Full of generalisations and flawed, this article brings no value to the subject at hand
The article is full of generalisations, brings no depth to the subject and is mocking some of the issues behind the initiative.
Your journalist's reasoning is full of flaws -
First of all, it seems that this person is of the opinion that nobody in a third world country has access to basic facilities such as public utilities. This is not correct. You will find that most countries have a middle class, a lower class with some (limited) purchasing power, and finally another group of people that are below the poverty line. You will find that, depending on the level of wealth present in a country, most of the demographic groups have no opportunities to purchase a computer. This down the line affects their employability, opportunities to create their own business (within the IT industry and otherwise).
Second of all, not all of the countries targeted by this initiative are third world countries (as stated above) - the fact is that computers are not part of primary and secondary education in all over the world.
In third place, as anyone who has been around during the last 10 years or so, has lived anywhere in the Western World and has been exposed to mass production, the higher the number of computers produced by the OLPC, the lower the manufacturing price. Hence, every time that a second manufacturer produces a computer to compete with the OLPC, the most likely it is that its price will have to increase. As it already has.
In fourth place - and with regards to electricity. Could I remind you that the unit has its own electricity generator, which can be activated by turning a crank or a pedal repeatedly? In the worst case scenario, most schools have electricity, and if a particular child doesn't have electricity at home and the battery runs out, the crank/pedal can be used to recharge the battery.
In fifth place - some international companies have social responsability programs in third world countries where they operate. I have seen these type of programs provide education (among other facilities) to their company employees and to local communities in the surrounding areas. I have observed this mostly among mining companies - they are usually located in remote areas, employee families have little access to facilities and need enticement to recruitment. Additionally the companies invest in the surrounding area, to obtain everything including food, contractors, electricity and water. Social responsibility programs would be an ideal target for this type of computer, as funds are limited and usually invested where they can get the best value for money.
I am sure other non-governmental organizations could be targeted by the OLPC.
I personally couldn't care less who contributes with the OLPC innards - whether it is intel or AMD. I hope that Negroponte succeeds in providing cheap computers to those that don't have access to them.
The sarcastic comments of your 'journalist' bring no value to the conversation. He fails to state why the Intel option is better. Even more, even though he states that poor people would 'rather be eating [dogs]' that having their taxes spent in computers, he states that the Intel option is better - even though IT IS MORE EXPENSIVE.
Did you have this 'article' proofread? What was your editor thinking??