"Nick Negroponte, founder and chairman of the One Laptop Per Child project, came out swinging at Intel on Friday, one day after the chipmaker decided to leave the group.Sigh. It seems that people are fighting and scrabbling for the moral high ground here -- much like the presidential debates we have been treated to over the past few weeks.
The OLPC's goal of bringing low-cost technology to children in developing countries apparently conflicts with Intel's goal of running a business. Even though the two agreed to put aside their differences in July, it's pretty clear that they never actually became friends.
'We at OLPC have been disappointed that Intel did not deliver on any of the promises they made when they joined OLPC; while we were hopeful for a positive, collaborative relationship, it never materialized,' Negroponte said in a statement distributed by the OLPC on Friday.
Intel cited 'fundamental differences' in describing its exit from the group Thursday; this appears to be the classic 'creative musical differences' breakup."
It's a real pity, since these guys, presumably, are not fighting for profits or power. Or are they? Certainly this has pitted the AMD folks against Intel and the Windows aficionados against Linux lovers -- and as the article's title indicates, the children lose.
As one who has been following the One Laptop Per Child initiative since it started, I am disappointed to see it degenerate into sniping.
A recent CNET article I blogged on a few days ago mentioned a lawsuit filed in Nigeria over OLPC's alleged use of patented technology. I wonder if these two stories are related in view of the fact that the laptop choice is still up in the air, and Intel is one of the players along with OLPC?
Whatever is going on in Nigeria and in other countries where this dispute is playing out, this is not a winner-take-all kind of situation. Intel and AMD processors are compatible, and both will run Windows or Linux. Is there any reason why there can't be cooperation?