OLPC - "eaten my homework"

[Jeff Kinz]

On Wed, May 31, 2006 at 04:13:11PM -0400, Ben Scott wrote:
> On 5/31/06, John Abreau <jabr at blu.org> wrote:
> > So you're saying someone who is knowledgeable about actual textbook
> > production costs is wrong, because if you ignore the real-world
> > costs he pointed out, you can imagine something completely inadequate
> > for a cheaper price.
> 
>   No.  I'm saying that some of the real-world costs apply to the
> laptop, too -- namely the cost of the content, which I'm told is a
> significant cost for most books.  I'm also saying that applying
> assumptions normal to textbook printing in the US to a hypothetical
> project to provide low-cost textbooks to the third world is not
> reasonable, jist as applying the cost of a laptop for a business in
> the US to OLPC is not reasonable.  In particular, US textbooks are
> produced in small runs with relatively low lead times, are updated
> relatively frequently, and often cary extras (e.g., CDs, curriculum
> support, etc.) unrelated to the textbook itself.  

Hi Ben, what you say here is true for College texts but not Public school
texts.  They don't have the frequent updates or the media extras(yet
much).

> Given that
> information that separates those costs from the actual cost of
> printing and binding a durable book is lacking in this discussion, I
> feel these are valid points.

Public school texts are generally used for a decade, or until they fall
apart, depending...

>   There's also the fact that, as someone else pointed out, it's a lot
> easier to build infrastructure to print books then it is to build
> infrastructure to manufacture laptops.  A project to help "developing
> nations" build printing operations in, coupled with royalty-free text,
> might be a very practical solution.
> 
>   Jeff Kinz was correct when he emphasized the differences between the
> OLPC project's "laptop" and what I can buy from Dell; I don't
> understand why these hypothetical textbooks have to be limited to what
> I can buy at the UNH Bookstore.
 
I did my comparison mostly to Elementary public school texts in my last
email which looks at some industry reported costs.

> 
>   I started out my involvement in this thread not really having an
> opinion for or against the OLPC concept, or the printed text
> alternative.  If this discussion happens to mirror the assumptions of
> the OLPC people (namely, assuming "It must be cheaper if it's on a
> computer"), the OLPC project might not be as well considered as I
> would have hoped.
> 
> > I looked at nationalcolorcopy.com, and I see no indication that they
> > produce anything as rugged as a textbook.
> 
>   I thought I made that clear when I wrote, "This isn't what it would
> actually cost to print a text book".  Jeff Kinz asked me to back up
> what *I* was saying (reasonable); I provided that information as a
> readily available demonstration that prices get dramatically lower if
> you print in volume.

The nationalcolorcopy.com cited price was erroneous. (way off)
See my previous email.

>   I just realized that Jeff Kinz actually pointed me in the direction
> of one bit of additional information that durable books do not need to
> cost $50 or more: "[Textbooks] have stringently high costs because
> their construction and content is different than anything else except
> coffee table books."  Some quick spot checks find examples of such
> "coffee table books" for under $10 at popular online retailers.  Again
> (and I'll try to make this as clear as I can), THIS IS NOT INTENDED TO
> SUGGEST THESE ARE EQUIVALENT TO A TEXTBOOK.  This is presented only as
> evidence that the question "Do textbooks have to cost so much?" is a
> reasonable one.

Dang - the last thing I want to do is help Ben's position!  :-)

Coffee books are not constructed like textbooks.  What they share in
common is the need for extensive layout work on the content.  Even so I
suspect that any large coffee table books selling for $10 are probably
remainders selling at or below cost. (maybe... I could be "worng" :) )


Ding!  And there's the bell for the next round, but Kinz is tired, he's
moving slowly and staggering.  Clearly he's in no shape for this kind of
bout.  Will his corner even let him go in for the next round?  and now
for this commercial message from our sponsors: