| ActiveMac | Anonymous | Create a User | Reviews | News | Forums | Advertise |
|
|
|
User Controls |
|
New User |
|
Login |
|
Edit/View My Profile |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ActiveMac |
|
Articles |
|
Forums |
|
Links |
|
News |
|
News Search |
|
Reviews |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
News Centers |
|
Windows/Microsoft |
|
DVD |
|
ActiveHardware |
|
Xbox |
|
MaINTosh |
|
News Search |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ANet Chats |
|
The Lobby |
|
Special Events Room |
|
Developer's Lounge |
|
XBox Chat |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ's |
|
Windows 98/98 SE |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Windows Me |
|
Windows "Whistler" XP |
|
Windows CE |
|
Internet Explorer 6 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Xbox |
|
DirectX |
|
DVD's |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TopTechTips |
|
Registry Tips |
|
Windows 95/98 |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Internet Explorer 4 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Windows NT Tips |
|
Program Tips |
|
Easter Eggs |
|
Hardware |
|
DVD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Latest Reviews |
|
Applications |
|
Microsoft Windows XP Professional |
|
Norton SystemWorks 2002 |
|
|
|
Hardware |
|
Intel Personal Audio Player 3000 |
|
Microsoft Wireless IntelliMouse Explorer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Site News/Info |
|
About This Site |
|
Affiliates |
|
ANet Forums |
|
Contact Us |
|
Default Home Page |
|
Link To Us |
|
Links |
|
Member Pages |
|
Site Search |
|
Awards |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credits |
 |
5 Reasons Windows 7 Is A Better Deal For Students Than Snow Leopard | |
|
||
| Time: 08:13 EST/13:13 GMT | News Source: CRN | Posted By: Andre Da Costa | ||
|
The Windows 7 special offer comes as Apple makes a push to grab share from Microsoft with Snow Leopard pricing aimed at undercutting Microsoft for the first time ever. Indeed, Apple, which released Snow Leopard on August 28, has gone to great lengths to price its products at a premium compared to Microsoft. Nevertheless, here are five reasons why Windows 7 is a better deal for students than Snow Leopard. | ||
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 26 through 50 of 340 Prev | Last | Next |
The time now is
8:34:11 AM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
| #26 By 7754 (206.169.247.2) at 9/22/2009 11:34:59 AM |
|
#21: you are speaking from the perspective of someone that "gets" IT. I wish it true of the general population, but it's not. Even then, however, the points about experience and liability still stand--you hire a person with experience and a particular skill set precisely because they aren't stumbling through a program, "figuring it out" as they go. That's how many costly mistakes are made. There is also a familiarity with just about any program through continued use that is invaluable--learning the quirks that every program invariably has, and how to deal with them. Much of that is not conceptual, and much of that cannot be easily picked up in classroom/training sessions.
I would hardly limit Microsoft Office to "business school." Grade school... I can see a better case for arguing for OO there. Again, however, the experience you gain over time with an application is invaluable. |
| #27 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at 9/22/2009 12:09:53 PM |
| #26: I see your point of view and I don't want to keep beating this dead horse. Besides, now I'm busy chuckling about how MS is copying the Apple retail stores and poaching their managers and employees. They are absolutely shameless. |
| #28 By 11888 (198.103.167.20) at 9/22/2009 12:40:51 PM |
|
I'm just saying that I would never reduce my expectations of children to be so low that I think they need to learn Office in school.
It's very disheartening to realise that one lives in times of such lowered expectations. How did we go from encouraging children to dream big to making sure they know PowerPoint? Any idiot can figure out the fundamentals of Office in an afternoon. Who are these dolts who complain to a school that their child isn't using MS Office in the classroom? I can only wish that more children get to have the type of parents that I did - where creativity and discovery is paramount. |
| #29 By 7754 (206.169.247.2) at 9/22/2009 1:55:14 PM |
| #28: I am partially a product of the pendulum swinging too far that direction. Creativity and discovery are important, but they must be balanced with practical (not trying to quibble over semantics here) skills. Dreaming big is great, but... a la Caddy Shack, "The world needs ditch diggers, too." Most of life is relatively mundane. But by no means are those less necessary. |
| #30 By 241766 (216.191.227.68) at 9/23/2009 10:38:07 AM |
|
I have to agree with MrRoper and Latch. As someone who has been programming for almost 30 years, and has worked with programmers for almost 20 years, I would much rather work with someone with good general programming skills and is knowledgeable in a number of programming languages and environments than someone who is an expert at Visual Basic in Visual Studio. They may know the tool way better than I and others do, but they invariably demonstrate that they spent way more time learning the ins and outs of the tool, and not enough time learning how to do the job correctly. General skills are transferable when a new environment is required, or a radical change to a familiar tool is forced upon them. I have talked to many employers, and have been one myself from time to time, and most of them preferred the transferable general skills to expertise in a single skill. In other words, being knowledgeable in programming in general, including object oriented methodologies, design patterns, several OO languages, etc., is much preferable to being an expert in Visual Basic or even Visual C++.
Rxcall also mentioned that "You learn what the world uses. In the early 90s it was VB and PowerBuilder, then came JAVA, now it's C# and Java. Until Open Source becomes more ubiquitous it is useless to teach it. " Umm, forgive me for saying this, but you just advocated teaching C# and Java, both of which are Open Source and ECMA standards. I love how you say they should be taught because they are in high demand and ubiquitous, but should not be taught because they are open source and therefore useless. Brilliant bit of logic, that is. You might want to try proof reading your post before hitting the Post button. |
| #31 By 7754 (206.169.247.2) at 9/23/2009 1:28:16 PM |
|
#31: I think you misunderstood my point. General skills are important too--but that doesn't mean it should *replace* specific skills. Those are important also... particularly when you have a de facto standard (in this case, well over 90% market share).
Regarding Open Source... I don't think that's Rxcall's point, either. It's about teaching widely-used skills rather than niche ones. If OpenOffice had 90% market share, that's what schools should teach. |
| #32 By 241766 (216.191.227.68) at 9/23/2009 1:48:36 PM |
|
To use an automobile analogy, if you were running a service station, would you want to hire a mechanic to be an expert on GM motors and systems, or would you want a mechanic who has a good grasp of motors and drive train systems in general, who is able to adapt to changes in design from one make and model to another, or even differences from one year of a vehicle to another? A mechanic who specializes on Chevys is going to be at a disadvantage when a Prius or a Chevy Volt rolls into the shop.
This is true of programmers as well. A generalist, which I admit to being myself, is better able to jump from one technology to another, such as going from VAX basic to Microsoft Quick Basic, to C, to Objective-C, to C++, or to C# and Java. As I do both C++ and C# these days, with a smattering of Java for fun, I can tell you that these require different ways of looking at things, and trying to do C# or Java "the C++ way" would present some nasty challenges to overcome. Single versus multiple inheritance is a small example of what I am talking about. A wider set of experiences with multiple tool sets makes it easier to adapt to changes from one version to another, or moving from one development environment to another. Unless you are applying for work at Microsoft or Oracle, having a wider set of knowledge of multiple tools is a benefit more than it is a hindrance. ETA: I am not aiming this specifically and exclusively at Microsoft, either, should anyone be wondering. I would say the same things about database servers as well, as I believe someone with a good database background on multiple databases would be preferable to someone who has only used, and was an expert in, Oracle databases. This post was edited by TheSkepticCanuck on Wednesday, September 23, 2009 at 13:52. |
| #33 By 7754 (206.169.247.2) at 9/23/2009 6:13:06 PM |
|
#32: but the car market doesn't reflect the reality of this situation. To match your analogy against the real world, say well over 90% of people drive a Prius. Now, mechanic schools say instead of teaching about how to service the Prius, they will instead teach how to service the Fiat Panda. They're both cars, right? As an employer, when you have two potential candidates come to you, would you rather hire the one that has worked on a Prius for years already, or the one that has worked on a Panda? Which one would you rather have work on your Prius?
Again, I'm not saying that this comes ***instead*** of learning general principles. Schools must teach that as well. But there is no "Generic Office Suite v12" out there... at some point, in this case, you have to pick a tool to use and a skill to learn. ***Both*** practical skills and general principles are important. |
| #34 By 28801 (71.58.225.185) at 9/23/2009 6:36:50 PM |
|
#32: Wow, I didn’t know we had a charter member of the Obtuse Society posting here.
To clarify, I believe our education systems should use the de facto standard of the day. If some day that is Open Office, then so be it. Clear enough? “having a wider set of knowledge of multiple tools is a benefit more than it is a hindrance.” Thanks for the tip, Captain Obvious. Everyone here thought having multiple diverse skills was a hindrance. “if you were running a service station, would you want to hire a mechanic to be an expert on GM motors and systems or would you want a mechanic who has a good grasp of motors and drive train systems in general” I wonder how you'd feel taking your brand new Audi in for service and some pimply-faced kid fresh out of vocational school with a <keanureeves >“ good grasp of motors and drive train systems in general”</keanureeves> opens your hood and starts tinkering around. Analogies suck like a prostitute – that’s why I never use them. This post was edited by rxcall on Wednesday, September 23, 2009 at 18:38. |
| #35 By 241766 (216.191.227.68) at 9/24/2009 8:33:32 AM |
|
#34: Wow, what a vitriolic asshole you are. No wonder the only people to post here are the hardcore fanboys like yourself. If this is how newcomers to the Activewin forums are routinely treated, then it is no wonder there are no new people interested in sticking around here. Maybe I should see if I can find a Windows related forum somewhere that has fewer assholes like yourself, and go back to merely lurking here once in a while when bored. <sarcasm> Thanks for the warm welcome. </sarcasm>
ETA: I think of this site as the anti-Slashdot, or Slashdot of the pro-Microsoft set. A lot fewer users, but the few that are here are just as nasty towards anyone, new or old, with a point of view that doesn't kiss the proverbial Microsoft ass. This is exactly the same thing that makes Slashdot unpalatable for those of us who are merely looking for an intellectual and thought provoking discussion without all the hate. This post was edited by TheSkepticCanuck on Thursday, September 24, 2009 at 09:08. |
| #36 By 241766 (216.191.227.68) at 9/24/2009 8:46:10 AM |
|
#33: My experience has been that by the time grade school and high school students graduate from post-secondary institutions, most of the current defacto standards are either gone, or sufficiently different as to bear little resemblance to what is currently being used. What particular niche they are interested in will also determine what they should be learning. If someone is interested in web programming, and goes to a Java shop to work, then all the Visual Studio experience will help little when he is given a system running Eclipse or NetBeans. Conversely, a Windows desktop application programmer will be well served to become experienced in Visual Studio. A secretary would need to have a better grasp of MS Word and other MS Office components than would a programmer, who can get along quite well with general office suite skills, which are easily transferred to whatever word processor and spreadsheet program the company wants to give them, as most programmers I know only use a very tiny subset of a word processor's features when typing up a functional specification or design document.
However, I do agree that both general and specific skills should be taught, but the students would be better served to be taught specifics of a programming language than specifics of Visual Studio or Eclipse. Being a proficient C++ or Java programmer is more valuable than being a so-so programmer who is a wiz with Visual Studio itself. Teach the skill, not the tool used to implement that skill. YMMV. |
| #37 By 23275 (68.117.163.128) at 9/24/2009 9:40:24 AM |
|
#35, 36,
Actually, rxcall is one of the nicer folks on the board and he'll share an objective opinion regardless of which side of an issue he's on. Classically trained method oriented programmers with solid business skills are what we look for. We've noted that they are able to learn any platform more quickly and since we never know what we're going to encounter in our work, the stronger the base skills an engineer has, the better. Strong math skills are particularly important to us, as we do everything from the stick first - e.g., from pencil and paper to prove the calc and then and only then do we commit to code. While we all really like the IDE MS offers, it isn't what drives. Requirements drive and these are rooted in practical considerations. So often we have to learn a new platform - say a mining operations suite that was custom built and added to over time. If we only knew one platform we would not know where to start and just last month, we had to convert a hospital's data that was based upon a system deployed in 1983. Having a lot of old timers around (in relative terms) that were trained long before modern IDE's were available helps a lot. TheSkepticCanuk - post away - all views are most welcome. I mean, we've had Latch in re-hab for years and we all hope one day that the meds will help <kidding, of course> |
| #38 By 241766 (216.191.227.68) at 9/24/2009 10:14:02 AM |
|
#37: "Actually, rxcall is one of the nicer folks on the board and he'll share an objective opinion regardless of which side of an issue he's on."
This actually reinforces what I said. If he is one of the nicer ones here, then I severely understated the problem. "Classically trained method oriented programmers with solid business skills are what we look for. We've noted that they are able to learn any platform more quickly and since we never know what we're going to encounter in our work, the stronger the base skills an engineer has, the better." Exactly! This is what I have been saying all along! Good solid base skills are transferable, and can do one well in many diverse situations. This is true in development environments as well as desktop productivity applications! I'd rather a person who knows the basics of mail merge and when to use it or not use it, than someone who is technically proficient at doing it in MS Word, but lacks the basics. Obviously, someone who knows both is even more valuable, but the base skill is 90% of the value, and the specific tool knowledge is 10% of the value. Ideally, both would be preferred to be taught, maybe even teaching how to do it on a couple of different tools, but time and resources being what they are, at least make sure the basics are well taught. As someone who has used MS Word since version 2, switching from WordPerfect for Windows 2, the tools change radically over time, but the understandings of basic principles are eternal, at least until the next big paradigm shift occurs. What good will specific MS Word skills be when the GUI is replaced by a VOI (Voice Activated Interface). Basic paragraph formatting and layout skills will transfer, but the keyboard shortcuts likely will be less useful. |
| #39 By 28801 (65.90.202.10) at 9/24/2009 7:46:37 PM |
| Someone needs a skin graft - preferably the thicker variety. |
| #40 By 245545 (94.41.94.12) at 10/19/2009 11:49:23 AM |
|
What type of drunk are you? Are you an angry drunk? Are you a person that talks a lot when they get drunk? Are you a person that does stupid things when they get drunk. ECT.
What type of drunk are you? For, example http://portishead.forums.umusic.co.uk/members/casodex.aspx <a href=http://portishead.forums.umusic.co.uk/members/casodex.aspx>Buy Casodex</a> |
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 26 through 50 of 340 Prev | Last | Next |
The time now is
8:34:11 AM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
