Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Intel undermines the $100 charity laptop Initiative (Shocking)

Last response: in CPUs
Share
January 5, 2008 4:49:50 PM

Intel have gone too far this time, they should be ashamed of themselves. This is just Evil...unbelievable.

Artice:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/6675833.stm

Article Quotes:
Quote:
Chip-maker Intel "should be ashamed of itself" for efforts to undermine the $100 laptop initiative, according to its founder Nicholas Negroponte.


Quote:
Professor Negroponte, who aims to distribute millions of laptops to kids in developing countries, said Intel had hurt his mission "enormously".


Quote:
He accused Intel of selling its own cut-price laptop - the Classmate - below cost to drive him out of markets


Quote:
Professor Negroponte says Intel has distributed marketing literature to governments with titles such as "the shortcomings of the One Laptop per Child approach", which outline the supposedly stronger points of the Classmate


AMD4life!
January 5, 2008 5:23:33 PM

oh shut up, you know something? most markets thrive on competition..... which pushes price down what the prof is saying is "intel is selling it's own version of MY product at a better price" and so FFS STFU and stop making flamebait threads in which you bash intel (i know your paid by amd, but please do it on another forum)
and i also notice they aren't really in the same price range - that article says the class mate costs $200, and how much is the OLPC laptop suposed to cost? oh yeah, half that (so actually i invalidated my own viewpoint, since they aren't competing....)
January 5, 2008 5:28:17 PM

Oh noez, Intel is selling cheap laptops to help the children..

We have enough people like this on the internet, we don't need more 8 year olds getting one.
January 5, 2008 5:29:28 PM

Is AMD supporting OLPC?
January 5, 2008 5:40:32 PM

AMD left the project a couple months back if I recall correctly, and they don't offer an alternative to it either, unlike Intel is doing.
January 5, 2008 5:49:56 PM

Why not Cnumartyr?? I think it'd be fantastic! I waste far too much time at school trying to show the kids how to use computers.. And I don't think the age matters - I remember losing a chess tournament to a little 8 year old girl! (ouch!). Believe me, kids are capable of far more than given credit for. As for the competition - it can only be good for all possible customers concerened as it improves quality and drives prices down. - believe me (-;. As for thunderman's comment - maybe he has understood that we all need amd/ati at the end of the day for the reason I just explained - that of competition.. So, yes! Come on Amd! (then we may finally see the 9000 series gpu an the 45 nm Cpus..) Zabba!

Be safe for the new year!

Ryan Adds
January 5, 2008 6:02:31 PM

Gggggrrrrrrraaaaaaaaaaagggggggggrrrrrrrrwwwww.... Pelotudo..... grogrllllllllllllllllllllll

Em... Sorry.
January 5, 2008 6:14:58 PM

thunderman said:
Intel have gone too far this time, they should be ashamed of themselves. This is just Evil...unbelievable.

Artice:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/6675833.stm

Article Quotes:
Quote:
Chip-maker Intel "should be ashamed of itself" for efforts to undermine the $100 laptop initiative, according to its founder Nicholas Negroponte.


Quote:
Professor Negroponte, who aims to distribute millions of laptops to kids in developing countries, said Intel had hurt his mission "enormously".


Quote:
He accused Intel of selling its own cut-price laptop - the Classmate - below cost to drive him out of markets


Quote:
Professor Negroponte says Intel has distributed marketing literature to governments with titles such as "the shortcomings of the One Laptop per Child approach", which outline the supposedly stronger points of the Classmate


AMD4life!





Ahhhh......You are so funny its just too precious
January 5, 2008 6:15:54 PM

The-Darkening said:
Gggggrrrrrrraaaaaaaaaaagggggggggrrrrrrrrwwwww.... Pelotudo..... grogrllllllllllllllllllllll

Em... Sorry.


Estas del tomate!

Ryan
January 5, 2008 6:20:57 PM

Gravemind123 said:
AMD left the project a couple months back if I recall correctly, and they don't offer an alternative to it either, unlike Intel is doing.


Really? I thought AMD was still part of the OLPC project. I really don't know, but it would've been news if the OLPCs only source for its CPU left the project.
January 5, 2008 6:33:27 PM

Poor people smell like sour milk, how is a computer going to change that.
January 5, 2008 6:35:24 PM

(quote)costs of production would be kept low if nations ordered the computers by the million but orders of this magnitude have yet to materialise(unquote)

How the hellll is that posssible?????????
What's 100,000,000 ollars to a country??
Maybe some countries prefer there people to remain uneducated. The internet has to be an integral part of development and education..

Gates could buy one for every American that's 25,000,000,000 dollars, an still have 10 billion change in his pocket..
Ryan..
January 5, 2008 6:37:48 PM

Major_Spittle said:
Poor people smell like sour milk, how is a computer going to change that.


The only thing that stinks here Major, are remarks like that.. I can only hope it was tongue in cheek that went way way way over my head..

Ryan.
January 5, 2008 7:05:26 PM

Ironnads said:
The only thing that stinks here Major, are remarks like that.. I can only hope it was tongue in cheek that went way way way over my head..

Ryan.


They would just use the OLPC to surf Europorn and play Doom.

Hell, they don't even sell them with a free box of condoms which is the real solution for poverty.
January 5, 2008 7:17:28 PM
January 5, 2008 7:20:10 PM

spuddyt said:
those laughing smilies..... there is something strangely demonic about them.... its like.... _______ thatmmuch :cry: 
i dont understand!


This from a guy with an avatar of Mario doggy boffing the Princess????????
January 5, 2008 7:49:34 PM

Intel cares little about this scheme, they are just trying to make a fast buck. The OLPC is a genuine caring scheme to help the less well off in the world. Intel have stooped very low to undermine Professor Negroponte good work. Intel will swallow up the OLPC scheme then abuse it's evil cooperate position as usual.

Intel are the Evil Empire!

January 5, 2008 7:56:41 PM

That's fantastic!
January 5, 2008 7:57:48 PM

Despite this being a really old subject,

Isn't competition good for the consumer?

This forces both companies to lower the price of their laptops to compete with each other. This benifits the consumer as they pay less.
January 5, 2008 8:02:04 PM

thunderman said:
Intel cares little about this scheme, they are just trying to make a fast buck. The OLPC is a genuine caring scheme to help the less well off in the world. Intel have stooped very low to undermine Professor Negroponte good work. Intel will swallow up the OLPC scheme then abuse it's evil cooperate position as usual.

Intel are the Evil Empire!




Dude, stop your killing me.......[/wipe tears of laughter from eyes]
January 5, 2008 8:12:24 PM

thunderman said:
Intel cares little about this scheme, they are just trying to make a fast buck. The OLPC is a genuine caring scheme to help the less well off in the world. Intel have stooped very low to undermine Professor Negroponte good work. Intel will swallow up the OLPC scheme then abuse it's evil cooperate position as usual.

Intel are the Evil Empire!


Explain to me who this program will help? If I was poor and got one I would just pawn it to buy food when I got hungry. Have you ever been hungry and not able to get food for a day?

Why wouldn't corporations just donate old computers to schools to help poor people, oooopps I guess they already do. :pfff: 
January 5, 2008 8:31:12 PM

"most markets thrive on competition" yeah, but they also know what consumers consider outrageous to pay for. Now we need the [RED] colored laptop.
January 5, 2008 8:36:29 PM

I'm just wondering why are you even replying to this topic. IMO thunderman (lol) is some kind of a 12 year old i*iot who thinks he knows everything. No offense against young people, they may be intelligent, opposing to thunderman. If his parents have bought him Intel CPU, he would be an Intel fanboy. I dont like flamewars, being started with posts like the op's ones.
January 5, 2008 10:22:07 PM

djcoolmasterx said:
Isn't competition good for the consumer?


Not when one company's goal is to force the other out of business and then raise prices; I have a hard time believing that Intel are seriously entering the $100 laptop market, rather than trying to destroy that market.
January 5, 2008 10:28:13 PM

MarkG said:
Not when one company's goal is to force the other out of business and then raise prices; I have a hard time believing that Intel are seriously entering the $100 laptop market, rather than trying to destroy that market.


Agreed!
January 5, 2008 10:30:43 PM

There is no $100 laptop market right now. The OLPC is going for around $200... So with Intel making a competing product we might get to a $100 laptop market.
January 5, 2008 10:53:07 PM

What about $100 GSM Satellite for the $100 laptops for the $100 international ISP? We could have the U.N. fund it, and then google could undermine the U.N. And keep track of terrorist's MySpace pages.
January 5, 2008 11:52:44 PM

too old
January 6, 2008 4:53:14 AM

Ironnads said:
The only thing that stinks here Major, are remarks like that.. I can only hope it was tongue in cheek that went way way way over my head..

Ryan.


Although I agree that MS's comment is a little inappropriate, the concept is still right. How is an one hundred dollar laptop going to change their life, if they can't even feed themselves, and live in war-torn countries? Education is the key, but it would take 10~20 years before these kids mature, and do something to change their lives.

What happens in the meantime? Who is going to protect them from warlords, ever growing epidemic, ever shrinking food supply, and ever shrinking medical support? Can OLPC protect them from bullets, cure their diseases, and/or feed them? I really don't think so.

IMO, I'm really skeptical how effective this initiative is. OLPC is a step in the right direction, but it shouldn't be praised as much as it is now. Others humanitarian efforts would still yield far better results (even in the long run), and should still be used to protect them while they receive education.
January 6, 2008 5:20:21 AM

Its called charity. Intel is in the cpu industry not the food industry. Thus this is what is most cost effective to them.
January 6, 2008 5:23:22 AM

Ed Stroligho on the OLPC-Intel Divorce:
http://www.overclockers.com/tips01274/
Quote:

"[W]e view the children as a mission; Intel views them as a market."

"We're like the World Food Program and they're McDonald's. They can't compete. . . . Paul Otellini himself would say that one size doesn't fit all. And we agree with that, of course. That wasn't the issue. They cannot compete with OLPC and be a partner."

It may not be PC to say this, but in the long-run, Intel is right and OLPC is wrong, and the world, including the poor kids, will end up be better off with Intel winning

We'll explain.

The OLPC XO is an idea whose time has come . . . and gone. It is a victim of its own success.

What do I mean by that?

OLPC succeeded before even building a single unit by drawing attention to the fact that what the less-than-rich world needs is a simple, cheap, portable computer.

They've served as a tripwire to get the biggest CPU company in the world to shift attention and make providing that a priority with its Silverthorne project.


The OLPC is a Charity, Intel is a business. "Philosophical differences" to say the least.
January 6, 2008 6:32:51 AM

It doesnt matter if Intel puts out a $50 laptop, cause they will be bankrupt by Q407, so sayeth Sharikou
January 6, 2008 6:58:44 AM

thunderman said:
Intel have gone too far this time, they should be ashamed of themselves. This is just Evil...unbelievable.

Artice:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/6675833.stm

Article Quotes:
Quote:
Chip-maker Intel "should be ashamed of itself" for efforts to undermine the $100 laptop initiative, according to its founder Nicholas Negroponte.


Quote:
Professor Negroponte, who aims to distribute millions of laptops to kids in developing countries, said Intel had hurt his mission "enormously".


Quote:
He accused Intel of selling its own cut-price laptop - the Classmate - below cost to drive him out of markets


Quote:
Professor Negroponte says Intel has distributed marketing literature to governments with titles such as "the shortcomings of the One Laptop per Child approach", which outline the supposedly stronger points of the Classmate


AMD4life!


Negroponte is a pompous ass, DELETED. What good are cheap laptops going to do for the poor kids in places like Darfur? They have no schools, no electricity, no food, no water, and possibly no shelter that's safe.

Turpit, please feel free to delete this post as you feel fit. This whole OLPC topic has ignored most of what is really needed, for far too long.
January 6, 2008 7:18:34 AM

I guess there's always two sides to a story...

http://www.news.com/8301-13579_3-9839806-37.html?tag=ne...
Quote:

According to Intel, Negroponte asked the chipmaker to stop selling its Classmate PC while it was part of the OLPC, which is currently shipping its XO laptop based on a chip from AMD. The Classmate PC was one of the sources of friction between Negroponte and Intel before they joined forces in July. Negroponte went on 60 Minutes in May and accused Intel of dumping Classmate PCs below cost in order to keep OLPCs out of the hands of needy children.

Intel and OLPC were working on an Intel-based version of the XO laptop, according to Agnes Kwan, an Intel spokeswoman, but the OLPC insisted that Intel end its production of the Classmate PC. Even more surprising, Intel is saying that the OLPC actually asked the chipmaker to stop working with any company that produces low-cost laptops, such as Asus' Eee PC.
January 6, 2008 9:47:08 AM

Not everywhere in Africa is war-torn and famine stricken you know.
January 6, 2008 10:06:49 AM

Major_Spittle said:
Poor people smell like sour milk, how is a computer going to change that.


I don't know what you're still doing here. I think No one wants to talk to people like you.
January 6, 2008 11:06:28 AM

I believe Intel just got lucky with C2D...even so it's only real strength is it's overclocking ability. In more professional benchmarks like Sciencemark AMD frags Intel. An AMD user will also benefit more using a 64Bit OS, than an Intel user would.
Intel didn't think us home users would have any need for a 64Bit... AMD proved them wrong. When Intel realized that they were wrong, they made a poor copy of the AMD Ahlon 64 technology.
Intel are very jealous of what AMD have achieved with the Phenom....they want their own native Quad. The Nehalem is nothing more than a half baked AMD K10 clone. Why have a copy..when you can have the original K10.

Intel undermines the OLPC scheme! AMD Invent! Intel copy! AMD care! Intel are Evil

AMD4life!
January 6, 2008 11:14:54 AM

thunderman said:
I believe Intel just got lucky with C2D...even so it's only real strength is it's overclocking ability. In more professional benchmarks like Sciencemark AMD frags Intel.

Sciencemark? How is that a professional benchmarks? Maybe you should use SPECfp_rate instead, since as someone said before, it represents the future of computing.

And how does "C2D's only real strength is in its overclockability" even make sense? C2D consistently outperforms K8 across the board, except in programs that emphasize scalability. It consumes less power at the same time.

Quote:
An AMD user will also benefit more using a 64Bit OS, than an Intel user would.

How? By consistently running SPECfp_rate, and astonished by how high the score is?

Quote:
Intel didn't think us home users would have any need for a 64Bit... AMD proved them wrong.

How? For home users, almost no program (except rendering, video editing, etc) take advantage of 64bit computing. Over 90% of people are still 32bit, and running with 2Gb of RAM or less. TBH, I see no distinct improvement from 32bit to 64bit. How did AMD proved Intel that home users would need 64bit?

When Intel realized that they were wrong, they made a poor copy of the AMD Ahlon 64 technology.
Intel are very jealous of what AMD have achieved with the Phenom....they want their own native Quad. The Nehalem is nothing more than a half baked AMD K10 clone. Why have a copy..when you can have the original K10.

Intel undermines the OLPC scheme! AMD Invent! Intel copy! AMD care! Intel are Evil

AMD4life! said:
When Intel realized that they were wrong, they made a poor copy of the AMD Ahlon 64 technology.
Intel are very jealous of what AMD have achieved with the Phenom....they want their own native Quad. The Nehalem is nothing more than a half baked AMD K10 clone. Why have a copy..when you can have the original K10.

Intel undermines the OLPC scheme! AMD Invent! Intel copy! AMD care! Intel are Evil

AMD4life!


I don't even want to try any more. Maybe you're 9nm's reincarnation, maybe not. You only take any anti-Intel news online, and post them without even digesting their meanings. The only thing I know is that you are a DELETED.
January 6, 2008 11:53:57 AM

thunderman said:
I believe Intel just got lucky with C2D...even so it's only real strength is it's overclocking ability. In more professional benchmarks like Sciencemark AMD frags Intel. An AMD user will also benefit more using a 64Bit OS, than an Intel user would.
Intel didn't think us home users would have any need for a 64Bit... AMD proved them wrong. When Intel realized that they were wrong, they made a poor copy of the AMD Ahlon 64 technology.
Intel are very jealous of what AMD have achieved with the Phenom....they want their own native Quad. The Nehalem is nothing more than a half baked AMD K10 clone. Why have a copy..when you can have the original K10.

Intel undermines the OLPC scheme! AMD Invent! Intel copy! AMD care! Intel are Evil

AMD4life!

I've seen that statement quite often and I think it was all from you. Have any sources?
a b à CPUs
January 6, 2008 11:55:03 AM

Gravemind123 said:
AMD left the project a couple months back if I recall correctly, and they don't offer an alternative to it either, unlike Intel is doing.

Wrong!


The OLPC project is using an AMD Geode processor. And that is the bug up Intel's butt about the whole OLPC project. But the fact is, Intel did/does not have a processor available that met the OLPC's powers and design specs.

Until recently, Intel was developing a new low power processor for the OLPC project but pulled out because the OLPC foundation had issue with Intel producing the ClassmatePC to compete with the OLPC.

Generally speaking competition is good, but in this case Intel looks like a heel. Intel is using their resources to compete with a non-profit. Lame...

Intel competing with the OLPC is like the Red Cross competing with the Salvation Army.

I wouldn't say Intel is evil, but I would say that Craig Barret has his head shoved pretty far up his a$$!

a b à CPUs
January 6, 2008 12:07:18 PM

pausert20 said:
There is no $100 laptop market right now. The OLPC is going for around $200... So with Intel making a competing product we might get to a $100 laptop market.

Won't happen when Intel is selling the Classmate for about $300.

The only way Intel could get Vietnam to buy the Classmate was by offering them a discount on the hardware as well as loading Hacao Linux instead of WinXP to save on licensing fees. Even with the discounts and no Microsoft licensing fees, the ClassmatePC was still more expensive that the OLPC's XO laptop.

The XO can be had for $100 per machine but the OLPC requires quantity sales (1000's per order) to reach the goal price of $100.

a b à CPUs
January 6, 2008 12:33:55 PM

croc said:
Negroponte is a pompous ass, you on the other hand are just an ass. What good are cheap laptops going to do for the poor kids in places like Darfur? They have no schools, no electricity, no food, no water, and possibly no shelter that's safe.

It's obvious that you know very little about the OLPC Project.

The OLPC in Darfur?!?! :lol:  :lol:  :pt1cable: 

I know, let's go to Afghanistan and sell the Taliban an OLPC! [/sarcasm]


January 6, 2008 12:49:48 PM

If AMD pays this moron to post crap on forums, why don't you just ban him?

I have an AMD myself, and i don't see whats all the hate between AMD and Intel users. Intel has a better product at the moment, stop hassling.

Lol i bet this guy is just some fat kid who's life revolves around a square piece of silicone =D.
a b à CPUs
January 6, 2008 12:54:41 PM

Thunderman STFU
January 6, 2008 12:55:24 PM

I think its more of.. the center of attention... Thunderboy is stuck between AMD and Intel, and seems to love AMD... yet if he breaks his leg, only mommy and daddy is going to be there for him.... not AMD. :lol: 
a b à CPUs
January 6, 2008 12:56:58 PM

Oh... just a second thought dose any one have benchmarks for the ASUS eePC, OLPC, etc? It should be a nice comparison ;) 
January 6, 2008 12:59:24 PM

Grimmy said:
I think its more of.. the center of attention... Thunderboy is stuck between AMD and Intel, and seems to love AMD... yet if he breaks his leg, only mommy and daddy is going to be there for him.... not AMD. :lol: 


Reminds me of that little guy who used to follow Mr. Incredible around :lol:  :lol:  :lol:  I don't think his name was Thunderboy though...
a c 172 à CPUs
a b å Intel
January 6, 2008 1:00:48 PM

thunderman said:
I believe Intel just got lucky with C2D...


C2D came out of the research center in Israel.

Intel funds research centers all over the world.

If you call that "lucky", I guess they were.
January 6, 2008 1:01:41 PM

Shadow703793 said:
Oh... just a second thought dose any one have benchmarks for the ASUS eePC, OLPC, etc? It should be a nice comparison ;) 


ASUS EEEPC outruns OLPC by far. Period. However, EEEPC was never meant to be a competition against OLPC.
!