Could or Should schools use more open source software?

daz

daz

daz

Soldato
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
24,081
Location
Bucks
Schools and education establishments get very favourable rates on licensing from Microsoft, but I can't help but think that any saving on IT infrastructure and software would mean more money to spend on teachers and other areas.

Ubuntu et al are all clearly good enough, and user friendly enough to be run on the desktop by anyone familiar with a graphical user interface - it's not more difficult than Windows Vista or 7. Another question is, would kids benefit from being exposed to an open source environment from a young age - where they can tinker with the inner workings of their computer? Would it hark back to an era when the UK created a generation of bedroom computer programmers all borne from playing with BASIC on their Spectrum/Amstrad/C64?
 
no.
the simple fact is that it's WAY cheaper to support a windows desktop setup than a Linux one and the kids are more likely to have windows at home
however.
I do think that kids would benifit from understanding command line stuff and using other operating systems etc but from what age I don't know.
having watched that electric dreams prog on BBC I was interested by the way that the kids where so impressed by simple programming etc. the reward factor was lower than most games but the response from the kids was all the stronger by the fact they had to think about how it all happened and that it was ALL DOWN TO THEM.
 
Ubunto may have jumped leaps and bounds from when I tried it a couple of years ago but I doubt it, so that means there is still a disproportionate amount of command usage to control it or install products so it's not as easy as you make out. However OS's are just one open source product, there are many more that may be useable.

I agree with both of you however, playing around with other interfaces and programming could be very useful, both for learning and protecting yourself as more and more of our life becomes computerised.
 
Yes.

All we're taught in IT is how to use software that we already know how to, or some software they spent way too much on just for the hell of it. We're not taught binary in maths any more and all of the actually important facets of IT are completely ignored. It's important that people actually learn about IT since it's such a huge industry rather than getting a crash course in 'My First PC'. Using Open Source software such as Linux would definitely help, not to mention run better on the cheapo machines that the Schools get.

Did you know that Blair signed a contract to say that Schools would use mainly Microsoft software for basic use?
 
tbh thats no bad thing. unless you're going to go into servers etc you're not going to see linux/unix etc in the mainstream office/service based work.
 
That depends... i assume Chrome OS will bring a whole host more Linux users to the market, boosting the market share to at least the same as OSX. Now since it's a 'web based' distro a lot of those people are going to want something else cool and free to use for more serious work. So they'll be looking at existing distros, and it grows from there.

As it stands, Linux has the capability to become a serious competitor to Windows, and open source in general (looking at Open Office here) can take on Microsoft and other companies products easily. The problem is that not enough people actually know about it because of many reasons. One of which being that it's not in the shop when they go looking for a new OS. A large popular company like Google using Linux could be just what Linux needs.
 
Absolutely not.

As said it would cost a fortune to support open source deployment in a large envrionment like a school

You're mixing up computers as tools for learning and computers for learning about computers.

I'd have no objection to having a single lab which dual booted and the 'IT' classes made use of a Linux environment as a tool for learning about Linux. Maybe not even dual boot maybe a VMWare deployment with VMs without persistent storage.

Compare the cost of MS software Vs time and expertise (and therefore money) of an open source solution - MS will be cheaper every time.
 
Not really, all the PCs in one room are networked (at least in my School) so that they get the OS and Program data from a server. Just put it on that server and it's available for all the computers in the school. Depends what that software is though really.

A reason why they probably won't do it is that they're security freaks. Give them Linux means giving them Terminal, which means they have access to anything they want. And because they work in a school the technicians obviously don't know enough to take away the Terminal.

Linux would be better for general use because, as i said earlier, they use the cheapest PCs they could find. They are pretty rubbish, and there are persistent problems with resource usage and speed.
 
I think it would be great if everyone else did the same... but the majority of businesses use windows, so it would be pretty pointless not using MS when teaching BASIC skills to people in highschool.
 
You're all talking like linux has the same depth of UI like windows and to an extent OSX, problem is if you want to go any deeper than files and folders to view photos you start to need the command console, with windows when was the last time you used it? It's going in the right direction but it's still not there yet.
 
daz said:
That's the typical argument - is it true though?
Click to expand...

Think of it this way -

MS:
Technicians are common as muck therefore cheap to employ
Licences are at ludicrous discounts
Easy to manage and secure through AD, Exchange, ISA server - all very easy to deploy, run, set up and manage on a day to day basis whilst maintaining a secure and importantly a filtered environment for the kids to use.

OSS:
Expensive engineers and developers as they are less common
Software is free but there is no software for large networks comparable to AD
This makes it more difficult to manage where difficult == time == expensive
Ok so you can use LDAP but the thing is there is no off the shelf solution for it which means development time.

The original argument was to use OSS to save money - answer it is that it won't as you spend the money you saved on licences on infrastructure management staff.

As for a better learning environment - most businesses will use MS so that's a good place to start. And for those studying IT at GCSE and A-Level should have access to a lab which has OSS software on it, as well as be taught networking fundamentals instead of how to design a website in frontpage - which was all they really covered when i was at school which was why i didn't bother taking A-Level IT as it would have just been a waste of time.
 
As very well put above... "You're mixing up computers as tools for learning and computers for learning about computers."

Support costs would be significantly higher, 90% of educational software is targeted at Windows operating systems and has no linux based alternative... most pupils have windows PCs at home and expect the same level of compatibility with fileformats, etc. and are probably already somewhat familiar with windows. Pupils are taught skills that are relevant to the jobs they are likely to be looking at - how often do you see things along the line of "must have experience with microsoft office", etc.

I don't see any harm in introducing those that are ready for it to open source platforms and software - but it should be more in the form of virtual machines or a dedicated lab.
 
As far as the OS goes switching from Windows would be stupid (for all the user-based computers) as it would cause a large amount of confusion for 99% of students. However I think having all office-type digital documents related to your course/degree being made and saved in OpenOffice would be a HUGE benefit. As well as being able to submit work in ODF. Would mean no student would actually require Microsoft Office.
 
They should at least explain the concept.

I'm suck of hearing about teachers telling students that downloading an operating system for free is illegal, or it's illegal to replace Windows.
 
Superewza said:
Not really, all the PCs in one room are networked (at least in my School) so that they get the OS and Program data from a server. Just put it on that server and it's available for all the computers in the school. Depends what that software is though really.

A reason why they probably won't do it is that they're security freaks. Give them Linux means giving them Terminal, which means they have access to anything they want. And because they work in a school the technicians obviously don't know enough to take away the Terminal.

Linux would be better for general use because, as i said earlier, they use the cheapest PCs they could find. They are pretty rubbish, and there are persistent problems with resource usage and speed.
Click to expand...

ok
a) you sound like a student. if theres one thing I've learned from working with schools it's that you HAVE to be a "security freak" when you give kids access to any systems.

b) every technician/network admin/etc I've worked with in schools know more about linux than I'd want to.

c) whats the system req for windows XP? my old Sony vaio laptop is rated XP ready with it's 1.2Ghz processor and 256Mb ram. I'm 99.99% sure I've never seen a PC with less than double that spec in a school in my working life apart as an off network testbed system.

d) with supplying an OS over the network as you say (where it's refreshed every time they turn it on) apart from the bandwidth issues (I've seen this used. first lessons are NOT a pretty sight.) the main cost they will have is support. with windows licences they will already have paid for them and just either have a support contact with their vendor OR be supporting it off their own back. how much does it cost to employ a red hat certified eng/admin? how much does it cost to hire a Microsoft certified eng/admin?

Fillado said:
As far as the OS goes switching from Windows would be stupid (for all the user-based computers) as it would cause a large amount of confusion for 99% of students. However I think having all office-type digital documents related to your course/degree being made and saved in OpenOffice would be a HUGE benefit. As well as being able to submit work in ODF. Would mean no student would actually require Microsoft Office.
Click to expand...
this.
that and all office installs should default to save as 97-2003
 
Last edited:
http://www.freesoftwaremagazine.com...sing_gnu_linux_and_thin_clients_across_school
http://news.zdnet.co.uk/software/0,1000000121,39247744,00.htm
http://www.theregister.co.uk/Design/page/linux_case_study_orwell_high_school.html
http://www.sourcewire.com/releases/rel_display.php?relid=22707&hilite=

Fairly conclusive evidence that it is cheaper in hardware and software, and is more ethically compatible with the objectives of a school environment that is publicly funded.
Every school in the UK should be required to use open solutions wherever it is of the same or lesser cost.

ps "Photoshop/office doesn't work" is no excuse. They should be using open solutions like GIMP/Openoffice if it is taxpayer money.
 
Last edited:
I disagree.

You simply cannot compare the GIMP with Photoshop - Photoshop far outstrips it in terms of usability, support and features.

Put it this way, you're a teacher, teaching a graphic design class at A-Level, the GIMP simply isn't going to cut it, leaving those kids with basically no chance of landing a design job because they don't know how to use Photoshop, the GIMP they can learn with at home, to use Photoshop they'd have to use a knock-off copy because the schools haven't invested in them.

Obviously you've never tried to manage a large network like a school or you'd know exactly why Linux isn't being used. Even in universities, linux is restricted a lot of the time to the CompSci labs where they will dual boot!

When i was at university they started deploying SunRAY thin clients - which just logged on via terminal services to a Win2k3 box!
 
dave-lew99 said:
I disagree.

You simply cannot compare the GIMP with Photoshop - Photoshop far outstrips it in terms of usability, support and features.

Put it this way, you're a teacher, teaching a graphic design class at A-Level, the GIMP simply isn't going to cut it, leaving those kids with basically no chance of landing a design job because they don't know how to use Photoshop, the GIMP they can learn with at home, to use Photoshop they'd have to use a knock-off copy because the schools haven't invested in them.

Obviously you've never tried to manage a large network like a school or you'd know exactly why Linux isn't being used. Even in universities, linux is restricted a lot of the time to the CompSci labs where they will dual boot!

When i was at university they started deploying SunRAY thin clients - which just logged on via terminal services to a Win2k3 box!
Click to expand...

I think you make one good point and one bad one here.

Familiarity with industry standard software is a good reason to avoid open source alternatives, there's no point teaching students something they'll never use (though there are plenty of areas where this doesn't stop schools).

Management is something which everybody wants to cite as an excuse but the fact is we currently have around 15,000 servers deployed worldwide and around 55% of those run linux (with another 10%+ on solaris) and they're all managed, patched and backed up centrally.

It may not be as out of the box anybody who's done an MCSE can do it but there's nothing to stop you doing it very well and in many respects unix systems are easier to manage, particularly if you have exotic requirements. That said, schools and universities don't do particularly when it comes to sysadmin staff (and it'll always be that way, they don't pay enough to attract the best and that won't change anytime soon) so the reluctance to take on managing a linux estate is somewhat understandable.
 
Minto said:
ps "Photoshop/office doesn't work" is no excuse. They should be using open solutions like GIMP/Openoffice if it is taxpayer money.
Click to expand...


Its a very good excuse... when was the last time you saw a job ad that said must be proficent with GIMP? (that wasn't an ad for the adult industry)... working knowledge of photoshop and ms office are a basic prerequisite for many jobs...

GIMP is a poor alternative anyhow imo - there are free image editing packages for my windows mobile phone with better workflow and functionality.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom