Today my XO or “$100 laptop” arrived. It brings with it the cool-looks-like-a-Fisher-Price-toy kind of responses from others. I fire it up and without doing anything, I’m online. (Our technicians had issues with the wireless in their office but it worked without even keying in a WEP code here). I take a quick tour and have a look at some of the other activities. (The XO uses the term activities rather than programs). Soon I’m stumped because it doesn’t function exactly like my Dell laptop.
So here are the questions that hit me almost immediately: Will kids like it? Is it intuitive? What is required in schools to make it work?
It’s not really about the XO but about the varying devices we carry. I think of Clarence’s recent post on boxes and it resonates with me. The difference that in our country and others with wealth, we’re not content unless it’s shiny, new and almost ridiculously intuitive. We’re dazzled and amazed with the interface of the itouch. We’re begging the industry to make things easier, better, faster, cheaper and for the most part, they are responding. We’re extremely impatient and frustrated when things don’t work they way we think they ought to.
Several years ago, a number of school divisions in Saskatchewan embarked on an experiment with Sun Microsystems to institute a thin client model of computing. The idea was to provide greater access at a low cost. Some divisions, sold the farm, dumped all their PC’s and adopted this system 100%. Some, like ours, chose to place these in classrooms, maintain existing systems, but hopefully provide students with greater access. If you surveyed most teachers in my former division, they would categorize this as a failure. Many classrooms rarely used the systems for a number of reasons. Lack of training, challenges around support. There were some are continue to be some teachers who looked at the systems, asked what they could do and built their classrooms around what they could do rather than what they couldn’t.
This to me is a critical mindset that needs more attention and promotion. Cellphones, ipods, thinclients, handhelds, laptops and XO’s all have potential as learning tools. But one must understand what each does well. I realize my digital camcorder can take photos but really unless I’m in a hurry or just need something quick, I won’t use it for that purpose. The desire for the all in one device continues but I wonder if it will ever occur.
I think about people with older vehicles. Whether they use it as a second vehicle or their primary, most aren’t naive enough to think they have a great vehicle. Most see it for what it is; a means of transportation, not fancy, the radio may not work, they may have to do a little trick to get it started but it works. It gets them from A to B. It’s about perspective.
So as I look at my XO, I want to know what it does well and use it for that purpose. I worry that students and teachers will have similar reactions as we introduce low cost computing into classrooms as they have with our Sun project. I worry that when I take the XO home for my 9 year old to play with that she’ll say, “this sucks”. It sucks compared to the $2000 laptop she uses. The reason we don’t think cellphones suck are because we see them for what they are and that is communication devices first and foremost. The fact that some can browse the internet, take photos and videos and play music is a bonus. If I started calling a cellphone a computer, maybe it loses some of its significance. As far as the XO goes, maybe calling it a laptop isn’t the best term. Maybe we need a term paradigm for these new flash based devices. I’m trying to present new tools and devices not simply with enthusiasm but clear understanding of what they can and can’t do. Too often people lose focus and assume too much of a product or service. For example, animoto may not be the tool for a real quality piece of storytelling but it does a nice job of making taking a few images and presenting them in an interesting way. The XO is a courageous attempt at providing lowcost computing to the world certainly with limitations but not without value. The story of stuff seems to be playing in the background for me.
Technorati Tags: olpc, clarencefisher, sunmicosystems, xo, animoto
Great questions, Dean. My 10-year-old sort of likes the XO, but always gravitates back to the Dell Desktop or one of our laptops in the end. Partly that’s because some Flash-heavy kids’ sites seem to work fine in the XO browser and some don’t…
Pingback: Media Districts Entertainment Blog » Are we spoiled?
Yes, we are spoiled. I realized that as soon as I got my XO hoping that it was something more. It isn’t. It is what it is … a low end computer, and I don’t like the idea of giving children tools (or resources) that will be good enough for 1995.
My 3yr old has her own Powerbook and she gets around well on it. She hates the XO. It’s slow, small, and from someone who has learned on a Mac, non-intuitive. Sure it has icons and symbols … but it is non-intuitive in other ways.
I’ve had issues with the OLPC project, but though that at the very least I a good product came out of it. The XO is not a great product. It’s junk. It’s bad enough that we dump our consumerist values on the “third-world”, do we really need to dump our junky products there as well?
I’m concerned you’re still comparing it to your Powerbook. There is no comparison. My father has a 6 year old laptop and he’s happy with it. He doesn’t need it for much more than web browsing and photo sharing.
It’s like saying, we shouldn’t give our used clothes to the poor because we consider them junk. I still say it’s about perspective and what we could use it for. I get the feeling you see it has zero value. That can’t be right. I’ve been browsing the web fairly easily. 1995 or not, that’s still valuable. What do you expect for $100?
I don’t think comparing clothes and technology is fair. The Internet is not the same as 1995 and many of the useful resources will not work on the XO, or not work well. Clothes will always be useful, regardless of style … as long as they function. This XO is not as functional as it should be even if I factor in my instantaneous gratification quotient.
I understand the “teach a man to fish” argument but seeing the XO, I would rather see this spent on food and clothing and other forms of education. If OLPC is “successful” it is because it created a new low-end market. Companies are paid. Children and North America get new toys. Children in other “targeted markets” will likely see the least of all benefits.
I’m pessimistic yes, but I guess time will tell. There’s got to be a better way.
But many resources will work well. Maybe instead of putting the onus on OLPC to produce a better product, maybe developers should be working to make their content work on the XO?
Are you saying it could be better? I can’t speak to that because I’m not a programmer or hardware expert. Is it the best product for $100? I don’t know. I haven’t seen better. The other issue is that although I see more lower costs computers coming, the durability, mesh network and other features are specifically designed for third world countries.
I also am hesitant to engage in the “they should be spending money on food or clothing argument”. You can’t help everyone and you can’t criticize people for choosing their charities. Questioning people’s charitable efforts because their is a real or perceived better choice is a dangerous road to go down.
What might be a better way?
I got one of those fancy LG VX9900 cell phones, thinking I might be able to use Moodle on it, instead of lugging my 12″ iBook (several years old). I can’t, and I hate AT&T and don’t want to hack an iPhone. So I’m shopping for a “micro-laptop” to do my Moodle classes. For $100, this might work for me. Or maybe an Asus.
On the other hand, I drive a 1982 Honda Civic. People tell me to dump it. It has a tiny vaccuum leak (the radio’s fine). But I do really like it; it’s not just that my expectations are lower. It gets 42 mpg. And I could give you a long list of technology I miss because things “improved”, starting with my Apple Personal Laserwriter. As a historian of technology, I can tell you that it’s all cyclical; there’s a lot less upswing of “progress” than one would think.
I thought the issue on the XO was the durability and connectivity (the mileage), not the features. Maybe we’re just spoiled by the ideas rather than the products.
Pingback: Iphone » Blog Archive » Comment on Are we spoiled? by Lisa M Lane
Dean, my third graders are using the one I bought. We are right now cycling through a “half hour on our XO”, so everybody gets a chance to play. They are blogging from it, making music, videos, writing and copying to their flash drives. Somebody discovers something new on it several times a day. It is discovery time.
My classroom is full of high end computers (12) and laptops (5). The kids know what a screaming computer is like because they are on one several times a day.
My kids also understand what this computer is about, and why it is here. Eight and nine year olds get it. And of course their teacher makes them blog about their experience on it 🙂 The link below is to the start of their responses to my assignment. It will lengthen over the next week or so, so check back later, too: http://tinyurl.com/247vdz
ps – I often read through my Bloglines on it when I get to school because it starts and hooks up to our network faster than my Dell laptop 🙂 … do you have Opera on it yet?
Alec,
What Mark said. 🙂
Seriously Mark, thanks for a real live review. You rock. I don’t have Opera, point the way. I followed Sylvia Martinez link to install Skype and felt quite proud of myself. Would love to try Opera if it makes browser better….miss tabbed browsing.
OK Dean, here’s a win/win proposition.
I like Mark’s story. You’ve got the network. It’s the $100 dollar laptop (well not really … but well let that specific go this time.)
Find 100 stories like Marks of successful implementation of the XO in classrooms where it appears learning is happening. Here’s the catch, 50 of those have to be outside of North America and Europe. I am sure the network can find 100 stories out of the millions of these things sold.
Win #1: We have 100 stories of success that we can share with others.
Win #2: I’ll take back my “junk” comment (even though it has not yet found my Airport Extreme network, is extremely slow and unresponsive, etc. etc.).
So stories, not just mentions. And hey, stories in a number of multimedia formats would even be nicer.
What do you think?
Actually Alec, that’s a good idea. Going back to my SunRay analogy, my guess is that we likely had 20% of our classrooms using them effectively. Given the alternative was have 1 PC in your room or 5 Suns, it’s interesting to note that many would have chosen 1PC over the 5 Suns…not the Mark Ahlnesses or Kathy Cassidys.
So finding those examples of effective use would be helpful. Can this be organized? Has this collection already started? I’m all for it. But this conversation is far from over 😉
Dean, you asked about Opera. Go here: http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Opera
Gotta replace that default browser. You’ll be in a Linux-type environment, nothing new for you I’m sure.
I was lucky to be surrounded by XO geeks and gurus in Seattle last weekend: http://tinyurl.com/2shkau
If you REALLY want to push this and start something from square one, try http://xousers.ning.com/
Big proponent of all this technical stuff related to the XO is Tom Hoffman at http://www.tuttlesvc.org
This post and this one address some of the concerns expressed above. The XO hardware is as near perfect as any device you can buy; the software is simply not done and completely unoptimized, and the priorities for which parts to finish first are based on what kids in the third world want and need, not you.
Regarding Flash and other un-free software. The OLPC Foundation has a commitment to software freedom, and they won’t ship commercial Flash on their disc image. If I was buying these for the People’s Republic of Tom Hoffman, however, I’d be telling my geeks to get Flash on there, which is trivial, since this is Fedora Linux, Gecko, etc. underneath.
Also, related to the Flash issue, both kids and grownups here have gotten increasingly used to the idea that the web is the computer. This is partly because the web is great technology, but also because the non-web parts of our computer often haven’t kept up. Take your XO with you somewhere you don’t have web connectivity and you have to spend some time fighting boredom by playing with TamTam, EToys and some of the other built in software on the XO. It is good stuff, but you need to spend more than 30 seconds idly poking at it. Also, the collaborative features of the native activities are very important but incompletely implemented. It is a different paradigm for collaboration though that doesn’t require cramming everything through the web.
Also, I have a feeling that a lot of people feel “confused” by features that simply are not implemented or are broken, which is confusing, to be sure, but a different kind of confusing than a design problem.
Lastly, I haven’t actually used my XO much lately, but I don’t feel guilty about it and neither should you. You can come back to it over the course of the next year as more updates come out and the software ripens. There is a ton of room for improvement, and I think it will improve.
I not sure you are being spoiled as much as well, the newest toy has come out and those with the money want to play with it. As we move into the new century farther someone has to test out ideas. If they did not we still all be teaching in a one-room schoolhouse. So I think you just the test and depend on where the XO land.
Hi Dean,
I invite you to read my post on “top ten rules for XO reviews” at http://blog.genyes.com/index.php/2008/01/05/olpc-xo-top-ten-checklist-for-g1g1-reviews/
To jump on Tom Hoffman’s comments, yes we are spoiled. And incredibly self-absorbed. Can’t we put ourselves in someone else’s shoes for five seconds and see that the OLPC design serves needs than our own?
I recently took my XO to a party and gave it to a 11 year old. I had started up the TamTam music maker, thinking that he would like that and I didn’t have time to sit with him. 30 minutes later I came back and he had figured out how to start the word processor and had written a story. He didn’t think it “sucked”, it did exactly what it was supposed to do. His mother told me he “hates” writing and won’t do it for school assignments.
Of course, this doesn’t prove anything about the XO design except that we need to give kids tools that suit their needs in their unique situations, not ours.
Yes, you are spoiled. The fact that you can afford a $2000 laptop for your daughter indicates that XO is not for you.
When I was a teenager (early ’90s), I was into computers. I went to a computer class in a youth center, learned to use a computer, play DOS games, program Basic and Pascal. I bought and studied books about programming, almost religiously read the two Russian computer magazines. But I did not own a computer, even though were not so rare in my environment: 2 out of 12 classmates of mine had a PC at home. I dreamed about having a computer I could program on. I would *kill* for something like XO.
I owned the first machine when I was a second year CS student (1998). It was a 386DX40 with 4 megs of RAM — a system that could easily be 8 years old at the time. It was a lot of fun to learn Linux on it, set up sound, X Window, dial-up networking, UUCP mail, Lithuanian fonts and keyboard, hack on little programs, write HOWTOs about what I figured out.
If the XO laptops will reach their target audience in Africa and South America, I’m sure there will be thousands of kids for whom it will be the biggest and most significant gift in their lives. A passport into our world, gateway into their future.
I didn’t want to get back into this but the language of technological panacea is emerging and just have to remark that technology (not the XO, not a Powerbook, not anything form) is NOT a panacea for our world problems or our/their educational systems. People will alway have different opinions on the quality of any device/hardware, and that’s thing, but to put so much hope on the OLPC or the XO in the “third world” is bound to dilute other efforts that may be more beneficial. I am not saying that the OLPC is not going to benefit some kids, but putting so much emphasis on this project to change the world is, in my humble opinion, wrong-headed.
I appreciated Sylvia’s list, but I’d like to pay special attention to her first point “you’re not the customer”. I like this but the OLPC has made assumptions about what “the customer” needs. Did the OLPC really emerge from what these cultures expressed as their needs, or from what the West (or a few people related to OLPC) felt “was best for them”. Beware colonialism, beware technology as panacea.
Once again, the conversation is where the learning is. Each one brings new perspectives, insights, links and opinions. All are valid.
For me the issue remains not whether the OLPC is a great program or whether technology will save the world. I’m simply trying to determine if we can find value in various devices when they don’t live up to our high expectations. I revise my original analogy on clothing to transportation and see if i can better explain my thinking.
We have a variety of forms of transportation from walking to airplanes. I’m wondering if the variety of devices we use can been seen in the same light. Do we recognize that sometimes a 30 year old ten speed bike can be useful or do we reject it because it’s not a car?
That’s all I’m saying. Does a $100 laptop with a relatively slow processor, limited programs serve a purpose either in a wealthy nation or in Africa? I would like to think yes but am afraid we in affluent countries can’t find it value. We throw the 30 year old ten speeds in the dump.
I think the fundamental missed connection is that the XO is not slow because it is obsolete. It is slow because they are trying to innovate in software and you’re looking at a buggy, unoptimized early version of it.
I’m wondering where the things you’re having problems with are coming from. Certainly some of the problems with slowness, etc. will be because of unoptimized software, and that issue has been covered above rather heavily. Some of that will get better with time, some of it will probably remain after a while as well. On the other hand, take a look at your processor usage sometime when you’re doing one or two things on a “normal” computer. Word processing? Web browsing (with one or two tabs)? Either way, your computer is probably not using more than a few percent of its processor if it’s a new computer. And a bunch of what it is using is probably going into the operating system itself. So these computers certainly aren’t underpowered for what they’re doing: One or two activities at a time. I suppose my point is that the XO wasn’t meant for video editing or 3D rendering, it’s meant to run a few applications and get that power into the hands of people who haven’t had it. And from that standpoint, I think it’s likely to do pretty well.
I think this is a very interesting and important conversation. I’ve seen it surface many times over the years about the XO, Alphasmarts, Palms, and even the Apple eMate. How much computer is enough? I think part of the problem is the idea that there is a single answer, which there clearly isn’t. Different tasks and different applications in different settings require different computers.
I’ll also want to respond to one of Alec’s concerns. I don’t see many people in this discussion holding up technology or the XO as a panacea. The impact of the device will vary from individual to individual, from meaningless to life-changing. Re-read what Albertas said above. Not every student will have that reaction to computers, but for him, it ignited a life-long passion. Without access to some form of technology, he would have never discovered that passion. In the same way we want all students exposed to writing, art, music, science, math and more – not only to learn the basic skills and information, but for each of those students to find their passions. The XO can be a powerful part of any of these content areas, but it can also open up doors for those children for whom technology is their undiscovered talent.
16 years old. 1982. 1965 Ford galaxy 500. 200 bucks. Transmission slipped, engine toasting (slowly), body rusty, seat propped up by a 2 by 4. But man, I had arrived! It was MY Mercedes! I could talk cars with other people, drive instead of walking (although walking was faster) learned how to fix and improve, and interacted on a whole new level with old and newer friends. Social networking improved as well (but I won’t go there.)
It was new to me. Although too slow for the super “highway” I was there. I participated, had a voice.
I just hope the laptops don’t smoke like mine did.
Pingback: Cell Phones Computers
Pingback: Ideas and Thoughts from an EdTech » Blog Archive » Unlearning
Pingback: Open Thinking & Digital Pedagogy » OLPC to Switch from Linux to Windows?