4 ms·

Going to play devil's advocate here. Teachers will push Windows, because they know about it and they can teach it. If you throw a pile of linux machines at teac

Going to play devil's advocate here. Teachers will push Windows, because they know about it and they can teach it. If you throw a pile of linux machines at teachers, how many are going to have the time, ability, and will to actually learn it well enough to teach it? It's hard enough to get a school to teach kids anything beyond using Office. I'd be happy to make things as easy as possible on the teacher who are willing to go the extra mile to teach with a Pi, without making them go another 10 miles learning a new OS to do it.

zanny 12y ago
Except the teacher on Windows by design cannot teach a huge chunk of the stack that makes a computer a computer. They talk about hardware, maybe a bit about the ToS breaking NT source floating around this comment section, skip over everything else and land on this theme park island of C# standard library and Windows forms. It leaves a huge gap in the childs education on computing that is one the major reasons so many people today do not even know Windows is not the only OS out there. And of course if they learn on Windows they are going to stay on Windows a huge majority of the time and it just breeds another generation of .net developers who would have a panic attack if a line didn't end in a semicolon.
- UK-AL 12y ago
  I think modern .net devs chose the platform out of its advantages, not because its what they only know. I know fair few .net developers, and they've all had linux years, and tried various languages.
  - 72deluxe 12y ago
    All the .NET devs and classic ASP (!) devs I know were/are scared stiff of Linux, see it as a hobby environment not used widely (they obviously don't think about servers, they use Windows servers and use the magic that IIS + .NET does for them), don't see outside the Windows development world and pronounce Linux as Lyenucks. Giving them a Raspberry Pi with Linux on them would kill them. I think they should widen out.
  - rbanffy 12y ago
    A lot of them choose .NET because their CTOs chose it because a Microsoft account representative told them it was enterprise-grade and had full Microsoft support while playing golf.
- slantyyz 12y ago
  >> Except the teacher on Windows by design cannot teach a huge chunk of the stack that makes a computer a computer. Is this really necessary for most kids? My view might be skewed because I grew up in the 80s, but everything I learned back then were things like Basic, COBOL, Fortran and Pascal. One of my high school classes did some assembly language on the Apple II, but I'm not sure most of the people in my class wanted to get down to the nuts and bolts. If a kid is really into the nuts and bolts, they'll likely discover Linux organically. I learned most of my computing skills outside of class by doing my own research. And back then, there was no such thing as Google, just magazines at the newsstand and books in bookstores and the library. I would say the majority of kids would probably be content enough learning how to make a web app, which can be easily done on Windows without needing knowledge of the stack that makes a computer a computer. I just switched back to Windows from OSX, and the only reason why I have Visual Studio on my machine is so that I can compile some of my node libraries. I hardly think using Windows will breed a generation of .net developers at all.
  - yellowapple 12y ago
    > but everything I learned back then were things like Basic, COBOL, Fortran and Pascal. Think about what you had back then, though. At best, you had Mac OS (which was as abstracted away from actual computer internals as Windows is today). All the other options - whether it was Commodores or Ataris or DOS-based IBM-compatibles - involved working very close to the hardware. You were manually dealing with interrupts and memory access and other very-low-level components. Basically, the reason why you didn't have to delve very far into the underlying system was because there wasn't an underlying system in the first place for you to delve into. COBOL and Pascal were pretty high-level, but BASIC and Fortran are along the same lines as C (especially back then): very low-level, very directly-wired-to-hardware, very thin abstractions over raw assembly. You were already delving into way more than students today would ever be able to delve into on a Windows-NT-based operating system (where you don't even have DOS internals to muck around with, unlike on Windows 3.x and 9x - which is what I personally grew up on). Yeah, students might be able to get by on a bit of HTML and Javascript and maybe Ruby or Python, but I would be lying if I claimed that such an education would be as in-depth and worthwhile as what your or I experienced pre-2000.
- 72deluxe 12y ago
  Excellent points, your "theme park land" C# comment made me laugh

zanny 12y ago

Except the teacher on Windows by design cannot teach a huge chunk of the stack that makes a computer a computer. They talk about hardware, maybe a bit about the ToS breaking NT source floating around this comment section, skip over everything else and land on this theme park island of C# standard library and Windows forms. It leaves a huge gap in the childs education on computing that is one the major reasons so many people today do not even know Windows is not the only OS out there. And of course if they learn on Windows they are going to stay on Windows a huge majority of the time and it just breeds another generation of .net developers who would have a panic attack if a line didn't end in a semicolon.

UK-AL 12y ago
I think modern .net devs chose the platform out of its advantages, not because its what they only know. I know fair few .net developers, and they've all had linux years, and tried various languages.
- 72deluxe 12y ago
  All the .NET devs and classic ASP (!) devs I know were/are scared stiff of Linux, see it as a hobby environment not used widely (they obviously don't think about servers, they use Windows servers and use the magic that IIS + .NET does for them), don't see outside the Windows development world and pronounce Linux as Lyenucks. Giving them a Raspberry Pi with Linux on them would kill them. I think they should widen out.
- rbanffy 12y ago
  A lot of them choose .NET because their CTOs chose it because a Microsoft account representative told them it was enterprise-grade and had full Microsoft support while playing golf.
slantyyz 12y ago
>> Except the teacher on Windows by design cannot teach a huge chunk of the stack that makes a computer a computer. Is this really necessary for most kids? My view might be skewed because I grew up in the 80s, but everything I learned back then were things like Basic, COBOL, Fortran and Pascal. One of my high school classes did some assembly language on the Apple II, but I'm not sure most of the people in my class wanted to get down to the nuts and bolts. If a kid is really into the nuts and bolts, they'll likely discover Linux organically. I learned most of my computing skills outside of class by doing my own research. And back then, there was no such thing as Google, just magazines at the newsstand and books in bookstores and the library. I would say the majority of kids would probably be content enough learning how to make a web app, which can be easily done on Windows without needing knowledge of the stack that makes a computer a computer. I just switched back to Windows from OSX, and the only reason why I have Visual Studio on my machine is so that I can compile some of my node libraries. I hardly think using Windows will breed a generation of .net developers at all.
- yellowapple 12y ago
  > but everything I learned back then were things like Basic, COBOL, Fortran and Pascal. Think about what you had back then, though. At best, you had Mac OS (which was as abstracted away from actual computer internals as Windows is today). All the other options - whether it was Commodores or Ataris or DOS-based IBM-compatibles - involved working very close to the hardware. You were manually dealing with interrupts and memory access and other very-low-level components. Basically, the reason why you didn't have to delve very far into the underlying system was because there wasn't an underlying system in the first place for you to delve into. COBOL and Pascal were pretty high-level, but BASIC and Fortran are along the same lines as C (especially back then): very low-level, very directly-wired-to-hardware, very thin abstractions over raw assembly. You were already delving into way more than students today would ever be able to delve into on a Windows-NT-based operating system (where you don't even have DOS internals to muck around with, unlike on Windows 3.x and 9x - which is what I personally grew up on). Yeah, students might be able to get by on a bit of HTML and Javascript and maybe Ruby or Python, but I would be lying if I claimed that such an education would be as in-depth and worthwhile as what your or I experienced pre-2000.
72deluxe 12y ago
Excellent points, your "theme park land" C# comment made me laugh