November 2007


My friend sent me the link to the launch of the $199 PC by Everex. It was indeed quite interesting to read about since I have been following the MIT’s $100 laptop plan for a long time now. I am sure that Negroponte is definitely wondering, how the hell did this happen so quickly?

Well, I dug in a little further just to find out what exactly these two offerings are and how different are they?

Well, let’s start with the more well known one

The $100 laptop

This is a product created under the One Laptop per Child (OLPC) vision with the help of MIT Media Lab. Nicholas Negroponte has been working on this for at least a couple of years now and it is finally a reality. I have not personally tried the laptop, but there are others who have. Here is a pre-review!

The most interesting and innovative feature of the whole laptop is that it can be charged mechanically. A few winds ensures that it is good to run for another half and hour. Given that it is designed to work in the most remote African village, this is great!

From the latest news we know, the $100 laptop is actually going to priced very close to $200 ($182 from what I last remember reading).

Now for this Everex and gOS based machine: $199 PC

This machine is built to have all of Google’s products and was confused as Google’s OS. The clarifications can be found here. The most amazing (strange - however you see it) part is that these are only available through Walmart? (Is that where Americans are buying PCs these days?? ) I thought Indians bought a funny places, but buying PCs at Walmart is definitely a new thing to me and worse yet, it seems to be exclusively available just there!  What’s the deal in that?

Another interesting thing about this $199 PC is that it is powered by VIA (which is probably the third largest PC chip company after Intel and AMD). Interestingly, VIA has shown a clean value proposition in building such cheap hardware and obviously there are lots of advantags to doing that. Once the cost of the PC goes down (like the telephone instrument), it’s uptake goes up… More people using it means more outreach of software and more necessity of broadband (making PC broadband also highly inexpensive esp. in a country like India). If the dream to put a PC in every village has to be realized, hardware like this needs to be created! After all, people don’t really need super powerful machines. They just need to be able to the basic Office stuff and perhaps use the internet for communication, tele-medicine and getting info about their business (primarily agriculture and commodities). More about the Indian need and situation in another post.

This as well as the $100 laptop are powered by Linux and other Free/Libre Open Source Software (a philosophy that the start up I work with believes in passionately). The similarities are amazing and yet each tool has it’s own distinct value proposition.

Let’s see how both of these inexpensive machines pan out!

There was a very interesting article I read today from the stable of Knowledge@Wharton (K@W) titled: “Software’s Future: Melding the Web and the Desktop.” The article essentially talks about the three evolving models characterized by Microsoft (desktop software licenses and web based services), Google (primarily web based services with desktop data sharing) and Adobe (platform for building apps for both desktop+web like AIR).

All three models were discussed and various business models surrounding the same were discussed as well.

Microsoft: product licensing + subscription + ads

Google: ads + subscription (recently started with their $50/user/year for Google Docs)

Adobe: Sales of developer tools for their standard formats (pdfs, flash etc.)

My thoughts on the same are as follows:

The purely web based scenario will take at least a decade to truly mature. There is a lot of movement towards that field and the pace of growth is tremendous, but a lot of organizations are critically (and correctly) concerned about data security and service outage. I believe in my previous post, I talked about SaaS and how it has certain drawbacks of which data security and service outage (or withholding) were prime.

What is amazing though is the fact that a professor at Wharton echoed our thoughts on the pricing model of the future of software. We believe software is moving more towards becoming a utility than anything else. We believe that going forward charges on software would be on the basis of a utility firm (pay exactly for how much you use - not a fixed amount per month, but rather exactly how much you use!)

Here is an excerpt from the article:

(Prof.) Anand says another model that’s likely to emerge is one that is based on usage. In this model, a person who used a program infrequently could employ the web-based version for free or a small fee. Heavy users would pay more based on usage. In this model, which would apply to both web-based and desktop software, Anand likens software providers to electric utilities. “The notion is you can charge different prices based on levels of usage,” he says.

Given the huge disparity in usage of software in various companies, it is more appropriate to charge them as per their usage rather some standard blanket fee. It also becomes easier for the company to measure the utility of using certain services. Cost cutting will have more meaning in the organization when such vital usage and impact statistics are recorded and available.

We discussed this same thought almost 3 months back and are working towards making this a reality in the enterprise collaboration space.