SECTION A
1. What are the capabilities of the XO laptop (especially the latest version, XO-3)? How well-suited is this machine for developing countries?
The One laptop per child organization (herein referred to as OLPC) was started by MIT’s Nicholas Negroponte in 2005. And the mission statement of the organisation is as follows:
“To create educational opportunities for the world's poorest children by providing each child with a rugged, low-cost, low-power, connected laptop with content and software designed for collaborative, joyful, self-empowered learning. When children have access to this type of tool they get engaged in their own education. They learn, share, create, and collaborate. They become connected to each other, to the world and to a brighter future”
Their aim was to provide this laptop at a cost of $100 and Mary Lou Jepson, as chief technical officer of OLPC had to consider a range of environmental factors for the design to be tailored to the particular needs of the developing world (Buchele, 2009:1). These challenges included electricity availability, extreme temperatures and the rugged physical environments of these countries (Brown, 2009:8). After several years of research and development, the result was the XO laptop featuring hardware innovation in power supply, display, durability and networking. The first model XO1 was launched in November 2007 at a cost of $188, failing at the initial goal price of $100 but it revolutionized the PC industry to be motivated to develop lower-cost education-oriented PCs (Kraemer, Dedrick & Sharma, 2009:66).
The capabilities of the XO1 included the following: 1. The processor is a 433 MHz AMD Geode which uses less than 0.8 watt of power and does not need a cooling fan. Heat is kept away from the lap of the user by placing the motherboard directly behind the screen and not in the base of the laptop which is ideal for extreme temperatures in developing countries. Power to the processor chip is cut-off when the CPU is inactive but any action by the user causes it to reactivate with 0.2 to 1 seconds which conserves energy during idle times and also when used in eBook mode (Buchele, 2009:2). Different battery technologies are used like the new lithium-iron phosphate with safety a huge concern and heat testing a non-negotiable. Although the low power consumption of the machine helps the battery is also designed to last more than five years or 3000 recharges (Rampoza, 2007b:46). 2. Since many children in the developing world spend most of their time in the outdoors, the black and white reflective LCD screen is sunlight readable and is lower cost and uses less power. A dual reflective-backlight mode was created by overlaying a lower resolution (133 dpi) colour LCD, which is not that expensive on top of the higher resolution black and white LCD which gives the appearance of higher resolution suitable for indoor use. An LED backlight is used instead of a cold cathode fluorescent tube which uses less power and is more rugged and can be easily removed or replaced. The screen is small enough to be cheap but still large enough to be readable (Buchele, 2009:3). 3. For further durability the XO laptop has no hard disk and mass storage is accomplished by Flash memory. Users can store programs of files on a central server instead (Buchele, 2009:4). 4. The laptop serves as a network router for any other XO and by creating a mesh network, a single internet connection can be shared across and entire village (Rampoza, 2007b:56) On this mesh network, students can chat or share work like for example a teacher can share a reading assignment by adding the eBook onto the Mesh. The mesh can be sorted in many ways like by task or project groups making it even more user friendly (Rampoza, 2007a:50). 5. The operating software system is called Sugar and is based on the Fedora Core Linux. Sugar is a graphical user interface which puts an icon representing the individual user at the centre of the screen and then Zooms out to show the user in relation others connected to their XO’s. When used in the home mode you see the XO man (O on top of an X) as yourself but when in the friends mode or neighbourhood mode, other XO men represents your friends and they can be identified by nicknames. You can view the activities they are busy with and it has a chat function. This creates a feeling of connectedness which is common in rural communities and they can identify with. See Annexure A. Sugar enables the users to modify and improve the software by changing the colours of a game or moving objects from one application to another. Any programmer can also make suggestions for improvements as it is open source software (Hamm, 2007:1). With a Firefox Web browser, RSS reader, eBook reader, drawing tool, Python music creator, writing application, colour camera, microphones, an advanced calculator function and lots of games, it is easy to see why the creators of OLPC calls it the “low floor, no ceiling” approach to development (Rampoza, 2007a:50). 6. OLPC have implemented a three-fold security system to prevent kids from just selling the laptops to use the money for other needs as is the case in many unsuccessful NGO projects in developing countries. A lease-system is implemented whereby a laptop is registered to a certain school or server. If the laptop is not used within this network and “checks in” at least once every X days, the laptop would shut itself off and only the registered official of that network will be able to reactivate it. A laptop will therefore be useless to buy if not used in the vicinity of the server. There is also no need to steal a laptop as OLPC’s saturation goal is that all children in a geographic area will receive a laptop. The last security feature is the register of stolen laptops that can identify a stolen laptop and turn it off remotely whenever it gains internet access (Buchele, 2009:5). The XO also uses Bitfrost security which limits access rights of applications, files and users (Rampoza, 2007a:48). 7. The shell of this light weight machine is resistant to dirt and moisture, the keyboard is sealed by a rubber membrane and the WiFi antennas is movable and rubberised to increase the ruggedness. All units go through a 45-80cm drop test and the keyboard can be customized for different languages (Kraemer, Dedrick & Sharma, 2009:69).
The XO development is in continuum and even before XO 1 was released, development started on XO 2 and 3. But release of these models was cancelled in favour of the latest XO 4 laptop, XO 4 Touch laptop and XO 4 Tablet.
As mentioned previously, the OLPC project moved the whole IT industry to develop lower-cost PC’s and when Intel launched their Intel Classmate at $250, Libya, which planned to purchase 1.2 million XO’s,S rather opted for the Intel. The persuading factor for them was that the XO runs on Linux and not Windows and that Intel provided more teacher training (Kraemer, Dedrick & Sharma, 2009:69).
After intense research and development, the initial shortcomings of the XO 1 were addressed in the XO4 by a system/motherboard upgrade. After an agreement between Microsoft and OLPC was reached, the XO 4 can now run on Windows and Linux. The XO 4 also boasts 3D graphics, an SD card, Touch Screen( on the Touch version) and a more mechanical Keyboard with larger keys. The Keyboard is tested through a 1000,000 cycles and all connectors will last 5000 insertion/removals. It has a video camera and can be powered by Solar Power and Battery charger packs.
The XO4 is the most “Green” laptop ever made and because the XO will last 2 times longer than normal laptops, it will stay out of rubbish dumps longer. Its light weight and small size uses less material than normal laptops reducing the impact on the environment even more. It’s new LiFePO4 (Lithium Ferro Phosphate) battery lasts 4 times longer than normal laptop batteries, again staying out of the dumps four times longer. Much less power is used than normal laptops and it can use solar power and other power-limited energy sources which makes it even more environmentally friendly.
A study by Gyabak & Godina (2011:2239) found that in a Bhutan village the community did not want to start a gasoline generator to power the XO’s because the noise might disturb the migratory Black-necked cranes. It is situations like this that requires more development for alternative energy and power sources for the XO’s in developing countries. For classroom situations, especially those without "grid" power the multiple battery charger will solve the problem of power because it allows a number of laptop batteries to be charged in a small cabinet taking AC or 12VDC input.
CONCLUSION
It is clear from the above examples that the design capabilities of the XO laptop are extremely well suited for the often harsh environments of developing countries. And except for the availability of internet access and electricity to charge the laptops and the lack of Windows in the older XO1 versions, not many other design problems have been reported.

2. How would the use of the XO laptop narrow the global digital divide? Compare the potential impact of this machine to that of cell phones in developing nations.
In order to determine whether the digital divide was decreased by the XO laptops or Mobile phone technology, one should first understand what this divide entails. According to Kellner (cited by Gyabak and Godina, 2011:2236) the digital divide can be described as the “disparities in relation to access and training for technological resources” and pertains to Knowledge, access and awareness of the technology. The barriers that developing countries face to narrow this divide is outdated telecommunication policies, lack of infrastructure, traditional education, high costs, relevant content that is country specific , English language dominance of the ICT’s and the lack of technological support (Chen & Wellman, 2004:18). Simply put the digital divide is the division between the “have nots” and the “haves” regarding access to Information and Communication Technologies or ICT’s (Pittaluga & Rivoir, 2012:146).
MOBILE TECHNOLOGY
To date there is significant proof that the deployment of Mobile technology in developing countries has made a huge impact on narrowing the digital divide and although statistic is constantly changing the footprint of mobile technology in developing countries have increased significantly. According to Waverman, Meschi, & Fuss (cited by James & Versteeg, 2007:2) the impact of mobile phones on the growth rate of developing nations is double that of in developed nations and that 10 extra phones per 100 people increases GDP by 0.6% points. It is more accurate to measure the digital divide in developing countries by usage thereof and not ownership or access because the barrier of high cost was overcome due to “sharing” mobile phones (Gilwald, 2005:23; Sinha, 2005:6; Stork, 2005:112). Another example of narrowing the divide was due to privatization and liberalization of the telecommunication sector in Jamaica resulting in the mobile phone subscribers increasing annually at a rate of 300% during 1999 and 2005 (James, 2010:143).
Historically the Indian government viewed telecommunications as a luxury and did not want to invest in infrastructure. But government changed their view in the early 2000’s and overcame this barrier with policy reform. Telecommunications infrastructure became the fastest growing sector in the country resulting in an increase of 155 million mobile phone subscribers in 8 years. This had a positive effect on the efficiencies of the markets by improving information flow and reducing search costs, especially in markets with short supply chains (Abraham, 2007:8)
A second example is the supportive ICT policies by China’s government during 2005 which narrowed the gap between those who have access to ICT and those who don’t (Loo & Ngan, 2012:899).
To overcome the often high costs of mobile technology, developing countries have created innovative ownership and payment models and rather using the cheaper text messaging or beeping (dialing a number but hanging up before the call is connected - missed call) (Sinha, 2005:8-13).
Apart from the obvious advantages of mobile phone in business, mobile phones also had psychological effect for individuals who could now socialize with friends and family across vast geographical distances in these developing countries.
XO LAPTOP
Although OLPC was very successful in designing a laptop to suit the natural environment, not enough research was done on the social and cultural environments it planned to distribute the laptops. According to Mishra & Koehler (cited by Gyabak and Godina, 2011:2237) the unique circumstances for a particular rural community should be taken into account when deciding how to implement new technology and it was proved by their study where the conservation of the Blacked-necked cranes was given higher priority than powering up the XO laptops. In this very traditional country of Bhutan, teachers still embraced the transmission mode of instruction (teacher as the purveyor of knowledge) and the students were reluctant to explore the laptop beyond the instruction of the teacher (Gyabak & Godina, 2011:2239). According to Kraemer et al. (2009:71) resistance by teachers are due to fears of their reduced status and not understanding how the style of teaching will be influenced by the technology.
Another challenge was the colonial perceptions regarding the English language used by the XO laptop which created resistance from the students and teachers to initially accept the technology and only students who was proficient in English could benefit from it (Gyabak & Godina, 2011:2239). Despite efforts to narrow the digital divide by ICT’s the fact that the majority of all internet content is English is widening the gap in developing countries (Chen & Wellman, 2004:20).
Computer anxiety was experienced by a number of students because they believed that computers are difficult to use and did not think that they have the skill to master it. Although once they overcome this barrier through access and guided exposure, they experienced greater self-confidence (Cotton et al., 2011:427). In order for technology to have a positive impact, adequate training is needed which was successfully done by Intel when they launched the Intel classmate with extensive training and support programs for teachers and users (Einhorn, 2007:39; Kraemer, Dedrick & Sharma, 2009:69). Einhorn (2007:439) also found that student’s increase use of the XO laptops was influenced by the teacher’s knowledge and use thereof. During OLPC ‘s pilot program in rural Peru it was found that the teachers used the XO laptop as the proverbial “stick” and not the “carrot” by punishing students who did not do their homework and not allowing them to take their XO’s home (Johnson, 2008:73). It was also noted that in traditional cultures, the parent’s view of the technology had a huge impact on the student’s use of the laptop and did not allow them to take the laptops home (Bajak, 2012:12). Parents training and involvement is critical to enable success as can be seen by the implementation of OLPC in Uruguay with PLAN CEIBAL, where households got the laptop instead of only the students and the parents supported, guided and encouraged learning through the XO much more than seen in other projects (Pittaluga & Rivoir, 2012:157). In another recent study it was found that the abstract reasoning of children using the XO laptops was improved in Ethiopia, one of the poorest countries in the world. This project was more successful because the teachers received their own laptops and compulsory extensive professional training on how to use the XO but also how to stimulate student use thereof (Hansen et al., 2011:996).
Equal distribution proved to be another issue as some schools in Rwanda simply did not receive enough laptops for all the learners and computer labs were setup where they could get access to the laptops. This resulted in overcrowding and some students chose not to participate (Rubagiza, Were & Sutherland, 2010, 41).
Innovation also depends on the ecosystem of network infrastructure, services (like repairs and technical support) and training. OLPC contracted with a cellphone distributor Brightstar to help with the distribution in these diverse markets and worked with local voluntary organizations in some countries to help with the implementation. It planned to rely on the governments to provide distribution, training and support after purchasing the laptops. None of these institutions could overcome the infrastructure, financial and technical problems and simply did not have enough resources to deploy millions of laptops in developing countries (Kraemer, Dedrick & Sharma, 2009:70). The data on actual distribution to date received from participating countries varies from that published by the OLPC’s website which creates confusion regarding success of the project.
CONCLUSION
It is unfair to compare mobile phones success in narrowing the digital divide in developing countries to date with that of the XO laptop as Mobile technology had a head start of a view years. OLPC did not consider the social and cultural and infrastructural aspects before launching the projects which resulted in a very slow start, but more recent studies have shown that with the proper assistance from Governments and addressing the social and cultural issues, I believe that OLPC will reach their goal eventually. If it is purely educating the developing nations that OLPC aims for, perhaps implementing mobile learning (m-learning) would result in more rapid access to knowledge as the footprint of mobile users in developing countries increases daily and is much more than computer use. It is more cost effective and no additional infrastructure is needed.