As children, the majority of us who are 20 years or more in age right now, imbibed most of our school learning though traditional methods and means. Our teachers wrote on black / white / green boards and with that came sheaves of handwritten notes, printed notes and loads of books.
This model of education served us quite well and we are absolutely at ease with computers which we use for our work. This is also a model which is the most cost effective one for developing countries and wastes the least number of resources.
The logic the ‘$100 Laptop program’ or ‘The One Laptop per Child association’ (OLPC) follows is completely contrary to this. They feel that for every child — learning can only be complete through computers. And since a portable computers is a Laptop, by extension through a Laptop only. Therefore, they set out on a mission to manufacture a laptop which would cost $100 in all.
They are a non-profit organization and are funded by several major IT companies in the US and as famously declared by Nicolas Negroponte, the chairman, ‘’It’s an education project, not a laptop project.’’
The laptops that they produced were never sold for $100. They are sold for around $188 each. There were many hiccups along the way. The organization did not receive as many orders for the cheap laptops as originally projected and many who did place orders never received their laptops.
Now in a bid to attract more buyers for the green and white ‘’XO’’ as these laptops are called, the OLPC has teamed up with the monolithic Microsoft so that these computers can be loaded with the Windows operating system and so push up the cost of the laptop by $18 to $20 more.
Its an uneasy technological marriage to say the least and seems to dilute many of the key features of the original ‘’XO’’. It is a move aimed at attracting more buyers who are familiar with the MS label and so feel safer with the Windows OS and also to take advantage of Microsoft’s crushing hold on the world of computing. It’s like David making peace with Goliath and going out for a ride on his shoulders.
The focus here does not seem to be learning at all, but to sell as many laptops as possible. How does that fit in with the ideals once espoused by this ‘’non-profit’’ organization?
Providing some sanity in this discussion is John Wood, founder of ‘Room to Read’, as mentioned above he says that scalability and affordability should be emphasized over high-tech solutions. That a library for example, is more cost effective and has a wider reach and will educate more children than the number of laptops which cost as much.

** ( Image: Wikipedia)