[SLL] OLPC

[Mr.Scrooge]

--- Rob Smith <kormoc at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Jan 4, 2008 7:59 PM, Glenn Stone <technoshaman at liawol.org> wrote:
> > Well, *duh*... Intel's legally bound purpose in life is to try to take over
> > the wo.... err, Maximize Shareholder Value.  That means *everybody* else
> > gets screwed.  Employees, customers, and sure as heck, Open Source
> > projects.  Now, sure, there's been some good code out there (ee100, e.g.)
> > but it's all been in the name of Sell More Hardware.  An OLPC isn't Intel
> > hardware.  Therefore Intel is legally bound to detract as much from it as it
> > can.  Regrettable?  yes.  Surprising?  Not in the least.
> 
> That's not really fair. Intel was quite happy to work with the OLPC
> until they (OLPC) told Intel they couldn't continue with their own
> project (Classmate, Started Mid 2006), which they had before they were
> accepted into OLPC (Mid 2007). If OLPC had a problem with the
> Classmate, why wasn't it brought up before allowing Intel to join the
> group? It's not like OLPC didn't know about Intels other offerings
> long before accepting the membership...
> 
> ~Rob
> 
I agree its unfair but supposedly Intel was cutting the legs out from OLPC by taking a loss on the
Classmate. That isn't fair either. I thought the objective was to help children not make money but
maybe i am missing the point.

-Max


      ____________________________________________________________________________________
Looking for last minute shopping deals?  
Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.  http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping