Find all your DIY electronics in the MakerShed. 3D Printing, Kits, Arduino, Raspberry Pi, Books & more!

First-Leaked-Picture-Of-The-Next-Generation-Xo-2-Olpc-Laptop-2
Leaked picture of the upcoming XO-2 OLPC via netbooknews.de. The next OLPC is being reported to be an open source hardware project too

It appears that the very first photo of the next-generation OLPC XO 2.0 low-cost laptop has finally emerged on the Internet, showing us some of the things we should be expecting. In addition to that, it looks like Nicholas Negroponte, the founder of the One Laptop Per Child project, has confirmed that the next-generation XO laptop is going for a different design and marketing strategy. To be more specific, the upcoming laptop, which could be released sooner rather than later, will be meant to provide users with a book that can be a laptop as compared with the first XO laptop, which was meant as a laptop that could be a book.

Update: The OLPC press folks emailed back… I asked “will the OLPC be open source hardware”… They said–

That’s definitely the intention of everybody at OLPC. However, when you
outsource as much as OLPC does, it will be a challenge to persuade
partners to open up their intellectual property.

Phillip Torrone

Editor at large – Make magazine. Creative director – Adafruit Industries, contributing editor – Popular Science. Previously: Founded – Hack-a-Day, how-to editor – Engadget, Director of product development – Fallon Worldwide, Technology Director – Braincraft.


Related

Comments

  1. Andy says:

    Stupid question : What’s the point of being “open hardware” if the only way anyone can see the work-in-progress is if someone ‘leaks’ a blurry photograph?

  2. Phillip Torrone says:

    @andy – i don’t think they’re ready to talk about all this yet. i think it’s fair to give them a chance to talk to the world directly when they’re ready – i have an email out to them and i will post anything they send along.

  3. Peter says:

    Hopefully they’ll do a better job of marketing this than the first one. It predated the netbook craze and the demand was fairly obvious, but they refused to sell to individuals except under the buy two get one deal. Making it a consumer product would have driven down the price of manufacture and benefited third world governments too.

  4. Berend says:

    The screen looks like paper…. I think it’s just a mockup.

  5. Phillip Torrone says:

    @peter- good news for you – you can start your own laptop company and show the world how you’d market it. if it’s OSH, you’ll be able to show your expertise in marketing and deploying the OLPC.

  6. benice says:

    makers, in case you haven’t noticed yet:

    make: is a product of MIT.
    OLPC is a product of MIT.
    Bug Labs bug base thing is a product of MIT.

    make: is in bed with MIT.

    The reason that make: waves a flag so vigorously for these projects is they are simply supporting their friends (not because they are SO super-duper-great).

    other points of interest:
    OLPC has its own graduate class at MIT: MAS.964…

    O’Reilly Media (make:’s publisher) has strong ties with MIT (thanks for the open source though, Tim)….

    also consider how often MIT projects make their way into this blog…

    You can see the resulting defensive attitude toward MIT can be seen in phillip’s comments- especially in the rather harsh and condescending comment made toward peter’s previous comment – seems to say you’re not SMART enough to pull this off peter… if only you went to MIT.

    so makers, here you go: its more about who you know.

    [oh and make: if you're really that smart make the comment thing work properly, or didnt MIT teach you captcha design?]

  7. Phillip Torrone says:

    @benice, hi anonymous commenter…

    you’re not correct. MAKE is not a product of MIT, it was started by dale our publisher, he doesn’t have any ties to MIT that i know of. our editor in chief is mark, he also doesn’t have any ties that i know of. MAKE did not receive any funding from MIT, we do not pay MIT. please provide some evidence about how it is a “product” of MIT.

    bug labs – peter their founder as far as i know has nothing to do with MIT, they’re based out of NYC and again – as far as i know they’ve never done anything with MIT – again, please provide some evidence on that one too.

    as far as oreilly media & MIT go, again – as far as i know there are only speaker, author, friend and family relationships – can you please elaborate?

    to be clear about my comment – i wasn’t being harsh or condescending at all – the whole idea behind OSH is that you can run a company based on the IP if you want, if you can do it better, GREAT – otherwise, don’t just snark someone for doing something. OLPC is not OSH, it might not be – i’m actually disappointed in the first OLPC and how it was deployed, does this mean our fictional MIT ties are now severed?

    re: the MIT projects here, we have more ITP (NYU) projects on MAKE – does that mean we’re in bed, a product of and all that other stuff too? we also have 10x the number of arduino projects, so many that some folks complain – the arduino is definitely not a MIT project.

    i won’t remove your comment – but if you’re going to accusations like this you need to state who you are and also keep it on topic. you’re welcome to email directly too if you’d like to discuss this.

    as far as our comment system goes, yes – it’s broken, we’re working on that — we never claimed to be smarter than anyone else, in fact i think we’d claim everyone else out there is smarter, we just celebrate them – it’s not a smarts thing, it’s a MT server and upgrade thing (time).

  8. Phillip Torrone says:

    @Peter – since the previous commenter brought up you’re comment – the idea of OSH is the you could use the IP and start your own company, i think that’s extremely cool, everyone could compete and more people could market / deploy the OLPC is different ways – may the best ideas win…

  9. comments... says:

    testing the comments…

  10. Stephen says:

    I’ve not really got anything to say, I’d just like to get my own semi-angry reply from the moderator.

    OLPC is a good idea, I think that making it a charity arrangement was ultimately the best way but there was a problem with people wanting to buy them themselves and the additional cost of the extra one you had to buy “for overseas” put it into a completely different price range.

  11. Phillip Torrone says:

    @Stephen – we don’t moderate comments here, i read each one and only remove spam or something like cursing or personal attacks – and usually i work with the commenter to come up with something constructive – you won’t get any semi-angry replies from me ever.

    as far as the strategy goes, i wish the previous anonymous commenter asked me what i thought instead of assuming i supported the OLPC – i think he would have been surprised what i’d say.

    any way, i agree – the OLPC is a good idea, it’s clearly going to happen, it might end up being from ASUS or someone else. either way, i’m excited about a future with millions of people with access and tools.

  12. Diarmuid Wrenne says:

    Hi,

    Honestly, it looks like a mockup and a fairly uninspired one at that

    What we should do as an interested group of makers is get involved in the OLPC and put our energy into making it a great OSH project. While the arduino is on a different scale on a number of levels (cost, size and potential market), the project has shown that a well conceived OSH project can garner huge support and eventually gain a critical mass that makes it bigger than the original creators.

    The crunchpad project from techcrunch, (which hopefully will still go ahead even after the horrible spitting incident with Mike) is not open source but has an involved following that may be influencing the design.

    A word of pessimism though. The Via open book design created a few ripples of interest when it was launched, http://www.viaopenbook.com/, but little (AFAICT) follow up. Creating a hack board like the arduino is relatively simple; creating a consumer electronics product as an OSH and expecting little manufacturers (or even big ones) to clap their hands and retool their plants, is less so.

    The comments about Philip and Make and ties to MIT are out of line. Make is a great resource and an inspiring totem for makers to organise around. MIT is the best technical university in the world and a super sharer of information and ideas (open courseware). Even if there were ties or cross promotion, what would be the big deal. I find the blog so interesting because they pull in interesting info from so many sources, as we as producing fine work themselves.

    Regards
    Diarmuid Wrenne

  13. Steve Noyce says:

    Looking at that image the finger is casting a shadow on the “screen”. Im no physicist but im pretty sure it would be difficult to cast a shadow on a backlit screen (unless it wasnt backlit, transreflective). So while it would be very cool if they manage to produce this for anywhere near their proposed price i think it’s pointless releasing blurred mockup photo’s to generate buzz on something that
    is very unlikely to become a real product.

    But here’s hoping!

  14. Todd's Spleen says:

    PT,
    You do look like you remembered to “pack your angry eyes” in the thumbnail by your posts. I think it gives people the impression that you are scolding them even when you are not.

    Oh, and do you support of the OLPC?

  15. Phillip Torrone says:

    @Todd’s Spleen – hah, you’re right. i always look a little sad, it’s how i look.

    as far supporting the OLPC… i love the idea, not the implementation – as i said with peter, if the OLPC is OSH it’s good news, many of us could start our own laptop companies and try something else.

In the Maker Shed