<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/" > <channel><title>Comments on: 2nd Gen OLPC &#8220;E-Book&#8221; Design Revealed</title> <atom:link href="http://cybernetnews.com/2nd-gen-olpc-e-book-design-revealed/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><link>http://cybernetnews.com/2nd-gen-olpc-e-book-design-revealed/</link> <description>Technology News</description> <lastBuildDate>Sat, 26 May 2012 00:02:06 +0000</lastBuildDate> <sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod> <sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency> <generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator> <item><title>By: Ashley</title><link>http://cybernetnews.com/2nd-gen-olpc-e-book-design-revealed/#comment-138180</link> <dc:creator>Ashley</dc:creator> <pubDate>Wed, 21 May 2008 18:04:32 +0000</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://cybernetnews.com/?p=12697#comment-138180</guid> <description>&lt;div class=&quot;commentquote&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;#comment-138174&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Lashiec wrote:&lt;/a&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;Pardon me, but I’m very pessimistic on this one. That technology looks very advanced to be sold for $75, and more considering how the goal of the first OLPC was not meet, nor in terms on demand and surely not in its first price.Then there is also the question of whether the organization will survive until then or not, taking into account the problems they’re going through. It would be nice if it succeeds, but with all these problems and competition from other players (Asus, Intel, MSI, etc.) it’s going to be tough.&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;/div&gt; You&#039;re right in that the goal of the first OLPC in terms of price has not been met... yet. Their goal is to continue to drop the price and by 2010 it should be under the $100 mark.It&#039;s understandable that you&#039;re pessimistic about it, but from the sounds of it, the parts they are using are pretty affordable like using the same screens you&#039;d find on portable DVD players as the touchscreens. $75 may be a little on the low side, but I&#039;d imagine they&#039;d be able to make these for at least the cost that the current generation sells for.It&#039;ll definitely be interesting to see what happens...</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<div class="commentquote"><a href="#comment-138174" rel="nofollow">Lashiec wrote:</a><br /><blockquote>Pardon me, but I’m very pessimistic on this one. That technology looks very advanced to be sold for $75, and more considering how the goal of the first OLPC was not meet, nor in terms on demand and surely not in its first price.</p><p>Then there is also the question of whether the organization will survive until then or not, taking into account the problems they’re going through. It would be nice if it succeeds, but with all these problems and competition from other players (Asus, Intel, MSI, etc.) it’s going to be tough.</p></blockquote></div><p>You&#8217;re right in that the goal of the first OLPC in terms of price has not been met&#8230; yet. Their goal is to continue to drop the price and by 2010 it should be under the $100 mark.</p><p>It&#8217;s understandable that you&#8217;re pessimistic about it, but from the sounds of it, the parts they are using are pretty affordable like using the same screens you&#8217;d find on portable DVD players as the touchscreens. $75 may be a little on the low side, but I&#8217;d imagine they&#8217;d be able to make these for at least the cost that the current generation sells for.</p><p>It&#8217;ll definitely be interesting to see what happens&#8230;</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Lashiec</title><link>http://cybernetnews.com/2nd-gen-olpc-e-book-design-revealed/#comment-138174</link> <dc:creator>Lashiec</dc:creator> <pubDate>Wed, 21 May 2008 15:33:30 +0000</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://cybernetnews.com/?p=12697#comment-138174</guid> <description>Pardon me, but I&#039;m very pessimistic on this one. That technology looks very advanced to be sold for $75, and more considering how the goal of the first OLPC was not meet, nor in terms on demand and surely not in its first price.Then there is also the question of whether the organization will survive until then or not, taking into account the problems they&#039;re going through. It would be nice if it succeeds, but with all these problems and competition from other players (Asus, Intel, MSI, etc.) it&#039;s going to be tough.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Pardon me, but I&#8217;m very pessimistic on this one. That technology looks very advanced to be sold for $75, and more considering how the goal of the first OLPC was not meet, nor in terms on demand and surely not in its first price.</p><p>Then there is also the question of whether the organization will survive until then or not, taking into account the problems they&#8217;re going through. It would be nice if it succeeds, but with all these problems and competition from other players (Asus, Intel, MSI, etc.) it&#8217;s going to be tough.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Change</title><link>http://cybernetnews.com/2nd-gen-olpc-e-book-design-revealed/#comment-138173</link> <dc:creator>Change</dc:creator> <pubDate>Wed, 21 May 2008 15:19:00 +0000</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://cybernetnews.com/?p=12697#comment-138173</guid> <description>Okay, who knows where to find the fountain of youth?!  8)</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Okay, who knows where to find the fountain of youth?! <img src='http://cybernetnews.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_cool.gif' alt='8)' class='wp-smiley' /></p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> </channel> </rss>
<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Minified using disk: basic
Page Caching using disk: enhanced
Database Caching using disk: basic
Object Caching 225/246 objects using disk: basic

Served from: cybernetnews.com @ 2012-05-25 19:33:25 -->
