What a complete load of tosh. Education is about teaching children valuable skills they can apply in their daily lives. How many of them would ever see a PC running Linux again? The cost argument doesn't really stand up either, books cost money and 'do nothing but line the pockets of the publishers' to paraphrase the author. It's not as if computers running Linux cost nothing either.
If Linux is going to find a place in mainstream education, it's going to have to earn it. This is of course quite possible. Raspberry Pi is a good example of this. I can see Linux forming a valuable part of a more advanced secondary school computing curriculum too.
The article is living in the past though. Many children now, and many more in then future will equate computers with tablets. Some will run iOS, others will run Android and maybe some might even run Windows. Decisions about which solution best serves the educational needs of children should be in the hands of educators, not technological partisans.
My normal day involves dissecting frogs, working out quickly equations like 13x12 in my head and calculating when two trains heading in opposite directions are going to pass each other.
Just last week, I was held at gunpoint and told to find the integral of an equation, then - you won't believe this - my boss said I was fired unless I could write 1000 words on Jane Austin's "Pride and Prejudice" by the following day.
I have never had to encounter linux, and I'm so glad there are people like you fighting to keep education relevant!
I don't wish to hijack this thread but tying the Raspberry Pi to education is terrible if you ask me.
I agreed about the Raspberry Pi being the best device for education right from day one. That was until my father bought my daughter one for her birthday and I ended up being the resident "fix it guru" for it.
The thing teaches you merely how to jump through funny shaped hoops to get something working rather than anything realistic or helpful. Most of it is google-fu and copy and paste. When you do finally get there it's a baron land of absolutely unrealistic, undocumented crud that can't self-serve. Plus it barely works and browns out to start with resulting in USB-hub jiggery-pokery (and that only happens because I actually understand how USB works).
For ref, I have 20 years' of Unix and Linux experience (right down to writing kernel drivers) and it was painful getting it off the ground so I'm not approaching it blind.
Being critical (constructively!) of this results in the RPI forum thread being deleted which in itself an affront and a general recommendation against the things.
The author's argument is mainly that Windows as a dominant OS for school computers is more expensive than Linux, and is proprietary.
What the author fails to take into account is that the major cost to schools and school systems is the continuing cost of ownership for these computers. Updates, maintenance, tech support, all cost time and money. I regularly perform alternatives analyses for clients, and while I'd love to more often recommend open source solutions, the risk of finding qualified support or full-time employees, and the often greater costs associated with that service, is usually too high to not go proprietary (all features and needs being otherwise equal).
However, I do agree with the spirit of one of the author's ethos(es?), and perhaps disagree with simonh here -- a flavor of Linux shouldn't be discounted because the students may never see it again. The OS really doesn't matter so long as tools are provided for word processing, performing internet research and exploring information that students may discover. There's a wealth of this in the mainstream Linux distros and I think it'd be a fine alternative.
You're contradicting yourself in the rush to sound like an authority.
Androids is a Linux computer.
Learning linux is vital - because Linux runs everywhere, and almost everything!
Been on a train in Europe? Your life is being protected by Linux. Made an Internet connection in the USA? You're using Linux, somewhere.
Teaching kids to use the Linux OS should be as equally valid an approach as teaching them Windows. The Linux ecosystem is as equally viable as any other - so why should kids miss out on the value of this technology, just because a corporate lackey has managed to make a deal with school administrators?
In the early 1980s, Apple decided that they were going to own the education market. They sent salespeople to school districts, explaining that computers -- the future of education, as everyone and magazine articles said -- could be affordable, and here was a complete plan including discounts, financing, and software.
The result was that the Apple II series did take over the education market, and also sold quite a few machines to the parents of kids who used Apples in school.
School is not about making you smart or giving you a job. It's about giving them the power to drive their lives.
Computer education is important and should really have a more important part. And when I say computer, I'm not advocating for PC, mobiles, Windows, Linux, or whatever thing whose market share will have drastically changed in ten years.
Children should be taught that they can have a computer do tasks for them and, if possible, without practical dependence on whichever architecture/OS you pick. I don't care which system they train on, as long as they get that computers are logical systems with predictable output. I don't care which language they learn, as long as it makes them understand computers are not some black boxes but things they can control.
Also, I would like such an education to teach that the Internet is not some big corporation controlled by shady lolcatz or a box supervised by elders in Big Ben. I would like them to know that the World is vast and that the Internet is shallow; the Internet is in their reach and allow them to go farther than ever (geographically, but also intellectually).
tl;dr: the important is making them understand they can, not necessarily how (they should be able to teach themselves specific skills)
The tablets are not easily programmable _from the tablet_.
The distinction has to be between educating people how to do things on the computer (which really doesn't take all that long, but can turn into "qualifications in specfic version of Word"), versus understanding the technology enough to fix your own problems and develop new things.
What other common subjects that employ a large proportion of the population do you think shouldn't be taught in schools?
When exactly do children apply geology in their daily lives, or calculate refraction? It sounds as if you're making a case for home economics, basic arithmetic, and reading to be the only subjects. Maybe marketing?
>Education is about teaching children valuable skills they can apply in their daily lives.
Train the proles up so that they can be useful to their future employers? Teaching any specific vendor's products exclusively isn't a proper role for a public institution.
> How many of them would ever see a PC running Linux again?
Practically none, if the educators who choose which company's products are the winners tend strongly to one vendor's products.
> The cost argument doesn't really stand up either,
No, but it bothers me a bit that one dominant market player gets the majority of public money, and another tends to get nothing. I'm not sure how to solve this though.
>books cost money and 'do nothing but line the pockets of the publishers' to paraphrase the author.
There are a lot of fair criticisms of the textbook publishing industry.
> It's not as if computers running Linux cost nothing either.
True. But at my college, Microsoft licensing is a budget item as is maintenance of Windows PC's. If they were Linux PC's the replacement for those expenditures would probably cost less. A more proper solution would probably cost slightly more than standardizing exclusively on Windows.
>If Linux is going to find a place in mainstream education, it's going to have to earn it. This is of course quite possible.
Public institutions ought not to be picking winners here. It isn't appropriate.
>Decisions about which solution best serves the educational needs of children should be in the hands of educators, not technological partisans.
Well, currently it is usually in the hands of institution IT folk, most of which (in my experience) tend to be technological partisans.
Yeah, but they need to see that life is difficult and you have to struggle to become successful. What could be better than a bit of Linux to give a taste of that?
Android is a Linux-based OS. You can use an AOSP-derived distribution as a hackable Linux. Nearly every hosting service provides Linux. Linux is in your TV, STB, and car (maybe in the form of Android).
How many YC ventures' server software are running on a hosted Linux system? How many of their endpoints are running on Android? Was the toolchain Linux-based?
My school used Windows for everything. I remember when in year 7 (6th grade) I was complaining about the computers to my IT teacher, as many do. His response was "there is another way!".
A few days later, he found me and gave me a Linux live CD with Knoppix on it. I remember it claimed to have 2GB of software, compressed into the 700MB a CD could hold. I could put it in my family computer at home, and without installing anything, changing settings, messing up the computer my parents used in any way, I could use an entirely different OS, it was amazing!
This was the point at which I realised how software and hardware were truly separated. A computer was no longer an 'appliance'. The "start button" wasn't part of the computer, it was just some software that I could replace.
I believe, and have told many people in the years since, that this was the turning point in my computer education, that has lead to me studying computer science, and becoming a software developer.
Linux should be a part of school education, because teaching kids that computers aren't appliances, that hardware and software have a split, and you can change both, is crucial to developing a real understanding of how they work.
Ah Knoppix. I remember how blown away I was when I first ran the Live CD; at that time I had no idea it was even possible. It's a shame that it faded from popularity once Ubuntu came along.
I too have many fond memories of Knoppix I discovered it in the 11th grade; I remember being mesmerised by the rows of multi-coloured console text at boot up with that cool rotating carat and all the badass software it came default with- like ettercap and Wireshark.. What a script kiddie I was, lol. People think such superficial details are unimportant but they really do leave an impression on you. Writing this from Ubuntu 13.10..
Teaching those topics at school is crazy. This is just "random stuff" for kids, completely nonsense.
We should teach "how" computers work (very basic principles) and maybe "how" communications work (very basic principles). And definitely we don't need to teach kids about HTTP... Maybe, and only maybe, we could teach them how a programming language can help them with their "math homeworks" and things like that...
Teaching those in school would be a waste of time. I work full time in the tech industry and don't fully understand all of those topics because they are irrelevant to me. People are never going to need to understand them for daily use.
One should teach children using the best tools for the job; cost should not be an issue here in the consideration. What is the quality of educational software in the Linux world compared to Windows? What about compared to OS X? What about usability? Accessibility? A rather vapid statement about "cost" isn't going to cut it as an argument as to why Linux should be used.
Even amongst Free operating systems, why Linux? What are the advantages compared to FreeBSD, or OpenBSD, FreeDOS, or ReactOS? In an article like this, you need more than a few vague statements to back it up ideology, you need evidence and proof that Linux is the best route.
I agree. It would be much more useful to focus on things like the differences between package management systems in various OS's and maybe point out the strengths. For Linux this would be easy scripting and generic problem solving while in Windows you have a much more "solution" based ecosystem.
Don't misunderstand me, I don't advocate hardcore CS for everyone, but some basic scripting would not hurt the average student.
No it shouldn't, and honestly neither should programming. Sometimes I swear we can get so drunk on our own farts that we think engineering is the only valuable profession in the world, when in reality not everyone needs to be able to code a rails app if all they want to do is check their Facebook. There are many other jobs that are important and valuable to society that do not involve CS - lets just put down the kook-aid.
If a person does not understand how the world around them works (and most of it is driven by computers), how can we expect them to adequately operate in it?
A couple weeks back I remember the case when someone bleached her home because she feared she could catch the viruses on her computer. There are many people who do, for the lack of a better word, rituals with their computers because they can't figure out their wi-fi radio tales some time to grab the local network signal. They do it because they did it once and it worked and they have no idea it had nothing to do with the problem they were trying to solve.
A basic understanding of technology is increasingly important.
It's primitive tribalism. People should learn "computing" as part of a school education as over life things are going to change and they're going to need to adapt.
I think this is a great idea. My secondary school (UK) actually had a wealth of voccational subjects. From the age of 13 I studied Cisco, Red Hat and then Oracle DB. By 16 I had a CCNA. Oracle Certified DBA and a few vendor certifications like Security+ and Network+
The real issue was Universities acknowledge them as points towards UCAS so practically everyone on the course ended up staying on another year or two and studied other subjects to get the necessary points.
I'm hopeful that one day the system will cater for more subjects but its a long way way at least in the UK.
If someone were using Linux to teach I as a student would think their using some crap computers. Like it or not students don't see the potential of Linux like we do and truth is Windows is still more user friendly then Linux when it comes to doing some moderately advanced things.
Probably the closest you can get is KDE since for most users if the setting isn't in the GUI it doesn't exist.
It would be cool if schools had a mix of windows and Linux computers though that way students can learn that Windows doesn't equal computer there are other OS's as well. And before you ask no, where I'm from Apple was as if it didn't exist.
I only learned about Linux when i was 14 and to be honest i though it was crap at first since all Linux windowing systems that I tried were awful.
But i continued to discover more of my system and figured out that Linux without the terminal is only appropriate for grandmas that can barely use a computer and are unlikely to run into driver issues when connecting new devices.
> I as a student would think their using some crap computers.
When was the last time you saw a machine running Linux in person?
> unlikely to run into driver issues when connecting new devices.
I am not a grandma and the last device that didn't play nice with my Linux machines was a prototype Blackberry phone. I somehow don't think it was the computer's fault.
While windows 95 was getting big, at school and we had a course of technical learning where we'd use a Thomson T-08 to move a robotic arm, picking bricks on a conveyer belt.
Were we impressed by the machine ? Hell no, everyone knew it was a piece of crap in that day and age. Just as we were not impressed by retroprojectors, chalk boards, out of date cassette players and 10. years old science experiment stuff.
Did we learn to program the arm in some simple basic like language I forgot how it looked like ? Well, yes, because we wanted good grades. Like for every other course.
I think most of us didn't care about programming, but at least the ones that never touched a computer before got to know how an algorithm would look like and how a program runs.
Linux at school should be efficient on the same level, to teach basic things (not just programming of course) and give a first experience in something students might not care about at all.
PS: to be clear, I don't think linux at school should be used to push linux, helping some group's agenda shouldn't be school's role. Giving students more insight into how the *nix like systems work and can be used is a better goal, primary windows user could bet behind as well.
>If someone were using Linux to teach I as a student would think their using some crap computers.
Why does the installed OS imply anything at all about the quality of the hardware?
> Like it or not students don't see the potential of Linux ...
Why would they, if they have never been exposed to it?
>and truth is Windows is still more user friendly then Linux when it comes to doing some moderately advanced things.
I've always felt the opposite is true, that most Windows based solutions enable people to do easy things easier than with Linux, but that implementing more complex solutions often quickly becomes harder on the Windows platform than on Linux. That's been my experience, YMMV.
>It would be cool if schools had a mix of windows and Linux computers though that way students can learn that Windows doesn't equal computer there are other OS's as well. And before you ask no, where I'm from Apple was as if it didn't exist.
I agree. I think it makes for better educated graduates, and a better marketplace for computing products.
>I only learned about Linux when i was 14 and to be honest i though it was crap at first since all Linux windowing systems that I tried were awful.
Oh my (hypothetical) God. For a moment there I thought this was The Linux Foundation (not federation.)
Coming to the topic at hand: This reeks of fanboyism and fanaticism. While I personally agree that young people should be introduced to more than Windows as a part of their edution in computing, this is taking the rhetoric too far.
> Imagine where humanity could be today if we had used that approach right from the start and for every single product out there.
That is exactly the model Linux has offered for over two decades now. If it was such a good model, systems like Windows and MacOS should now be history.
I believe all government institutions should be using open source software virtually everywhere (if something doesn't exist yet, they can build it). That way the things we build with taxpayer money will be much longer lasting, and interoperability with future technologies should be a much easier task, rather than relying on the whim of a private company and its profit incentives.
Linux is so used in education. It isn't used as widely as it ought to be, but it is most certainly used, and its share is growing. I am a CC instructor in a vocational program, and each year our students install both Linux and Windows on our lab PC's. They will use this PC throughout the year to complete their coursework and are responsible for maintaining it. Graduates of our program will have installed both operating systems at least twice, often many more times. I think it is important to promote general computing skills even though that is not my department's core discipline.
I don't think it is wrong for a college to have a Microsoft site license, but I do think it is wrong for a public college to require a specific vendor's products where equivalents exist. I also think it is wrong for a public college to force students' exclusive use of a single vendor's products. Computers are mere tools and it isn't the job of a public institution to choose winners.
At least in Uruguay, and by some definition, Linux is part of the school education. All public schools students have an XO, running Linux, Sugar as desktop environment, mesh networking, and a bunch of educational apps, including Scratch (not very explored in class unfortunately) and Turtle Art, that is also used to explore robotics in schools with the project Butia.
But linux per se is not the central target. But i would trade that for what they are actually learning, specially at their age. It leaves the door open to exploration, and so far 2 students from here already won the google code-in for activities related with Sugar.
The problem here is that (in the UK at least) kids come out of school knowing nothing about about a computer works or programming - windows/mac/ios/android increasingly hide this from you. Kids think that programming a computer game is some trival task and have no idea how to even make the simplest of programs.
The counter point is that they shouldn't need to know this, but then why do we teach flower germination? or the causes of the second world war? or Shakespeare? - I've never had to use these in everyday life.
It's not all that bad now and wasn't when I was at school (in the UK). During my time, we had the Acorn BBC Micro to start with, then the Archimedes. These were both programmers dream machines and code we did, usually plugged into large Lego machines. After that it diverged into "office studies" as RM dumped millions of PC clones but there was still Quick Basic and Turbo Pascal available that was taught at a lot of schools either as a mainstream subject or through "computer clubs".
Now there was a gap for me but I have children now and they are learning how to write HTML and basic JavaScript. They are using software to produce video productions and stop-frame animations, they are even getting instruction from parents on how to write python. They have Windows desktops, iPads and a few Linux netbooks. They have it pretty good.
And this is a London primary school with an Ofsted "needs improvement" rating.
> have no idea how to even make the simplest of programs.
The simplest possible programs are still very simple and short. Even with verbose languages.
One drawback here is that even a simple game by modern standards is light-years ahead of my best efforts on the Apple II. And those best efforts would be considered rather mundane or sub-standard today. A modern-looking program involves interacting with a GUI library and they are complicated animals.
What a successful teacher should do is to instill the love for the essential part of the program. When you write a "guess the number", there is no need for particle generators, applause, music and animated backgrounds. Keeping the basics short the kids will learn that programming is no different than creative writing using imperative forms all the time.
IMO all kids at school should be taught an ugly, difficult language like x86 assembly. Hardly any of them will understand it to a significant degree, but they will appreciate how difficult working with computers is. They will be more impressed with say, grep, or the original DOOM game.
Some of those kids will grow up to be somebody's boss, that potentially annoying, ignorant boss that expects you to juggle knives while tap-dancing in clogs.
I don't think it's a bad idea. Generally, I'd say skills learnt using Linux would be fairly transferable to other computer based tasks, regardless of OS.
The article however; utter shite. It's bad journalism.
'do nothing but line the pockets of the publishers', well yes. The company does profit from this, so? That's not valid argument to not use it in a schools? It should be approached from a 'look what we can learn from free tools' angle.
Of course it should. The Linux cli is as good a gateway to understanding of the world around you as the Commodore 64 and the Apple II clis were for me as a kid.
If you start a child off with Windows or Mac, look forward to them maybe not ever understanding what a directory is, or that a computer has two types of memory. Consciously choosing and paying a premium to learn computing from Windows or Mac OS sounds to me only mildly better than trying to learn computing with a Playstation. They're simply not meant to be user serviceable.
I don't know what to say about not teaching children computing. There's a better case for teaching computing than any other science, if you judge usefulness by daily opportunity to use your skills to understand and improve your situation. The only reason I'd be against it is because I love being overpaid to do simple work due to the ignorance of the general population of the machines that completely run their lives.
My goal for a childhood education in computing would be to produce an adult that understands the capacity and flexibility of computing, and can be trusted to manage or hire computer workers, an adult who won't over or underestimate what can be done with computers, and an adult that has a deep relationship with the devices which, from now on, are going to be in physical contact with them at all times.
Yes, it's more important than learning how to fix your car. I've never had a car. How many people can say that about a computer? How many people can say that about a computer without ignoring embedded devices?
> I don't know what to say about not teaching children computing. There's a better case for teaching computing than any other science, if you judge usefulness by daily opportunity to use your skills to understand and improve your situation. The only reason I'd be against it is because I love being overpaid to do simple work due to the ignorance of the general population of the machines that completely run their lives
Well, at least you're honest about it, but I think that line of thinking does lead to certain problems in the industry. One that popped immediately to mind was:
What are the two types of memory of a computer? Can you recommend any resources (books/websites) to learning things like that about a computer?
Edit: I googled it but each result explained a different type of memory (caches, system RAM, virtual memory, hard drive) or (RAM vs ROM) or (Primary vs Secondary).
[+] [-] simonh|12 years ago|reply
If Linux is going to find a place in mainstream education, it's going to have to earn it. This is of course quite possible. Raspberry Pi is a good example of this. I can see Linux forming a valuable part of a more advanced secondary school computing curriculum too.
The article is living in the past though. Many children now, and many more in then future will equate computers with tablets. Some will run iOS, others will run Android and maybe some might even run Windows. Decisions about which solution best serves the educational needs of children should be in the hands of educators, not technological partisans.
[+] [-] 1stop|12 years ago|reply
Just last week, I was held at gunpoint and told to find the integral of an equation, then - you won't believe this - my boss said I was fired unless I could write 1000 words on Jane Austin's "Pride and Prejudice" by the following day.
I have never had to encounter linux, and I'm so glad there are people like you fighting to keep education relevant!
[+] [-] csmithuk|12 years ago|reply
I agreed about the Raspberry Pi being the best device for education right from day one. That was until my father bought my daughter one for her birthday and I ended up being the resident "fix it guru" for it.
The thing teaches you merely how to jump through funny shaped hoops to get something working rather than anything realistic or helpful. Most of it is google-fu and copy and paste. When you do finally get there it's a baron land of absolutely unrealistic, undocumented crud that can't self-serve. Plus it barely works and browns out to start with resulting in USB-hub jiggery-pokery (and that only happens because I actually understand how USB works).
For ref, I have 20 years' of Unix and Linux experience (right down to writing kernel drivers) and it was painful getting it off the ground so I'm not approaching it blind.
Being critical (constructively!) of this results in the RPI forum thread being deleted which in itself an affront and a general recommendation against the things.
[+] [-] mattlutze|12 years ago|reply
What the author fails to take into account is that the major cost to schools and school systems is the continuing cost of ownership for these computers. Updates, maintenance, tech support, all cost time and money. I regularly perform alternatives analyses for clients, and while I'd love to more often recommend open source solutions, the risk of finding qualified support or full-time employees, and the often greater costs associated with that service, is usually too high to not go proprietary (all features and needs being otherwise equal).
However, I do agree with the spirit of one of the author's ethos(es?), and perhaps disagree with simonh here -- a flavor of Linux shouldn't be discounted because the students may never see it again. The OS really doesn't matter so long as tools are provided for word processing, performing internet research and exploring information that students may discover. There's a wealth of this in the mainstream Linux distros and I think it'd be a fine alternative.
Except for that whole ongoing-maintenance thing.
[+] [-] fit2rule|12 years ago|reply
Androids is a Linux computer.
Learning linux is vital - because Linux runs everywhere, and almost everything!
Been on a train in Europe? Your life is being protected by Linux. Made an Internet connection in the USA? You're using Linux, somewhere.
Teaching kids to use the Linux OS should be as equally valid an approach as teaching them Windows. The Linux ecosystem is as equally viable as any other - so why should kids miss out on the value of this technology, just because a corporate lackey has managed to make a deal with school administrators?
Inverse-Totalitarianism!
[+] [-] dsr_|12 years ago|reply
The result was that the Apple II series did take over the education market, and also sold quite a few machines to the parents of kids who used Apples in school.
[+] [-] yoha|12 years ago|reply
Computer education is important and should really have a more important part. And when I say computer, I'm not advocating for PC, mobiles, Windows, Linux, or whatever thing whose market share will have drastically changed in ten years.
Children should be taught that they can have a computer do tasks for them and, if possible, without practical dependence on whichever architecture/OS you pick. I don't care which system they train on, as long as they get that computers are logical systems with predictable output. I don't care which language they learn, as long as it makes them understand computers are not some black boxes but things they can control.
Also, I would like such an education to teach that the Internet is not some big corporation controlled by shady lolcatz or a box supervised by elders in Big Ben. I would like them to know that the World is vast and that the Internet is shallow; the Internet is in their reach and allow them to go farther than ever (geographically, but also intellectually).
tl;dr: the important is making them understand they can, not necessarily how (they should be able to teach themselves specific skills)
[+] [-] weland|12 years ago|reply
How many of the will end up making decisions on the assumption that there is nothing else that runs on a computer except for Windows?
[+] [-] cabalamat|12 years ago|reply
> Many children [...] will run Android
Care to reconsider your argument?
[+] [-] pjc50|12 years ago|reply
The distinction has to be between educating people how to do things on the computer (which really doesn't take all that long, but can turn into "qualifications in specfic version of Word"), versus understanding the technology enough to fix your own problems and develop new things.
[+] [-] pessimizer|12 years ago|reply
When exactly do children apply geology in their daily lives, or calculate refraction? It sounds as if you're making a case for home economics, basic arithmetic, and reading to be the only subjects. Maybe marketing?
[+] [-] fnordfnordfnord|12 years ago|reply
Train the proles up so that they can be useful to their future employers? Teaching any specific vendor's products exclusively isn't a proper role for a public institution.
> How many of them would ever see a PC running Linux again?
Practically none, if the educators who choose which company's products are the winners tend strongly to one vendor's products.
> The cost argument doesn't really stand up either,
No, but it bothers me a bit that one dominant market player gets the majority of public money, and another tends to get nothing. I'm not sure how to solve this though.
>books cost money and 'do nothing but line the pockets of the publishers' to paraphrase the author.
There are a lot of fair criticisms of the textbook publishing industry.
> It's not as if computers running Linux cost nothing either.
True. But at my college, Microsoft licensing is a budget item as is maintenance of Windows PC's. If they were Linux PC's the replacement for those expenditures would probably cost less. A more proper solution would probably cost slightly more than standardizing exclusively on Windows.
>If Linux is going to find a place in mainstream education, it's going to have to earn it. This is of course quite possible.
Public institutions ought not to be picking winners here. It isn't appropriate.
>Decisions about which solution best serves the educational needs of children should be in the hands of educators, not technological partisans.
Well, currently it is usually in the hands of institution IT folk, most of which (in my experience) tend to be technological partisans.
[+] [-] CmonDev|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Zigurd|12 years ago|reply
How many YC ventures' server software are running on a hosted Linux system? How many of their endpoints are running on Android? Was the toolchain Linux-based?
[+] [-] danpalmer|12 years ago|reply
A few days later, he found me and gave me a Linux live CD with Knoppix on it. I remember it claimed to have 2GB of software, compressed into the 700MB a CD could hold. I could put it in my family computer at home, and without installing anything, changing settings, messing up the computer my parents used in any way, I could use an entirely different OS, it was amazing!
This was the point at which I realised how software and hardware were truly separated. A computer was no longer an 'appliance'. The "start button" wasn't part of the computer, it was just some software that I could replace.
I believe, and have told many people in the years since, that this was the turning point in my computer education, that has lead to me studying computer science, and becoming a software developer.
Linux should be a part of school education, because teaching kids that computers aren't appliances, that hardware and software have a split, and you can change both, is crucial to developing a real understanding of how they work.
[+] [-] durzagott|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] _nedR|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] binocarlos|12 years ago|reply
* how DNS works
* the process model with stdin,stdout,env vars + cmd args
* streams - text or otherwise
* protocols like HTTP but what they actually did on the wire
Every OS uses the above list and so even for a young child - you can teach by example.
Surely using nice fluffy diagrams it would be worth trying this to find out that only 'old' people can understand such things?
[+] [-] professorTuring|12 years ago|reply
We should teach "how" computers work (very basic principles) and maybe "how" communications work (very basic principles). And definitely we don't need to teach kids about HTTP... Maybe, and only maybe, we could teach them how a programming language can help them with their "math homeworks" and things like that...
[+] [-] k-mcgrady|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Sanddancer|12 years ago|reply
Even amongst Free operating systems, why Linux? What are the advantages compared to FreeBSD, or OpenBSD, FreeDOS, or ReactOS? In an article like this, you need more than a few vague statements to back it up ideology, you need evidence and proof that Linux is the best route.
[+] [-] skriticos2|12 years ago|reply
Don't misunderstand me, I don't advocate hardcore CS for everyone, but some basic scripting would not hurt the average student.
[+] [-] rythie|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|12 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] radida|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] rbanffy|12 years ago|reply
A couple weeks back I remember the case when someone bleached her home because she feared she could catch the viruses on her computer. There are many people who do, for the lack of a better word, rituals with their computers because they can't figure out their wi-fi radio tales some time to grab the local network signal. They do it because they did it once and it worked and they have no idea it had nothing to do with the problem they were trying to solve.
A basic understanding of technology is increasingly important.
[+] [-] csmithuk|12 years ago|reply
MacOS should be a part of School Education!
It's primitive tribalism. People should learn "computing" as part of a school education as over life things are going to change and they're going to need to adapt.
[+] [-] joshcrowder|12 years ago|reply
The real issue was Universities acknowledge them as points towards UCAS so practically everyone on the course ended up staying on another year or two and studied other subjects to get the necessary points.
I'm hopeful that one day the system will cater for more subjects but its a long way way at least in the UK.
[+] [-] Fuxy|12 years ago|reply
Probably the closest you can get is KDE since for most users if the setting isn't in the GUI it doesn't exist.
It would be cool if schools had a mix of windows and Linux computers though that way students can learn that Windows doesn't equal computer there are other OS's as well. And before you ask no, where I'm from Apple was as if it didn't exist.
I only learned about Linux when i was 14 and to be honest i though it was crap at first since all Linux windowing systems that I tried were awful.
But i continued to discover more of my system and figured out that Linux without the terminal is only appropriate for grandmas that can barely use a computer and are unlikely to run into driver issues when connecting new devices.
[+] [-] rbanffy|12 years ago|reply
When was the last time you saw a machine running Linux in person?
> unlikely to run into driver issues when connecting new devices.
I am not a grandma and the last device that didn't play nice with my Linux machines was a prototype Blackberry phone. I somehow don't think it was the computer's fault.
[+] [-] hrktb|12 years ago|reply
Were we impressed by the machine ? Hell no, everyone knew it was a piece of crap in that day and age. Just as we were not impressed by retroprojectors, chalk boards, out of date cassette players and 10. years old science experiment stuff.
Did we learn to program the arm in some simple basic like language I forgot how it looked like ? Well, yes, because we wanted good grades. Like for every other course.
I think most of us didn't care about programming, but at least the ones that never touched a computer before got to know how an algorithm would look like and how a program runs.
Linux at school should be efficient on the same level, to teach basic things (not just programming of course) and give a first experience in something students might not care about at all.
[1] http://atomictoasters.com/tag/thomson-t08/
PS: to be clear, I don't think linux at school should be used to push linux, helping some group's agenda shouldn't be school's role. Giving students more insight into how the *nix like systems work and can be used is a better goal, primary windows user could bet behind as well.
[+] [-] fnordfnordfnord|12 years ago|reply
Why does the installed OS imply anything at all about the quality of the hardware?
> Like it or not students don't see the potential of Linux ...
Why would they, if they have never been exposed to it?
>and truth is Windows is still more user friendly then Linux when it comes to doing some moderately advanced things.
I've always felt the opposite is true, that most Windows based solutions enable people to do easy things easier than with Linux, but that implementing more complex solutions often quickly becomes harder on the Windows platform than on Linux. That's been my experience, YMMV.
>It would be cool if schools had a mix of windows and Linux computers though that way students can learn that Windows doesn't equal computer there are other OS's as well. And before you ask no, where I'm from Apple was as if it didn't exist.
I agree. I think it makes for better educated graduates, and a better marketplace for computing products.
>I only learned about Linux when i was 14 and to be honest i though it was crap at first since all Linux windowing systems that I tried were awful.
That may have been a fair assessment at the time.
[+] [-] pritambaral|12 years ago|reply
Coming to the topic at hand: This reeks of fanboyism and fanaticism. While I personally agree that young people should be introduced to more than Windows as a part of their edution in computing, this is taking the rhetoric too far.
[+] [-] f_salmon|12 years ago|reply
The concept of "open source" should be part of school education.
We don't need thousands of proprietary version of the same thing. That's a HUGE waste of resources on literally every level.
All we need is 1 version that is accessible, clone-able, and modifiable for everybody.
Imagine where humanity could be today if we had used that approach right from the start and for every single product out there.
[+] [-] Tmmrn|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jussij|12 years ago|reply
That is exactly the model Linux has offered for over two decades now. If it was such a good model, systems like Windows and MacOS should now be history.
But those proprietary systems still dominate.
[+] [-] higherpurpose|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] fnordfnordfnord|12 years ago|reply
I don't think it is wrong for a college to have a Microsoft site license, but I do think it is wrong for a public college to require a specific vendor's products where equivalents exist. I also think it is wrong for a public college to force students' exclusive use of a single vendor's products. Computers are mere tools and it isn't the job of a public institution to choose winners.
[+] [-] gmuslera|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] rythie|12 years ago|reply
The counter point is that they shouldn't need to know this, but then why do we teach flower germination? or the causes of the second world war? or Shakespeare? - I've never had to use these in everyday life.
[+] [-] csmithuk|12 years ago|reply
Now there was a gap for me but I have children now and they are learning how to write HTML and basic JavaScript. They are using software to produce video productions and stop-frame animations, they are even getting instruction from parents on how to write python. They have Windows desktops, iPads and a few Linux netbooks. They have it pretty good.
And this is a London primary school with an Ofsted "needs improvement" rating.
It's not all that bad.
[+] [-] rbanffy|12 years ago|reply
The simplest possible programs are still very simple and short. Even with verbose languages.
One drawback here is that even a simple game by modern standards is light-years ahead of my best efforts on the Apple II. And those best efforts would be considered rather mundane or sub-standard today. A modern-looking program involves interacting with a GUI library and they are complicated animals.
What a successful teacher should do is to instill the love for the essential part of the program. When you write a "guess the number", there is no need for particle generators, applause, music and animated backgrounds. Keeping the basics short the kids will learn that programming is no different than creative writing using imperative forms all the time.
[+] [-] NAFV_P|12 years ago|reply
IMO all kids at school should be taught an ugly, difficult language like x86 assembly. Hardly any of them will understand it to a significant degree, but they will appreciate how difficult working with computers is. They will be more impressed with say, grep, or the original DOOM game.
Some of those kids will grow up to be somebody's boss, that potentially annoying, ignorant boss that expects you to juggle knives while tap-dancing in clogs.
[+] [-] derrzzaa|12 years ago|reply
The article however; utter shite. It's bad journalism.
'do nothing but line the pockets of the publishers', well yes. The company does profit from this, so? That's not valid argument to not use it in a schools? It should be approached from a 'look what we can learn from free tools' angle.
[+] [-] unknown|12 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] pessimizer|12 years ago|reply
If you start a child off with Windows or Mac, look forward to them maybe not ever understanding what a directory is, or that a computer has two types of memory. Consciously choosing and paying a premium to learn computing from Windows or Mac OS sounds to me only mildly better than trying to learn computing with a Playstation. They're simply not meant to be user serviceable.
I don't know what to say about not teaching children computing. There's a better case for teaching computing than any other science, if you judge usefulness by daily opportunity to use your skills to understand and improve your situation. The only reason I'd be against it is because I love being overpaid to do simple work due to the ignorance of the general population of the machines that completely run their lives.
My goal for a childhood education in computing would be to produce an adult that understands the capacity and flexibility of computing, and can be trusted to manage or hire computer workers, an adult who won't over or underestimate what can be done with computers, and an adult that has a deep relationship with the devices which, from now on, are going to be in physical contact with them at all times.
Yes, it's more important than learning how to fix your car. I've never had a car. How many people can say that about a computer? How many people can say that about a computer without ignoring embedded devices?
[+] [-] NAFV_P|12 years ago|reply
Well, at least you're honest about it, but I think that line of thinking does lead to certain problems in the industry. One that popped immediately to mind was:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technical_debt
I think this situation is probably going to grow. One day, even you and I could be considered ignorant.
[+] [-] computernovice|12 years ago|reply
Edit: I googled it but each result explained a different type of memory (caches, system RAM, virtual memory, hard drive) or (RAM vs ROM) or (Primary vs Secondary).
[+] [-] sentientmachine|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] remon|12 years ago|reply
Author : "Challenge...accepted"