I only blogged about the $100 laptop at month ago ("Libya & the $100 Laptop"), but now it already looks like that "save the underdeveloped world" computer has been hit the a 50% price increase -- see "For $150, Third-World Laptop Stirs Big Debate."
Seems to me that this isn't fair -- isn't it better to under promise and over deliver? (And not the other way around.)
And maybe those folks who would benefit from a gadget like this might benefit even more from serving their real hierarachy of needs first -- like food, clothing, shelter? Oh, and how about health care?
The phone lines are open ...
Technorati
Del.icio.us
Slashdot
Digg
![chocolate[1].jpg](http://blog.tmcnet.com/blog/tom-keating/images/chocolate%5B1%5D.jpg "chocolate[1].jpg")
A 50% price increase? More like a 1,000% price increase. We ran the full cost of ownership numbers and they're not pretty:
http://www.olpcnews.com/sales_talk/price/the_real_cost_of_the.html