Chromebook has a browser-first Linux OS that can run on ARM and is easy to manage, so why did these schools need to switch to Mac? Chromebooks seem to have a bad reputation like earlier Android phones, why can't they fix that? Meanwhile they aren't successfully taking Windows users while Microsoft keeps making that experience worse.
The article doesn’t say why, but at launch the MacBook Neo was the most inexpensive Mac Apple ever made, and it’s a full proper Mac. Despite being inexpensive, it also isn’t junk.
Chromebooks can be had for cheaper, but if a school district was on the fence before about moving to Macs, then Apple made the decision much easier for them.
It is a good idea to give children well designed and nice things, if this can be afforded. An item that is well designed and nice looking tends to receive better care. To a degree this is what you'd want to teach - to really care.
There isn't a guarantee, if you'd give a child a nice looking thing, that a child would care. But given a piece of junk, they'd surely would not, that is guaranteed.
> Apple's latest earnings call revealed a wave of K-12 districts abandoning Chromebooks and Windows machines in favor of the company's new MacBook Neo
It's not just Chromebooks but Windows machines. Schools really should be providing OS-agnostic computer education, and for that they really should support any machine, especially Windows machines which more easily support changing their OS.
This just changes from having them teach "click this Windows-specific icon to do this" to "click this Mac-specific icon to do this".
Schools are still being used as a tool of OS companies to lock-in users for life.
I wouldn’t get too excited on this topic. The differences between a Mac or Windows PC round to nearly zero in basic GUI operations, and the primary software kids will be using regardless of hardware is likely either G Suite or Microsoft Office depending on what the school district prefers, and most likely accessed through Google Chrome either way.
If they want to game, they’ll eventually get a Windows PC. Even if the school district doesn’t deploy Macs, they’ll likely end up with a Mac by the time of college anyway. And tomorrow won’t be the Year of Desktop Linux either, unless Microsoft really really botches Windows.
> The differences between a Mac or Windows PC round to nearly zero in basic GUI operations
Which should make things easier to educate OS-neutrally.
> and the primary software kids will be using regardless of hardware is likely either G Suite or Microsoft Office depending on what the school district prefers.
> > The differences between a Mac or Windows PC round to nearly zero in basic GUI operations
> Which should make things easier to educate OS-neutrally.
It also makes it unnecessary to teach minute differences. If a student needs to make a switch later for educational, vocational or interest-based reasons, they can figure out the minute differences or seek help.
>> and the primary software kids will be using regardless of hardware is likely either G Suite or Microsoft Office depending on what the school district prefers.
> That's what I object to.
I figured you would, but again: anybody will learn any system they need to because of either work, education or personal reasons. People don’t switch off Excel & don’t want to switch off of Excel because they don’t have to. If you’re only ever going to learn exactly one spreadsheet app in your life, Excel is the one you probably want to learn, unless you don’t strictly need Excel for your vocation, then you can make the choice yourself. Options exist, but it’s fine to treat Excel like the default, because it is.
You're not wrong, but I've sat in an elementary school classroom while a teacher was doing the computer class.
It was already difficult with a class attempting to follow instructions in a single OS; if a teacher had to be giving three sets (at least three!) of instructions to a bunch of kids, they realistically wouldn't get anything done in the 50 minutes they have each week.
I could see a proposal to using one trimester for Windows, one trimester for Mac and one for Linux - because it genuinely is kind of hard to switch from one to the other, and it would be useful if kids had a basic familiarity with all three. (Though, how do you choose which distro to use for Linux? Or do you just make them walk uphill each way on the command line?)
You work almost exclusively with the common ground, the common conventions. Teach them file managers, "programs" in a very general sense, windows (being able to resize and position them, the window buttons (to close, maximize, etc.), window menus, etc.), the concept of saving a file from a program, file extensions. You take little pauses to explain how things may differ slightly between OSes.
You take the same approach with programs (web browsers as opposed to simply Chrome, spreadsheets as opposed to simply Excel, etc.).
Once they have the common ground, you can expand on differences, but always OS- and program-neutral, because schools shouldn't be a marketing tool.
The idea is that students should be able to use any computer in a very basic extent. It doesn't take much.
> (Though, how do you choose which distro to use for Linux? Or do you just make them walk uphill each way on the command line?)
You pick the one that has the most common ground with the other OSes.
Again, you're not wrong, but I think you're underestimating just how much hand-holding and very specific instructions a lot of kids need in these classes.
You have to teach them both the general concepts ("data lives in things called files, each file lives in a folder, folders are arranged in a hierarchical tree-like structure") - but you also have to teach them to actually use these things, and you have to wait for each student to have done The Task that is being asked of them. Because if you just talk in vague abstractions, it's not going to sink in as much as Doing The Task will.
If you have any sort of opportunity to observe a elementary or middle school computer class, I strongly urge you to. It's very enlightening.
(Actually, observing any kind of class is very interesting. I used to do it at least once a year for work. I know that every profession is probably super interesting to an outside observer, but - especially as a parent - that was wildly interesting and worthwhile.)
Both Windows and ChromeOS have Debian subsystems that are easy to enable and use. I prefer the macOS way for my job, but for students it doesn't really matter.
You can assign a mobile device policy on the Mac, and the OS is image based (like a Chromebook). They are much more flexible than Chromebooks, you're not running Adobe Premier or Logic on ChromeOS.
The price is also close enough that its probably worth the migration.
I think Google completely failed to capitalize on its lead, and is probably making things worse by replacing the platform with Android and rebranding things.
At a similar time as the MacBook Neo launch, Apple unified their Device Management programmes as one 'Apple Business'. So perhaps things have improved on that front.
Google can't decide what the hell they wanted a Chromebook to do and IT departments everywhere are fed up with it.
Plus I don't think schools are ready to have to deal with managing glorified Android laptops now that Google signaled their wholesale abandonment of the Chromebook platform.
Chromebook has a browser-first Linux OS that can run on ARM and is easy to manage, so why did these schools need to switch to Mac? Chromebooks seem to have a bad reputation like earlier Android phones, why can't they fix that? Meanwhile they aren't successfully taking Windows users while Microsoft keeps making that experience worse.
Because they’re low quality trash
Why? Aren’t people saying that Chromebooks are easier to deploy and manage in schools?
The article doesn’t say why, but at launch the MacBook Neo was the most inexpensive Mac Apple ever made, and it’s a full proper Mac. Despite being inexpensive, it also isn’t junk.
Chromebooks can be had for cheaper, but if a school district was on the fence before about moving to Macs, then Apple made the decision much easier for them.
It is a good idea to give children well designed and nice things, if this can be afforded. An item that is well designed and nice looking tends to receive better care. To a degree this is what you'd want to teach - to really care.
There isn't a guarantee, if you'd give a child a nice looking thing, that a child would care. But given a piece of junk, they'd surely would not, that is guaranteed.
> Apple's latest earnings call revealed a wave of K-12 districts abandoning Chromebooks and Windows machines in favor of the company's new MacBook Neo
It's not just Chromebooks but Windows machines. Schools really should be providing OS-agnostic computer education, and for that they really should support any machine, especially Windows machines which more easily support changing their OS.
This just changes from having them teach "click this Windows-specific icon to do this" to "click this Mac-specific icon to do this".
Schools are still being used as a tool of OS companies to lock-in users for life.
I wouldn’t get too excited on this topic. The differences between a Mac or Windows PC round to nearly zero in basic GUI operations, and the primary software kids will be using regardless of hardware is likely either G Suite or Microsoft Office depending on what the school district prefers, and most likely accessed through Google Chrome either way.
If they want to game, they’ll eventually get a Windows PC. Even if the school district doesn’t deploy Macs, they’ll likely end up with a Mac by the time of college anyway. And tomorrow won’t be the Year of Desktop Linux either, unless Microsoft really really botches Windows.
> The differences between a Mac or Windows PC round to nearly zero in basic GUI operations
Which should make things easier to educate OS-neutrally.
> and the primary software kids will be using regardless of hardware is likely either G Suite or Microsoft Office depending on what the school district prefers.
That's what I object to.
> > The differences between a Mac or Windows PC round to nearly zero in basic GUI operations
> Which should make things easier to educate OS-neutrally.
It also makes it unnecessary to teach minute differences. If a student needs to make a switch later for educational, vocational or interest-based reasons, they can figure out the minute differences or seek help.
>> and the primary software kids will be using regardless of hardware is likely either G Suite or Microsoft Office depending on what the school district prefers.
> That's what I object to.
I figured you would, but again: anybody will learn any system they need to because of either work, education or personal reasons. People don’t switch off Excel & don’t want to switch off of Excel because they don’t have to. If you’re only ever going to learn exactly one spreadsheet app in your life, Excel is the one you probably want to learn, unless you don’t strictly need Excel for your vocation, then you can make the choice yourself. Options exist, but it’s fine to treat Excel like the default, because it is.
Meanwhile we learned to use Appleworks in elementary school, haha
You're not wrong, but I've sat in an elementary school classroom while a teacher was doing the computer class.
It was already difficult with a class attempting to follow instructions in a single OS; if a teacher had to be giving three sets (at least three!) of instructions to a bunch of kids, they realistically wouldn't get anything done in the 50 minutes they have each week.
I could see a proposal to using one trimester for Windows, one trimester for Mac and one for Linux - because it genuinely is kind of hard to switch from one to the other, and it would be useful if kids had a basic familiarity with all three. (Though, how do you choose which distro to use for Linux? Or do you just make them walk uphill each way on the command line?)
You work almost exclusively with the common ground, the common conventions. Teach them file managers, "programs" in a very general sense, windows (being able to resize and position them, the window buttons (to close, maximize, etc.), window menus, etc.), the concept of saving a file from a program, file extensions. You take little pauses to explain how things may differ slightly between OSes.
You take the same approach with programs (web browsers as opposed to simply Chrome, spreadsheets as opposed to simply Excel, etc.).
Once they have the common ground, you can expand on differences, but always OS- and program-neutral, because schools shouldn't be a marketing tool.
The idea is that students should be able to use any computer in a very basic extent. It doesn't take much.
> (Though, how do you choose which distro to use for Linux? Or do you just make them walk uphill each way on the command line?)
You pick the one that has the most common ground with the other OSes.
Again, you're not wrong, but I think you're underestimating just how much hand-holding and very specific instructions a lot of kids need in these classes.
You have to teach them both the general concepts ("data lives in things called files, each file lives in a folder, folders are arranged in a hierarchical tree-like structure") - but you also have to teach them to actually use these things, and you have to wait for each student to have done The Task that is being asked of them. Because if you just talk in vague abstractions, it's not going to sink in as much as Doing The Task will.
If you have any sort of opportunity to observe a elementary or middle school computer class, I strongly urge you to. It's very enlightening.
(Actually, observing any kind of class is very interesting. I used to do it at least once a year for work. I know that every profession is probably super interesting to an outside observer, but - especially as a parent - that was wildly interesting and worthwhile.)
At least MacOS is unix based and has a proper shell etc (not that school kids will be using it).
For someone who picks up technical stuff easily learning how MacOS actually works is much more useful (and closer to linux/bsd) than Windows.
Modern windows is just a weird, locked down mess that doesn't teach you much about anything
Both Windows and ChromeOS have Debian subsystems that are easy to enable and use. I prefer the macOS way for my job, but for students it doesn't really matter.
You can assign a mobile device policy on the Mac, and the OS is image based (like a Chromebook). They are much more flexible than Chromebooks, you're not running Adobe Premier or Logic on ChromeOS.
The price is also close enough that its probably worth the migration.
I think Google completely failed to capitalize on its lead, and is probably making things worse by replacing the platform with Android and rebranding things.
At a similar time as the MacBook Neo launch, Apple unified their Device Management programmes as one 'Apple Business'. So perhaps things have improved on that front.
Google can't decide what the hell they wanted a Chromebook to do and IT departments everywhere are fed up with it.
Plus I don't think schools are ready to have to deal with managing glorified Android laptops now that Google signaled their wholesale abandonment of the Chromebook platform.
> Google signaled their wholesale abandonment of the Chromebook platform
When?
They announced a Chromebook replacement called the Googlebook in May. It's supposed to be "AI native", whatever that means.
[dead]
Just seem it was a question of time.