World Ahead: Intel’s Enlightened Self-Interest It may be a good program but they aren't doing it for free Intels World Ahead Program (which is in its second year of development) has regularly been promoted as a charitable effort by the company to bridge the digital divide throughout the world. But make no mistake: Intel is in it for the money. An in-depth report by Fast Company takes a look at how Intel targets the developing countries that are likely to spend a lot of money bettering their business. One of the important areas highlighted in the article is how Intel has been accused of sabotaging other charitable efforts, such as OLPC, because they are competitive to Intels business in these other countries. For Intels part, theyre not denying that theyre in this business to make a buck. Called a fine example of enlightened self-interest by the reports author, World Ahead could be an example of how technology companies can pattern their growth in a way that benefits the greater community.
|
 zed260Premium join:2007-09-30 Cleveland, TN kudos:1 1 edit | there goal is make everyone love intell then use them to make yourself big bucks
all companies are out for a profit | |
|  |  MrMoodyFree range slavePremium join:2002-09-03 Smithfield, NC | Re: there goal is Hey, it worked for Apple. | |
|  |  | | What else does a company exist for if not profit? | |
|
 koamPink PeckerPremium join:2000-08-16 East Puddle Reviews:
·Shoreham Telephone
| Old news This is ancient news. Everyone knows that Intel is doing this and why. It's good business and it's not news. The headline and intro suggest some kind of deception on Intel's part. Then the rest of the article says that it's not deception. Make up your mind.
Why such needless sensationalism? | |
|  |  ThrowDemsOutIf you can't convince 'em, confuse 'emPremium join:2002-03-03 Mullica Hill, NJ kudos:4 | Re: Old news said by koam:This is ancient news. Everyone knows that Intel is doing this and why. It's good business and it's not news. The headline and intro suggest some kind of deception on Intel's part. Then the rest of the article says that it's not deception. Make up your mind. Google does the same thing and everyone runs around praising them. Intel does it and some news item tries to paint them as duplicitous in the headline. But, then again, the vast majority of internet denizens are easily fooled and led around by the nose. Maybe Intel should get the same PR firm that Google uses. -- Internet News My BLOG My Web Page | |
|  |  |  gaforcesUnited We Stand, Divided We Fall join:2002-04-07 Santa Cruz, CA | Re: Old news Google has a huge fan base from giving away gigs of email accounts and social networking. Intel has some hardware fans and a few engineers, and gives very little for free.
Even a PR firm cant make a hip company from a bunch of geek engineers and scientist who think mathematics is a substitute for sex.
Even the blue guys failed at that ... -- Do ye, quieting in your bosoms your strong hearts, Who of many good things have had your fill even to surfeit, With what is moderate nourish your mighty desire; for neither will We yield, nor shall you have all else as you wish. Solon | |
|
 Titus PulloI came, I saw, I slept join:2004-06-26 kudos:1 Reviews:
·Embarq Now Centu..
| Plowing ahead in order to make your life better by educating the third world; that way you're on equal footing with your economic equal! Isn't Intel trying their hardest to put some lowly millionaire out of business with this? The guy with the $100 (or $200) notebook computer?
I was going past Pravda, uh, I mean 60 minutes a few weeks back and thought I saw the story. Seems Intel smelled a market (this guy's) and decided to cash him out while they cashed in. But then Intel could smell a fart amongst a cavalcade of shitwagons.
Ahhh ... nothing like Corporate Goodwill with a profit tag attached.
-- A toe tag is more like it | |
|  |  Reviews:
·magicjack.com
| Re: Plowing ahead said by Titus Pullo:Isn't Intel trying their hardest to put some lowly millionaire out of business with this? The guy with the $100 (or $200) notebook computer? Negroponte (the guy with the $100 notebook) isn't necessarily a "business". He's a tech guy who took some time off from MIT (or wherever) to pursue a mostly philanthropic vision.
Negroponte's been his own worst enemy. The $100 laptop became a $140 laptop. Then $180. Then $200. He thought he had some contracts with foreign governments. A year passed, the governments backed out, and Negroponte remarked that he's not a businessman and had mistaken a handshake for a real commitment. Lately he's been promoting a "buy one, give one" campaign (which makes it a $400 laptop in order to get a laptop into the hands of a child).
I don't blame corporations for leaving. As they do, Negroponte blames them instead of himself for his troubles. He had a great vision. But, that doesn't make a business.
Mark | |
|  |  |  | | Re: Plowing ahead Well it made it 400$, but that bill would have been footed by consumers of the first world making it effectively "free." Intel didn't want that though as I recall. | |
|
 | | The problem is SELF-INTEREST is not COMMON-INTEREST Sure, Intel makes more money, but that's not necessarily the best COMMON interest. That's the problem with the megacorps. They are always about 'self interest' over the needs of the people.
Getting a computer at the lowest price running linux goes against everything the megacorps stand for. They are WORKING to MAINTAIN their 'effective monopoly' position, and anything that works against their goal, is by definition, a threat.
The world would be a much better place if the interests of the people were more important that the interests of the megacorps. You see it every day, in every story, from AT&T filtering to usage caps. Those policies are NOT in the best public interest, but only in the interest of the coke snorting, whore screwing, corrupt and EVIL megacorp executives. -- Relgion and Politics don't mix! I have firsthand knowledge of what happens when ANY religion mixes with ANY politics. | |
|  |  | | Re: The problem is SELF-INTEREST is not COMMON-INTEREST Intel isn't a monopoly, there are tons of other chipmakers. In the general PC market though it is mainly Intel vs. AMD. Also what is this BS about linux? Intel makes tons of chips for linux servers. Don't consider Microsoft and Intel as synonymous.
»news.theage.com.au/intel-withdra···k6r.html | |
|  |  |  Reviews:
·magicjack.com
| Re: The problem is SELF-INTEREST is not COMMON-INTEREST I can see his point. Intel (among others) benefit when Windows upgrades an OS or app, triggering huge numbers of hardware upgrades. A reduction of Windows users would affect that.
This could mean Intel (and video card, memory, motherboard manufacturers, etc.) are sensitive to MS as a market maker. It might go the other way, with MS being dependent upon the hardware manufacturers as market makers (allowing Microsoft to add features, bloat.). With Linux (as a desktop) it can survive on hardware a few generations old.
Mark | |
|  |  |  |  2 edits | Re: The problem is SELF-INTEREST is not COMMON-INTEREST Those that use old hardware, would find a way to use it either way, whether it is some other open source OS or Windows 95. The bottom line is those old boxes are being used for mundane use such as testing tweaks and running routers. The corporations and individuals running real applications will always have a need for ever increasing computing power. People don't buy higher end PCs (or at least the sector of the market that is actually a significant percentage of Intel's clientel) to run Vista bloatware gui crap. They do it to run the latest game, the latest data crunching application, to accommodate an increasing amount of server traffic, or to handle larger databases of their own clients.
While I see your point I think it is a very weak one because in reality while linux market share may be low, it's open source and adaptable nature is of no threat to Intel. Microsoft might have some leverage over Intel, but not enough to dictate OS usage as companies like IBM are distributing linux on a mass scale.
The issue here is actually that people in the US wanted a machine... | |
|
 |  PDXPLT join:2003-12-04 Banks, OR 1 edit | So who, specifically, at intel do you know who snorts coke or screws whores?
'sounds like you're getting confused with that former CEO of Broadcom. | |
|  |  |  | | Re: The problem is SELF-INTEREST is not COMMON-INTEREST said by PDXPLT:So who, specifically, at intel do you know who snorts coke or screws whores? 'sounds like you're getting confused with that former CEO of Broadcom. Go back to the 70s and 80s, when "coke snorting" and "whore screwing" were HUGE and I BET you could find at least a couple execs from Intel...  | |
|
 |  tshirtPremium,MVM join:2004-07-11 Snohomish, WA kudos:3 Reviews:
·Comcast
| said by karlmarx:Getting a computer at the lowest price running linux goes against everything the megacorps stand for. They are WORKING to MAINTAIN their 'effective monopoly' position, and anything that works against their goal, is by definition, a threat. .....corrupt and EVIL megacorp executives. selling as many chips as possible, at the highest average price, is what intel does. Not only, is it not corrupt and evil, it is the fiduciary responsibility of the executive at any company to do everything possible in the interest of the stockholders. Since there is far more need for computers in developing nations then the "one laptop per child" program can provide alone, intel can sell/provide there product to those areas with slightly higher budgets then the minimum that OLPC charges. I'm not sure where you think the money comes from to pay for either effort without "for profit" industries. | |
|  |  TzaleProud Libertarian ConservativePremium join:2004-01-06 NYC Metro | said by karlmarx:Sure, Intel makes more money, but that's not necessarily the best COMMON interest. That's the problem with the megacorps. They are always about 'self interest' over the needs of the people. Getting a computer at the lowest price running linux goes against everything the megacorps stand for. They are WORKING to MAINTAIN their 'effective monopoly' position, and anything that works against their goal, is by definition, a threat. The world would be a much better place if the interests of the people were more important that the interests of the megacorps. You see it every day, in every story, from AT&T filtering to usage caps. Those policies are NOT in the best public interest, but only in the interest of the coke snorting, whore screwing, corrupt and EVIL megacorp executives. OK KarlMarx, we'll listen to your rant on 21st century American Capitalism...
-Tzale -- Neoconservatives (G.W.B) are not real conservatives. A conservative believes in defending the Constitution. First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win. - RON PAUL 2008 »www.usconstitution.net/const.html
| |
|  |  |  ThrowDemsOutIf you can't convince 'em, confuse 'emPremium join:2002-03-03 Mullica Hill, NJ kudos:4 | Re: The problem is SELF-INTEREST is not COMMON-INTEREST said by Tzale:said by karlmarx:Sure, Intel makes more money, but that's not necessarily the best COMMON interest. That's the problem with the megacorps. They are always about 'self interest' over the needs of the people. Getting a computer at the lowest price running linux goes against everything the megacorps stand for. They are WORKING to MAINTAIN their 'effective monopoly' position, and anything that works against their goal, is by definition, a threat. The world would be a much better place if the interests of the people were more important that the interests of the megacorps. You see it every day, in every story, from AT&T filtering to usage caps. Those policies are NOT in the best public interest, but only in the interest of the coke snorting, whore screwing, corrupt and EVIL megacorp executives. OK KarlMarx, we'll listen to your rant on 21st century American Capitalism... -Tzale He should record his posts and play them back over and over again because it is always the same thing. -- Internet News My BLOG My Web Page | |
|
 |  koamPink PeckerPremium join:2000-08-16 East Puddle | more tedious anti-capitalist drivel. dry up and go to cuba if you love karl marx so much. enjoy. | |
|  |  |  | | Re: The problem is SELF-INTEREST is not COMMON-INTEREST said by koam:more tedious anti-capitalist drivel. As opposed to the tedious pro-capitalist dogma that comes from other posters... | |
|
 | | above comment Wow............. | |
|  garmst join:2000-09-17 New York, NY | I am in it for the money too! Intel's interest and mine are in perfect alignment. Make ME to the fastest and cheapest CPU chip on the planet.
I also like Intel's next plan for me: WiMax. Intel is my bud!
If I was Intel I too would help out the folks who will be my next customers. Eventually everyone will be a "next" customer but someone has to be the first "next" customer.
The developing country at the very bottom most likely is more interested in food, medicine, schools and such rather than mass interest access. | |
|  |  PDXPLT join:2003-12-04 Banks, OR | Re: I am in it for the money too! said by garmst:The developing country at the very bottom most likely is more interested in food, medicine, schools and such rather than mass interest access. That's not true, but it's an understandable attitude on this site; e.g., many of you say the same thing about broadband access by low-income people in the U.S., "they don't want it or need it".
That's because the people here mostly use the internet as a toy; i.e., downloading entertainment, BS'ing on forums like this, etc. In contrast, developing countries want to use it as a driver of economic development and a provider a social services: a way for villages to get services from doctors and teachers that heretofore have had none, a way for farmers to connect to markets that they haven't been able to before, etc. | |
|  |  |  garmst join:2000-09-17 New York, NY 1 edit | Re: I am in it for the money too! No, developing countries are no more mature about internet use, they are human beings such as ourselves. If they want a Doctor, they want a real doctor showing up, not a virtual doctor. Social services are delivered on the spot by a real person, not a web form.
Development in a developing country involves people on the scene delivering services, support, logistics, and knowledge transfer.
There is no virtual Peace Corps.... | |
|  |  |  |  PDXPLT join:2003-12-04 Banks, OR | Re: I am in it for the money too! said by garmst:If they want a Doctor, they want a real doctor showing up, not a virtual doctor. Easy to say in comfy NYC. But a real doctor ain't gonna show up no matter how much they want it. If the village nurse can consult with one 300 Km away over broadband, that's better than nuthin'. And alot cheaper for the gov't to provide. | |
|
 |  | | Ummm, teach a man to fish... the laptop provides information. Basic things like proper wound treatment, basic crop and weather information, and knowledge of opportunities such as development loans. | |
|
 | |
|
|