Roy Schestowitz wrote:
> Microsoft Screws Students With Academic Licensing Package
>
> ,----[ Quote ]
> | Now, to be honest, I am quite impressed with the options for Office
> | 2007. What I'm focusing on, is the fact that Microsoft plan to
> | distribute Vista "Home Premium" as Academic software instead of
> | Vista "Ultimate" edition. Why is this? It's because even though
> | it's an "Upgrade" version, it doesn't facilitate upgrades from the
> | previous Academic release!
> |
> | Conspiracy? I think so!
> `----
> http://www.nigelj.com/blog/2007/01/microsoft-screws-students-with-academic-licensing-package/
> http://tinyurl.com/yxy7jo
>
It's OK. It only costs a little bit to upgrade
http://www.pcworld.com/zoom?id=127629&page=8&type=table&zoomIdx=1
http://tinyurl.com/yetgk4
Keep in mind that if you want to run Linux as the "host" operating
system, you only need Home Basic, but Microsoft makes you upgrade to
Vista Business or Ultimate.
To UPGRADE from whatever to Vista:
Business Edition - $199
Ultimate Edition - $259
The difference between Business Edition and Ultimate
Business Edition doesn't include Media Center (no DVDs, MP3s, ...)
Business Edition doesn't include BitLocker Drive Encryption (you don't
need to protect business information on your computer from hackers - do
you?). Of course, most people who want to secure specific files -
encrypt the individual Zip files using something like WinZip.
http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,127629-page,8-c,vistalonghorn/article.html
If I'm using Linux as the host operating system:
I don't need Aero and Flip 3D - it comes with Linux XGL.
I don't need Mobility and Tablet PC support (IO is managed by
Linux).
I don't need Meeting Space (already have GAIM and VNC).
I don't need Media Center (Can use RealPlayer or ipodder).
I don't need Business Backup and Networking and Remote Desktop
(Linux does all this).
I don't need BitLocker Drive Encryption ( I can encrypt any file
with a simple command).
However, due to the Microsoft END USER LICENSE AGREEMENT
If I purchase a retail PC with Home Premium (Retail value $239), I
still need to spent AT LEAST $299 for features I don't want or need,
that will just try to you memory I'm not willing to allocate.
Stevie, how about offering a Linux "client license" containing only
Home BASIC functionality for say - $50. Oh, that's right, it's called
Win4Lin.
> With Open Source software, not only is cost lowered, but there are also
> no fishy traps that rely on lockin of data.
> Related:
>
> UK Government criticised for stifling open sauce in schools
Appearantly they don teech da cids hou to spel eether.
> ,----[ Quote ]
> | MP Pugh reckons shcools should support independent or open source
> | software firms. He says, "In my experience a school is a key part
> | of the community and as such has a role to play in the economy of
> | that community. By supporting SMEs the local high-technology
> | industry will be encouraged which will benefit everyone."
> http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=36464
It's the classing Apple/Microsoft maneuver. It reminds me of the days
when IBM would win contracts by reminding the decision maker how many
people were employed in that city, state, or country. It wasn't a
direct threat, but there was the implication that if they didn't get
the money, there might be some job cuts.
The real thing to consider is - do you want to teach kids how to be
dependent on a supplier who will charge them premium prices to support
their dependency. If so, why not just offer pot smoking 101, and
cocaine sniffing 201.
Microsoft knows that forcing kids to use Microsoft Office for all of
their homework assures that only the rich kids can get passing grades.
If Open Source was used, even kids from low-income families could be
over-acheivers. And if you have all of these poor kids suddenly being
able to create their own businesses and market products and services
via the web, who is going to clean the houses, mow the lawns, and sort
the garbage?
> Becta under fire for procurement framework
> ,----[ Quote ]
> | Nineteen MPs have accused a government agency of restricting the
> | procurement of software in schools.
> `----
> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/11/29/becta_procurement_criticised/
It's ironic that spending premium prices to buy monopoly priced product
from self admitted criminals who have paid $billions in restitution in
exchange for immunity from prosecution, requires no justification. On
the other hand, using technology which can be obtained for little or no
immediate cash outlay is simply forbidden.
Suppose a government agency said "We can only buy our cars from Porche,
and any attempt to purchase cheaper cars, including cars from local
companies, must be justified in public hearings costing $millions of
dollars in time and money.
> MPs criticise government roadblocks to Open Source adoption in schools
> ,----[ Quote ]
> | The UK Government's own studies have shown savings of up to 60% can be
> | made by schools and colleges using Open Source software. Despite this
> | clear advantage, some MPs believe the software procurement frameworks
> | from Becta and official advice from DfES effectively locks out the us
> | of free, Open Source software.
> `----
> http://opensourceblog.itproportal.com/?p=220
This sounds about right. Remember, the time and labor of the students
is not considered an expense, which is why Linux doesn't provide the
typical 80-90% savings. Something tells me that the students might be
better off if they weren't wasting hundreds of hours playing video
cames on their PC when they are supposed to be doing their homework.
But no. We'll mandate the use of an operating system whose primary
advantage is game software, let them try to do their homework as the
dancing paper clip tries to help them, and then nod with understanding
when they say "a Windows Worm ate my homework".
|
|
