Is the $ 100 laptop no more than a really expensive light-bulb?

Written by Gavin Chait

Back in 1997, as a young engineering student, I conducted a cost-benefit analysis on the Freeplay Wind-up Radio, then in early release.  It was being pitched as a low-cost way to bring the wonders of telecommunications and information to the poor masses of the developing world;  after all, it didn’t need batteries to run and that must make it significantly cheaper.  

Clearly, the thinking went, it is this lack of cheap information which is holding up development.

A wind-up radio retails for $ 90.  You can get a cheap Chinese radio and PM 9 battery (which will last about six months) for about $ 8.  In other words, you’d need to use that wind-up radio for ten years before it starts paying for itself ... and I’m not sure they last that long.  Freeplay has subsequently marketed the radio as a novelty gift item and emergency radio in case of power failures … in rich countries.

Now we have the $ 100 laptop from Nicholas Negroponte and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT).  I admire and applaud the work that has gone in to producing a useable and versatile machine that can be produced for such a low price.  As an engineering exercise it is awesome.

As a development exercise the whole project is on much shakier ground.  The first point to consider is that there are already computers available in developing countries that cost significantly less than $ 100.  Bridgeport Technical Services, based in Cape Town, has a PII entry-level desktop on offer for $ 45.  Sure, not a brilliant computer if you’re used to the latest and greatest, but certainly very affordable and much better than the Intel 286 which was my first PC in 1991.  And I managed to get a science degree using that one.

The computers are hand-me-downs but, if charities can distribute second-hand clothes to developing countries, I can’t imagine that anyone would turn up their nose at a used pc.  We have bought several for the office and are extremely happy with them.

Negroponte claims:   “Desktops are cheaper, but mobility is important, especially with regard to taking the computer home at night. Kids in the developing world need the newest technology, especially really rugged hardware and innovative software.”

He doesn’t explain why this is so other than to add the following:  “In one Cambodian village where we have been working, there is no electricity, thus the laptop is, among other things, the brightest light source in the home.”

That has to count as probably the silliest reason in the world to waste all this time and effort producing a $ 100 laptop.  There are many technological breakthroughs in the $ 100 laptop that I hope will be introduced into commercial mainstream notebooks – using them as a light-bulb isn’t high on my list.

There is also the question of moral hazard, that niggling thing that economists worry about.  If you give your child a mobile-phone and they know you’ll simply replace it without comment if it disappears I can guarantee that they’ll lose it pretty quickly (especially if they see an upgrade they prefer).  Negroponte says of his freely distributed laptop:  “There are many reasons it is important for a child to own something - like a football, doll, or book - not the least of which being that these belongings will be well-maintained through love and care.”

Negroponte’s naïve faith in humanity extends to the governments he expects will distribute these computers “like textbooks”.  These are the same governments who fail to distribute textbooks as well.

It has been remarked in previous posts that education is of critical importance to development but it can, and does, take place effectively without technology.  As Hernando de Soto expressed in the seminal “The Mystery of Capital”, plenty of countries got rich without the benefit of any technology at all.

The $ 100 laptop sounds like a bright engineering idea in search of a reason to exist.
 

---

< Prev		Next >