Becoming Leery
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| Abe Sep 17, 2007 7:28 AM EDT |
The price of OLPC computer went up from $100 to $188 and their justification is cost of production. It is getting really suspicious especially when we don't see enough open reporting from a non-profit organization. Now if the reason is to collect more funds to build more units to give to countries that can't come up with the money, that is a different story and I don't think any one would mind or care. But, if the increase in price is to make it suitable enough for MS to offer it with Windows, that is not appropriate and unacceptable. That would be shenanigan and bluntly cheating. |
| gus3 Sep 17, 2007 8:08 AM EDT |
I have a problem with Microsoft's request/demand, for one simple reason. They've done everything they can (including criminal acts--remember, convicted monopoly here) to close off the pre-installed market to everything but Windows, and now they want OLPC to open up? I hope Negroponte has the intestinal fortitude to tell them where to shove it. |
| Abe Sep 17, 2007 9:03 AM EDT |
Quoting:I hope Negroponte has the intestinal fortitude to tell them where to shove itI appreciate your point and even with my high despise to MS, I still believe in open competition. My point I was making is, the OLPC group keeps increasing the hardware resources of the computer and consequently increasing the price. They cite monetary exchange rates. I don't believe that is the case since China's money is partially based on the US Dollar. If the added resource are needed for Linux to run better, they are not saying so. I believe Negroponte Is increasing resource for Windows to be able to run on it. Remember there were meetings between Negroponte and MS. I believe the resource issue was a major one that was discussed. OLPC shouldn't be accommodating for Windows. MS can have their own. |
| gus3 Sep 17, 2007 9:20 AM EDT |
Abe, thanks for the ground work on encapsulating my thesis: "No open competition for those who try to stifle it." Maybe Negroponte is trying to boost it enough to get it to run Windows? If so, he'll lose my support completely. He'll be just another laptop maker, as far as I'm concerned. |
| Abe Sep 17, 2007 11:05 AM EDT |
Quoting:He'll be just another laptop maker, as far as I'm concerned.May be he is heading this way, otherwise, why would he quit the MIT Media Lab! |
| hkwint Sep 17, 2007 11:21 AM EDT |
Quoting:They cite monetary exchange rates Compared to the Euro or British pound, horseshit indeed. I looked it up, and back when Negroponte first told about the $100 dollar laptop in an e-mail, january 2005 according to their own timeline, one US Dollar was equal to 1,35 Euro. Today that's 1,39 Euro, a difference less than 4%. Same for the British pound, though not sure about Chinese money. |
| Abe Sep 17, 2007 12:14 PM EDT |
Quoting:one US Dollar was equal to 1,35 Euro. Today that's 1,39 EuroHkwint, Isn't the other way around? 1 Euro equals $1.35? GWB would love your figures. :) |
| Sander_Marechal Sep 17, 2007 12:46 PM EDT |
Quoting:Compared to the Euro or British pound, horseshit indeed. Yes, but we're not comparing against Pounds or Euros here, but against Yuans. http://www.x-rates.com tells me that the dollar has dropped about 10% since Jan. 2005 in comparison to the Yuan. Factor in about another 10% increase in price due to inflation and general booming in China. Then don't take the $100 as a starting point but the $150 that the first few batches were going to cost ($100 was the long term goal for large volumes). $150 * 1.1 exchange rate * 1.1 inflation = $181.50. That's only $6.50 off the mark of todays quoted price of $188. That ain't too bad, really. |
| Abe Sep 17, 2007 3:43 PM EDT |
Quoting:$150 * 1.1 exchange rate * 1.1 inflation = $181.50. That's only $6.50 off the mark of todays quoted price of $188. That ain't too bad, really.I didn't check your math, but it seems to be corrrect, but I have couple questions that still bother me. 1. Why was there increase from $100 to $150? Wasn't that because of more resources? Or was it inflation and such also? 2. Where did you get the 10% inflation in China? Is that from a reliable source? 3. And most importantly, how do you reconcile the increase in cost of the OLPC while every other computer, electronics gadget, device, or product made in China or The Far East in general went down in cost? I am puzzled? |
| moopst Sep 17, 2007 7:10 PM EDT |
China has been exporting deflation for the last 15 years or so by keeping the yuan pegged to the dollar (they have adjusted it higher once or twice but they won't float it). The price increase is either due to an overly optimistic estimate or due to increased hardware performance. |
| Sander_Marechal Sep 17, 2007 9:41 PM EDT |
Quoting:1. Why was there increase from $100 to $150? Wasn't that because of more resources? Or was it inflation and such also? Nicholas Negroponte has always said that the $100 laptop would cost well over $100 in the beginning, and that the $100 mark would only be attained after several large production runs. It's nothing new, really. Quoting:2. Where did you get the 10% inflation in China? Is that from a reliable source? Nope, that's just a guesstimate for 3-4 years of economic boom in China and bad results in the US. But even pegging this at 5% or 0% would lead to a laptop cost of $173.25 or $165 respectively. Not too far away from $188. Quoting:3. And most importantly, how do you reconcile the increase in cost of the OLPC while every other computer, electronics gadget, device, or product made in China or The Far East in general went down in cost? Cost generally drops because there are either new models comming out pegged at or above the price of the old hardware, or because large production runs make the hardware cheaper. The XO was designed for 2007 hardware, not 2004-2005 hardware and contains lots of parts that aren't "standard" in the computer industry but are specialty items for the XO (Screen, Wifi, etcetera). There's no benefit of scale yet (until the XO goes into full production, which will drive the cost of later XO's down) and most parts do not have newer versions that drive down the price of the versions used in the XO. |
| Abe Sep 18, 2007 6:11 AM EDT |
Quoting:There's no benefit of scale yet (until the XO goes into full production, which will drive the cost of later XO's down) and most parts do not have newer versions that drive down the price of the versions used in the XO. Sorry, there is scale. 5 or 6 countries already committed to purchase 1 million each. Some of them already paid it, ex: Libya. The manufacturer wouldn't start production until there are commitments and they got them. |
| Sander_Marechal Sep 18, 2007 1:13 PM EDT |
Abe: But have the parts for those committed puchased all been produced, shipped and payed for? It's only after that when the benefit or large production runs start working. Once the part manufacturer has recouped a large swath of his initial investment and startup cost, and when new prices are negotiated for subsequent runs. |
| Abe Sep 18, 2007 1:51 PM EDT |
Sander, We don't have all the facts, on the other hand, like I said before, the price keeps going up and multiple times while everything else keeps going down. That doesn't make sense to me and something isn't right. If it was mis-estimation and didn't figure in cost of material, inflation, etc. then someone did a real lousy job. In my opinion, if they can't come out with good explanation, something else is going on. If I were responsible for any of the countries that already committed, I would demand an explanation. |
| Sander_Marechal Sep 18, 2007 3:02 PM EDT |
I don't know. Like I explained, the increase in price isn't shocking for me. What I am far more interested in is if and how the hardware has changed. It's far easier to prove your MS theory by looking at the hardware than it is by looking at the price. |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!