They use Lenovo Chromebooks which are built like brick sh*thouses with proper full-travel keyboards and touchscreens.
Chromebooks work, and I am a big fan of them in education. I have a pretty good idea how hard our teachers work, and I'd hate to think of the Windows bullshit being imposed them, like it's imposed on me and my coworkers.
Chromebooks free up teachers and IT admins from Windows update administration, anti-virus software install and administration at the computer level, and from most other malware other than browser extension malware.
Google Docs is incredible and a huge step forward to the point that where possible, most of my own notes are accessible to me from anywhere I can get into my Google account.
For a child, this means they no longer have to schlep a laptop around. Just an account and a Chromebook or other thin client are needed.
I'm a big fan of Microsoft's recent changes, and generally a pretty heavy Windows user warts and all, but it's interesting that Microsoft have never been able to make say cross-machine sync'd folders work, despite pushing it for like 15 years, whereas DropBox has built a giant business from it.
Chrome book is indeed a real killer product, not just for schools but for average home users as well.
Microsoft used to have a Briefcase icon on desktops for offline file syncing. It used to work for those who used it effectively (it was under used of course). But yes, Dropbox went further than anyone else.
A couple personal anecdotes related to this: I volunteer at a school to help maintain around 300 iPads and ~20 iMacs. It's awful. (I am a longtime Mac user at home BTW). The management tools around updating the iPads, installing apps, and configuring users are all terrible, unreliable and old. It leads to teacher frustration and less use of the equipment in the classroom. The only thing worse are the windows computers, which are in such bad shape that they just stopped using them.
An example: To install an app for all students on the iPads, we need to plug them all in to a big USB hub, then connect a Mac with management software to it and run a sync procedure. It fails on about 10% of the devices, so we run it again. Each run takes several minutes. There are over-the-air methods for doing this, but they're corporate solutions not provided by Apple and are pretty expensive.
So given all that, if ChromeBooks promise per-user customization and document storage with much simpler administration, it's no wonder they're taking over.
I have mixed feelings about this. Personally, working as a contractor at Google was one of the interesting jobs I have had and I generally like Google.
That said, after reading Dave Eggers' excellent book "The Circle" last year and having watched the movie yesterday, I was reminded of the dangers (even if fictional in the case of the book) of a monopoly controlling knowledge. The book/movie is obviously about Google and information monopolies even if the fictional company is named The Circle. Buying the education business with free/inexpensive services definitely increases Google's chance of being the information monopoly.
Personally I like to pay for services. I pay for FastMail and just use GMail as a backup email. I pay for Evernote instead of using free offerings like Keep. I pay for Office 365 to get lots of cloud storage and the Office apps for the rare times when I need them. I pay for using GCP and I buy movies and TV shows from Google Play and Apple. It is a cliche, but I like to be the customer and not the product.
I understand that School districts are on a tight budget, so it is understandable that they make use of free (or priced under-market) services.
For a historical perspective on the privacy issue, I found this book review interesting.
"So from the beginning, kings had an incentive to make the country 'legible' – that is, so organized and well-indexed that it was easy to know everything about everyone and collect/double-check taxes. Also from the beginning, nobles had an incentive to frustrate the kings so that they wouldn’t be out of a job. And commoners, who figured that anything which made it easier for the State to tax them and interfere in their affairs was bad news, usually resisted too."
So this resistance to being indexed has very deep roots! But I think we're way past that point now. Being "undocumented" makes it very hard to participate in society.
I also think it is kinda backwards that a for-profit corporation is subsidizing public education. This is a symptom of a broken system and instead of praising Google we should fix what is broken about the system. This also creates an interesting precedent if it sticks. Are parents going to beg Google to prop up their schools now?
Did the invention of printing press made them a monopoly? Google does not generate information; they facilitate it. The more the information is free, the more it will be converted to knowledge by these same schools and students. Your comparison of it to your values of buying things for yourself, is misleading.
> he said: “I cannot answer for them what they are going to do with the quadratic equation. I don’t know why they are learning it.” He added, “And I don’t know why they can’t ask Google for the answer if the answer is right there.”
Wow. Back when I worked for Boeing on the 757 design, there were engineers that were "formula pluggers" who pulled formulas out of manuals and used them. Then there were engineers who understood the formulas - where they came from, what assumptions they were based on, and how to derive them.
The latter used the formulas correctly, the former often blindly misused and misapplied them.
Googling for a formula is not how proper engineering is done.
> I cannot answer for them what they are going to do with the quadratic equation. I don’t know why they are learning it
This sounds disingenuous to me. There are lots of things kids and college students and adults learn that have no immediately foreseeable application. I'm sure most people on HN have thought about it. I wonder what the consensus is.
My take is that learning how to use technology should not be a classroom priority, for many reasons. One of those reasons is that there is no guarantee that whatever tech you learn will stick around. I had a high school teacher insist that we use Ask Jeeves rather than Google because she "liked it better."
It feels as if the adoption of Google products is driven much more by convenience for the school system than by a strong belief that it improves learning. I'm not an expert, but I remember reading more than once that technology doesn't seem to have a meaningful main effect on learning (though perhaps has a mild interaction effect with the teacher.)
The article itself barely addresses the question of learning outcomes, and focuses so much more on privacy.
This is probably taking his off-hand remarks too seriously, but I don't think anyone really uses the quadratic equation for anything. Quadratic functions definitely come up, and the derivation of the quadratic formula is definitely useful to learn, but the formula itself seems like a mathematical dead end.
In general I think being forced to learn things with no clear application is part of why the school system fails so many people.
I agree on both points. If we limit education on absolute minimum every kid is guaranteed to use, they wont learn all that much and they wont be able to proceed to college nor do non-trivial professional jobs. If you come to college without knowing quadratic equation, you wont be able to keep up with physics classes designed for students who already know elementary school math. If you don't understand for cycle when you are 18, you will have very hard time competing with students who come in already knowing real programming. Duh.
Continuation of that quote is no better. You wont even recognize utility of quadratic equation in more complicated equation (exercise) if you do not understand and remember it - much less google it. You will simply fail at solving it. There is also big difference between people who know history enough to see something suspicious when they see bad history and people who believe everything they read on random discussion forums.
-------------------
I think that changing tech school to use because new tech is more convenient to administer is perfectly good reason on itself. I don't know why everyone needs to bs about "transforming education" each time. However, I would much rather have education transformed by people who a.) value learning b.) can explain what quadratic formula is useful for c.) have knowledge of education theory (they dont need to agree with most of it, but they should know what it is they disagree with).
> there is no guarantee that whatever tech you learn will stick around.
Ok, but there are plenty of aspects of using tech that transcend the lifetime of the actually device you are using. Coding, of course, is timeless, but even the basic idea of experimenting/discovery within a UI is something that many older adults lack from not having tech when they were younger.
The other issue is that these devices have a limited lifetime in comparison to what they are replacing, paper textbooks. We may complain that textbooks our kids have are X years old, or don't have Y or Z fact in them that has transpired since the book was printed, the fact remains that the school didn't have to refresh that book every couple years at great expense. Chromebooks, laptops, iPads, etc. all are fragile and have a very limited lifespan in comparison to a textbook. That money would be much better spent on teachers which will have a far greater impact on the student's lives than any book or piece of tech ever will.
Do we really think that 20 years from now students will look back fondly and remember their old Lenovo Chromebook? Or will they remember the teacher that took the time out to make an impact in their lives?
Technology changes, it's impossible to keep up. Human interaction is a constant over all these years and advances.
Yup I would agree from what I have seen end up happening at schools that are given tech but don't have the long term resources to utilize it right.
Ideally you pay attention to the people who have done some teaching and know something about tech like Sal Khan. He understood what tools kids need only after spending a bunch of time teaching kids.
Tech is not magic just like information access is not magic. Libraries have existed for a longer time than schools have but we don't send our kids to libraries cause a good guide makes more of a diff in where kids end up in life than just access and tools.
For us Microsoft tools were the highest price point and we didn't use 50% of the features. Apple Enterprise is a joke though they are making good progress now. Google had just enough of a tool at a price we could really justify to the tax payers. As for Google evangelism we offer Google docs and office 365 online. Students are free to choose as Google and Microsoft have been awesome at cooperation in tools. We also have a training with outgoing seniors about how and why free accounts exist on websites. I've always told them they can used a paid account to retain privacy. To this date no seniors have chosen this. Most don't even convert accounts but just use takeout, the bulk data download tool.
I would be very happy if the kids became conversant in libre office. It has all the functionality they need and they would be comfortable with it going into college.
Google is providing cheap, stable laptops for education and most people commenting here are painting Google as an evil data-hungry corporation. I get that companies should be subject to scrutiny due to their outsized responsibility and impact, but this is just silly.
In 2013 only 60% of children had internet access at home in the U.S.[0]
It might not seem like a big deal for HN readers, but computer access is still a really, really big deal for kids in the U.S.
I have around 15 students, and afaik all of them use Android. Most of them are 13-14 years old. They have absolutely no understanding of how advertising-based businesses work, a poor knowledge of privacy settings or the workings of data deletion, nor do they have any remotely adult conception of why they should worry about those things.
They share everything. Sometimes they even take pictures of my whiteboard doodles.
Google's objective is in plain sight for everyone to see. Imo, this Chromebook move is not good at all.
> “I cannot answer for them what they are going to do with the quadratic equation. I don’t know why they are learning it.” He added, “And I don’t know why they can’t ask Google for the answer if the answer is right there.”
To me, this is giving Google much more than your privacy, customer loyalty or ad exposure. Your are giving away some of your very basic abilities: if you only learn to search with Google, you will not learn how to reason on your own. Knowledge stored in your brain is of much better use than that on Google, because your brain is capable to perform much more powerful queries on it.
However, using a brain at its maximum power needs years of training, which is what one would really expect to receive in school. This training requires that your brain works on its own, without external help from a search engine, for more or less the same reason you will hardly become a strong cyclist if you train on a motorbike.
Schools should really be wary of too much computer time for children.
>To me, this is giving Google much more than your privacy, customer loyalty or ad exposure. Your are giving away some of your very basic abilities: if you only learn to search with Google, you will not learn how to reason on your own. Knowledge stored in your brain is of much better use than that on Google, because your brain is capable to perform much more powerful queries on it.
Sorry, but this just sounds like propaganda. As an academic, Google is the single most useful tool at my disposal. It doesn't inhibit original thought, but lets me focus on what's actually new by giving me access to things that are already known and available.
Google I feel has broken Microsoft Office monopoly the difference will be felt 10 years from now though. Earlier everyone had grown up using Microsoft office now most children will grow up using Google Office suite. Though I still think Google sheets is still way behind Microsoft Excel. The day Google can build a convertor that can convert all excel files and macros etc I would shift to Google sheets currently I have too many years of work to move to Google sheets. The next generation of students growing up with Google won't have the same problems.
Isn't proficiency with Microsoft Office still expected in most workplace environments? Google docs, sheets, slides all fall short of the capabilities of their equivalent applications in Office. The Google apps are good enough for many tasks, but really don't cut the mustard if you are accustomed to the depth of capabilities in Office. Are we doing students a disservice by sending them out into the world without proficiency or even familiarity with Office?
1. The Google stuff works. I would have loved for that kind of organization and management in my elementary school classes. Google docs is also great and means I don't have to beg my not so wealthy parents for a Microsoft word license (or learn in the 4th grade how to pirate it).
2. Let's not kid ourselves, everyone is going to make a Google account anyway. As long as the school accounts aren't used in collecting ad data (which they're not) this is a non issue.
Well of course! How else will you manage to look at historical trends of your consumers? Gotta start sucking the cash out of the little ones from an early age.
I wish someone from the GNU/Linux crowd could make a chromebook-like software set that was really Free software.
With regards to quadratic equation comment,
Aside from being one of the simplest non trivial derivations/ uses of algebra you could teach children (and often the derivation is not taught...), the solutions to polynomials have a very important place in the history of mathematics and the development of modern algebra (which of course is also not taught...)
Should children all be forced to gain an appreciation for the significance and origins of modern algebra? I think, yes. We force them to learn history of whatever country they reside in, year after year. We force them to learn and appreciate novels and literary analysis (equally "useless"). If they don't have an appreciation for mathematics is or does (and quadratic equation is a simple example leading up to some VERY important developments), how will they really know whether or not they want to have a career involving math some way in the future?
Google Classroom has an interesting monopolising effect on schools. Google Classroom has changed the price dynamics hugely; making it impossible for other providers to really compete since they give so much away for free. It is really a shame - Google Classroom (the app) isn't the best LMS as it is quite unresponsive and confusing.
Exactly. This is an example of the possible downside of relaxed anti-trust enforcement: leveraging your domination in one area to brutalize competition in another.
Also, they've been caught once not keeping kid info private. They'll do it again. But, free.
Classroom for us is used in elementary,3-5. We use canvas for middle and high. Classroom doesn't have the features yet to be used at higher levels, though it's getting there.
What? Teachers love Classroom and why they pay to use. Something does not dominate as quickly as Google has in k12 unless very good. People do not lime change.
Chromebooks are much better than iPads for this kind of a task for sure, but I wouldn't want everything my child wrote and looked up throughout his development sent to a major advertising corp. This data should still be maintained by the school or by a company the school partners with with a zero internal or external sharing policy.
Does Classroom contain ads?
No. Like all G Suite for Education services, Classroom contains no ads and never uses your content or student data for advertising purposes. Learn more about [privacy and security](https://edu.google.com/trust/).
If there was a chromebook that came with a SIM card and an unlimited data plan, worldwide, I would buy it in a heartbeat and replace my Macbook. I like the idea of cloud storage, the ability to instantly log onto a new machine and have everything there. This critically depends on 100% connectivity though.
This is a huge step in the right direction. Microsoft Office and Windows are a huge unnecessary and practically unmaintainable approach.
That being said, public education would benefit even more from using a consistent, maintainable, and free Linux distribution.
Public schools but a lot of worthless effort into providing computers for students that are (attempt to be) secure and usable. A good Linux distribution (like NixOS, or even Ubuntu) has tools to provide a consistent maintained operating system for tens or hundreds of systems. This has been the case for over a decade, but administrations have assumed that since everyone uses Windows, that they would be swimming upstream to do otherwise.
[+] [-] watmough|9 years ago|reply
They use Lenovo Chromebooks which are built like brick sh*thouses with proper full-travel keyboards and touchscreens.
Chromebooks work, and I am a big fan of them in education. I have a pretty good idea how hard our teachers work, and I'd hate to think of the Windows bullshit being imposed them, like it's imposed on me and my coworkers.
Chromebooks free up teachers and IT admins from Windows update administration, anti-virus software install and administration at the computer level, and from most other malware other than browser extension malware.
Google Docs is incredible and a huge step forward to the point that where possible, most of my own notes are accessible to me from anywhere I can get into my Google account.
For a child, this means they no longer have to schlep a laptop around. Just an account and a Chromebook or other thin client are needed.
I'm a big fan of Microsoft's recent changes, and generally a pretty heavy Windows user warts and all, but it's interesting that Microsoft have never been able to make say cross-machine sync'd folders work, despite pushing it for like 15 years, whereas DropBox has built a giant business from it.
[+] [-] webwanderings|9 years ago|reply
Microsoft used to have a Briefcase icon on desktops for offline file syncing. It used to work for those who used it effectively (it was under used of course). But yes, Dropbox went further than anyone else.
[+] [-] Roritharr|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ivm|9 years ago|reply
And inaccessible forever if you lose access or get banned from your Google account.
[+] [-] code777777|8 years ago|reply
All of our documents and apps (Word, Excel, Outlook, OneDrive) are available in any browser.
[+] [-] matt2000|9 years ago|reply
An example: To install an app for all students on the iPads, we need to plug them all in to a big USB hub, then connect a Mac with management software to it and run a sync procedure. It fails on about 10% of the devices, so we run it again. Each run takes several minutes. There are over-the-air methods for doing this, but they're corporate solutions not provided by Apple and are pretty expensive.
So given all that, if ChromeBooks promise per-user customization and document storage with much simpler administration, it's no wonder they're taking over.
[+] [-] mark_l_watson|9 years ago|reply
That said, after reading Dave Eggers' excellent book "The Circle" last year and having watched the movie yesterday, I was reminded of the dangers (even if fictional in the case of the book) of a monopoly controlling knowledge. The book/movie is obviously about Google and information monopolies even if the fictional company is named The Circle. Buying the education business with free/inexpensive services definitely increases Google's chance of being the information monopoly.
Personally I like to pay for services. I pay for FastMail and just use GMail as a backup email. I pay for Evernote instead of using free offerings like Keep. I pay for Office 365 to get lots of cloud storage and the Office apps for the rare times when I need them. I pay for using GCP and I buy movies and TV shows from Google Play and Apple. It is a cliche, but I like to be the customer and not the product.
I understand that School districts are on a tight budget, so it is understandable that they make use of free (or priced under-market) services.
[+] [-] skybrian|9 years ago|reply
"So from the beginning, kings had an incentive to make the country 'legible' – that is, so organized and well-indexed that it was easy to know everything about everyone and collect/double-check taxes. Also from the beginning, nobles had an incentive to frustrate the kings so that they wouldn’t be out of a job. And commoners, who figured that anything which made it easier for the State to tax them and interfere in their affairs was bad news, usually resisted too."
So this resistance to being indexed has very deep roots! But I think we're way past that point now. Being "undocumented" makes it very hard to participate in society.
http://slatestarcodex.com/2017/03/16/book-review-seeing-like...
[+] [-] dkarapetyan|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] webwanderings|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|9 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] WalterBright|9 years ago|reply
Wow. Back when I worked for Boeing on the 757 design, there were engineers that were "formula pluggers" who pulled formulas out of manuals and used them. Then there were engineers who understood the formulas - where they came from, what assumptions they were based on, and how to derive them.
The latter used the formulas correctly, the former often blindly misused and misapplied them.
Googling for a formula is not how proper engineering is done.
[+] [-] mafribe|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jtraffic|9 years ago|reply
This sounds disingenuous to me. There are lots of things kids and college students and adults learn that have no immediately foreseeable application. I'm sure most people on HN have thought about it. I wonder what the consensus is.
My take is that learning how to use technology should not be a classroom priority, for many reasons. One of those reasons is that there is no guarantee that whatever tech you learn will stick around. I had a high school teacher insist that we use Ask Jeeves rather than Google because she "liked it better."
It feels as if the adoption of Google products is driven much more by convenience for the school system than by a strong belief that it improves learning. I'm not an expert, but I remember reading more than once that technology doesn't seem to have a meaningful main effect on learning (though perhaps has a mild interaction effect with the teacher.)
The article itself barely addresses the question of learning outcomes, and focuses so much more on privacy.
[+] [-] Eridrus|9 years ago|reply
In general I think being forced to learn things with no clear application is part of why the school system fails so many people.
[+] [-] watwut|9 years ago|reply
Continuation of that quote is no better. You wont even recognize utility of quadratic equation in more complicated equation (exercise) if you do not understand and remember it - much less google it. You will simply fail at solving it. There is also big difference between people who know history enough to see something suspicious when they see bad history and people who believe everything they read on random discussion forums.
-------------------
I think that changing tech school to use because new tech is more convenient to administer is perfectly good reason on itself. I don't know why everyone needs to bs about "transforming education" each time. However, I would much rather have education transformed by people who a.) value learning b.) can explain what quadratic formula is useful for c.) have knowledge of education theory (they dont need to agree with most of it, but they should know what it is they disagree with).
[+] [-] jessriedel|9 years ago|reply
Ok, but there are plenty of aspects of using tech that transcend the lifetime of the actually device you are using. Coding, of course, is timeless, but even the basic idea of experimenting/discovery within a UI is something that many older adults lack from not having tech when they were younger.
[+] [-] coleca|9 years ago|reply
Do we really think that 20 years from now students will look back fondly and remember their old Lenovo Chromebook? Or will they remember the teacher that took the time out to make an impact in their lives?
Technology changes, it's impossible to keep up. Human interaction is a constant over all these years and advances.
[+] [-] Kholo|9 years ago|reply
Ideally you pay attention to the people who have done some teaching and know something about tech like Sal Khan. He understood what tools kids need only after spending a bunch of time teaching kids.
Tech is not magic just like information access is not magic. Libraries have existed for a longer time than schools have but we don't send our kids to libraries cause a good guide makes more of a diff in where kids end up in life than just access and tools.
[+] [-] seastonATccs|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] dhimes|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] TelmoMenezes|9 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] hanibash|9 years ago|reply
In 2013 only 60% of children had internet access at home in the U.S.[0]
It might not seem like a big deal for HN readers, but computer access is still a really, really big deal for kids in the U.S.
[0]https://www.childtrends.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/69_fi...
[+] [-] chicob|9 years ago|reply
I have around 15 students, and afaik all of them use Android. Most of them are 13-14 years old. They have absolutely no understanding of how advertising-based businesses work, a poor knowledge of privacy settings or the workings of data deletion, nor do they have any remotely adult conception of why they should worry about those things.
They share everything. Sometimes they even take pictures of my whiteboard doodles.
Google's objective is in plain sight for everyone to see. Imo, this Chromebook move is not good at all.
[+] [-] walterbell|9 years ago|reply
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surveillance_capitalism
video: https://youtube.com/watch?v=0QwPHinDdOc
[+] [-] thomastjeffery|9 years ago|reply
Ideally they would use a nice maintainable linux distro, but no one is doing that right now, AFAIK.
[+] [-] giomasce|9 years ago|reply
To me, this is giving Google much more than your privacy, customer loyalty or ad exposure. Your are giving away some of your very basic abilities: if you only learn to search with Google, you will not learn how to reason on your own. Knowledge stored in your brain is of much better use than that on Google, because your brain is capable to perform much more powerful queries on it.
However, using a brain at its maximum power needs years of training, which is what one would really expect to receive in school. This training requires that your brain works on its own, without external help from a search engine, for more or less the same reason you will hardly become a strong cyclist if you train on a motorbike.
Schools should really be wary of too much computer time for children.
[+] [-] tacomonstrous|9 years ago|reply
Sorry, but this just sounds like propaganda. As an academic, Google is the single most useful tool at my disposal. It doesn't inhibit original thought, but lets me focus on what's actually new by giving me access to things that are already known and available.
[+] [-] omash|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] bamboozled|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] xbmcuser|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] patja|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] lumberjack|9 years ago|reply
Imagine if Trump decided he no longer wanted to hire anyone for a public sector job, if they are pro-green politics.
Society will come to regret this and I'll probably still be alive to witness it.
[+] [-] notatoad|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] misingnoglic|9 years ago|reply
1. The Google stuff works. I would have loved for that kind of organization and management in my elementary school classes. Google docs is also great and means I don't have to beg my not so wealthy parents for a Microsoft word license (or learn in the 4th grade how to pirate it).
2. Let's not kid ourselves, everyone is going to make a Google account anyway. As long as the school accounts aren't used in collecting ad data (which they're not) this is a non issue.
[+] [-] pmoriarty|9 years ago|reply
The only cost is the student's privacy. Gotta get them sucking at the Google teat early, and in to their database as soon as possible.
[+] [-] gravypod|9 years ago|reply
I wish someone from the GNU/Linux crowd could make a chromebook-like software set that was really Free software.
[+] [-] unknown|9 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] zzzzzzzza|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] samtoday|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] dhimes|9 years ago|reply
Also, they've been caught once not keeping kid info private. They'll do it again. But, free.
[+] [-] seastonATccs|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] johnsmith21006|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] maxxxxx|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] thrillerson|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] duality|9 years ago|reply
From [Common questions about Classroom](https://support.google.com/edu/classroom/answer/6025224?hl=e...)
Does Classroom contain ads? No. Like all G Suite for Education services, Classroom contains no ads and never uses your content or student data for advertising purposes. Learn more about [privacy and security](https://edu.google.com/trust/).
[+] [-] johnsmith21006|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] plg|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] kevin2r|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] thomastjeffery|9 years ago|reply
That being said, public education would benefit even more from using a consistent, maintainable, and free Linux distribution.
Public schools but a lot of worthless effort into providing computers for students that are (attempt to be) secure and usable. A good Linux distribution (like NixOS, or even Ubuntu) has tools to provide a consistent maintained operating system for tens or hundreds of systems. This has been the case for over a decade, but administrations have assumed that since everyone uses Windows, that they would be swimming upstream to do otherwise.