6 Aug
2008
6 Aug
'08
2:12 p.m.
I wrote:
That was one of the major criticisms of the OLPC, but
hte critics
didn't understand that the OLPC with suitable software and e-texts
was a LESS EXPENSIVE replacement for textbooks.
der Mouse wrote:
I'm not convinced that is actually true. I'm
perfectly ready to
believe it's true if you consider only up-front monetary costs, but
there are a lot of other costs involved, such as the failure modes (one
failure in a relatively fragile bit of electronics and _all_ your texts
go poof, to name just one problem), the lack of separability (you can
read at most one of those texts at a time, no matter how many people
are available), and support infrastructure needed (a book can be taken
almost anywhere, without anything additional, and still work; a
computer needs, at a minimum, a source of electrical power).
The failure rate was included in the cost analysis. Yes, that does push
the per unit price above the initial $188, but it is *still* lower than
the cost of paper textbooks.
That's also one of the main reasons why Mary Lou Jepsen invented the
display that has a color mode AND a sunlight-readable high-contrast B&W
mode. Textbooks (electronic or otherwise) are no good if you can't
actually read them, and a normal laptop display isn't really adequate.
Eric