[HN Gopher] Schools should be using open source software
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Schools should be using open source software
        
       Author : bradley_taunt
       Score  : 189 points
       Date   : 2022-05-30 16:19 UTC (6 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (tdarb.org)
 (TXT) w3m dump (tdarb.org)
        
       | r_hoods_ghost wrote:
       | Gotta love the authoritarianism of the open source evangelists.
       | 
       | "Schools should only be allowed to use and teach with open source
       | software."
       | 
       | So that's be freedom for thee but not for me. Good to know.
        
         | josephcsible wrote:
         | Public schools are part of the government, and the government
         | should absolutely be held to higher standards than its
         | citizens.
        
         | digisign wrote:
         | Yes, freedom to line BillG's pockets, rather than contribute to
         | society.
        
       | enumjorge wrote:
       | With open source you typically trade polish and easy-of-use for
       | customizability and transparency. I feel like that's the opposite
       | of what school staff need, who are typically overworked and want
       | simplicity above anything else. They need technology that is as
       | transparent as possible, and open source software is typically
       | not that.
        
       | mcdonje wrote:
       | Not only schools, but any public entity. Taxpayer dollars should
       | be respected. That means embracing lower cost options, supporting
       | open source projects, and pushing for right to repair.
        
         | AussieWog93 wrote:
         | I don't know. The purpose of schools is to teach kids, not
         | advocate for particular popular campaigns/crusades.
        
           | digisign wrote:
           | It's not to advocate for corporate earnings either.
        
       | parmezan wrote:
       | Truth is people don't care what operating system they get as long
       | as it 'just works'. LibreOffice is IMO too ugly and unusable to
       | use for tech illiterates.
       | 
       | Windows 10 and defender does a bloody good job of blocking lots
       | of malware. Think of tools like mimikatz. You don't see Ubuntu
       | blocking a mimikatz-like binaries.
       | 
       | Firefox is slower compared to Chrome. People care about speed.
       | Firefox is also not privacy friendly. Lots of telemetry to
       | mozilla/google.
       | 
       | You are out of touch and have embraced the cult that is Linux,
       | Open Source. I don't understand why the algorithm pushes your
       | post to the top.
        
         | easrng wrote:
         | Firefox is not slower than Chrome. Some things are faster in
         | Firefox (optimized JS, starting workers) and some are faster in
         | Chrome (WASM).
        
       | cityzen wrote:
       | I am beyond livid that my kids have to use this Google classroom
       | bullshit. I have zero doubts they are building profiles on our
       | kids no matter what the lying liars at the top say.
       | 
       | I keep telling my wife, "I still cannot believe that a
       | multinational ADVERTISING company is being used to "teach" kids".
       | It is so incredibly stupid when you look at it for what it is.
       | 
       | I hope Larry and Sergey are loving this monster they created.
        
       | sQEjOG4eEBcsVwU wrote:
       | I definitely agree with this, and my only real "complaint" is
       | that this applies to not just schools, but everywhere.
       | 
       | For schools, I'd definitely love to see open _hardware_ , if not
       | just to give the kids a chance to understand the chips that run
       | the software as well.
        
       | t43562 wrote:
       | I live in the land of Raspberry Pi but the local school wants
       | iPads and windows laptops. What can you do? A lot of people just
       | aren't interested in computers and if there's one little
       | disadvantage they are happy enough to not have anything. The
       | stupid educational websites they like don't all work perfectly
       | with RPi so "bzzzt". Next.
        
       | quijoteuniv wrote:
       | I think this is so obvious that even Microsoft is wondering how
       | they have pulled it of so long. Now to avoid people leaving
       | Microsoft have included WSL and it works pretty well. Soon with
       | GUI too...
        
       | jcranmer wrote:
       | > Word, Excel, PowerPoint. Why have these become the "standard"
       | of text manipulation and processing?
       | 
       | I hate to break this to you, but because (especially for
       | PowerPoint) these are legitimately among the best options, at the
       | very least, distinctly better than any open-source office
       | offerings. Maybe the author is unaware of how well these programs
       | do in their roles because they've been actively avoiding any
       | situation that would call for the use of these or similar
       | programs... the use of a plain text document, not even a lightly-
       | formatted HTML document, makes me think that they actively go out
       | of their way to avoid using a word processor.
        
       | shadowgovt wrote:
       | I need a term for this common conceptual error that I see folks
       | in the software space make... One that I've made many times. It's
       | like the inverse of smartest person in the room syndrome... It's
       | the reasoning error where you believe that most people, or even
       | the median person, is its competent at a skill you care
       | passionately about as you are, because you've been doing it so
       | long you forgotten how legitimately hard it is.
       | 
       | Most schools do not have the financial resources to hire a system
       | administrator who can maintain an open-source architecture or the
       | technical shops in house to maintain one themselves. From their
       | point of view, the freedom and flexibility granted by an open
       | source framework is a cost, not a benefit. It means there's no
       | right answer to how to do it, so when they screw up (and they
       | inevitably will screw up regardless of what infrastructure they
       | use), they don't have a standard, closed source architecture to
       | point to to shift blame.
       | 
       | From their point of view, closed source versus open source is
       | irrelevant because the two are equivalently opaque to them.
       | 
       | Given all of that, there is probably meat on the bones for a
       | company that chooses to use a fully open source stack to build
       | solutions for schools, and the schools willing to invest in the
       | resources to do the work in the house will be able to grow from
       | that open source solution to when they maintain. But that does
       | put the company who goes that road at the disadvantage of every
       | customer being a potential competitor in the future...
        
         | robocat wrote:
         | It is the other end of the Dunning-Kruger effect. Read the
         | paper: "unskilled and unaware" and " _skilled_ and unaware"
         | were the surprising discoveries.
        
           | shadowgovt wrote:
           | You're right! I had forgotten. Thank you for bringing this to
           | my attention.
        
       | makecheck wrote:
       | Like any organization, things have to be reliable and some open-
       | source doesn't really have the support model figured out.
       | 
       | And if cost is an issue, that is more an indictment of how
       | schools are funded: if there doesn't seem to be room in the
       | budget for buying software and/or support, why is that the
       | budget?
        
       | webmaven wrote:
       | Some time ago, I had the opportunity to speak frankly with the
       | then CTO of the NYC department of education, and pitched them on
       | the idea of replacing Windows with Linux, or at least MS Office
       | with OpenOffice, touting both the Free-as-in-Speech and Free-as-
       | in-Beer benefits, as well as the lower hardware costs.
       | 
       | What they told me was that similar pitches from vendors like
       | RedHat were useful to them in that they invariably prompted
       | Microsoft to offer a deal, IIRC, somewhere around
       | 1$/month/computer (annually, about the cost of a new keyboard;
       | which they had to buy a lot of), and that they had to replace the
       | computer hardware often enough due to wear and tear (students are
       | _very_ hard on computers) that the hardware savings would be
       | illusory.
       | 
       | If I were to try and make a similar pitch today I might try
       | calculating in the cost of electricity, but there is simply no
       | way Microsoft is going to let itself be undercut on price for the
       | software per-se for those big marquee accounts.
       | 
       | Of course when taking competitive bids like that, you really
       | should price in the eventual switching costs when comparing bids,
       | but hardly anyone does that correctly in the public OR private
       | sector, and sunk-cost fallacies tends to overwhelm the decision
       | making process.
        
       | jms429 wrote:
       | I was an IT manager in a school (not any more), and was asked by
       | a parent why I wasn't using Linux everywhere.
       | 
       | Our Microsoft licensing cost PS1000 per year, and our MSP cost
       | about PS10,000 for remote support and a weekly onsite.
       | 
       | Using Linux, our licensing cost would have gone, and maybe we'd
       | have gotten another year or two from desktop hardware, but our
       | support costs would have increased massively - I couldn't find a
       | local msp who'd do desktop Linux support the same way we were
       | getting. not to mention all the training for teachers, and the
       | nightmare of finding replacements for things like smart notebook,
       | custom assessment software, and windows only curriculum software.
       | 
       | Biggest headache would have been the teachers. Some of them found
       | windows 10 too difficult to use, and pushing them onto Linux
       | would have needed a full time techie on hand.
       | 
       |  _linux is better_ is not always the case.
        
         | pessimizer wrote:
         | It's Free software, there's no earthly reason that every school
         | should be individually figuring out how to support Linux. Open
         | a state office of Linux support and stock it full of developers
         | and techs. Create a federal network of those to work on large
         | projects.
         | 
         | We need to shed the consumer mentality when it comes to FOSS.
         | It gives us bizarre expectations of it, and we impose
         | unnecessary limitations on ourselves without thinking. It's
         | ours, and we can do what we want with it.
        
           | kwhitefoot wrote:
           | Just use https://www.skolelinux.de/en/
        
             | pessimizer wrote:
             | There are endless options. School systems have thousands of
             | employees and administrators; if they can't figure out how
             | to support what are generally wonderfully crafted, complex
             | pieces of software handed to them on a plate, they're not
             | really fit for purpose. We're outsourcing institutional
             | self-sufficiency to Microsoft and Google.
        
           | Swenrekcah wrote:
           | It's a great idea and the only thing that makes sense, but if
           | you do that you'll get an uproar that government is
           | infringing upon private enterprise and distorting the market
           | and all that.
        
         | wtch98 wrote:
        
           | enchiridion wrote:
           | Towns choose to continue using lead pipes all the time and
           | pay for water treatment that makes them safe.
        
           | uthinter wrote:
           | This is a very poor analogy. The benefit Linux is offering is
           | marginal and even in terms of cost which can be recuperated
           | or rather offset by hiring more professionals .
        
           | Kwpolska wrote:
           | What, exactly, makes Windows so bad you compare it to a
           | "lead-laced watter supply"?
        
             | [deleted]
        
         | temp8964 wrote:
         | Also many comments here forget people have both work computer
         | and personal computers. Most people are familiar with the
         | Windows eco system from their personal computer. Forcing them
         | to learn a different system is just unrealistic.
        
           | pessimizer wrote:
           | No, it separates school from home. It isn't like Debian
           | stable with a MATE desktop could confuse anyone.
        
           | prmoustache wrote:
           | I don't know, 25 years ago most people didn't even have a
           | personnal computer at home yet they were forced to learn to
           | use desktops from windows, os2, solaris cde, mac os or
           | sometimes just an arcane text based terminal. Not so long ago
           | people were still working mostly with a fullscreen curse
           | based window from a telnet client.
        
         | npteljes wrote:
         | That's the point everyone should consider in the Windows/Linux
         | debate. Windows/Office is not the de facto standard because
         | they are superior technology - they won because Microsoft
         | produced good enough software, employed every business trick in
         | the book while also pioneering some, and because they covered
         | the bases OP pointed out. Service and user experience is not
         | only a very important part to provide, but often the part that
         | makes or breaks the product.
         | 
         | That said, what schools teach is just some legislation away. I
         | believe regulation could make it happen even now, if the
         | regulators wanted so. But, of course, regulators are people too
         | and therefore, yet again, it's not up to the technology itself
         | to be better.
        
           | ed25519FUUU wrote:
           | I think you're missing OPs main point that any money saved
           | from switching to open source would be eaten away and
           | reversed dramatically with _support costs_.
           | 
           | Can you get unlimited remote support and a weekly on-site
           | tech for $10k a year? No way.
        
             | npteljes wrote:
             | I'm not missing that at all, I'm saying two things, that
             | for one, Microsoft does this support thing well enough and
             | two, legislation doesn't have to take the easier way, if
             | they'd say that schools must teach X, the market would
             | figure it out somehow. It would probably even be a worse
             | experience as it is currently, but that never stopped any
             | legislator.
        
               | scarface74 wrote:
               | Yes, just like the "market" figured out how to increase
               | privacy after the GDPR and not just a shit ton of cookie
               | pop ups.
        
           | bobthepanda wrote:
           | The problem with regulating what kind of tech you should use
           | is that it can be surprisingly hard to change or update after
           | the fact.
           | 
           | South Korea mandated usage of ActiveX in the 1990s as one of
           | the first countries to push into online shopping, and it took
           | until 2020 to get rid of it (and Internet Explorer)
           | altogether.
        
             | digisign wrote:
             | It's unlikely mandating open standards would result in that
             | flavor of lock-in.
        
         | nicoburns wrote:
         | Far point regarding support, but I've found that Linux is often
         | actually a lot more friendly for non technical people than
         | windows a long as you don't step beyond what is possible in the
         | UI.
        
           | ed25519FUUU wrote:
           | You've never had to support Linux if you think this. Hardware
           | support is absolutely all over the board. It works but often
           | requires tinkering, which is a support nightmare when you
           | have hundreds of potentially thousands of users.
        
             | enriquto wrote:
             | Sounds like a sweet reason for laptop vendors to provide
             | the best linux hardware support once schools mandate free
             | software!
        
             | nicoburns wrote:
             | Presumably if you did this for a school you'd have
             | standardised hardware that you control.
        
           | the__alchemist wrote:
           | What were the use cases you've found success at? I've only
           | found Linux (Ubuntu etc) to be a smooth and stable experience
           | when not installing things beyond what's included by default.
           | Have tried some variant of Linux every other year for the
           | past 20. Turns into dependency hell and arcane incantations.
        
             | pessimizer wrote:
             | It might be that you're thwarted by trying to install it on
             | bleeding edge machines. I've run Debian stable on my home
             | servers and Debian testing on my workstations for years.
             | Nothing ever goes wrong, it's boring. Debian stable is rock
             | solid.
        
           | blagie wrote:
           | It's actually more friendly in the command line too. I've
           | done support on both.
           | 
           | Anything reaching a high level of complexity basically falls
           | apart on Windows. I can tell someone on Unix: "Type exactly
           | X" into the command prompt.
           | 
           | If I want someone to get there editing the registry, using
           | the Window terminal and/or modifying complex system settings
           | through a GUI which changes seemingly every week, it's
           | basically a dead-end.
           | 
           | Kids learn terminals fine too.
        
         | dgb23 wrote:
         | For this to work we would need a specialized, simplified, "just
         | works" distribution with a well defined set of hardware support
         | and software packages. Slow moving, standardized, minimal
         | configuration capabilities and with laser focus on security,
         | "non-technical" and educational UX and documentation.
         | 
         | Companies and institutions could build on that foundation to
         | provide support and integration. It could enable a kind of
         | specialized market for IT in education that can be relied on.
         | 
         | Sounds like a monumental effort. But doable. Are there any
         | attempts at this?
        
           | ssivark wrote:
           | I would imagine that Debian (with the benefit of
           | community+repository size and inertia) or Fedora (with the
           | benefit of community+repository size, and something adjacent
           | to commercial support) might be the best bet for such a
           | distribution. Rolling anything different is likely to
           | fragment avenues for support. IMHO, even Linux Mint / Pop OS
           | feel too niche. Rolling a custom distro is almost surely a
           | bad idea.
        
             | kwhitefoot wrote:
             | https://www.skolelinux.de/en/
        
           | jjtheblunt wrote:
           | Would it work if that distribution were Win11, since it's got
           | WSL2 ?
        
           | anticensor wrote:
           | Turkish government attempted twice and mostly failed:
           | https://www.pardus.org.tr
        
           | pragmatic wrote:
           | Cromebooks have filled this niche for better or worse.
        
         | AussieWog93 wrote:
         | I've heard this is why schools are switching to Chromebooks now
         | - massively reduced support costs.
        
         | GordonS wrote:
         | Wow, I guess this was a small school? Was it "only" Microsoft
         | Office licenses, or was other software included too?
        
           | jms429 wrote:
           | At the time, MS educational licensing was cheap as hell, we
           | paid a set price per teacher and that then included windows &
           | office for everyone.p, including free licenses for the kids
           | to download office at home. I'm sure it's changed now.
        
           | bombcar wrote:
           | Microsoft knows the value of having people used to their
           | software.
           | 
           | You can get absolutely insane educational discounts.
        
             | newsclues wrote:
             | That value needs to be understood and exploited by the OSS
             | competition to Microsoft.
        
             | grammers wrote:
             | Agreed. Once kids learned it at school, they are reluctant
             | to switch - just listen what people say about teachers...
             | That's Microsoft's strategy.
        
             | selykg wrote:
             | Non-profit here. Getting an E5 license is simply a no
             | brainer. It's insane.
        
         | kkfx wrote:
         | It's not a matter of better, but a matter of society: no single
         | surveillance capitalism software must be allowed for children
         | nor public institutions in general, by law. States who allow
         | that are already in a deep threat, and no, I'm not joking.
         | 
         | Beside that: Microsoft have invested big money on desktops,
         | their own way, it's normal you find better support around, and
         | that's because schools do not teach anything IT related as they
         | MUST, witch means for users, not against them...
        
           | hnusersarelame wrote:
        
         | alaricus wrote:
        
         | digisign wrote:
         | > not to mention all the training for teachers, and the
         | nightmare of finding ... windows-only ... software
         | 
         | This was the traditional argument against moving away from MS
         | products.
         | 
         | Suddenly, most of these folks moved to Google products a few
         | years back. Somehow these points didn't factor in. Why do you
         | think that is?
        
           | gadflyinyoureye wrote:
           | Tech changed. Most of the google suite exists within the
           | browser. While the teachers had to learn new tools, they
           | didn't have to learn a new OS. Even if the OS learn was
           | trivial, it could still make for a hard transition. It was
           | foreign. It was scary.
           | 
           | Google is Google. They've been using it for years. They're ok
           | with the browser. Less emotional load.
        
           | baisq wrote:
           | Because Google products are good and work exactly the same on
           | any kind of computer or phone (i.e. no differences between
           | distros or hardware)
        
           | zinekeller wrote:
           | Probably because of
           | 
           | > I couldn't find a local msp who'd do desktop Linux support
           | the same way we were getting.
           | 
           | You could find competent third-party GWorkspace support, plus
           | unless you fully moved to ChromeOS, you will still support
           | Windows in one way or another (although students usually gets
           | Chromebooks, try moving a teacher using a 15-year old
           | application that still works on latest versions of Windows).
           | RHEL is geared towards enterprise but not education sectors,
           | and I'm not aware of a _commercial_ support which specialty
           | is in the education sector.
        
           | scarface74 wrote:
           | Because Google manages most of the complexity.
        
             | digisign wrote:
             | They do manage a lot of things, but not the two things OP
             | mentioned and I copied.
        
         | jandrese wrote:
         | My school district has all of the machines on their domain.
         | 
         | Linux still doesn't have anything remotely as capable as Active
         | Directory.
        
           | Maursault wrote:
           | Active Directory is an implementation of LDAP and uses
           | Kerberos, both OSS. So, in effect, Linux has something
           | _exactly as capable_ as Active Directory.
        
             | AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote:
             | Spoken like someone who has never in their lives tried to
             | do any of the things AD does in Linux.
        
           | [deleted]
        
           | sekh60 wrote:
           | FreeIPA combined with something like ansible will do it.
        
             | ed25519FUUU wrote:
             | Can you find someone to install it, configure it, maintain
             | it and update it, and support it (including on-site once a
             | week) for less than $10K a year?
             | 
             | Microsoft is losing money to have schools run this
             | software.
        
               | chucky_z wrote:
               | FreeIPA is a Redhat upstream thing (389 Server or
               | something?) so yea I'd imagine Redhat would probably work
               | with a school district for wicked good pricing.
        
               | robertlagrant wrote:
               | Do Microsoft do that work directly?
        
               | scarface74 wrote:
               | No, but you can throw a rock and find cheap good enough
               | managed service providers that can do it -- ie Microsoft
               | partners. MS has been building out the network for
               | decades.
        
           | KronisLV wrote:
           | > Linux still doesn't have anything remotely as capable as
           | Active Directory.
           | 
           | I legitimately want more people to talk about this and to
           | share their experiences. Do people run OpenLDAP? Something
           | like FreeIPA? Maybe 389 Server?
           | 
           | What's the most popular or maybe easiest to use *nix solution
           | for managing lots of accounts and devices, policy etc.? What
           | about solutions for just managing accounts/login information
           | or integrating with self-hosted software of all sorts?
        
             | Spivak wrote:
             | Honestly, the best domain server for Linux is active
             | directory and if you have but a single Windows machine in
             | your school it's mandatory anyway so unless you're managing
             | massive fleets to warrant the FreeIPA bridge sssd-ad is
             | more than good enough.
        
             | notesinthefield wrote:
             | Every edu ive worked with using Linux rolls an ubuntu
             | derivative which has for six LTS versions supported easy AD
             | integration. Smaller subsets just use Ansible + AWX but
             | they are typically just manging the basics.
        
           | chrisseaton wrote:
           | Now that almost everything is accessed by a web browser...
           | what do you even need Active Directory for? Like printers or
           | something?
        
             | jandrese wrote:
             | For locking down the machines so the kids don't mess them
             | up. For pushing policy down when they need to change
             | something. All of the stuff that's routine for an AD
             | administrator.
        
               | chrisseaton wrote:
               | Don't know why we just don't give people a laptop and a
               | login for the web services they need. If they can run a
               | laptop at home just fine why does it need to be any more
               | locked down than that for school work? And what policies
               | do you need to just run a web browser? It's not the NSA.
        
               | ocdtrekkie wrote:
               | So, your entire tech support will be inundated with
               | undoing scams and ransomware perpetrated by malicious
               | search ads, for one.
               | 
               | Chrome is outright terrifying to have on a computer if
               | you don't push down about four pages of enterprise
               | policies to lock it down.
               | 
               | The idea of letting employees have administrative access
               | to PCs that sensitive corporate data or childrens'
               | personal info is on is downright terrifying.
        
               | [deleted]
        
               | Spivak wrote:
               | But letting them access that same data on their personal
               | computers and laptops is fine?
               | 
               | If banks can let you access your account information on
               | non-bank owned machines and parents can access their kids
               | personal info from their phones I think we can manage a
               | fleet of untrusted endpoints.
        
               | ocdtrekkie wrote:
               | Many tens of billions of dollars are stolen via those
               | untrusted endpoints every year, mostly targeting at risk
               | groups like senior citizens.
        
               | bobthepanda wrote:
               | Yes, because the school district is not legally liable
               | for parents doing stupid things outside of school
               | grounds, but it _is_ legally liable for its employees '
               | conduct.
        
             | ocdtrekkie wrote:
             | Group Policy is low key the most powerful thing in tech.
             | Secure all the clients? Yes. Personalize all the clients?
             | Yes. Install software? Sure. Disable unsafe browser
             | features in third party browsers? Also yes!
             | 
             | Group policy is such an insanely convenient configure-once-
             | apply-everywhere system, I'm still not sure why anyone
             | would run a corporate network without it. Modern MDM
             | solutions don't even come close to the extensive level of
             | customization you can do with a GPO.
        
             | KronisLV wrote:
             | > Now that almost everything is accessed by a web
             | browser... what do you even need Active Directory for?
             | 
             | What about signing in with your firstname.lastname account,
             | with the particular web app talking with the AD server
             | through something like LDAP?
             | 
             | Thus, your credentials for all of the integrated software
             | should be managed centrally, in the particular AD server or
             | a similar solution.
             | 
             | Or maybe even SSO with something like Kerberos or an
             | alternative?
        
               | chrisseaton wrote:
               | There a tons of free SSO services, such as Google.
               | 
               | And why do you need to control people's laptop login?
               | That can be local.
        
               | KronisLV wrote:
               | > And why do you need to control people's laptop login?
               | That can be local.
               | 
               | Some organizations might want to ensure that your account
               | follows certain policies in regards to the password
               | expiry dates or how "secure" they are.
               | 
               | Furthermore, if you leave an organization, they might
               | want to remove all of your access credentials to all of
               | the linked platforms/devices in one fell swoop.
               | 
               | While you are in the organization, they might want to
               | allow you to use certain pieces of software (say, GitLab,
               | Nextcloud, Mattermost, anything that talks LDAP) by
               | giving you a particular group membership, such as
               | everything for PROJECT_X/CLASS_X and so on.
               | 
               | Similarly, when a certain platform requires user
               | credentials, they might also want to explicitly allow
               | this platform to integrate with their account management
               | software, by giving it certain credentials to talk to the
               | AD server, which can later be revoked.
               | 
               | Oh, and password resets are also nice to centralize, in
               | case you ever screw up.
               | 
               | Sometimes their hand might also be forced due to
               | compliance reasons: imagine Google basically owning your
               | company and information about all of the accounts/devices
               | due to them having the actual data.
        
               | hirako2000 wrote:
               | The argument is that because so much is now cloud
               | services in the browser, it makes centralised AD far less
               | holistic hence better assess the cloud services settings
               | for compliance. There is some truth and risk in that, go
               | reset the password of those 3 services not supporting
               | SSO. Reality about security is to deal with the admin
               | trouble, MS isn't removing processes, education, trust,
               | and their costs, it likes to give the impression that it
               | does hence asking you money for removing the difficult
               | invonvenience of actual security needs
        
       | pipeline_peak wrote:
       | The only compelling point was reducing hardware costs. Even then,
       | it showed how out of touch this guy is.
       | 
       | Having a school system transition to raspberry pi's sounds like a
       | capped nightmare.
        
       | _trackno5 wrote:
       | This person is totally out of touch with reality.
       | 
       | I do agree, however, that public entities should lean on open-
       | source software where possible. It's our tax money that's paying
       | for all those licenses. I see no point in govt agencies requiring
       | windows licenses when most of the work can be done through the
       | Office suite in a web browser.
        
         | na85 wrote:
         | >I see no point in govt agencies requiring windows licenses
         | when most of the work can be done through the Office suite in a
         | web browser.
         | 
         | The point is there's someone to sue when things go wrong. I'm
         | not being facetious.
         | 
         | If government runs Gentoo and it turns out there's a decades-
         | old bug in polkit that gets chained with an 0day that results
         | in everyone's social security numbers getting leaked, who's
         | responsible?
         | 
         | If that happens with Microsoft they can in theory sue, and more
         | importantly they can blame Microsoft in the media.
        
           | josephcsible wrote:
           | There are critical security vulnerabilities in Microsoft
           | products all the time. When was the last time Microsoft lost
           | a lawsuit over one?
        
       | chrisseaton wrote:
       | You can tell this person is out of touch and doesn't actually
       | have any experience of the systems they're complaining about,
       | because they think people are still using IE and Word over Chrome
       | and Google Docs.
        
         | djaychela wrote:
         | Not that long ago (5 years) I was teaching in a school that
         | still used Internet explorer. I commented to the it guy that I
         | used Firefox. His response was "I'm not having that rubbish on
         | my network".
         | 
         | A lot of school IT staff I've met in the UK are not at the
         | cutting edge. Many of them are older, have an out of date skill
         | set, and don't get regular training - there's just not the
         | budget for it, and many schools would baulk at paying market
         | rates for talented, up to date support staff / management.
        
         | drcongo wrote:
         | My kids' last school still sends Word docs out as email
         | attachments. I raised with them the fact that this is not a
         | portable document format, was regularly unreadable on my Mac,
         | and discriminates against the poorer families. Turned out the
         | head mistress' brother works for Microsoft so this didn't go
         | down well.
        
           | notjulianjaynes wrote:
           | >unreadable on my Mac
           | 
           | >discriminates against poorer families
           | 
           | I agree just funny.
           | 
           | I'd argue PDF is equally problematic as it is often designed
           | for A4 paper format, and this not easily readable on mobile
           | devices, which poorer families are more likely to have as
           | main computing device.
        
             | drcongo wrote:
             | PDF is, it's true, also appalling. What I was actually
             | asking the school to do was just write the shit they put in
             | Word docs in the actual email. There was absolutely no need
             | for it to be in an attached document, it was just words and
             | pictures.
        
         | notjulianjaynes wrote:
         | I worked for a time as a substitute teacher in a school system
         | where the kids were given individual Chromebooks beginning in
         | middle school. Many staff expressed concerns over the privacy
         | implications of having a cloud-tied indenty from such a young
         | age.
         | 
         | This was also a school who won an award for it's cyber
         | security. More than once I found full student rosters with
         | username/password printed out sitting on the teacher's desk.
         | 
         | I suppose this is a different rant than school's should use
         | FOSS. I don't think schools should impose a digital footprint
         | on their very young as students.
         | 
         | I have no children and no longer work in education.
        
         | ocdtrekkie wrote:
         | I mean, you're both assuming you know the local education
         | systems of the author, and Microsoft is still very much taught
         | in plenty of schools, and also... Chrome/Docs has the same
         | problems, but even worse.
        
           | chrisseaton wrote:
           | > Chrome/Docs has the same problems, but even worse
           | 
           | Well exactly - if you want to tackle this 'problem' then
           | first you have to understand why LibreOffice isn't a
           | replacement (because you need to replace Google Docs not
           | Word.)
        
           | jeffbee wrote:
           | The author doesn't even bother making a case for what these
           | "problems" might be.
        
         | alaricus wrote:
         | It would not suprise me if a lot of schools still run Windows
         | XP.
        
       | VoidWhisperer wrote:
       | I can count on one hand the number of teachers that I had in high
       | school that would be able to maintain the use of open source
       | software for their classrooms.. one did (eclipse for CS AP) and
       | the other was the web design prof who had a decent understanding
       | of computers.
       | 
       | The rest of the teachers and actually many of the students too
       | were not technically inclined enough to be able to deal with the
       | issues that can come up in open source software, and that
       | would've for sure overwhelmed the like two IT dudes who were
       | already busy regularly having to fix projectors and SmartBoard
       | problems
        
       | u801e wrote:
       | After reading through the post, I think that more, if not almost
       | all, posts should be in plain text.
        
         | 2b3a51 wrote:
         | Just wondering about the line length. Would piping the OA
         | through `fmt` not help readability?
        
         | thorncorona wrote:
         | Why? It looks absolutely garish and hard to read.
        
       | 2b3a51 wrote:
       | I work in the UK post compulsory sector (18+ basic skills
       | teaching, aka adult education, mostly maths), so not the primary
       | age focus of the OA. A few reflections after the organisations I
       | work for pivoted at a month's notice to 100% online delivery:
       | 
       | Most of the students I see use their phones as the main Web
       | access device (zoom online classes + video lessons + pdf files
       | for documents and all). Touch screen/direct manipulation UI is
       | were it seems to be at. Students like _drawing_ on my slides. I
       | work with a teacher who makes extensive use of Google 's Jamboard
       | (Please don't cancel this project!!!) to check understanding.
       | Each student in an online class of 10 can have a copy of a
       | problem on their own page in Jamboard and show their working.
       | 
       | One of my employers IT dept (Microsoft shop all through, 1500+
       | client PCs) was happy to make OpenOffice(*)/GIMP/Inkscape
       | available on the network. Students discovered the packages
       | themselves and some used them without realising that they could
       | have their own copies at home for nowt.
       | 
       | The other employer has gone Microsoft 365 total with Teams and
       | all. The Web based office applications allow students to produce
       | basic docs and keep the resulting files in their online storage.
       | Few problems so far. Some integration with Moodle for course
       | pages.
       | 
       | A large College locally uses Google Education to provide similar
       | facilities. Students who take courses from both institutions seem
       | to work well with the two different systems. I think people in
       | these days of mobile devices are less dependent on one UI.
       | 
       | Addressing the OA's main point: yes I think we could use more
       | open source OS and applications in schools. Chromebooks are
       | almost there when you think about it. BUT I suspect the future is
       | Web apps. Contrast geogebra(1) with Logo(2) (and I think there is
       | room for both)
       | 
       | (1) https://www.geogebra.org/calculator
       | 
       | (2) https://el.media.mit.edu/logo-
       | foundation/what_is_logo/logo_p...
       | 
       | Meta: I had to use links -dump
       | https://tdarb.org/posts/schools.txt | fmt | less
       | 
       | to read the OA. Lines just too long on graphical Web browser.
        
       | kkfx wrote:
       | Schools BY LAW _must_ only use FLOSS run on their own iron or
       | state-backed one, no single private company must be allowed for
       | safety of students data. That 's is.
        
       | scotty79 wrote:
       | They should also cook food and prepare beverages instead of
       | selling branded packaged products.
       | 
       | But that's not what's profitable.
        
       | hulitu wrote:
       | > A great deal of push-back comes from stubborn IT
       | professionals[0] determined to keep things running on Windows -
       | since this is mostly what they are familiar with.
       | 
       | No. The push back comes from management. In a university in
       | Eastern europe (20 years ago) people were using what was
       | available: unix on servers (sun, linux, BSD) and DOS and some
       | windows 3.1 then 95 and NT on PCs. Windows was pirated like the
       | majority of windows software. Then the law made SW piracy a
       | felony. And as the law began to be enforced, MS came and made
       | agreements with the university to distribute the MS software for
       | free to students and to teach classes with Microsoft products.
       | This was during the times when Linux was a "cancer" and
       | "communism". The IT professionals must dance as the management
       | sings.
        
       | carlospwk wrote:
       | I'd love to agree with this but almost every experience I've had
       | with an open source project that has a complex GUI has been
       | painful. Tried to switch from Sheets to Libre Office Calc and
       | it's like going back to an incredibly buggy Excel, with a
       | downgrade in UX/UI.
       | 
       | PS. Why is this post a .txt file? I can't even click the links.
        
         | kcplate wrote:
         | I found it ironic. The reason I avoid FOSS alternatives is
         | because of the UX issues. I get wanting to be small and
         | unobtrusive, but at least make your links clickable.
        
       | tgv wrote:
       | > Photoshop. Illustrator. Why are these the first applications
       | used for image editing and creation?
       | 
       | Because they're bloody good (well, Photoshop is). And Gimp isn't.
       | 
       | > Coding IDE (optional) ===> vim
       | 
       | That's not out of touch, that's beyond the pale.
        
         | iliketrains wrote:
         | To be honest, I find Photoshop to be not so good for many use
         | cases. Gimp is not ideal, but I use it much more often. Like
         | alpha channel editing? Absolute nightmare in Photoshop. In gimp
         | it is just another channel and I can apply curves or other
         | effects directly to alpha channel. How about ability to
         | save/not save color info for pixels with 100% transparency?
         | 
         | Or saving image where Photoshop often does not remember from
         | where the file was opened, or that I have to manually select a
         | file type from a drop down. In gimp, just type the extension. I
         | also like scripting and automating using python.
         | 
         | On the other hand, Photoshop excels in layer effects. In gimp,
         | these effects are applied and you cannot mutate the underlying
         | layer (like change text with shadow and bevel).
        
         | croes wrote:
         | It's pretty useless if they are pretty good if can't afford
         | them afterwards
         | 
         | Like driving lessons in a Porsche
        
           | npteljes wrote:
           | Not really because businesses have to license it properly,
           | and Adobe just lets go of the rest. Meanwhile piracy leads to
           | great adoption.
        
         | TaylorAlexander wrote:
         | > > Photoshop. Illustrator. Why are these the first
         | applications used for image editing and creation?
         | 
         | > Because they're bloody good (well, Photoshop is). And Gimp
         | isn't.
         | 
         | Imagine you're teaching people carpentry. There is a really
         | nice automatic screw gun that accepts a cartridge of screws all
         | lined up automatically so each one loads in place after the
         | last one. It is super easy to use and people can get straight
         | to fastening beams together. But the device is very expensive,
         | and they cannot be repaired if they break, and the screw
         | cartridges require a monthly plan where they will send you
         | screws even if you still have plenty from last month, with a
         | chip to make sure the screws won't feed from last month.
         | 
         | Now compared to a boring battery operated drill, where the user
         | has to _gasp_ place each screw on the drill bit by hand, these
         | fancy automatic screw feeding drills seem WAY BETTER! Surely
         | the person can make better buildings with the fancy screw gun
         | right? And we want them to make the best buildings possible
         | right?
         | 
         | Well the boring drill has user serviceable parts. Everything
         | can be removed and replaced if needed. There are no control
         | chips to stop it working. You don't have to pay every month for
         | anything. And placing each screw on the bit by hand is fine,
         | it's what everyone did ten years ago and those buildings are
         | all still standing. Heck you're standing in one of those
         | buildings right now!
         | 
         | So maybe we should teach the students how to use tools that
         | work without all this extra cost and nonsense. It's really a
         | minor difference, since the point isn't to use the fanciest
         | possible tool, but to teach them how to build buildings in a
         | way that they can always take with them everywhere they go. And
         | after they graduate school, they're not going to want to pay
         | every month for one of those fancy drills!
        
           | nonrandomstring wrote:
           | "Principles not products". That's what I call it. I've always
           | taught that way and my students _love it_. At least the ones
           | smart enough to realise they 're being given a proper ground
           | up education. We do every step the hard way, breaking it down
           | with a historical context, a rationale and exposure to
           | several different basic tools that do that fundamental job.
           | They get to see the continuum between logic and arithmetic
           | operators and a full application stack. Right at the end I
           | let them loose on full-blown commercial toys - and they _love
           | that too_ , because they can now see the value those polished
           | applications add. They can also see what is just cosmetic
           | fluff and marketing patter.
           | 
           | It's only the weaker students who are quick to "demand the
           | latest shiny industry standard gizmos... because, like,
           | jobs". And of course the management twonks who've been
           | blinded by vendor lobbying and kickbacks. Truth is, modern
           | software is so slick any fool can grab a ready-made plugin-o-
           | matic that thinks for you and wipes your arse, but without
           | understanding _principles_ the moment they change the GUI you
           | 're completely lost.
        
           | TheOtherHobbes wrote:
           | That's a terrible analogy for the differences between
           | Photoshop and Gimp.
           | 
           | For one thing Photoshop is a transferrable skill. Gimp will
           | get you laughed out the door of most photo studios and design
           | agencies.
           | 
           | For another - too many FOSS people _just do not understand_
           | that tinkering with tools is not the point for most users.
           | 
           | If you like tinkering with tools, go tinker with tools. Most
           | people have work to do, and tinkering with tools is not
           | something they want to be distracted by.
           | 
           | Photoshop is far from being my favourite product, and Adobe
           | are _very_ far from being my favourite company. In fact I -
           | and millions of other users - would be _delighted_ if we
           | could save $$$$ a year with a free alternative.
           | 
           | Which applies in the general case. If FOSS was a realistic
           | and workable alternative, it would storm the market and _most
           | people would be using it._
           | 
           | But it isn't. Most FOSS applications are aimed at self-
           | selecting technical users, and there's very limited interest
           | in making tools for non-technical users.
           | 
           | In fact IMO FOSS culture lacks the mindset and skills - and
           | very possibly the empathy - to understand what general users
           | want from their tools.
           | 
           | It's been a success for developers who want to make technical
           | tools for other developers. And also for infrastructure. Not
           | to take anything from that, because that's both significant
           | and true.
           | 
           | But for popular non-expert applications? Simply - no.
        
             | thewebcount wrote:
             | > and very possibly the empathy
             | 
             | Yeah, exactly this. Open Source developers don't care about
             | how you work or what you want your tools to do. They care
             | about what's fun and interesting to program.
             | 
             | I can't imagine forcing students to care about .rc files
             | and whatever's in /etc. Not to mention the differences
             | between whatever shell is installed by default and the
             | various other shells that are also scripting languages,
             | etc. I'm a veteran programmer in my 50s and this shit is
             | too much for me to care about. I have work to do. Editing
             | text files in vim or Emacs is utterly stupid for most
             | users. It's not like TextEdit or Notepad don't do most of
             | what students need without a bunch of cryptic crap
             | involved, or that IDEs wouldn't allow students to delve
             | into programming much more easily. I just don't get the
             | cult of Unix. Yes, it's powerful for a large class of
             | things that programmers like to do. But it's a terrible OS
             | for normal users. And that won't change until the people
             | making it and making tools for it grow up and think of
             | someone other than themselves when they write programs.
        
               | zinekeller wrote:
               | > Yeah, exactly this. Open Source developers don't care
               | about how you work or what you want your tools to do.
               | They care about what's fun and interesting to program.
               | 
               | While I agree with this, it's interesting how Blender
               | basically resisted losing focus on boring-but-important
               | things (while keeping the fun and interesting parts).
               | Probably the fact that Blender was originally planned to
               | be a commercial application.
        
               | jancsika wrote:
               | > > and very possibly the empathy
               | 
               | > Yeah, exactly this. Open Source developers don't care
               | about how you work or what you want your tools to do.
               | They care about what's fun and interesting to program.
               | 
               | It's more likely that designing effective UX is just
               | extremely difficult. I'm guessing it's so difficult that
               | neither the user nor the FOSS developer even know how to
               | define the problem in a lot of cases.
               | 
               | E.g., go back and try to find a pre-Google era user
               | asking for streamlined search capability in some Linux
               | application mailing list. Something like, "I just want to
               | type in the thing I'm looking for and find the thing I
               | wanted." IIRC most university library search tools before
               | Google had a few dozen fields to specify the _type_ of
               | data you wanted to search for, and a crappy  "keywords"
               | field that often didn't return the desired record. So a
               | student would search by first _not finding_ what they
               | were after, then calling over a librarian to help them
               | choose the correct fields and input strings.
               | 
               | I'll rankly speculate that any such discussion on a pre-
               | Google FOSS application user list would have consisted of
               | a developer arguing that such an approach cannot work by
               | providing a set of canned edge-cases with unresolvable
               | ambiguities. And this response would have convinced the
               | user who likely had no idea how the whole search algo
               | works in the first place, or what the potential solutions
               | could look like.
               | 
               | Then Google came along. (Well, the Google that exist
               | before the current one which seems to be purposely
               | inserting non-relevant results that a recommendation algo
               | has determined still have a decent chance of engaging the
               | user.) And the FOSS mailing list response tacitly shifted
               | from, "That's probably not a well-formed feature," to,
               | "Patches accepted." I'm not sure what the current
               | response would be, but I doubt it generates a lot of
               | enthusiasm for improving the UX.
               | 
               | Hell, even in the well-formed feature requests the
               | implementation details are probably a major pain in the
               | ass. For funsies-- go download the old Gimp that
               | consisted entirely of toplevel windows, and try to figure
               | out the most workable way of converting it a single-
               | window app with subwindows. That's like some kind of
               | demented detention punishment for FOSS devs who break the
               | CoC. I wouldn't wish it on anybody.
        
             | digisign wrote:
             | With this logic we'd demand students learn the best
             | proprietary calculator-hardware instead of arithmetic.
             | 
             | No, this is not the point of school.
        
             | KronisLV wrote:
             | > For one thing Photoshop is a transferable skill. Gimp
             | will get you laughed out the door of most photo studios and
             | design agencies.
             | 
             | This is pretty much a self-perpetuating cycle and what
             | happens when you have something close to a monopoly.
             | 
             | Everyone uses Photoshop, almost nobody uses GIMP. Everyone
             | uses Chrome, almost nobody uses Firefox. Everyone uses
             | Windows, almost nobody uses Linux and so on...
             | 
             | Thankfully, in the server space, *nix reigns supreme and
             | FOSS has a larger foothold, though thanks to the above, the
             | "year of the Linux desktop" may as well never come.
             | 
             | > Most FOSS applications are aimed at self-selecting
             | technical users, and there's very limited interest in
             | making tools for non-technical users. In fact IMO FOSS
             | culture lacks the mindset and skills - and very possibly
             | the empathy - to understand what general users want from
             | their tools.
             | 
             | I'd say that it's also a matter of prioritizing what's
             | necessary to get things done and simply not having the
             | resources for the rest: UX, marketing, branding,
             | integrations and so on.
        
               | AussieWog93 wrote:
               | >This is pretty much a self-perpetuating cycle and what
               | happens when you have something close to a monopoly.
               | 
               | That's simply not true. While having high market share
               | does give you a short-term advantage, if a better
               | alternative exists you'll bleed market share over time.
               | Look at what happened to Netscape, then Internet
               | Explorer, then Firefox. It'll happen to Chromium
               | eventually too.
               | 
               | Open-source alternatives to popular desktop software
               | packages have existed for decades, and the reason they
               | haven't snatched market share away from the main packages
               | is because they don't work well.
        
               | KronisLV wrote:
               | > That's simply not true. While having high market share
               | does give you a short-term advantage, if a better
               | alternative exists you'll bleed market share over time.
               | Look at what happened to Netscape, then Internet
               | Explorer, then Firefox. It'll happen to Chromium
               | eventually too.
               | 
               | The time frames at play shouldn't be forgotten about
               | here, nor should the magnitude of the effect.
               | 
               | Most developers universally hated IE from IE 6 (2001) to
               | IE 11, which might still be supported until 2030:
               | 
               | > Microsoft is committed to support Internet Explorer
               | that way to 2030 at least, with one year's notice before
               | it is discontinued.
               | 
               | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Explorer_11
               | 
               | And yet, it still had to be supported and for some
               | systems still needs to be. For whatever stupid reason,
               | many were locked into using it and had little choice.
               | Sure, eventually it could be tossed aside by most sane
               | enterprises, but if developers had been given proper
               | reign over what to choose to use, then it would have been
               | ditched a few years after the release of IE 6 (Firefox
               | came out around 2002).
               | 
               | The average Joe/Jane doesn't really care about the
               | browsers, though. They might not even recognize what a
               | browser really is, merely know that they can use that one
               | icon to access the Internet. Thus, the choice is made for
               | them. Similarly, most laptops and desktop computers come
               | with Windows preinstalled due to manufacturer deals, much
               | like how most Android variations come with adware and
               | other garbage. Nobody wants it, but nobody (at a certain
               | price point), has any alternatives.
               | 
               | If you don't know that there's a choice to make, someone
               | else will make it for you.
               | 
               | And i'd posit that there isn't as much of a difference
               | between being technologically illiterate in Windows and
               | being technologically illiterate in *nix.
               | 
               | > Open-source alternatives to popular desktop software
               | packages have existed for decades, and the reason they
               | haven't snatched market share away from the main packages
               | is because they don't work well.
               | 
               | This is fair, though, especially because most FOSS
               | software is basically developed below the poverty line:
               | https://staltz.com/software-below-the-poverty-line.html
               | 
               | Nobody's going to have good UX or fancy onboarding if
               | they can barely find enough resources to keep the project
               | going and fix all of the bugs, as well as handle the
               | technological churn of keeping dependencies up to date
               | etc.
               | 
               | Outside of the ravings of FOSS enthusiasts and niche
               | circumstances (e.g. servers), open source software will
               | generally find it hard to compete with commercial
               | offerings, most of the time, especially when it comes to
               | software for the common folk.
        
               | AussieWog93 wrote:
               | >Similarly, most laptops and desktop computers come with
               | Windows preinstalled due to manufacturer deals, much like
               | how most Android variations come with adware and other
               | garbage. Nobody wants it, but nobody (at a certain price
               | point), has any alternatives.
               | 
               | I hear this a lot, but I don't think it's the primary
               | reason why Desktop Linux has negligible market share
               | (neither does Linus, FWIW). Plenty of people build their
               | own PCs, or have a custom PC built for them by a
               | friend/independent shop, and even amongst these
               | enthusiasts Linux use is rare.
               | 
               | The main problem, at least in my experience as a user, is
               | the fact that Desktop Linux is janky to use. Unless you
               | have the time and patience to learn about all the
               | subsystems and fix the issues that keep cropping up,
               | you're going to want to just spend the money on an OS
               | that "just works". OSX is obviously the best in this
               | regard, but modern Windows with automatic driver installs
               | comes pretty damn close.
               | 
               | (As a developer, the fact that there's no universally
               | agreed-upon standards make it a pain in the arse to
               | support too.)
               | 
               | >Nobody's going to have good UX or fancy onboarding if
               | they can barely find enough resources to keep the project
               | going and fix all of the bugs, as well as handle the
               | technological churn of keeping dependencies up to date
               | etc.
               | 
               | IMO, the main issue with open-source isn't actually
               | finding developers (people love working on OSS) but doing
               | the kind of boring, rigorous QA that you'll see in a
               | commercial firm. Nobody's going to volunteer to reproduce
               | specific edge cases in a printer driver, so it sits
               | broken for decades.
        
               | prmoustache wrote:
               | >The main problem, at least in my experience as a user,
               | is the fact that Desktop Linux is janky to use. Unless
               | you have the time and patience to learn about all the
               | subsystems and fix the issues that keep cropping up,
               | you're going to want to just spend the money on an OS
               | that "just works". OSX is obviously the best in this
               | regard, but modern Windows with automatic driver installs
               | comes pretty damn close.
               | 
               | When was the last time you used Linux, 2003?
               | 
               | The only problem with Linux is manufacturers that don't
               | advertise support of their devices and that there are way
               | too many distros so you can't have one ecosystem like you
               | have a windows or macos ecosystem with certified devices.
               | 
               | But if you stick with Lenovo thinkpads, brother printers
               | and bog standard everything running a Fedora linux is
               | like running a macos with well supported devices.
               | 
               | We'd nerd having all kind of hardware sold whose
               | compatibility is well tested and sold under the <insert
               | your favorite distro> brands.
        
               | thorncorona wrote:
               | I used PopOS as well as Fedora on my desktop for school
               | for 2 years. Tried it on a Lenovo as well and that was
               | pretty laughable. I lost 30% of my battery life switching
               | to linux. I gave up this year and just bought the 16" M1
               | Mac when it came out. Some things are absolutely
               | laughable about it but for the most part it just works
               | TM.
               | 
               | For the 95% use case it's fine but the 5% where stuff
               | just _breaks_ is infuriating.
               | 
               | Office just doesn't work right, and random things subtly
               | break and it's hard to fix even as a technical user. I
               | don't want to navigate between a bunch of files and waste
               | time editing config files for hours. Give me a UI that
               | tells me how to fix my shit.
               | 
               | Only place where I run linux now is on a virtualized
               | server using Proxmox. Linux is a great server OS but it
               | just doesn't work very well as a user distro.
        
               | Spivak wrote:
               | Which is what Sketch and Figma did with Adobe XD and what
               | Procreate did with Photoshop digital painting features.
        
               | goosedragons wrote:
               | I don't think this is entirely true for programs that
               | rely on significant network effects. Photoshop and MS
               | Office are entrenched because they are so widely used and
               | anything other than absolutely perfect file compatibility
               | with their formats is deemed trash. MS knows this and
               | that's why the Office file format is such a complicated
               | bloated mess of a "standard". Since nobody else can do it
               | "right" everybody keeps picking MS office...
        
           | chrisseaton wrote:
           | This makes sense if your job is to teach them about the
           | tools. If it's a software engineering or IT course then yeah.
           | 
           | If it's an English Literature course then nobody cares about
           | the tool used. Moleskine, Google Docs, Word, whatever, who
           | cares. Google Docs is free. Why give yourself more hassle
           | than that?
        
           | adamesque wrote:
           | This isn't quite the right analogy; it's not the difference
           | between a fancy tool you can't service yourself and a simple
           | tool you can.
           | 
           | It's like a world where everyone uses a particular kind of
           | tool that works well and is expensive, but also... the
           | standard. Everyone expects you to know how to use this tool
           | to do a particular kind of common work.
           | 
           | And then you come along and say, no, we should teach people
           | how to use a _different_, cheaper tool! It doesn't work
           | nearly as well, and isn't what people in the "real world"
           | use, but if you spend years familiarizing yourself with a
           | completely different field, you can service and maintain it
           | yourself!
           | 
           | You might not get many takers.
        
           | cortesoft wrote:
           | Ok, now imagine you only have one person who knows how to use
           | the boring drill, and they have 5,000 people to teach, and
           | zero budget to hire anyone else. There is no way they could
           | teach everyone, so they use the automatic one.
        
           | l33t2328 wrote:
           | The thing is that Adobe sweet offers a better product than
           | GIMP. It's easier to use which, like it or not, does matter.
           | Upon from that, it has more capability out of the box than
           | GIMP.
           | 
           | If you care about teaching students to design good buildings,
           | why waste a ton of time showing them how to place screws.
        
           | dahart wrote:
           | > maybe we should teach the students how to use tools that
           | work without all this extra cost and nonsense.
           | 
           | Maybe we oughta collectively write better open source
           | software if we want to opine on what schools should do? Gimp
           | doesn't have to suck, but it does. I say that with true love
           | for gimp and admiration for the people who write it, and I
           | can't complain about it because I'm not helping write it.
           | (But that is an option, you and I could contribute to gimp.)
           | 
           | Part of the problem is that neither of your analogies are
           | relevant in practice. Gimp isn't a cheaper less automatic
           | Photoshop, it's a tool that often doesn't meet professional
           | workflows at all, and certainly wasn't made kid friendly.
           | It's not the same tool and can't do the same things. Also my
           | kids were taught both gimp and photoshop, and they hated
           | gimp. (And adobe makes photoshop available to schools for
           | relatively cheap, compared to retail.)
           | 
           | The analogy about the software being serviceable is not going
           | to fly in schools. Submitting patches is not something
           | teachers can do. Submitting bug reports isn't either. So what
           | good is a theoretical idea that the software is open? The
           | only thing schools can do in practice is pay money for
           | support. And money is the single biggest problem they have.
           | Vague concerns about privacy and lock-in are just _way_ down
           | on the list of school  & teacher priorities, right? I'm
           | _wildly_ in favor of having good open source software, of
           | avoiding education market capture by for profit companies,
           | and having insanely better privacy controls. Open source
           | sounds awesome, but I think it needs to improve before we
           | start demanding that people use it or teach to it.
        
           | asiachick wrote:
           | You clearly don't know photoshop. A better comparison is
           | Notepad vs VIM or Notepad vs Emacs. Notepad kind of works.
           | You load, save, copy/cut/paste, find, save. What else do you
           | need? Vim and Emacs have a learning curve but are way more
           | powerful.
           | 
           | If you don't understand how much more powerful Vim and Emacs
           | are over notepad, most people who do know the difference
           | would see the flaw in your opinion that all 3 are text
           | editors and one is as good as another.
           | 
           | The same is true of Photoshop vs gIMP. Photoshop has non-
           | destructive editing. gIMP does not. That alone is a huge
           | force multiplier. Photoshop has non-destructive layer and
           | group styles, gIMP does not have layer styles as all. That's
           | just few of the 100s of features Photoshop has that gIMP
           | doesn't. They're not just minor features, they're force
           | multipliers and game changers. gIMP has been planning to add
           | the major ones for 15yrs or so but for whatever reasons has
           | not gotten there.
           | 
           | https://www.gimp.org/docs/userfaq.html#when-will-gimp-
           | suppor...
        
             | iggldiggl wrote:
             | > Photoshop has non-destructive editing. gIMP does not.
             | That alone is a huge force multiplier.
             | 
             | Oh yes. I'm not using Photoshop, but some hidden-secret
             | alternative developed by two brothers from Bavaria
             | (PhotoLine), because I'm only doing some small-scale
             | private hobbyist stuff, and an (even at the time) slightly
             | older version of their software had been included for free
             | in a photography-themed edition of some computer magazine.
             | 
             | That old version didn't have non-destructive layer effects
             | (although even at that time it already supported non-
             | destructive scaling/rotating/shearing of layers, which was
             | quite nice, and which I gather GIMP doesn't support even
             | today?). As my proficiency with it grew, I started running
             | more and more into the limitations of that, until I
             | eventually decided that maybe I should finally just buy a
             | license for the current version of the software, since of
             | the features it had gained in the intervening years was
             | indeed non-destructive editing.
             | 
             | This turned out to be absolutely the right decision,
             | because non-destructive layers are indeed a game changer.
             | No more making lots of backup copies of layers, no more
             | clumsily noting down somewhere in the layer names or
             | wherever what sort of effects I had applied in case I
             | needed to re-tweak something, non-destructive liquifying,
             | etc. etc. Plus a few nifty other features, and still the
             | same familiar UI despite the large version jump, so
             | absolutely no reason to regret the upgrade.
        
           | webmaven wrote:
           | _> Imagine you 're teaching people carpentry. There is a
           | really nice automatic screw gun that accepts a cartridge of
           | screws all lined up automatically so each one loads in place
           | after the last one. It is super easy to use and people can
           | get straight to fastening beams together. But the device is
           | very expensive, and they cannot be repaired if they break,
           | [...]_
           | 
           | Wait, let me stop your metaphor right there. How often do you
           | imagine end-user software like Photoshop or MS Office
           | actually "breaks" in a way that actually requires "repair"?
           | 
           | Imagine if you will, that most of the time that your magic
           | screw gun happens to jam, that simply unplugging it and
           | plugging it back in again magically cleared the problem up,
           | and you could continue where you left off.
        
           | germinalphrase wrote:
           | Your example is only apt when using the tool is the point of
           | the learning. More realistically, the drill is supposed to be
           | an entirely necessary but _incidental_ aspect of the
           | learning. In this scenario, any amount of time or effort
           | expended on problem solve the drill is taking time away from
           | the primary learning objective.
           | 
           | This is why teachers use Word and Google Docs. They _do not
           | give a shit_ about the tool. The tool is a means to an end.
           | Word and Docs are familiar. Word and Docs work.
        
           | bombcar wrote:
           | This basically exists for drywall:
           | https://www.milwaukeetool.com/Products/Power-
           | Tools/Fastening...
           | 
           | And it's a different skill set for sure, but highly worth it
           | - someone who knows how do use it can hang drywall by
           | themselves pretty easily.
           | 
           | If that's your job, you should definitely know how to use it
           | (and how to use just the gun, and the simple drill).
        
         | jka wrote:
         | Somewhat agreed, although to be fair, the other migration paths
         | do seem more reasonable:
         | 
         | > MS Office Suite ==> LibreOffice Suite
         | 
         | > Illustrator ==> Inkscape
         | 
         | > IE/Edge ==> Firefox
        
           | temp8964 wrote:
           | > MS Office Suite ==> LibreOffice Suite
           | 
           | LoL. LibreOffice Suite is terrible compared to MS Office.
           | There's simply nothing on par with Excel, PowerPoint, or
           | Word. Also many are forced to use Outlook because of MS
           | exchange.
        
             | KronisLV wrote:
             | > LoL. LibreOffice Suite is terrible compared to MS Office.
             | There's simply nothing on par with Excel, PowerPoint, or
             | Word. Also many are forced to use Outlook because of MS
             | exchange.
             | 
             | You know, i'm not sure about that. For what i need it to
             | do: text processing and the occasional bit of nicer
             | layout/tables/images and so on, it's decent. The same goes
             | for presentations and spreadsheets.
             | 
             | The problematic bit is that the rest of the world runs on
             | MS Office file formats and you'll run into problems due to
             | limited compatibility sooner or later. Then again, the
             | formats themselves are Eldritch abominations, so that's to
             | be expected, as the same happens with OpenDocument formats
             | when opened in Microsoft software.
             | 
             | The most interesting set of problems i had were with Writer
             | screwing up my bibliography, though most people prefer
             | external software for that anyways: https://blog.kronis.dev
             | /everything%20is%20broken/libreoffice...
             | 
             | (that said, dear god did i hate the requirements for
             | reference formatting in university, why couldn't we just
             | put a link/reference and leave it at that)
             | 
             | As for the other alternatives: in my opinion, Inkscape has
             | the worst UX of them all, though can still work okay in a
             | limited set of circumstances.
             | 
             | Firefox seems like an okay browser, despite the inept
             | management in the recent years.
             | 
             | Thunderbird is a pretty cool e-mail client, by the way. It
             | even includes a feed reader!
        
               | jahewson wrote:
               | I don't know if I would consider screwing up my
               | bibliography to be "decent", but hey. You're right about
               | file formats - and of course it runs deeper, file formats
               | are just a manifestation of feature sets and models. When
               | you have a model mismatch, as LibreOffice does, then
               | you're sort of set up to fail, no matter how clean and
               | open the file format is (or isn't).
        
               | KronisLV wrote:
               | > I don't know if I would consider screwing up my
               | bibliography to be "decent", but hey.
               | 
               | More or less the same how Word routinely messes up how
               | images should be laid out in respect to the text around
               | them. Though every office package does that to some
               | degree. Or also how messy working with something like
               | Apache POI is when you want to generate spreadsheets
               | programmatically, or read them. Or how Windows keeps
               | reverting diagnostics settings much like spyware would.
               | Or how Linux distros have problems with sound drivers.
               | Generally usable, good enough, but still with annoying
               | quirks.
               | 
               | Then again, i'm not motivated enough to use LaTeX so
               | aside from a bit of complaining, i guess i just have to
               | tolerate the many packages out there and their quirks.
               | 
               | > You're right about file formats - and of course it runs
               | deeper, file formats are just a manifestation of feature
               | sets and models. When you have a model mismatch, as
               | LibreOffice does, then you're sort of set up to fail, no
               | matter how clean and open the file format is (or isn't).
               | 
               | Hmm, i wouldn't do LibeOffice a dirty like that and
               | dismiss it as some prime example of a particular bad
               | architecture, nor would i agree that it's what my
               | original argument was about.
               | 
               | I cannot comment on what would be a "good" office format
               | example, as the internals of either look pretty bad to
               | me, consider seeing what's inside those documents
               | sometime. Extract the contents of a .docx and a .odt file
               | and see the XML - Microsoft's is not quite readable,
               | while OpenDocument's is a tad too verbose. It would
               | probably have to be XML because of the node structure,
               | but neither like HTML, nor what those two office packages
               | have in store.
               | 
               | My original argument was closer to the following:
               | regardless of a format being open or not, dealing with a
               | domain such as word processing in any advanced capacity
               | is likely to provide lots of accidental and lots of
               | inherent complexity. Basically, any format that's more
               | complicated than Markdown will have so many quirks and
               | behavior that's specific to the implementation, that any
               | other software package will be unable to reproduce it
               | 1:1.
               | 
               | Just look at how many years it took for web browsers to
               | even display CSS/HTML the same (for the most part) and
               | they had the opportunity to work with a bunch of
               | relatively simplistic standards, whereas office document
               | formats feel way less developer friendly in that regard.
               | Ergo, lacking compatibility.
        
               | jahewson wrote:
               | What I'm trying to say is that when we say "file format"
               | for anything non-trivial we really mean "semantic model",
               | the encoded representation of that isn't so important.
               | 
               | There's nothing bad about architecting software around
               | ODF (it came first, after all) but it inevitably will
               | lead to incompatibilities with OOXML. Likewise for the
               | inverse. I wouldn't call these quirks as much as an
               | impedance mismatch.
        
             | wtch98 wrote:
             | I don't get this. My work email is on exchange, but I
             | haven't used outlook for 15 years - I access web based
             | exchange from firefox on my linux laptop
        
               | temp8964 wrote:
               | Many people don't like the web version, and Outlook can
               | manage multiple email accounts in one place.
        
               | prmoustache wrote:
               | Gnome evolution too.
        
             | grayclhn wrote:
             | For _school_ use the extra functionality is basically
             | irrelevant. (Excel for some college level courses is an
             | unfortunate exception.)
        
               | Kwpolska wrote:
               | The user interface of LibreOffice is garbage. The ribbon
               | is much more discoverable than toolbars and menus (and
               | no, LibreOffice's ribbon imitation isn't as good as the
               | original).
               | 
               | And if you're talking about Excel... LibreOffice Calc
               | doesn't have tables (with nice styling, automatic formula
               | filling, and using column names in formulas), and working
               | with PivotTables requires a separate dialog box with no
               | simple live preview.
        
             | jka wrote:
             | For the sake of argument I'll agree with you. Even then,
             | there's a key difference between the two software stacks:
             | anyone could improve LibreOffice.
             | 
             | Could you name an issue you have with Calc that makes you
             | feel it is inferior to Excel? (something more specific than
             | look-and-feel, ideally, although I admit that may be a
             | factor in reality)
        
         | stoicjumbotron wrote:
         | While I somewhat agree with this, another good alternative
         | would be Affinity Photo[0] (and is 50% off as of this writing).
         | One time buy, nice UI and UX and is also quite comparable to
         | Photoshop.
         | 
         | 0: https://affinity.serif.com/en-us/photo/#buy
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | hirako2000 wrote:
         | Gimp is quite on par with photoshop, and unless you are a pro,
         | the difference of feature set doesn't matter.
         | 
         | On adobe, I prefer using photopea than ever having to touch
         | photoshop again, that's a tell that it isn't all that great to
         | since a free to use replias fits all my needs.
         | 
         | I would concede photoshop has a better UX, on Windows and OSX
         | that is true, but on its native linux home, it blends rather
         | well with gtk approach to UIs and flow.
         | 
         | IDE wise, plenty of OSS solutions on par with commercial
         | products now, at least for tooling education needs.
        
           | [deleted]
        
           | throwaway742 wrote:
           | Photoshop's AI features are light years ahead of GIMP.
        
           | jacquesm wrote:
           | Yes, but being able to use Gimp isn't going to help your
           | career and being able to use Photoshop is.
        
             | seclorum_wien wrote:
             | Both programs are easy to use, though. If a company has
             | Photoshop installed, use it, sure. But there is also no
             | reason not to use GIMP if that is preferred, and .. you
             | know .. _gets the job done_ anyway.
             | 
             | I get art from artists to integrate into apps all the time
             | that wasn't made in photoshop. Most important is they know
             | what they're doing, whatever they're using...
        
           | w4rh4wk5 wrote:
           | > Gimp is quite on par with photoshop, and unless you are a
           | pro, the difference of feature set doesn't matter.
           | 
           | No, Gimp is quite bad when it comes to non-destructive
           | editing. Even the FAQ mentions that [1]. As someone who works
           | in game development, non-destructive editing, specifically
           | layer effects are used _everywhere_. Especially for UI
           | elements and stylizing text.
           | 
           | [1]: https://www.gimp.org/docs/userfaq.html#when-will-gimp-
           | suppor...
        
             | hirako2000 wrote:
             | Sure. I tried to answer contextually. If some kids get to a
             | certain level, they will be using adequate tools for the
             | job. I think the critic is about standard bulk licenses
             | bought for kids training on multi disciplinary activities.
             | In the context i would say destructive vs non destructive
             | or that gimp has filters that are not gpu optimised while
             | adobe does are secondary concerns. + don't have me dig to
             | find a non destructive photo editor that is open source :)
        
           | tgv wrote:
           | The UX totally kills Gimp, like it hinders LibreOffice,
           | especially in comparison to Excel. Let's not forget many
           | pupils have little affinity with corporate IT and no interest
           | in learning text editing for the heck of it. If you have to
           | teach it anyway, best give them easy tools that they can
           | recognize later in life, and with which they can help their
           | grandparents.
           | 
           | Given the fact that IT teachers are scarce (at least here;
           | teachers for programming aren't available at all below
           | advanced educational levels), I do think that simply
           | foregoing teaching these skills might even be better.
        
             | prmoustache wrote:
             | > no interest in learning text editing
             | 
             | Why is this relevant to the use of gimp ot libreoffice? I
             | never had to open a text editor to use gimp or libreoffice
             | (well apart than writer itself duh).
        
           | na85 wrote:
           | >Gimp is quite on par with photoshop, and unless you are a
           | pro, the difference of feature set doesn't matter.
           | 
           | It's not about the features. I agree there's more or less
           | feature parity for the 90% of use cases, but gimp has bad UX.
           | 
           | It's just clunky and frustrating to use, and there's no sugar
           | coating that fact.
           | 
           | I hate using gimp.
        
             | hirako2000 wrote:
             | I don't argue the UX is lacking, i still hate using
             | Photoshop even more, and would have liked, as a kid, to be
             | told how to use open tools even if not as good. It surely
             | would have been better than what i got: Windows 98 which
             | only had MS paint in it at my high school computer room,
             | and that wouldn't be the only productivity tool missing on
             | any Windows machine we may find at schools even today,
             | while some linux package manager is 1 click and 1 command
             | away to install literally whater, for free, probably better
             | security reviewed than the next commercial product.
        
             | prmoustache wrote:
             | > It's just clunky and frustrating to use, and there's no
             | sugar coating that fact.
             | 
             | Having used both as well as alternatives (like paint shop
             | pro and some others), this is mostly resistance to change.
             | You are used to photoshop so anything with a different
             | paradigm will feel unituitive. Same with libreoffice and
             | office if you don't care to understand the concepts.
             | 
             | Resistance to change is a strong thing. Objectively, macos
             | and windows desktop are slow and clunky interfaces compared
             | to say, gnome3. Yet many people even among linux users hate
             | the later because they have been used to slow and clunky
             | and don't understand smooth.
        
           | blagie wrote:
           | Sorry. gimp is crap compared to Photoshop. Gimp was on-par
           | with Photoshop when it came out in the nineties. It hasn't
           | improved much since.
           | 
           | That said, gimp is free. Adobe Creative Suite is over half a
           | grand a year. For most people, knowing gimp is a useful life
           | / workspace skill. Only the very elite will have access to
           | Photoshop. Learning Adobe tools is simply not helpful for 98%
           | of the population, as a life skill (beyond the general skills
           | learned with any tool).
        
           | moralestapia wrote:
           | Good products sell themselves. If GIMP were better AND free
           | people would be all over it.
           | 
           | "B-b-ut Photoshop cornered the market", wrong, plenty of new
           | apps like Procreate have found success just by being a tiny
           | bit innovative and delivering a quality experience.
           | 
           | I really like OSS (and have contributed to several projects)
           | but what matters in the end is the UX. There's a reason why
           | Apple is a trillion dollar company.
           | 
           | Some projects are just mediocre and stagnant while trying to
           | save face by saying they are OSS, at the end of the day no
           | one cares, people just move along.
           | 
           | Other projects are so poisoned now that they barely resemble
           | what they once were in their best times, i.e. Firefox and
           | their self-imposed race to the bottom.
        
             | prmoustache wrote:
             | If firefox is the bottom, I don't really understand where
             | do you put chrome or edge. Abysses?
             | 
             | There is a lot to say about Mozilla management but Firefox
             | the browser is really good.
        
         | robertlagrant wrote:
         | Inkscape actually getting pretty good, though. That'd be a good
         | start.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | ankaAr wrote:
       | I'm from Argentina. We have a OLPC like plan named "Conectar
       | Igualdad" And the City of Buenos Aires had (or have, I don't know
       | if still running) another one named "Plan Sarmiento".
       | 
       | Both plans were the battle zone between Microsoft and open source
       | software community.
       | 
       | For the first plan, the government started a project named Huayra
       | Linux, a debian derivate with a bunch of software designed here
       | for the kids. For Sarmiento, it came with a debian tweaked
       | installation, that was barely working because the closed source
       | of the wimax chipset (it was only working for windows, and yes,
       | the students had free internet in the city)
       | 
       | The battle was so hard, that Microsoft licensed the windows
       | distribution for 1 dollar each, and they got a contract where all
       | the machines must to be installed with windows.
       | 
       | Despite a lot of trials and errors, a lot of work without a
       | project to learn from (maybe ceybal from uruguay is the closest
       | example of a really well project) and the scale (I'm talking
       | about millions of notebooks) I'm sure that open source software
       | is the best from a IT perspective, from social perspective and
       | with the best margin to build things that your school, your
       | students, your city or country needs.
        
       | cbracketdash wrote:
       | Interestingly, many schools are now using ChromeOS, a "locked-
       | down" version of linux.
       | 
       | Alas, only Chrome and Google-based applications are allowed;
       | however, it's a good step away from more expensive products.
        
       | kwatsonafter wrote:
       | There needs to be a, "third way" developed that isn't, "FOSS/Open
       | Source" or, "Proprietary." It's worth remembering how much of the
       | revolutionary computing of the 194/5/60's was developed using
       | models that tactfully combined private and public industry.
       | Programs like ARPA provided funding for open ended research which
       | gave us the Alta and the ARPANet (thanks Lick!) while companies
       | like IBM performed an important social function in providing
       | especially young engineers with cutting edge jobs during their
       | golden era. There's a vivid history on this subject that's worth
       | looking into.
       | 
       | https://press.stripe.com/the-dream-machine
       | 
       | If we're going to be adults about the thing-- Developing
       | technology requires global or at least national stability. Global
       | stability traditionally has, "required" global hegemony.
       | Developing technology allows the United States and her allies to
       | to remain technically ahead of competing nations which in a
       | feedback loop allows for the development of further technology.
       | There's a sideways argument that in truth, in some sense, that
       | the technology we, "ought" (Hume) to be using in schools should
       | be, "nationalized" in the same sense that the, "internet" as a
       | tangible infrastructure is a, "national" resource. Imagine a kind
       | of Sudbury School where children use advanced, "democracy
       | computers" to, "rehearse" avid citizenship given the political
       | constraints of our society. The computer could facilitate a
       | social revolution in an educational setting if used in this
       | manner. I really do think this is what Alan C. Kay is talking
       | about when he says, "the computing revolution hasn't happened
       | yet."
       | 
       | Also HyperCard! and Project Xanadu! and Blackjack! and Hookers!
       | (Exclamation point!)
        
         | germinalphrase wrote:
         | " ...children use advanced, 'democracy computers' to,
         | 'rehearse' avid citizenship given the political constraints of
         | our society"
         | 
         | What does this mean?
        
       | colesantiago wrote:
       | As far as I know most industries other than the software industry
       | uses Windows, Word, Excel, PowerPoint, Photoshop, Illustrator etc
       | and not any of these open source ones.
       | 
       | > IT departments could opt to use any one of the lightweight
       | Linux distros available.
       | 
       | Which one? That is the problem and don't get me started on tech
       | support.
       | 
       | This screams completely out of touch.
        
         | guerrilla wrote:
         | > As far as I know most industries other than the software
         | industry uses Windows, Word, Excel, PowerPoint, Photoshop,
         | Illustrator etc and not any of these open source ones.
         | 
         | The reason for that could have to do with schools. It could
         | change if schools changed.
        
         | bachmeier wrote:
         | > As far as I know most industries other than the software
         | industry uses Windows, Word, Excel, PowerPoint, Photoshop,
         | Illustrator etc and not any of these open source ones.
         | 
         | There are good arguments on both sides of this issue, but this
         | one (which comes up repeatedly) is not among them. It's absurd
         | to argue that elementary schools should design their curriculum
         | exclusively to train students for the job market.
        
           | colesantiago wrote:
           | Who said this?
           | 
           | All I am saying is that when non tech savvy people are
           | working with software there is a high likelihood that they
           | will be using the above software.
           | 
           | Even if it is for the job market, I doubt a hiring manager
           | would take a look twice at LibreOffice or even GIMP in a
           | candidate's CV.
           | 
           | Unfortunately Microsoft and Adobe or any other proprietary
           | software is an expectation in some industries outside of the
           | software industry.
        
         | tigerlily wrote:
         | Like imagine if Microsoft just stopped supporting all their
         | products though.
        
         | alaricus wrote:
         | I think you are the one out of touch. My Boomer parents only
         | need help from me once a year or less with their Ubuntu
         | machines. If they can do it, so can genZ students.
        
           | xigency wrote:
           | The students aren't at issue, it's the teachers. Your parents
           | might as well be tech wizards compared to the the most tech
           | illiterate instructor. Not to mention that the sample size is
           | much larger when looking at a school or district compared to
           | one household.
        
             | alaricus wrote:
             | They can learn. It's not hard.
        
       | psadauskas wrote:
       | Not just that, but any software that is funded by government
       | grants should be mandatory open-source, with some possibly some
       | minimal exceptions for top-secret things like ICBM guidance
       | systems.
        
       | sbuk wrote:
       | This article should have been written using HTML...
        
       | blagie wrote:
       | Personally, I think the argument today is different. I see the
       | kinds of data being collected about my child by school ed-tech
       | vendors, and it's scary.
       | 
       | Looking backwards in history, Nazi Germany and Soviet police
       | states are good examples of why having people know too much about
       | you can get you killed, depending on political system.
       | 
       | Looking at the present, people's jobs and political careers are
       | destroyed for having said things which were mainstream views a
       | half-century ago. Statues are torn down of people who held
       | perfectly mainstream views 150 years ago. I have no idea which of
       | the things my child says and knows now will be taboo in another
       | 50 years. I do know the schools are storing all of that in
       | archives with a whole bunch of fly-by-night ed-tech vendors.
       | 
       | I don't know how this is going to end, but mark my words: This
       | will end badly. We have a history and a present of persecuting
       | people for less, and privacy is what protects us.
        
       | hnusersarelame wrote:
       | This is dreadfully out of touch and only serves the interests of
       | FOSS advocates, not the students. Give kids the tools that will
       | make them successful in their educational and professional
       | careers. Nobody is using GIMP in the graphic design world.
        
         | Andrew_nenakhov wrote:
         | > Nobody is using GIMP in the graphic design world.
         | 
         | This statement is false. In my company it is used all the time
         | for any image manipulations, by both graphic designers and
         | managers. Last time I've seen photoshop was maybe in 2007 or
         | so.
        
           | kcplate wrote:
           | You are the outlier then. I have been in publishing and
           | advertising industry since the late eighties through many
           | companies. I can't remember a time that it wasn't the defacto
           | standard since at least the early 90s
        
             | digisign wrote:
             | Those are not particularly large industries.
        
       | cube00 wrote:
       | The "job market" argument no longer holds up with Google ruling
       | the education roost. You won't see Chromebooks or GSuite's
       | Docs/Sheets used in enterprise as frequently as Microsoft's
       | products.
        
         | demopathos wrote:
         | > You won't see Chromebooks or GSuite's Docs/Sheets used in
         | enterprise as frequently
         | 
         | Right now we don't see it. GSuite will completely take
         | Microsoft's place in corporate environments in the next 10
         | years. All my peers entering the workforce right now love
         | Google docs and detest Word. It's just a matter of time for
         | when that age bracket becomes the decision makers.
        
           | ghaff wrote:
           | I don't have experience with Office 365, but GSuite has been
           | transformative. I never want to go back to mailing files
           | around. Furthermore, while you'll always have power users who
           | need Excel or Word for some reason, in general, GSuite for me
           | has pretty much everything I need and it's far more
           | streamlined. It's very rare that I want to do something--
           | other than when I need to exchange Word files--that I can't
           | do with Google (and even then I can usually work around it).
        
             | na85 wrote:
             | I have experience with both and O365 is a fucking
             | nightmare.
        
         | nogbit wrote:
         | I do right now see Google Workspace being used as the primary
         | goto for office docs and email at a very large company. It's
         | happening.
         | 
         | O365 is a mess, with Excel online I can't even create a named
         | range, something so basic that has been in Google Sheets since
         | day one. As an example.
        
       | alaricus wrote:
       | Everyone should be using open source.
        
       | msh wrote:
       | You know a person have no clue about education when they suggest
       | to use vim to teach people how to code.
        
         | sunsunsunsun wrote:
         | You could easily spend a semester teaching how to use vim
         | before you even write any code.
        
       | zerop wrote:
       | Sharing from my experience of selling SaaS products for school
       | management to schools -
       | 
       | 1. School staff is not tech savy. They can not install or manage
       | open source easily.
       | 
       | 2. They mostly prefer commercial software with paid support.
       | Software is critical to them but not their main business. They
       | lack expertise and willingness to go for Open source software.
        
         | guerrilla wrote:
         | > They mostly prefer commercial software with paid support.
         | 
         | But there's commercial free software with paid support.
        
           | moralestapia wrote:
           | ORLY?
           | 
           | Give me an OSS alternative to Google Workspace and I'll move
           | _today_.
        
             | guerrilla wrote:
             | I'm no expert but aren't there literally dozens upon dozens
             | of those? Nextcloud, Zimbra, Kolab, etc. for example? [1]
             | There are hundreds of companies that provide nextcloud
             | hosting with support alone [1]...
             | 
             | 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_collaborative_soft
             | ware...
             | 
             | 2. https://nextcloud.com/providers/
        
               | moralestapia wrote:
               | Nextcloud is quite good and is the only one I'd seriously
               | consider from that list.
               | 
               | However, their Standard plan (which is the one that has
               | Office-like apps) is actually more expensive than what I
               | pay now on G, so there's literally no incentive for me to
               | switch.
        
               | guerrilla wrote:
               | I don't know what you mean by "their." There are hundreds
               | of providers. Some are like $5/month.
        
               | moralestapia wrote:
               | their = Nextcloud's.
        
               | guerrilla wrote:
               | Okay well there are like 30 partners just on the
               | Enterprise landing page alone. You should shop around.
               | 
               | Also, I just remembered. The Sonoma County Office of
               | Education is already using Zimbra as its groupware. I
               | wouldn't write it off entirely either.
        
         | alaricus wrote:
         | > They mostly prefer commercial software with paid support.
         | 
         | Most paid support is awful.
        
       | zachrip wrote:
       | Schools need long term turnkey solutions that offer support and
       | someone who will pick up the phone when they call. The school
       | district I went to used macs and you were allowed to install
       | whatever browser you wanted on them. We used google drive or just
       | the hard drive to store files. Forcing folks to use niche
       | software means they cannot just use whatever the rest of the
       | world is using when they graduate. Teachers, parents, students,
       | etc would need to learn these new programs that they haven't used
       | before. I don't really seen any positives to this except a feel
       | good story about open source. Who actually knows what the costs
       | would be? The support time? Etc. I'm sure there will be a lot of
       | school sysadmins reading this and thinking "please just stay in
       | your lane."
        
         | nonrandomstring wrote:
         | > Schools need long term turnkey solutions that offer support
         | 
         | No they don't. Schools need affordable and generally available
         | software that kids can freely download, and which are flexible
         | and open enough to be tailored. It is ironic to label solutions
         | that basically lock-down and lock-in student's options as
         | "turnkey". More like "throw away the key"!
         | 
         | > someone who will pick up the phone when they call.
         | 
         | But no-one ever does. This harks back to the Total Cost of
         | Ownership (TCO) FUD Microsoft were spewing in the early 00's.
         | In 2022 we all know exactly what big-tech customer support
         | looks like even if you pay dearly for it. Basically you're on
         | your own, and good luck to you.
         | 
         | > Forcing folks to use niche software
         | 
         | Forcing anyone to use any software is wrong. Software should be
         | a _choice_ in the same way that religion, diet, political
         | affiliation and our choice of friends. There is not _only one
         | way_. Understanding that there are choices - alternative ways
         | of doing things - is fundamental to innovation and should be
         | taught to kids from a very young age.
         | 
         | > they cannot just use whatever the rest of the world is using
         | 
         | That is a disingenuous generalisation. There is no "rest of the
         | world".
         | 
         | > when they graduate.
         | 
         | One thing I've learned over many years of teaching tech, is
         | that by the time students graduate and get into a real job
         | market the things that were hot when they were freshmen have
         | moved on. Google services have been axed. Adobe versions and
         | licenses have changed. Microsoft applications moved into the
         | cloud and radically changed their interfaces. It is actually
         | Free Open Source Software that retains greater stability and
         | offers greater career value longevity, even it is is
         | functionally poorer.
         | 
         | > Teachers, parents, students, etc would need to learn these
         | new programs that they haven't used before.
         | 
         | In tech, we all have to learn new things we haven't used
         | before, all the time. It's the nature of rapid progress. To
         | infer that this is somehow only true of open source software is
         | wrong.
         | 
         | > I'm sure there will be a lot of school sysadmins reading this
         | and thinking "please just stay in your lane."
         | 
         | We have a massive problem with de-skilling of ICT admins at the
         | primary, secondary, and even higher-ed levels. I believe this
         | is a direct cause of poorer educational outcomes because the
         | technical support staff are unable to serve needs in a rapidly
         | advancing world that demands innovation and deeper skills than
         | clicking boxes on a webmin panel to choose some Windows
         | options.
        
         | hirako2000 wrote:
         | Yes, that's why IT admins in public funded institutions need to
         | be told the standard they are to follow, 80% of the "internet"
         | runs on linux, and GUIs have filled pretty much all gaps,
         | drivers aren't the nightmare it was 20y ago.
         | 
         | Open source even if causing problems that dont exist with
         | commercial solutions is worth it overall. Plus, linux support
         | licences do exist.
        
           | Shared404 wrote:
           | > Plus, linux support licences do exist.
           | 
           | I would much rather RH, SUSE, Canonical, Zorin, Elementary,
           | or any other FL/OSS company get those contracts than
           | Microsoft or Apple.
           | 
           | Business runs on Windows because schools run on Windows.
        
             | compiler-guy wrote:
             | As a historical matter, this is exactly backwards. Schools
             | chose windows because businesses used it. Linux and other
             | unices barely even registered until the late 2000s, even at
             | the university level, except within computer science
             | departments.
             | 
             | Even today, various linux UIs are somewhat behind Cinnamon
             | ad Gnome, in fit, finish and polish. But in the 2000s it
             | was a joke. KDE didn't appear until 1998 and it was very
             | much a work in progress. Windows 95 had been out for three
             | years and was leaps and bounds ahead.
             | 
             | Every year since then has been wildly proclaimed as the
             | "Year of the Linux Desktop". It keeps getting closer, but
             | still isn't really there.
        
               | Shared404 wrote:
               | Good point.
               | 
               | I should've worded what I was trying to communicate
               | better - the reason that businesses are stuck on
               | Windows/MS Office is because all any "average joe" knows
               | is Windows/MS Office.
               | 
               | In my opinion, if we want to be able to move ahead, we
               | need to start by educating people on how to actually use
               | a computer, instead of being used by it. Afaict, the only
               | way to do that is to move away from the "You may do what
               | Microsoft/Apple say you can do" reasoning that pervades
               | schools.
               | 
               | That itself would require some amount of movement from
               | Windows. Ideally, there would be a course where you learn
               | how to use Windows/Linux/Mac and learn about other
               | options, but as that'll never happen I would be very
               | happy to at least see a shift from "Microsoft (and Apple
               | if you're rich) is all there is".
        
           | AussieWog93 wrote:
           | > Yes, that's why IT admins in public funded institutions
           | need to be told the standard they are to follow, 80% of the
           | "internet" runs on linux, and GUIs have filled pretty much
           | all gaps, drivers aren't the nightmare it was 20y ago.
           | 
           | I tried to switch to Linux a couple of years back. The GUIs
           | were fucked, and varied so much between distributions that
           | everybody just defaulted to the terminal anyway.
           | 
           | Hardware support was a major PITA. Everything would "work",
           | but there'd be random issues, like my printer (Brother colour
           | laser) refusing to go above about 50dpi regardless of what
           | setting I put, and some disk mounting service crashing
           | internally if I inserted and removed my SD card reader too
           | many times (nothing crazy, like 2-3 times over an 8 hour
           | session).
           | 
           | These pains were on Kubuntu. A more niche (yet still for some
           | reason recommended) distribution that I installed broke the
           | entire desktop environment when I tried to switch from the
           | broken, buggy mess that was Noveau to the properly QA'd
           | Nvidia stuff.
           | 
           | Similar experience with my Grandpa, for what it's worth. He
           | hated Windows 10's ads and tracking with a passion, and asked
           | me to install Linux on his machine when Windows 7 became EOL.
           | But nope, everything was broken.
        
           | zachrip wrote:
           | If someone wants to see this happen then they should start a
           | company which offers this as a service to schools - I've no
           | idea if this already exists, it probably does but my point is
           | schools don't just decide to run certain systems on their
           | own, they meet with providers and decide which best meets
           | their needs. Someone with this goal should try and get a spot
           | at that table and maybe it'll actually happen.
        
             | Shared404 wrote:
             | I believe Zorin Grid will be exactly that! When I first
             | heard about it, it appeared to be more education focused
             | and now appears to target education and enterprise.
             | 
             | https://zorin.com/grid/
        
             | pid-1 wrote:
             | I've worked as a sysadmin (not a school though) and I've
             | researched before how feasible it would be to allow a
             | subset of my users to run Linux as their main client.
             | 
             | The tooling simply is not there yet. Your only choice is to
             | pay very expensive licenses to either Suse or Red Hat.
        
               | digisign wrote:
               | Everything at our school running over the web. This is
               | not a barrier any longer.
        
           | compiler-guy wrote:
           | "Open source even if causing problems that dont exist with
           | commercial solutions is worth it overall."
           | 
           | Spoken like someone who doesn't have to deal with the day-in-
           | day-out hassle of running it in a school environment and
           | dealing with the lack of knowledge and support from your
           | superiors and users.
        
             | hirako2000 wrote:
             | I actually did that a couple of years and in a foreign
             | country that include language barrier and all sort of
             | logistical issues for provisioning hardware. It's more than
             | do-able, but yes, it involves thinking over needs and
             | filling gaps that aren't so obvious how to fill at first +
             | training staff. But that's what education is all about so
             | open source only, and it worked. The only commercial/closed
             | source pieces we used are cloud solutions, even then, it
             | could have been avoided by having just one other IT onboard
             | to maintain self hosted alternatives, which would have cost
             | less than the sum of the subscription services. But yea
             | here again it would have taken some education and a bit
             | more planning as no open source is click and play like most
             | commercial solutions.
             | 
             | We are bringing lack of knowledge and training to explain
             | the current trend, what an irony given we are talking about
             | sanctuaries of knowledge and education.
        
           | pid-1 wrote:
           | Linux dominates server side for sure, but very feel companies
           | run Linux in the client side.
           | 
           | In fact, the tooling used to manage Windows and Mac fleets
           | generally doesn't even exist for Linux, or is just very bad
           | (Active Directory, Intune, etc ...)
        
         | 0des wrote:
         | > I'm sure there will be a lot of school sysadmins reading this
         | 
         | Hard to read when convulsing in the fetal position.
        
         | npteljes wrote:
         | >whatever the rest of the world is using
         | 
         | This is exactly what Microsoft got right: establishing
         | themselves as the standard. Their OS on the PC, their OS on the
         | laptop, and their suite in the offices. Deals with governments,
         | deals with schools, and then, you're the idiot if you want to
         | use something else compared to "whatever the rest of the world
         | is using".
         | 
         | I do agree about turnkey solutions though. This is what MS got
         | right, and also I think what Red Hat and Canonical got right.
        
         | balaji1 wrote:
         | > "please just stay in your lane."
         | 
         | Well said. Most institutions and organizations need and would
         | prefer turnkey long-term solutions.
        
       | johncoltrane wrote:
       | Schools should use software that works.
        
       | lordnacho wrote:
       | Could be worth distinguishing between open source and free-to-
       | use.
       | 
       | Something like VS Code works nicely but costs nothing.
       | 
       | If there's a budget problem in schools there's certainly software
       | that can be used without paying for it.
        
       | abetusk wrote:
       | Wow, I didn't expect to see so much pushback from the community
       | here. This sounds pretty obvious to me.
       | 
       | Gimp is really not adequate for everyday usage compared with
       | Photoshop? Really?
       | 
       | LibreOffice/OpenOffice doesn't provide adequate alternatives to
       | spreadsheet/doc/csv? Really?
       | 
       | Notepad++ is not good enough of a text editor? Really?
       | 
       | One semi valid criticism is that there isn't a support
       | infrastructure to help organizations with their open source
       | needs. While I don't believe it on it's face, regardless, this is
       | an opportunity to push for that infrastructure and to help every
       | single FOSS project with funding to support the community needs.
       | 
       | Public infrastructure should not be captured by vendor lock-in.
        
         | kcplate wrote:
         | It's also about how much time you need to put into the apps.
         | The UX as stated elsewhere on this thread with these
         | alternatives just doesn't measure up.
         | 
         | For one off, simple jobs, used sparingly...those FOSS
         | alternatives are fine.
         | 
         | If I need to spend more than 10 minutes of time using
         | them...I'm frustrated beyond measure at their UX issues.
        
           | digisign wrote:
           | These are newbie children learning their first apps. They
           | don't need "professional" features or ground-breaking UX. Not
           | to mention these apps are generally better than MS stuff from
           | the 90s, which were good enough.
           | 
           | Learn a spreadsheet, pick up any spreadsheet easily for the
           | rest of your life.
        
       | sgwizdak wrote:
       | This article discusses end user applications, but nothing
       | regarding the classroom experience. (E.g., how does the teacher
       | monitor individual screens to ensure they're staying on task?) My
       | wife is a teacher and google classroom is what most of the
       | districts in this area leverage.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-05-30 23:01 UTC)