Why do schools use Windows?

[GreGorGy]

MY kids always ask me questions - somehow they think I know everything (close, but not enough).

Like yesterday - why was there a ring around the sun? I told them stuff like high altitude clouds and light scatter - they were happy with that.

Then today, they asked this one: Why do schools only use windows?

Damn good question. I answered why they don't use Linux - too difficult for teachers - and Mac - too expensive and local support/agency is terrible.
Of course, they have only a few schools of experience between themselves so my questions are, to those who know:

Why do schools use windows?
Are there schools that do not and use others?

 

[midrange]

Would be quite chilly in winter if they didn't.

 

[bullzeye.za]

Public Schools use windows because the Department of Education's computer labs come preinstalled with it.

Though they will soon be moving to Ubuntu. ( at least in some places )

 

[w1z4rd]

Also most normal techies are not too bright and dont have the capacity or will to support an edubuntu network. Edubuntu is not difficult for teachers at all. The problem is finding the brains to setup and support such a network.

I notice the Universities I work with have moved over to Novell Linux systems lately so there is some improvement there, but its happening mostly in the higher levels of education.

 

[Raithlin]

Mostly because Microsoft sponsor them. My kids learn how to use Windows Vista, and the latest version of Microsoft Office in "IT". I love the school and the high level of education, but this really disgusts me. However, because it's sponsored, I have no say in the matter as a parent.

I teach my kids Linux at home, although I have to have a Windows box for their homework/studies. That's why MS sponsors schools, if you were wondering. It's the old "teach them while they are young" adage applied to business.

 

[LongOne]

Schools use Windows because that is what kids will use in the work place when they grow up.

Very few businesses are prepared to spend the extra money needed to set up and maintain non Windows systems and virtually all businesses out there use Microsoft Office only.

I am in the IT business and even the government has realised that Open Source do not mean free and even if it is labeled FOSS , the cost of ownership of such free software can be more expensive than in Windows.

As an example one can use the issue of developing for Linux vs developing for Windows. I pay a typical Windows .Net developer up to R150 an hour while a Java developer can cost me up to R350 an hour. Java projects also take roughly 2.5 times as long to develop compared to Windows projects. The result is that my clients need to pay up to five times more for a Linux development.

Once they work that out for themselves, they quickly move over to windows because while it may be more expensive to buy the operating system, the cost of ownership in general is much lower - simple economics.

 

[Budza]

It's like the Bile class has now become 'religious studies' or life direction or some such BS.

They should do the same with PCs- Windows and Linux lessons. Problem comes into choosing the flavour of Linux.

I remember the word/excel/powerpoint classes- these should be OpenOffice. Kinda forces the parents to have (by hook/crook) a copy of Windows + Office at home for the kids to complete the homework etc. Bit of a scam- no wonder Windows 'sponsors' the schools.

 

[markings]

Whenever I have looked at open office and thunderbird in the past I got nauseous just looking at the user interface.
I need to look at the display all day, why should i look at something that has been put together by someone with no aestethic sense?

 

[w1z4rd]

Whenever I have looked at open office and thunderbird in the past I got nauseous just looking at the user interface.
I need to look at the display all day, why should i look at something that has been put together by someone with no aestethic sense?

Well hopefully you dont apply "it must look pretty" logic when working with schools. Hopefully if you were working with schools you would concentrate on functionality and security before "its looks pretty".

 

[Raithlin]

Whenever I have looked at open office and thunderbird in the past I got nauseous just looking at the user interface.
I need to look at the display all day, why should i look at something that has been put together by someone with no aestethic sense?

The UI isn't generally the best, I'll admit, but Thunderbird outperforms Outlook any day of the week.

Maybe I should get involved in one of these OSS projects, and modify the UI to suit you? Or wait... maybe YOU could! That's the joy of OSS apps - you too can make a difference.

 

[solo7]

Microsoft gives schools and ngo's windows software for next to nothing per licence....

 

[w1z4rd]

Microsoft gives schools and ngo's windows software for next to nothing per licence....

I heard that had stopped. It came across as classic bait and switch.

 

[Lydon]

Because you want to teach kids how to use the operating system they'll very likely be using out of school. It's the same reason we also used Macs at school - to give us experience with Mac OS.

 

[w1z4rd]

Because you want to teach kids how to use the operating system they'll very likely be using out of school. It's the same reason we also used Macs at school - to give us experience with Mac OS.

Academy of receptionists would use that logic.

When I was at school we used Spectrums

 

[graviti]

It comes down to a multitude of reasons actually. (I am an IT teacher at a government school).

1. Teaching IT, we are required to meet requirements for the syllabus. If the syllabus said you must run Windows 98, you had to run Windows 98. Of recent, they've realised the stupidity of it. So they've opened up the options. You may use whatever operating system you want, and whatever software you need, as long as you can complete syllabus. The current language of development in IT is Java. This can run in Windows, Linux and Mac, so not a problem.

2. The Education Department signed an agreement with Microsoft, whereby, as long as we purchased the initial Windows License, we would be able to upgrade to whichever version we wanted for free, as well as give us the full Microsoft Office package for free. Furthermore, we could install 1 server instance for free.

3. The decision to run Windows was initially made on the premises that 80% of the world uses Windows. (See above for reference). However, it does not mean that it is exclusive.

4. The teacher of the subject invariably has only ever used Windows themselves. Having seen the calibre of some of the people attempting to teach IT at the moment, it's no wonder that they are sticking to Windows. A lot of the teachers are still learning how to use the programs themselves. So a new environment is going to be difficult. However, that is not always the case.

The practical exam supplied for IT now includes OpenOffice variants of the MS Office questions. There are quite a few schools out there that have invested in Edubuntu or some other Ubuntu derivative to save costs. Netbeans and JGrasp run perfectly on Ubuntu.

Our school for instance, runs Windows XP across the board as an OS, merely because we have already made the investment, but our next lab will be an Ubuntu setup. 4 of our 10 servers are Ubuntu. The others are Windows Server 2003, merely because the investment has already been made. We have Open Office and many other FOSS packages installed everywhere. Through slow exposure the students are making their own choices as to which they prefer to use. We will educate according to the majority choice. My Grade 11 and 12 classes are sticking to MS Office, but the Grade 10 class want to be taught in both, as they see a future whereby skills in both could be essential.

To clear a few things up. The school gets free Office licenses! The students don't. So we encourage the students to install Open Office, and use it at school as well.

One of the requirements is that each child who does IT as a subject has to have their own PC. By using Ubuntu and Open Office, we are able to broaden the demographic to which the subject is available.

So the issue boils down to what was already in place, and do they have a champion to move away from a monopoly of software choices?

 

[fmr]

The Linux/Windows barrier is what separates boys from men, figuratively speaking. If you use your computer for Word Processing, Entertainment, or Gaming, then Windows is not a bad choice. If you are a programmer, webmaster, network administrator, etc., then Linux would be the way to go.

Therefore, my vote is that Windows should be tought in CAT (Computer Applications Technologies), and Linux in IT. Pupils who take IT should know the ins and outs of Windows already, and need a new challenge (i.e. Linux).

PS: I dual boot Windows XP and OpenSUSE Linux on my main computer

 

[markings]

The UI isn't generally the best, I'll admit, but Thunderbird outperforms Outlook any day of the week.

Maybe I should get involved in one of these OSS projects, and modify the UI to suit you? Or wait... maybe YOU could! That's the joy of OSS apps - you too can make a difference.

TB outperforms Outlook in what way? Speed or facilities? For the former I have a good and fast CPU.

Ah yes, if one is not happy with open source I can modify things myself. Maybe I have to learn a new computer language, I can introduce my own bugs and sort them out. Everyone can become a software writer/modifier. This is the kind of attitude which will keep open source from getting off the ground in a major way.
I just want to use a program, I don't want to modify it to get basic things right. It is wastefull of resources.
There is not enough time in the day to do what I have to do, let alone modify a UI because the one that it supplied looks terrible.

 

[The_Unbeliever]

Academy of receptionists would use that logic.

When I was at school we used Spectrums

Cool

When I was at Technikon, we used Apple II's... I hated it as there was no proper editing whereas the Spectrum had proper editing in.

 

[The_Unbeliever]

It comes down to a multitude of reasons actually. (I am an IT teacher at a government school).

1. Teaching IT, we are required to meet requirements for the syllabus. If the syllabus said you must run Windows 98, you had to run Windows 98. Of recent, they've realised the stupidity of it. So they've opened up the options. You may use whatever operating system you want, and whatever software you need, as long as you can complete syllabus. The current language of development in IT is Java. This can run in Windows, Linux and Mac, so not a problem.

2. The Education Department signed an agreement with Microsoft, whereby, as long as we purchased the initial Windows License, we would be able to upgrade to whichever version we wanted for free, as well as give us the full Microsoft Office package for free. Furthermore, we could install 1 server instance for free.

3. The decision to run Windows was initially made on the premises that 80% of the world uses Windows. (See above for reference). However, it does not mean that it is exclusive.

4. The teacher of the subject invariably has only ever used Windows themselves. Having seen the calibre of some of the people attempting to teach IT at the moment, it's no wonder that they are sticking to Windows. A lot of the teachers are still learning how to use the programs themselves. So a new environment is going to be difficult. However, that is not always the case.

The practical exam supplied for IT now includes OpenOffice variants of the MS Office questions. There are quite a few schools out there that have invested in Edubuntu or some other Ubuntu derivative to save costs. Netbeans and JGrasp run perfectly on Ubuntu.

Our school for instance, runs Windows XP across the board as an OS, merely because we have already made the investment, but our next lab will be an Ubuntu setup. 4 of our 10 servers are Ubuntu. The others are Windows Server 2003, merely because the investment has already been made. We have Open Office and many other FOSS packages installed everywhere. Through slow exposure the students are making their own choices as to which they prefer to use. We will educate according to the majority choice. My Grade 11 and 12 classes are sticking to MS Office, but the Grade 10 class want to be taught in both, as they see a future whereby skills in both could be essential.

To clear a few things up. The school gets free Office licenses! The students don't. So we encourage the students to install Open Office, and use it at school as well.

One of the requirements is that each child who does IT as a subject has to have their own PC. By using Ubuntu and Open Office, we are able to broaden the demographic to which the subject is available.

So the issue boils down to what was already in place, and do they have a champion to move away from a monopoly of software choices?

Excellent.

Students need to be taught that there is an alternative.

I use OpenOffice myself, no issues with how it looks. It does the job just as well as bloated Office 2007...

 

[Roger.Wilco]

Students need to be taught that there is an alternative.

I use OpenOffice myself, no issues with how it looks. It does the job just as well as bloated Office 2007...

I agree, they should be taught the alternative, but their main focus should be on the one that the kids will be using when they leave school (Windows).

As for OpenOffice, it's fine for your basic stuff, but when you start working for formulas, v-lookups, macros etc., then OpenOffice is nowhere close to Office 2007.