i doubt how a wi-fi only tablet be used to push content to the masses (students in the rural areas). Schools in india (specially govt. run) have limited or not connectivity.. so the question is what the govt planning to do with these tablets ??
They may find that the problem may be the touchscreen. Resistive touch screens tend to be a lot less reliable than capacitive ones (such as on the iPhone etc) and do wear out. They also can suffer from drift over time and are can be vulnerable to humidity and dirt. It is also very difficult to make them multi-touch, so you are going to do a lot of one fingered typing, no pinching or other multi-touch gestures etc. Having a large number of school children using these in rural and humid environments may be a maintenance nightmare!
Projective capacitive screens allow multi-touch, and have far fewer environmental vulnerabilities and wear-out mechanisms, but they do cost a lot more.
By reading this article, I think this "fantastic product" is delivered/released with photographs also shown. So, I doubt if it is still on paper.
To summarize, I agree with you "Talk is cheap" AND "Designed and Delivered product is also Cheap".
Lets talk how good the specs are how good the performance is...
BTW, it may be $60 BOM tablet and $35 subsidised, so lets not expect a dual core performance product
This is a commendable govt initiative to promote education. The tablet is perhaps a download and display device to push educational content and make it available to a vast majority who cannot access publications. The ubiquity of GSM infrastructure will make it easier for the content availability. You may not need a super-fast processor and/or an elaborate input system because it's not supposed to be interactive but facilitative(?). Definitely better (and cheaper) than the TV channels/content boasting of imparting quality education.
I guess in general it is a great idea if they can pull it off...but why the tablet? Everyone in the 3rd world is trying to get a cell phone, can really afford two devices? Would it be better to produce $35 cell phone? Kris