

The iPodTouch Is What The OLPC XO Should Have Been - fogus
http://www.wisdomandwonder.com/article/3496/the-ipodtouch-is-what-the-olpc-xo-should-have-been

======
TrevorJ
Synopsis: The ipod touch has better software architecture and mass-production
has made it cheap ergo it is better than the OLPC.

My conclusion: Apples to oranges. The touch does little to teach you to be
computer literate, and the lack of keyboard means learning to type isn't even
an option. For the target market in developing nations, the OLPC is still
better than an ipod.

~~~
TomOfTTB
Let me preface by saying I hate, hate, hate, hate, hate, hate, hate the XO-1.
In my year and a half or so of blogging it's probably the only blog topic that
managed to enrage me ([http://www.tomstechblog.com/post/Rarely-Am-I-Actually-
Angere...](http://www.tomstechblog.com/post/Rarely-Am-I-Actually-Angered-by-
Something-I-Read-But-This-Piece-of-Drek-Managed-To-Do-It.aspx))

So I'm biased.

That said I'd argue the OLPC doesn't do much to teach kids how to be computer
literate either. Look at the screen shots and you'll see the thing has more in
common with a $99 calculator than it does with a PC of any kind. It's design
centers around a few specialized apps and the Internet which are both things
the iPod touch does better.

So while I don't 100% agree with the author (a keyboard would be nice) his
point is a good one. The OLPC is a lousy product that only gets by because
it's aimed at people who supposedly have no other choice. But the iPod touch
being at the price point it is means there ARE other choices which in turn
makes the OLPC just a crappy project.

Poor people deserve great computing experiences too!

~~~
TrevorJ
Valid points.

I wish that simply making slightly outdated equipment easily available to
anyone who wants it, but doesn't have the economic means would gain more
traction.

Even if the hardware/software is outdated moving from windows 95 to windows
Vista is less of a cognitive leap than going from Sugar to Windows or Linux or
something.

I think we sell kids short in terms of how much they can catch onto by playing
around. I don't see the point in giving them a dumbed-down OS instead of a
'real' one.

~~~
TomOfTTB
Netbooks are getting to that point. They're both in the pircerannge of the
OLPC (with a hefty discount for Governments buying in the 100,000 range) and
they have mass market appeal behind them which should hopefully push software.

Honestly, I'm surprised the market for netbook specific children's games isn't
larger

~~~
TrevorJ
What would you consider 'netbook specific'? I've been able to run several
mainstream games on my netbook pretty decently.

------
padmanabhan01
My opinion: kids don't need laptops to learn. Old school concept/understanding
based learning works fine! I even think having a laptop then can be a
distraction or a hindrance to actual learning.

By the time they are in 8th or 9th grade, they can use normal computers. No
toy devices required.

~~~
bjelkeman-again
"Don't need", true. But can potentially really benefit from. Sugata Mitra had
a cracking presentation at Activate09 in London the other week, where he
showed how dropping computers in front of (illiterate) children could really
make them go and investigate and learn. The trick (he said) was not to give
one computer per child, but to have them work in groups.

The Guardian (event organiser) said that the videos of all speakers would be
up within a month, so maybe you can see this very inspiring presentation as
well.

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sugata_Mitra>

~~~
GHFigs
Here is is presenting on the same subject in 2007:
[http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/sugata_mitra_shows_how_ki...](http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/sugata_mitra_shows_how_kids_teach_themselves.html)

------
GHFigs
The two projects have had very different aims and constraints. The iPod
definitely would not have satisfied many of the aims of OLPC. Whether those
aims were sensible or realistic or competently executed is an exercise for the
reader.

------
chaostheory
hindsight is 20/20

------
illumen
Good luck teaching children how to use objc.

Seriously, python is way better than objc from an elegance perspective. You
don't need a crazy bloated cocoa API built on top with python either.

A book came out about pygame co-authored by someone in primary school. Not
only are kids able to use python, but some also know it well enough to write
books on the subject.

The ipod touch is subsidised by itunes/appstore/phone company. It's a console.
It's closed.

ipod doesn't do collaboration well. Apple bans developers from talking bad
about it - or tries to. It also doesn't have social learning features designed
into the apps, or the OS.

ipod touch has a much smaller screen, which is poor for reading and viewing
videos.

ipod touch can't be powered easily by a car battery.

You can't place the ipod touch on a desk, sit in your chair and play with it -
with other children sitting next to you. Imagine laying the ipod on the
desk... it would lie there flat. Fail.

The ipod touch is designed for a very different audience, and for different
goals. To expect it is as good for teaching, and learning as an OLPC is silly.

Has the author even seen an ipod touch in a learning environment? Has the
author even seen an OLPC at all?

I call uninformed ignoramus on the article - and fart in that general
direction.

