They’ve gotta use something. There are only 3 choices, and one of those has less than 3% market share. Of the two choices left, Mac is the better choice.
Schools are going to train kids on systems that they may encounter in the business world, and their chances of encountering a Linux DE are vanishingly small. Idk how many governments are transitioning to Linux, but the United States government wasn’t doing so when this US school issued laptops. I love Linux and use it on all my computers, but I’m realistic enough to understand why the school issued Mac or Windows.
On the other hand, who if not state could help Linux adoption? If such programs would become universal, students would train on Linux, and businesses would be compelled to adapt.
Real question - WTF does market share have to do with this?
No one running a program like this is gonna care about “market share”.
Most are gonna be 'give me cheapest you got" even if that means buying HS students baby’s 1st computer from ‘Fissure Nice’ (because they aint gonna spend money that can go in their pocket for name brand shit)
Schools exist to prepare students for their adult life, and the working world. They’re going to choose an operating system that the students are likely to encounter at their jobs, and elsewhere in their lives.
Most are gonna be 'give me cheapest you got" even if that means buying HS students baby’s 1st computer from ‘Fissure Nice’ (because they aint gonna spend money that can go in their pocket for name brand shit)
They gave them MacBooks, so I’m not sure how you are arriving at this conclusion. School administrators don’t get to pocket any school budget money that they don’t spend on students.
This is such a bad take. You’re seriously comparing the purchase of a tool brand for students to child grooming? Jesus dude. A computer is simply a tool, and Apple made one for an education market and price that was complete and convenient for that purpose. This is just as “bad” as them relying on all Pearson branded materials. Are there problems there? Yes, obviously. Pearson has market-based motives to keep schools on their materials and so they have tests that lean in on their text books and it’s all kinda gross. But it’s not like the answer is “let’s all just read Wikipedia in class” or “let’s compare all the different source books and find the real truth” as great as that would be, it’s just not realistic and the one reference isn’t particularly bad, it’s just not the best possible. I guess all that to say chill he fuck out, the solution to everything isn’t open source.
The marketing wasn’t to children? It was to schools? They still do market to children (like the iPhone and messaging) but CHILD GROOMING?!? Fuck off. Trying to sell legos to children so they’ll be hooked on high-quality plastic toys is also grooming? Y’all are fucking stupid.
Hit a nerve? I stand by my assertion that “tech in education” initiatives by predatory vendors is akin to grooming children. Get them to speak the language of your product early, so that they’ll be a customer for life. IIRC the term is called “Cradle to grave marketing”[1][2]. Leverage imprinting along the way for good measure. I get why the Googles and the Microsofts of the world are so eager to get their products into schools. That doesn’t mean that I agree with it.
I’m not saying marketing to children isn’t predatory. But this is a tool they need in school. It’s not practical at all to suggest they should be building computers and compiling their own OSes for school. Selling a product for use as a tool to children isn’t grooming. It’s definitely a marketing tactic, but so is everything?
So in this argument, Macs are tabaco and Linux would be… vaping? I’m not exactly sure what the absolutely necessary stress relief product would be in which a certain brand and an open source alternative would make sense to be comparable to cigarettes.
Maybe more like Jansport. Is jansport grooming kids to like a specific brand of backpacks? Or Nike for specific shoe brands? Or Kellogg and Tony the Tiger? All of these things pray on social expectations and the impressionable nature of children. Just because the school is providing fucking Lucern milk doesn’t mean they’re grooming kids to have a fondness and expectation for that milk brand. I understand this isn’t’ a popular opinion on the fedi, and I’m not fond of the big tech brands shitty tactics. But you’re all unrealistic dipshits.
you’re saying we should give kids cigarettes? or something like cigarettes? maybe kids don’t need to be addicted to things?
if you really need to keep this metaphor going, linux is, like, meditation or cognitive behavioral therapy or having friends, because its generally good for you, and doesn’t lock you into a bullshit proprietary ecosystem like tobacco or macs do.
see, the thing about lucerne milk is, if im making a milkshake, and I run out of lucerne milk but have an unopened bag of canadian milk, I can pour in the weird-ass canadian milk (spilling half of it because what kind of freaks put milk in a bag?) and it will work and be fine. because its just a company selling milk. all the milk is just milk. milk, in fact, is interoperable, and open if not free. hell, I can make milk if I really desperately want to.
if I have an apple product, and want to make it work with a non-apple-approved product, im going to have to fight their engineers at every step. fuck, getting them to start using FUCKING TCP/IP was like pulling teeth.
The worst part about this IMO is the school system teaching digital dependency on proprietary software vendors.
Big tech salivates at the thought of being a child’s “first”… much like other kinds of child groomers.
They’ve gotta use something. There are only 3 choices, and one of those has less than 3% market share. Of the two choices left, Mac is the better choice.
If you issue laptops, market share should not be your consideration except for availability of programs and tech support.
Linux has plenty of both, and the obvious advantage of being open source and transparent.
Btw, many governments are currently transitioning to Linux for that very reason.
Schools are going to train kids on systems that they may encounter in the business world, and their chances of encountering a Linux DE are vanishingly small. Idk how many governments are transitioning to Linux, but the United States government wasn’t doing so when this US school issued laptops. I love Linux and use it on all my computers, but I’m realistic enough to understand why the school issued Mac or Windows.
I see your point, thanks.
On the other hand, who if not state could help Linux adoption? If such programs would become universal, students would train on Linux, and businesses would be compelled to adapt.
Real question - WTF does market share have to do with this?
No one running a program like this is gonna care about “market share”.
Most are gonna be 'give me cheapest you got" even if that means buying HS students baby’s 1st computer from ‘Fissure Nice’ (because they aint gonna spend money that can go in their pocket for name brand shit)
Schools exist to prepare students for their adult life, and the working world. They’re going to choose an operating system that the students are likely to encounter at their jobs, and elsewhere in their lives.
They gave them MacBooks, so I’m not sure how you are arriving at this conclusion. School administrators don’t get to pocket any school budget money that they don’t spend on students.
This is such a bad take. You’re seriously comparing the purchase of a tool brand for students to child grooming? Jesus dude. A computer is simply a tool, and Apple made one for an education market and price that was complete and convenient for that purpose. This is just as “bad” as them relying on all Pearson branded materials. Are there problems there? Yes, obviously. Pearson has market-based motives to keep schools on their materials and so they have tests that lean in on their text books and it’s all kinda gross. But it’s not like the answer is “let’s all just read Wikipedia in class” or “let’s compare all the different source books and find the real truth” as great as that would be, it’s just not realistic and the one reference isn’t particularly bad, it’s just not the best possible. I guess all that to say chill he fuck out, the solution to everything isn’t open source.
No. It is not a bad take. Just look at candy cigarettes.
Oh it’s just advertising? Advertising is brainwashing, and nothing more. It should be outright banned. Especially campaigns targeting children.
The marketing wasn’t to children? It was to schools? They still do market to children (like the iPhone and messaging) but CHILD GROOMING?!? Fuck off. Trying to sell legos to children so they’ll be hooked on high-quality plastic toys is also grooming? Y’all are fucking stupid.
Hit a nerve? I stand by my assertion that “tech in education” initiatives by predatory vendors is akin to grooming children. Get them to speak the language of your product early, so that they’ll be a customer for life. IIRC the term is called “Cradle to grave marketing”[1] [2]. Leverage imprinting along the way for good measure. I get why the Googles and the Microsofts of the world are so eager to get their products into schools. That doesn’t mean that I agree with it.
I’m not saying marketing to children isn’t predatory. But this is a tool they need in school. It’s not practical at all to suggest they should be building computers and compiling their own OSes for school. Selling a product for use as a tool to children isn’t grooming. It’s definitely a marketing tactic, but so is everything?
and kids need stress relief, so why not let joe camel give it to them?
So in this argument, Macs are tabaco and Linux would be… vaping? I’m not exactly sure what the absolutely necessary stress relief product would be in which a certain brand and an open source alternative would make sense to be comparable to cigarettes.
Maybe more like Jansport. Is jansport grooming kids to like a specific brand of backpacks? Or Nike for specific shoe brands? Or Kellogg and Tony the Tiger? All of these things pray on social expectations and the impressionable nature of children. Just because the school is providing fucking Lucern milk doesn’t mean they’re grooming kids to have a fondness and expectation for that milk brand. I understand this isn’t’ a popular opinion on the fedi, and I’m not fond of the big tech brands shitty tactics. But you’re all unrealistic dipshits.
you’re saying we should give kids cigarettes? or something like cigarettes? maybe kids don’t need to be addicted to things?
if you really need to keep this metaphor going, linux is, like, meditation or cognitive behavioral therapy or having friends, because its generally good for you, and doesn’t lock you into a bullshit proprietary ecosystem like tobacco or macs do.
see, the thing about lucerne milk is, if im making a milkshake, and I run out of lucerne milk but have an unopened bag of canadian milk, I can pour in the weird-ass canadian milk (spilling half of it because what kind of freaks put milk in a bag?) and it will work and be fine. because its just a company selling milk. all the milk is just milk. milk, in fact, is interoperable, and open if not free. hell, I can make milk if I really desperately want to.
if I have an apple product, and want to make it work with a non-apple-approved product, im going to have to fight their engineers at every step. fuck, getting them to start using FUCKING TCP/IP was like pulling teeth.
Who was suggesting custom built PCs or Gentoo for schools?
comparison to pedophiles? maybe unfair. comparison to big tobacco? on fucking point.
a computer is a tool, sure, and the hardware is largely opaque at the high school level, excepting massive nerds
but every single one of these big tech companies runs all their shit on proprietary ecosystem lock-in, and keeping customers infantilized.
anything that isn’t open source should be fucking banned from schools.