Linux - Stop Holding Our Kids Back

Reminds me of many of my nazi like Computer teachers I had during my time in middle and highschool.

I remember getting yelled at for trying to figure out a comand line to exit out from a kiddie comand line programming (turtle?) program after miss clicking in a menu. She seemed to act like I really could of damaged something. OR the time she game a lecture about software piracy "never copy software" then when I asked about shareware (doom had just been released as shareware at the time) and freeware she claimed you still had to pay for them and gave me a evil look.

Although I do sense that this gentleman is grandstanding.
 
FAKE because there is no real name and address. If someone is that stupid you would HAVE to post their name and address so we can all tell this person how ignorant this person is.
 
finalgt said:
IMO the hardcore Linux dudes are so, so much worse.
Click to expand...

I fully agree... That whole 'freedom' and 'Micro$oft is ev0l' nonsense is getting so old by now.

As for this whole charade... I think there's a bit of a point here still (even though it's probably a fake story).
Like it or not, Windows makes the world go round. People should stop thinking so black-and-white. I have nothing against people using linux, but there is the fact that most computers (around 90%) run Windows/Office, and as such it is important for everyone to at least be familiar with the basics of that software. Most of them will be using it at work and/or at home.
And as such, introducing young students to Windows/Office is very useful. Ofcourse they could also be shown linux just so they know there's more software out there than just the stuff coming out of Redmond... Fact however is that most people will probably never come into contact with anything other than Windows, so it's not as useful to teach them linux as it is to teach them Windows.

I think that even most linux users will have to admit that they still need to know the basics of Windows/Office, because they are likely to encounter it in everyday life.
It sounds to me like many linux users are in denial about that, and go way overboard.

Aside from that, I can understand why people don't want students installing different OSes on school systems. It's a bit hard for a system administrator to maintain his systems that way.
 
brons2 said:
Unless you're on the IT staff, why would someone using a business workstation need to be an expert on Windows? Skills learned on Linux and Open Office can be translated into Windows, or Mac, or even vice-versa.

I help run a computer lab at a non-profit for disadvantaged kids and we run Macs and PC's running both Windows and Linux. Basically, whatever gets donated to us. The most important thing for us is to just get the kids in and sit him/her down in front of a computer, any computer, and teach them basic Internet and office productivity software for starters. The ones who have been coming for a while get into more advanced topics like multimedia production and HTML.
Click to expand...

Why would someone need to be an expert on Windows? They would not. The problem is that most computer users are so ignorant of anything tech related that if you move them from one version of Word to another, you are in for trouble. Now take that and train them on using email in Thunderbird and then move them to Outlook Express and they will all call for technical support. Been there, seen that.

A recent real life example: Customer bought a new el-cheapo machine from Best Buy. The new machine ran Vista instead of the XP they were used it. The thought was that since all they use is this one DOS program, the OS didnt matter. Well unfortunately you can not "full screen" this DOS app in Vista, although you can maximize it. Unfortunately maximizing leaves the border around it, the title bar, the start menu, etc. Their solution? They put the machine in the shop to have it downgraded to XP Pro (they chose Pro over Home because that is what they had on the other machines, they did not need to). We told them that several things did not have XP drivers (front panel screen, sound card, etc) their reply: "Can I full screen the program we use?", I said "Yes sir, but....", they said "then its fine, do it", once again I said "yes sir".

I had a lady a while back bring in her Windows 3.1 machine, would NOT talk about upgrading. Her response to any attempt was "it does exactly what I want, why should I change that?" In a world where this kind of thing happens you want to suggest moving these kinds of real world people from Windows to Linux?

Allan
 
TheMead said:
Reminds me of many of my nazi like Computer teachers I had during my time in middle and highschool.
Click to expand...

In fifth grade I got sent to the principal's office for changing the resolution on the computer I was using in typing class from 800x600 to 1024x768. I almost got suspended, no joke. :eek:

And yes, the whole "tried Linux in college" makes this news story sound like BS.
 
Good heavens! The ultimate brainwash victim!

I don't dig Linux, but geez...
 
BladeVenom said:
I don't think it's fake. There's more stupid teachers than smart ones.
Click to expand...

Me, neither. I was a computer science student in college. I took a 200 level course that involved programming in 1998 and the professor said that the entire class was based around DOS since he had never used Windows. He's a god damn computer science professor and he's not up on the latest??? On top of that, he was my advisor for the department!
 
I tried Linux a couple of years ago, and didn't personally care for it. I understand others like it, and that is fine. But, the whole Linux-evangelists thing is beyond annoying. And the "It's just as easy as Windows to use" argument is absolute BS.

If you want proof that Linux is not as easy to use as Windows or OSX, think about this: Windows and OSX cost well over $100 each, and they make up the large majority of the desktop market. Linux is FREE, and it still has an extremely low share of the desktop market.

If Linux were "as easy as Windows, and it works better", don't you think people would be installing it in huge numbers? Imagine if Apple made OSX compatible with all Windows capable PCs, and then decided to give it away for free. Do you think it would have an install base as small as Linux? Of course not. Over night, it would become a huge hit. People would be talking about it everywhere and trying it out, if for no other reason then to avoid buying a new copy of Windows ever again.

So, no. For the large majority of people, Linux is never going to be an acceptable replacement for Windows as a desktop OS. It is great server software, and something interesting to use on the desktop for those who like to be different (or those who hate Microsoft). But that is about it.
 
I lol'd at the "we did it in college" part, made Linux sound like some sort of drug...and it is, a good one. I would love to call shens, but I ran into the same mind set already a couple of times where I work where people had really never heard of all the Windows alternative drugs.

All hail Windows!
 
Read the guy's blog. He updated it with more information. Apparently he's been speaking with the teacher in question, and both sides lept to conclusions.
 
Dosomo said:
I tried Linux a couple of years ago, and didn't personally care for it. I understand others like it, and that is fine. But, the whole Linux-evangelists thing is beyond annoying. And the "It's just as easy as Windows to use" argument is absolute BS.
Click to expand...

I do agree that those preaching Linux can get annoying, but their reasoning is sound -- to open up the minds of those who believe that only Windows or Mac exist as viable OS's. In fact Linux is very viable, and therefore needs to be advertised. If you tried Linux a couple of years ago, you need to try it again because there have been exponential advancements in user-interface, ease-of-use, and productivity in the Linux world in the past 2 years.

Dosomo said:
If you want proof that Linux is not as easy to use as Windows or OSX, think about this: Windows and OSX cost well over $100 each, and they make up the large majority of the desktop market. Linux is FREE, and it still has an extremely low share of the desktop market.
Click to expand...

The only thing this proves is that both Windows and Apple have a larger share of the market. You are correct that ease-of-use was a big factor in the history of OS's which gave Windows the upper hand -- it is the industry standard front-end. However, now that Linux is viable as a client, the desktop market has seen shifts, albeit small since people are still learning about alternative OS's.

Dosomo said:
If Linux were "as easy as Windows, and it works better", don't you think people would be installing it in huge numbers? Imagine if Apple made OSX compatible with all Windows capable PCs, and then decided to give it away for free. Do you think it would have an install base as small as Linux? Of course not. Over night, it would become a huge hit. People would be talking about it everywhere and trying it out, if for no other reason then to avoid buying a new copy of Windows ever again.
Click to expand...

See, this is where you are wrong. The market is entrenched in years of using Windows and if you know anything about Business, you'd know that changes like that will not happen over night. It takes well informed decisions supported by research and testing to show a corporation that it should switch platforms and can still continue to perform as before.

Dosomo said:
So, no. For the large majority of people, Linux is never going to be an acceptable replacement for Windows as a desktop OS. It is great server software, and something interesting to use on the desktop for those who like to be different (or those who hate Microsoft). But that is about it.
Click to expand...

The biggest problem that Linux faces with increasing market share from companies entrenches in Windows is that most software used in business only runs on an MS-based OS and much of it is ancient. Companies face not only logistics from changing their clients but also rewrites of software that they've been using for years (This in many cases is needed or for the better anyway, but as we all know its about money and sometimes businesses just won't justify a rewrite).

The fact that you CAN run windows programs on Linux through WINE or other (Cedega, etc.) is a step in the right direction. Comparable programs in Linux that are used everyday (spreadsheets, word processing, minor databasing, graphics, reporting, etc.) have taken major steps in the past two years and offer viable alternatives for the "average" user. And this is exactly whom Linux enthusiasts are trying to advertise to, to target. Anything an "average" user does (surf the net, manage music, write papers, play with art, etc) Linux can do just as well as Windows -- and its easier than before. I'm not saying its perfect, but its a viable alternative.
 
Vryce said:
And the easier Ubuntu gets, the more it feels like Windows.


/duck
Click to expand...

I like this comment. I feel the same way about Ubuntu. However, you have to 'think' like your enemy in order to outsmart them.

I don't know whether or not to believe the story. The ignorance levels were very high, and it seems like a publicity stunt. It seems that this is over Yellow Dog linux per my pseudo-google-fu. It don't seem like HeliOS is an actual distribution of itself, so how the teacher tracked YDL back through Fixstars, Terra Soft to HeliOS is questionable. Unless someone can enlighten this situation.
 
I am enlightened now as to the involvement of HeliOS and how the teacher got back to Ken. Either way, interesting read.
 
THRESHIN said:
i remember having teachers like that - although not as bad. they're morons that don't know their ass from a hole in the ground on power trips for the most part. that dolt should be fired.
Click to expand...

If the teacher has tenure it's almost impossible to fire them no matter how bad they are. There are good teachers, but most of them could never survive in the real world on their own. Some of them tried with regular jobs, failed, and became teachers only as a result. Then they complain because the people with the regular business jobs are making more money than them.
 
slave to proprietary

slave to open source

the OS dollar differential is about $500 max

the time differential is immeasurable - some will get it quickly, most will never get it

pick your slave status of choice & then, please, STFU
 
g-money said:
See, this is where you are wrong. The market is entrenched in years of using Windows and if you know anything about Business, you'd know that changes like that will not happen over night. It takes well informed decisions supported by research and testing to show a corporation that it should switch platforms and can still continue to perform as before.
Click to expand...

I knew this argument would come up. And you are right that in the corporate world a switch from one OS to another takes a lot of time and research. However, this does not explain the incredibly slow and small adoption rate of home users. And home users are not as slow to adopt something "new and better". If they were, then how do you explain the high adoption rate of Firefox? Home users are very happy to try new software, if it is proven to be better than what they are currently using. If Linux were better and easier than Windows, it would have no trouble getting new users. After all, if there is one thing that grabs every person's attention, it is the word FREE.

You also skipped right over my comment about how quickly OSX would be adopted if it were in Linux's position. If Apple offered a compatible free version of OSX, it would take the market by storm. Microsoft would have very real competition. And it would happen virtually over night. The fact remains that even among the "enthusiast" PC community, Windows is the chosen OS over Linux. This means enthusiasts would rather spend money to buy a copy of Windows than deal with Linux, even if it is given to them.

g-money said:
Linux can do just as well as Windows -- and its easier than before. I'm not saying its perfect, but its a viable alternative.
Click to expand...

I am sure this is true. It is most likely "easier" than before. And it is a "viable" alternative. But neither of those facts make Linux easier or better than the mainstream solutions.

And don't get me wrong. I am not a Windows super-fan. I would happily try a new OS that brings real improvements to the table. However, the main selling point of Linux has always been great stability, but I haven't had stability problems with a Windows system since before XP. This leaves very little reason for me to deal with the headaches involved in running Windows programs in emulation.

I don't love MS, but I don't consider them the devil either. They provide a product that does what I want it to do without any real issues. If Linux wants my attention, they have to provide a very real and tangible benefit over their competitors. And currently, for me personally, I don't see that benefit. If I am wrong, someone please point out some things that a Linux OS can do that Windows can not. Because, so far all I hear is how it can do some things the same as Windows, and almost as easily.
 
Oh, and one last thing. I don't want my prevous post to sound like I am bashing Linux. Linux has some very valid uses. If I were setting up a server or building a box for a very specific purpose (HTPC or low-power internet device), I would absolutely consider using Linux. But for a day-in / day-out desktop OS, I don't see it as a viable solution for most people.
 
Dosomo said:
If I were setting up a server or building a box for a very specific purpose (HTPC or low-power internet device), I would absolutely consider using Linux.
Click to expand...

The sad thing is that Linux is the Windows of the *nix-world, in the sense that it's the only OS that most people know, and they don't bother looking at potentially better alternatives.
How about Free/Open/NetBSD for example?
 
DeathFromBelow said:
In fifth grade I got sent to the principal's office for changing the resolution on the computer I was using in typing class from 800x600 to 1024x768. I almost got suspended, no joke. :eek:

And yes, the whole "tried Linux in college" makes this news story sound like BS.
Click to expand...
LOL. Something similar happened to me. I went over the my g/f's parents' house to backup all their stuff cuz they were getting a mac. They were rocking 800x600 for some ungodly reason and I changed it to 1024. Just as I got back to my house I get a frantic phone call from my g/f because her parents said i broke their computer and i had to come back and fix it.

When I got back over there and they showed me what the "problem" was I almost slapped her mom in the face.
 
Yes, these people still exist. They are almost as bad as the IT guys who run from the room screaming as soon as they hear the words "open source" or "Linux."
 
It does feel slightly "off" for some reason, but I'm willing to take this at face value, and she "probably" tried a copy that was bought at the campus so she thinks that ALL of linux is for sale, THAT plus all teh stuff going o about piracy as well went into her mind.

That said, his response was WAY over the top, (Slave/union/etc etc.)

Linux IS good, but that said untill I can game on it without dual booting, or an emulator that won't choke on anything in the last year or so I have to stay with M$, even though they went out of their minds with Vista's pricing scheme
 
Dephcon said:
LOL. Something similar happened to me. I went over the my g/f's parents' house to backup all their stuff cuz they were getting a mac. They were rocking 800x600 for some ungodly reason and I changed it to 1024. Just as I got back to my house I get a frantic phone call from my g/f because her parents said i broke their computer and i had to come back and fix it.

When I got back over there and they showed me what the "problem" was I almost slapped her mom in the face.
Click to expand...

Well you should have shown them what you did and if they liked it that way.

I know people who HAVE to run at a lower res because of eyesight, so what is a no brainer to YOU may be to much for someone else.
 
If real, the teacher was definitely clueless and severly over reacted.. but the comments on that thread.. jesus linux nuts give us semi-normal geeks bad name.
 
GilmourD said:
Me, neither. I was a computer science student in college. I took a 200 level course that involved programming in 1998 and the professor said that the entire class was based around DOS since he had never used Windows. He's a god damn computer science professor and he's not up on the latest??? On top of that, he was my advisor for the department!
Click to expand...

I'm surprised he was using DOS, but I can't name one professor I had throughout undergrad/grad school that tought on an MS OS. I Take that back, x86 assembly was taught using Dos and the the 100 level (entry level programming) was taught on dos (old borland pascal compiler).

Most professors were openly hostile towards MS. In fairness, MS wasn't exactly a good corporate citizen in those days. "It's not finished until Lotus doesn't work." Claiming Chicago would be out by summer '94....then december 94 (I knew beta testers, and nobody thought it could be out in 94). MS knew that too...but it kept people from buying OS/2. I was not a fan in those days.

Nevertheless, the aversion to all things Microsoft was a bit much, even for me....that started to change around '97, but not in the higher level classes.
 
g-money said:
I do agree that those preaching Linux can get annoying, but their reasoning is sound -- to open up the minds of those who believe that only Windows or Mac exist as viable OS's. In fact Linux is very viable, and therefore needs to be advertised. If you tried Linux a couple of years ago, you need to try it again because there have been exponential advancements in user-interface, ease-of-use, and productivity in the Linux world in the past 2 years.



The only thing this proves is that both Windows and Apple have a larger share of the market. You are correct that ease-of-use was a big factor in the history of OS's which gave Windows the upper hand -- it is the industry standard front-end. However, now that Linux is viable as a client, the desktop market has seen shifts, albeit small since people are still learning about alternative OS's.



See, this is where you are wrong. The market is entrenched in years of using Windows and if you know anything about Business, you'd know that changes like that will not happen over night. It takes well informed decisions supported by research and testing to show a corporation that it should switch platforms and can still continue to perform as before.
Click to expand...

YOu're just plain wrong. Not a little wrong, but you couldn't be more wrong. Linux is NOT ready for the desktop market. When I use the built in Ubuntu install utility and it asks me for my password and it acts like it's installing and doesn't, that's a HUGE problem. When it does that without so much as a message telling me it failed, that's a complete loser for home users.

Windows has an incredible amount of stupid unintelligible error messages and when things go wrong, most users are fucked. But with Linux, the basics don't always work via the gui. Hell, a co-worker (who outside of work only uses Linux), decided to switch from Ubuntu to Fedora. He'd tried out the live CD and loved it. Installed Fedora and it completely locked every few minutes. He's currently reinstalling Ubuntu, because he's got to get it working before he leave for training in 2 days.

We've also seen Ubuntu lock up (it's uncomon, but it happens). There's just no advantage for the home user.

For developers, especially those of us who develop backend software, there are many advantages to *nix desktops and *nix in Virtualbox. If you're making a black box device (e.g. Tivo) Linux is a great OS. But if the end user has to actually interact with the OS itself, it's the wrong OS for 99% the people out there.

I really don't get why you'd argue otherwise, unless you don't know any non-tech people. Giving my parents Linux as their only OS is a recipe for making me miserable (which means they're not very happy either).

Now if you're going to give them an OS, and they're never ever going to install anything, then Ubuntu is probably OK....so long as YOU live nearby so YOU can take care anything they need...because they can't do it, and they aren't going to troll linux boards for info.

Some day, Linux may have a front end that is solid enough for the masses. That day has not come. It's come a long way, but I'd be surprised if it's ready for the masses in 5 years, but I won't be upset if I"m wrong.
 
MavMange said:
If the teacher has tenure it's almost impossible to fire them no matter how bad they are. There are good teachers, but most of them could never survive in the real world on their own. Some of them tried with regular jobs, failed, and became teachers only as a result. Then they complain because the people with the regular business jobs are making more money than them.
Click to expand...

And the reason they complain about pay is because Teacher pay in the U.S. is pretty fucking bad. So if our teachers aren't good (and I"m not going to get into a pointless debate where nobody is going to prove anything), maybe it's because we pay them so poorly that the most talented teachers go into some other field.

And FYI, being good in business or a good accountant doesn't mean you'll be a good teacher. I had many brilliant computer science professors in college. I can count on one hand the number who could teach....and they canned one of them, because she didn't bring in enough research $.

In Louisiana, in the late 90's, the starting salary for an elementary school teacher started at 14k. You could make almost that much at McDonalds.

And FYI, low salaries are why the teachers unionized in teh first place.
 
Flea77 said:
Why would someone need to be an expert on Windows? They would not. The problem is that most computer users are so ignorant of anything tech related that if you move them from one version of Word to another, you are in for trouble. Now take that and train them on using email in Thunderbird and then move them to Outlook Express and they will all call for technical support. Been there, seen that.

A recent real life example: Customer bought a new el-cheapo machine from Best Buy. The new machine ran Vista instead of the XP they were used it. The thought was that since all they use is this one DOS program, the OS didnt matter. Well unfortunately you can not "full screen" this DOS app in Vista, although you can maximize it. Unfortunately maximizing leaves the border around it, the title bar, the start menu, etc. Their solution? They put the machine in the shop to have it downgraded to XP Pro (they chose Pro over Home because that is what they had on the other machines, they did not need to). We told them that several things did not have XP drivers (front panel screen, sound card, etc) their reply: "Can I full screen the program we use?", I said "Yes sir, but....", they said "then its fine, do it", once again I said "yes sir".

I had a lady a while back bring in her Windows 3.1 machine, would NOT talk about upgrading. Her response to any attempt was "it does exactly what I want, why should I change that?" In a world where this kind of thing happens you want to suggest moving these kinds of real world people from Windows to Linux?

Allan
Click to expand...

I'm the network and server guy at work so I don't have to deal with these issues. However, in the educational environment I volunteer in (disadvantaged kids) they are all too happy to sit in front of a computer, any computer. And we do our best to provide them a variety of experiences. If I had people bringing in DOS or Windows 3.1 stuff, I would probably seek employment elsewhere. Quiet frankly I am not interested in working on computers for people who are so resistant to change. Because those sort of attitudes usually go farther than just their computers, they're usally obstinate in other areas as well.
 
Karen Greathouse may or may not be the person involved, either way leave all the Karens the hell alone. Her ignorance was astounding, yes, but so is the ignorance of some posters here (not naming any names).

Either way nobody however catty and mean deserves to have their life ruined in such a way.
 
Dosomo said:
I The fact remains that even among the "enthusiast" PC community, Windows is the chosen OS over Linux. This means enthusiasts would rather spend money to buy a copy of Windows than deal with Linux, even if it is given to them. .
Click to expand...
Well I don't think there are Linux versions of Crysis, FarCry2, any of the COD games, or anything like that. People with hard core video cards, CPU's and the like often play games. Games that are only available in Windows.
 
nilepez said:
YOu're just plain wrong. Not a little wrong, but you couldn't be more wrong. Linux is NOT ready for the desktop market. When I use the built in Ubuntu install utility and it asks me for my password and it acts like it's installing and doesn't, that's a HUGE problem. When it does that without so much as a message telling me it failed, that's a complete loser for home users..
Click to expand...
So you have a problem with the Ubuntu install and assume everyone has a problem with the Ubuntu install. Like nobody's ever had problems with a Windows install :rolleyes:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top