ubuntu, etc. Five minutes of instruction, however, will take care of that for most people.
I remember 20+ years ago when I bought my first Macintosh – a friend came over and was totally baffled by the single button mouse. How bizarre he exclaimed! One can’t possibly be productive with this thing.
Ten seconds of instruction and he was on his way.
The basic concepts of all the widely used OS’s are very similar. The notion that if one is ever able to finally grok the Sugar OS that they would somehow be at a disadvantage when they ultimately sit down in front of XP, OS X, or whateva is just absurd. Unfortunately that is the exact sort of FUD that Microsoft uses to try and pressure governments to prevent adoption of software other than their own. Even more unfortunate is that many governments seem to fall for that tactic.
The basic concepts are the same and 5 minutes of instruction will get most folks on their way. The same can be said when you take someone that has only used Windows and sit them down with a Mac or vice versa – some people will be totally clueless, some people will figure it out in short order and most would benefit from 5 minutes of instruction. It’s not a big deal.
The paint program in Sugar is not much different from the paint program that comes with Windows. Neither is intended as a replacement for folks that need/want PhotoShop or the GIMP. I think that for most people in the intended market the capabilities of the native Sugar app will provide them with many hours of amusement. I’ve seen some amazing artwork done over the past few hundred years with simple charcoal sticks. I don’t think having “only” three paintbrushes will prove to be a severely limiting factor when it comes to the creativity of the intended users.
One of the key things about Sugar that many folks overlook is that it was designed to be simple for many reasons. One of the coolest features is that every application on the XO one can easily access the source code. That is also true of other Linux distros but when you are trying to teach programming and give novices working examples of programs which is more likely to be a better place to start – the simplistic version of Paint included on the XO or the GIMP or even Tux?
I don’t know right offhand how many lines of code are in each of those applications but a wild guess tells me that the native Sugar Paint app is likely less formidable and thus more readily understood, extended and modified. And thus a better candidate for implementing the OLPC mission. We all take baby steps before we learn to run yes?
We won’t even mention trying to gain access to the workings of any flavor of Windows. Ooops…guess I just did. Sorry.
I find her (and others) lamentation that there is not an ebook program included to be completely off base. Of course there is a perfectly adequate ebook app – the browser.
Plain ASCII displays fine in a browser but if you wanted to “kick it up a notch” one can quickly learn some basic HTML and apply some formatting, links, etc.
Again – access to simpler tools is usually the best way to start.
The lack of FBReader might be a concern to first worlders but is of no consequence to the intended users. They will have all the tools they need to be empowered to create and share their own etexts.
One of the most frustrating things about all current pc OS’s is their seemingly inherent fragility. I know adherents to the various OS cults always like to proclaim how much better their OS is than others but the simple fact is that none of the most widely used OS’s offer rock solid stability. Sugar may not ultimately be more stable than other “real” Linux distros but I do have to believe that the Sugar KISS (so to speak) helps in that regard.
I can certainly understand why the XO may not appeal to jaded, wealthy pc users with years of pc experience and ownership. Again, we are not the intended audience and anyone that can’t think outside of their box of experience will miss the beauty of the OLPC XO.
Perhaps reading a story such as this recently posted one (and there are many other such stories out there):
Confessions of a Fundamentalist, Continued
(plain text link if the above does not properly “linkify” – http://www.olpcnews.com/software/sugar/more_fundamentalist_confessions.html )
will help in a better understanding of the OLPC mission and its goals and real world results. And, also gain a better understanding of how the XO hardware and software is not the bizzarro block of lead some imagine it to be.
I don’t mean to come off as some kind of OLPC cult member. I’m not. I think the OLPC organization itself appears to be in a bit of a shambles but I strongly believe (gee…can you tell?) that given the parameters and constraints of the mission the hardware/software is a wonderful thing. As in all consumer electronics the bits and pieces that make up the guts of these device will continue to become more powerful and cheaper and I look forward to the next iteration of the hardware. Sugar itself will continue to evolve but I think it would be a huge mistake to replace Sugar with Windows or a “real” linux distro for most of the intended audience. Obviously, as users gain experience they can certainly move on and up to whatever flavor of OS they want/need.
While Ficbot proclaims the OLPC XO to be pathetic I doubt that many of the kids in lesser developed areas that are fortunate enough to receive an XO would agree with her privileged perspective.
David–
My comment that FBReader is “a standard Linux program that I installed in a standard Linux way” was intended to address Ficbot’s claim that if “the laptop used a standard Linux distro, it could have included the open-source Tux paint program”. Of course the XO uses a standard Linux distro: Fedora. Sugar is merely the UI on top.
Sugarizing FBReader would make you and me happy, perhaps, but it would apparently make the application completely unusable for — maybe even invisible to — Ficbot, and anyone else who refuses to read the documentation for five minutes or play with the machine for six.
I’m back from my sister’s wedding and quite surprised to find so many replies to this! I will say for the purpose of context that normally, I would say no to David posting off-the-cuff remarks from me. I do prefer to research my reviews. But in this case I felt my first impressions did have potential value because these devices are designed to be useable right out of the box by people with limited computer experience—therefore, a ‘right out of the box’ run-through was, in my opinion, appropriate. Might I have learned how to do more things if I had read the wiki? Perhaps. But that was not the kind of review I was writing here. I was not writing from the viewpoint of someone who spent great gobs of time with this machine and had done all sorts of research. I was writing from the point of view of ‘how easy was this thing to use when a total newbie turned it on?’ And my answer stands, after reading your comments: not very. It was slow, it was poky to do things, and I could not figure out where anything was. I am fully prepared to accept that further time and/or research might have answered these concerns, but that does not affect one whit how I felt about a ‘first time user right out of the box’ experience, which would have been just as sucky no matter how much subsequent efforts might have improved things. Compared to my first experience with the EEE pc (and I say this even as someone with zero Linux experience prior to getting the E) there is just no contest. The EEE was much easier and had more impressive features.
Finally, I will add that while I welcome comments, even dissenting ones, on anything I say on this site, it would be nice if people could express them without insults, name-calling and snide remarks about my intelligence.
Ficbot is right–I do hope people will use more civility here, especially toward someone who has contributed so many terrific essays to the blog.
The other point is that like her, I continue to believe that the XO could be easier to use, right out of the box.
While Ficbot didn’t go through the documentation, we need to consider that she is experienced with technology. The typical first user of the XO will not be.
I hope that the XO’s software will someday be at that level. But for now, it is not.
Thanks, folks!
David