How schools are tricked into using PCs--when Macs are better

Zdnet ^ | 2/11/02 | Bob Shier

[Vermonter]

Editor's note: AnchorDesk is pleased to present guest columnist Bob Shier. A public school educator for more than 30 years, Shier lives in the Kansas City, Missouri area.

As an instructor of computer literacy in an all-Windows environment, I'm sometimes asked "would I ever consider using a Mac?" My answer: in a heartbeat!

So why am I teaching on Windows machines? Two reasons: peer pressure (we all accept that adolescents are slavishly conformist, but don't always recognize that the herd instinct is still present among adults), and false economies.

OFTEN, "fiscal responsibility" is cited as the reason to choose Windows over Macs. I suggest that there are two kinds of economy involved here: an out-of-the-box economy, and a down-the-road economy.

Of course, schools buy the cheapest boxes they can find--we're taxpayer funded, after all. Windows machines can be purchased for a somewhat lower initial investment.

Almost at once, however, the down-the-road aspect of the platform decision comes into play.

Here's my historical perspective.

FOR TEN YEARS, our school had an all-Mac lab. After a couple of years, they weren't as flashy as the new PCs in other district labs. But they kept chugging along year after year, doing exactly what we asked.

I did all hardware and software support as well as maintenance on the Macs, which amounted to cleaning the mice a couple of times a year and wiping off a monitor screen now and then.

Now that we have an all-Windows environment, I'm lucky to ever have more than 28 out of 30 machines functioning at any one time. Often less. I've started secretly hoping that some students will be sick from school during each class, just so nobody has to do without.

Regardless of how often technical-support people come, or how many things they fix, more problems show up as soon as they leave. If it's not bad memory, it's bad power supplies. If it's not bad motherboards, then it's bad hard drives. And when it's none of those, it's a software glitch that nobody has a clue how to fix.

For the tech support people, the time lag between my reporting a problem and its resolution may seem a minor matter. However, the phrase "mission critical" takes on new meaning as each new crop of impatient, exuberant, and hormonally enhanced adolescents enters my room each period.

THE TOTAL AMOUNT of staff time required just to keep these machines functional is an order of magnitude higher than what we experienced with the Macs. It almost defies belief.

Worse, the false economy of PCs is mostly buried under a ton of paper somewhere in the yearly budget document. In our case, personnel costs come from an entirely different piece of the budget pie than computer hardware.

Along with the false economy with Windows, I also can't find any real academic reason to go with the platform.

Over the past dozen or so years, PCs blanketed businesses everywhere and adults became more technologically comfortable. And parents started telling me to replace my Macs with PCs.

Their admonitions and opinions were not based upon any analysis of the efficiency and efficacy of computers in an educational environment. Rather, it was simply whatever they were using at work and whatever machine their friends had.

THE PARENTAL DEMAND that we teach kids to use "what's out there" is well-meant. It's based upon an understandable desire that children should become employable--that they should be able to conform to the prevalent platform of the workplace. The fact that the "prevalent platform" is in a constant state of flux is another matter entirely.

I'll add that just because you learn to drive in a Ford does not preclude you from eventually driving a Chevy. Same difference with standard productivity applications, such as Microsoft Office, which is available across platforms. But then, any general operation in a Mac application will be much the same in comparable Windows software, even if the exact machinations necessary to effect a result are slightly different.

For simple elegance of design, ease of use, and economy of operation, there's simply no comparison between the two platforms. If you want to work for the machine, go with Windows. If you want the machine to work for you, go with the Mac.

And that's what I really want for my students.

[zog]

--I don't know about other folks, but I always urge folks to buy macs also, especially if it's their first computer. You can sit down and use the thing the first evening, and they are extremely robust hardware-wise, the QA is something they have always emphasised heavily.. I've used both wintell and mac classics for years, and for most purposes I prefer macs. And there's so much software out there now, very little difference unless it's some highly specialised niche business, you can get what you want to do on either platform. And all the models-towers speaking here-made in the last few years are all as easy to upgrade and tinker around with inside the case as anything else, very easy.

Now with that said, I'm on week 3 using redhat linux, that's on a second drive on a mambo tower I built for a friend. One drive has 98se on it (I had the disk, that's why), the other I got some home burnt redhat disks, thought what the heck, try it out. I'm customising it for him now. I like it so far, it's close to becoming mainstream OS. The sheer enthusiam of these open source geeks is infectious, and you can't keep up with the advances. It's slick! I think it's a real capitalistic threat to both of the "big two" markets, both homedesktop and business. The only difference from winderz is it's still some command line stuff the average newbie might struggle with, but no different from dos commands really, all in all it's pretty nifty, and the gui is just as good as mac or windows, and redhats rpm manager and packages are easy to install. I haven't trtied mac osx yet, but looking forward to it, next-better apple machine I get. Waiting for the used prices to drop on powerbooks for that.

I say-get all three! heheh, I got vehicles from a moped to trucks, what's the difference? THE MORE COMPUTERS AND THE MORE DIFFERENT THE BETTER! yee haww! yahoo!

%^)

I think of girlfriends the same way, but the one I got now owns several large frying pans..........

[zog]

--I just saw my first real cobalt machine last week, a RaQ I think it is. pretty nifty. Was watching the live logs compared to a windows server box sitting next to it, with the windows box having twice as fast a chip in it. The cobalt linux box was much faster. Cheaper, too.

[B Knotts]

The only difference from winderz is it's still some command line stuff the average newbie might struggle with, but no different from dos commands really, all in all it's pretty nifty, and the gui is just as good as mac or windows, and redhats rpm manager and packages are easy to install.

Once you discover the true power of bash or tcsh, you'll be hooked. They're a LOT more powerful than CMD.EXE or COMMAND.COM. :-)

Another neat thing is even if you get fed up with sometimes-flaky PC hardware, you can run Linux (or NetBSD) on all sorts of other hardware.

[homeschool mama]

***As for all the other banter on this thread, I thought the line about answering your door naked when the J-Dubs come a callin useful.***

You're bad Fidgit. :o)

[zog]

--OK! I'm game! hardware, yes, MO POWER! What's your sugggestions for used hardware for someone on a hotchocolate and instant coffee level budget?

[toupsie]

PostgreSQL is also a reasonable option.

I agree PostgreSQL has its advantages. I use MySQL alot of intranet work and backended web sites -- but no ecommerce which I would use Oracle for.

[BnBlFlag]

The problem is PCs are used allmost allways in the business world regardless of the Mac's merits.

[supercat]

Once you discover the true power of bash or tcsh, you'll be hooked. They're a LOT more powerful than CMD.EXE or COMMAND.COM. :-)

How's it compare with MPW, which is itself much more powerful than cmd.exe or command.com?

[FreedomPoster]

AutoCAD ran on 386s, not that long ago, for crying out loud.

Revealing something about my age, I will admit to having run AutoCAD (very slowly) on an 8086 Compaq, then later an 8MHz AT clone 80286, c. 1985-1986. I was very pleased with myself at the time for managing to move the "special" video card to and installing the software on the new machine without having to go pay the VAR that sold us the initial setup. Whether that was "not that long ago" is arguable.

[B Knotts]

I've never used MPW, so I can't tell you. I think if you pick up an O'Reilly book on your shell of choice, you'll start to see how powerful these shells are. I prefer tcsh for interactive use myself, which I understand is the default OS X shell. I do shell scripting in bash, though, like everyone else.

[B Knotts]

Well, you can certainly pick up an old Sun or something, but bang-for-the-buck-wise, it's awfully tough to beat an AMD Duron and a KT7 motherboard. You can build such a box for a few hundred dollars, and the performance (particularly as a workstation) will far outstrip what you could find in a used Sun for the same price.

[Frumious Bandersnatch]

I'm not sure exactly what you are after, but Intuit makes a nice piece of financial software which does allow you to track stocks.  It is called Quicken.  I know that E*trade and Datek online allow you to do the same thing (in a more sophisticated and real-time fashion) through your browser.

[BoomerBob]

My apologies tying you to the national security computing statement... I browsed back and realized that it was someone else that made the claim.

I am familiar with Windows replicating software such as the one to which you linked. It's been my experience that it works with 60-70% of the software with greatly reduced efficiency. And of course, you know, pc's can run Unix as well so that is a wash between the systems... I too have heard the rumblings about IBM getting out of the pc market but my guess is at a minimum they will stick with notebook pc's as that is one of their best products... and finally, Apple has had net loss years since the return of Jobs. A look at the most recent report shows a net loss for their most recent quarter.

[The Raven]

C makes the world go round.

Should be Delphi.

[toupsie]

It's been my experience that it works with 60-70% of the software with greatly reduced efficiency.

Most of the time there is an Apple application that is the same as the PC version or is close to it. With over 14,000 applications written for Mac there is bound to be the equiv. I use Virtual PC everyday and it works fine on my fast G4 chipped Mac.

And of course, you know, pc's can run Unix as well so that is a wash between the systems...

Sure PCs can run UNIX (I use them as servers running BSD and Linux) but can Windows run UNIX natively? I can run MacOS, UNIX and Windows applications without rebooting and all at the same time.