Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> espoused:
> __/ [ Rick ] on Friday 17 March 2006 04:55 \__
>> On Thu, 16 Mar 2006 20:11:43 -0800, Larry Qualig wrote:
>>> thad01@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>>>> Just ran across the following on arstechinca...
>>>> OK, so Bill Gates may not be fan of the MIT $100 laptop, but I
>>>> personally can't wait to get my hands on one. I currently use my laptop
>>>> mainly for writing simple documents. It is an older Sony Picturebook
>>>> and has a small form factor I like, but eats batteries like crazy. The
>>>> MIT gadget looks perfect for me. It runs Linux, is powerful enough to do
>>>> some simple word processing and even access the net (built in wireless),
>>>> and includes a hand-crank to power it. I can actually haul this think
>>>> with me when I pack my camping gear on the bike and hit the wilds for a
>>>> week or two (can't do that with my Picturebook).
>>>> I expect this little Green machine to make quite a splash when it starts
>>>> rolling off the assembly line. Not only will it bring computing power
>>>> to many underdeveloped parts of the world, I expect it will become a
>>>> popular starter computer for many young people in the rest of the world
>>>> and be a fun project machine for geeks like me to tinker with. It will
>>>> likely spawn a bunch of copy-cats and knock-offs. This has the
>>>> potential to greatly raise the profile of Linux and create an entire new
>>>> generation of open source enthusiasts.
>>> Difficult to say for sure what will happen. But if history is any
>>> indicator then it won't be the sensation you're hoping for. Cheap items
>>> rarely do well in the marketplace. Time and time again we've seen that
>>> people are willing to pay for quality. Cheap items (Yugo, "Generic" brand,
>>> cheap beer (Iron City, Schlitz), cheap clothes, cheap sneakers, etc.)
>>> simply don't sell.
>>> I can think of several "cheap" items and companies that make these items
>>> which have failed. I'm having a difficult time thinking of any dirt-cheap
>>> products that have succeeded. But then again, I suppose there's always a
>> You seem to be confusing cheap with inexpensive, which are two very
>> different things.
> Larry's example is somewhat improper. Here you have no intent to *save*
> money. You simply need to offer something which is *affordable*. The
> children of Africa have not owned a Sony Vaio, so be sure they will be happy
> enough even if the computer breaks after several months (and probably
> replaced by another from the production line).
> The laptop cannot be named among failures like the Yugo because the US$100 is
> targeted at a different population altogether.
What makes you think that Yugo (Zastava) are a failure? They're not!
They continue to produce cars to this day.
This is in spite of the factory being deliberately bombed by Nato during
the last war.
I think that the general view of these vehicles is that they were
reasonable cars, but as they were based on older models (usually Fiats,
like Hyundia are based on GM/Vauxhall Astra), they were not so advanced
as equivalent period western and japanese cars.
If you look at a modern Skoda, you'll find that they're competitive with
current generation vehicles in all respects, in fact, they're quite nice
cars - no longer the subject of Jasper Carrot jokes as they used to be.
| Mark Kent -- mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
When a float occurs on the same page as the start of a supertabular
you can expect unexpected results.
-- Documentation of supertabular.sty