Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

US University Dumps Windows to go All Mac

Zonk posted more than 7 years ago | from the shiny-white-plastic-as-far-as-the-eye-can-see dept.

Apple 368

MacKeyser passed us a link to a MacWorld article about a University doing things a little differently. Instead of sticking with their inefficient mix of Apple and PC systems, the college is doing a 'total technology refresh', and adopting an all-Mac policy on the campus. Previously, a class at Wilkes University would be outfitted with something like 20 Macs and 20 PCs, to allow for individual preferences in software and OS use. With Boot Camp students at the Pennsylvania liberal arts college will be able to switch between Windows and OSX, choosing which applications and OS to use at any given time. "[Scott Byers, vice president for finance and the head of campus IT said] 'We think it will save $150,000 directly, in buying fewer units - even though the Macs cost more per unit than PCs.' The school, which enrolls about 4,000 undergraduate and graduate students, will reduce its inventory from nearly 1,700 computers to around 1,450 after the change over. Other costs savings, however, will be harder to measure. 'By standardizing, the IT department should be more productive,' Byers said."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Good for them! (1)

RyuuzakiTetsuya (195424) | more than 7 years ago | (#18384109)

They're an arts college, so this should be a perfect demonstration of Apple's OS dominance in the field of digital arts.

Re:Good for them! (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18384159)

I was just looking at the majors they offer and I'm trying to figure out how Wilkes is an art school. Liberal arts university, sure, but that's it. In fact, the only art program they offer is a minor. Also note that they have about 2,200 students.

Re:Good for them! (5, Informative)

PetrusMagnusII (309326) | more than 7 years ago | (#18384285)

I think you're confusing Liberal Arts with Art.

Take a look at the undergraduate majors:

http://www.wilkes.edu/pages/143.asp [wilkes.edu]

Accounting, Air & Space Studies being the first two on the list...

Re:Good for them! (2, Funny)

h2g2bob (948006) | more than 7 years ago | (#18384659)

Well, art does have a well known liberal bias.

Re:Good for them! (2, Informative)

JackMeyhoff (1070484) | more than 7 years ago | (#18384387)

Apple has nothing special for "Arts", Photoshop etc are all available on Windows as are drawing tablets. If you want specalised hardware for art then you shop Wacom and others not Apple.

Re:Good for them! (2, Interesting)

dreamlax (981973) | more than 7 years ago | (#18384471)

Then why does everyone say Macs are better for video/graphics? Every graphics designer I know uses a Mac.

Re:Good for them! (0, Troll)

JackMeyhoff (1070484) | more than 7 years ago | (#18384491)

Because they have nicer cases.

Re:Good for them! (1)

KDR_11k (778916) | more than 7 years ago | (#18384779)

I seem to recall there being a lot of fuss about the Altivec unit on PPC Macs being faster for applying filters in Photoshop but that strikes me as such a minor difference that I doubt it's the primary reason.

Re:Good for them! (5, Funny)

that this is not und (1026860) | more than 7 years ago | (#18384939)

The 'Altivec meme' has been cancelled. It is no longer to be used as an explanation of why Apple products are 'superior.' Similarly, all 'Pentium' jokes have now been rescinded, and any records regarding said jokes in the past are being wiped.

Didn't you get the fax?

Re:Good for them! (2, Informative)

Bobsledboy (836872) | more than 7 years ago | (#18384793)

Perhaps it has something to do with the fact that Macs are generally considered more user friendly for novice users, a group that I would guess video/graphics professionals would probably tend to fall into.

Because that's what they've always used (3, Insightful)

Sycraft-fu (314770) | more than 7 years ago | (#18384815)

That's really what it comes down to. I've heard lots of creative justifications, but they are BS when you get down to it. It is just legacy. Back in the day, Mac was it for graphics work. Windows couldn't do it and didn't have the apps in any case. So it was Mac or nothing. Likewise with things like digital audio. When it first started, it was ProTools or nothing, computers weren't powerful enough to do it on their own.

Well, many people don't like change, thus they stick with Macs because that's what they've always used. The other justifications usually come from the fact that they either just tend to listen to the marketing hype, or because they feel a need to try and justify the more expensive purchase.

Re:Because that's what they've always used (1)

DKlineburg (1074921) | more than 7 years ago | (#18384865)

WHAT!!! Ah, does that mean that Bill Gates stole that marketing practice from Mac as well? I couldn't find the link in my hurry, but note an article about 2 day's old about Microsoft encouraging piracy, and Bill himself saying as such a while ago. Guess they stole that from Mac as well, get them young and they will come; and pay.

Re:Because that's what they've always used (5, Insightful)

sgant (178166) | more than 7 years ago | (#18384869)

I don't know. Speaking from a perspective of a graphics pro that's used both platforms, the Mac just "feels" more natural to me. No, I can't put that in a quantitative explanation. I've gone from Mac to PC back to Mac and yes, Photoshop performs on both, but as I said, it just "feels" better to me on the Mac. I've tried to understand why this is, but I really can't put my finger on it.

But honestly, it all comes down to personal preference. I know in the pre-press shops I've worked at, the PC has tried to make inroads, but there are a few things that just keep it back. Font handling is one....though most shops are going to an all PDF workflow, so that mitigates some of these problems.

But like this article, the great thing about the Intel Macs is, you can run either OS X or Windows....or even Linux, if you want. I would say that the extra you pay for the Mac is actually made up for this ability right there. It's very versatile now.

Re:Because that's what they've always used (0, Troll)

that this is not und (1026860) | more than 7 years ago | (#18384969)

And the only reason you can't run OSX, and Windows, and even Linux on your non-Apple Intel box is why? Because of the dongle embedded in the Apple machine? I wouldn't call that 'versatile.' It's the same awkward kludge that dongles have always been, except, even worse, it's not a dongle you can plug into whichever machine you like.

Re:Because that's what they've always used (4, Insightful)

sgant (178166) | more than 7 years ago | (#18385089)

No, it IS versatile, you just have to use it on their Hardware. Their OS, their hardware. Don't like it? Don't buy it. No one is forcing anyone. But the perk of buying THEIR hardware is the option to run all 3 OS's if you want...that's versatility. Albeit you're paying more for the hardware for that versatility, but to some it's worth it.

Apple opening up OS X to run on any hardware isn't going to be happening anytime soon and I think that people should just get over it. If it happens it happens. I'm not holding my breath for it.

Re:Because that's what they've always used (1)

LKM (227954) | more than 7 years ago | (#18384905)

The other justifications usually come from the fact that they either just tend to listen to the marketing hype

How's that for some cognitive dissonance. "I don't understand why people chose Macs. But I know all about Computers. Thus, people who chose Macs must be stupid fucks who just tend to listen to the marketing hype."

Wow.

Re:Because that's what they've always used (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18384985)

That is exactly it.

Re:Because that's what they've always used (0, Flamebait)

that this is not und (1026860) | more than 7 years ago | (#18384995)

You're right. He is wrong to generalize in that fashion. The fact that some of us have the personal experience that all Mac users we have encountered are the (to be polite, I'll silently lip the first part) "....who just tend to listen to the marketing hype" folks may be a coincidence.

Re:Because that's what they've always used (3, Interesting)

Kjella (173770) | more than 7 years ago | (#18384919)

And in no small part: Because they've never grown dependent and/or highly skilled in any Windows-only software. How often do you hear "Yes OS X is great, but as long as it doesn't run $foo it's not usable to me". Or about Linux, for that matter. And a lot of those really creative types I've met, well... their minds seem "jumpy". I'm not saying it's a bad thing, it's probably what makes them creative, but I think they're prime targets for Apple's "just works" marketing because they wouldn't stay focused long enough to get technical problems fixed. Of course you have a whole class of basicly "graphics engineers" in the same way you got software engineers, but they tend to follow the creative guys' lead.

Re:Because that's what they've always used (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18384943)

"many people don't like change, thus they stick with Macs because that's what they've always used.

Well, that, and they probably like the fact that you don't need to run crappy software like Symantec or McAfee. Or Maybe they don't want to participate in the ritual suicide of computer users known as "upgrading to Windows Vista".

Re:Good for them! (1)

LKM (227954) | more than 7 years ago | (#18384889)

The Windows version of Photoshop sucks. It uses that weird Window-in-a-Window paradigm which makes it really hard to compare files open in Photoshop to files open in other apps. I truly dislike that application. Also, I think color management on Macs is simpler, and the Mac offers other creative apps which are not available on Windows, such as Aperture or Final Cut Pro (granted, both are from Apple, but these are kind of important apps for many graphic artists and photographers).

Re:Good for them! (1)

BiggyP (466507) | more than 7 years ago | (#18384959)

Heh, that's it's biggest selling point for windows users and the thing they get most cross about being different in the GIMP.

Re:Good for them! (3, Insightful)

blowdart (31458) | more than 7 years ago | (#18384691)

But it's not about that; and, as is often the case the slashdot headline is an anti-windows line.

With Boot Camp students at the Pennsylvania liberal arts college will be able to switch between Windows and OSX, choosing which applications and OS to use at any given time.

They are standardising on hardware, not an operating system. Which makes sense in terms of cost and hardware management.

Re:Good for them! (2, Informative)

iBod (534920) | more than 7 years ago | (#18384737)

This 'dominance' is slipping away.

The Mac offers nothing special or unique in the field of digital arts today.

It used to be the case that the Mac had better software tools and better color management but this is no longer true. The same software and specialist hardware is available for Windows and many cost-concious design shops have gone over to Windows on generic workstations.

A lot of designers still use Macs because they've always used Macs - simple as that.

Re:Good for them! (1)

Bert64 (520050) | more than 7 years ago | (#18384831)

The same can be said for windows relative to linux... People are still using it because they always have.

Re:Good for them! (4, Interesting)

omeomi (675045) | more than 7 years ago | (#18384873)

The same can be said for windows relative to linux... People are still using it because they always have.

Not at all. I'm all for Linux, but in art or digital audio, the tools available in Linux just don't stack up (yet) with ones available for Windows and OSX. Yes, there's the Gimp for graphics, and Audacity for audio (among a few others), but there's nothing that comes close to competing with ProTools, or any of the other major audio software applications, and I don't think there's much on Linux that competes with Illustrator or Quark, either.

Why do people buy that myth? (1)

Vexorian (959249) | more than 7 years ago | (#18385037)

Really people, how does using a Mac makes you more 'artistic'?

Re:Good for them! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18385045)

My ass.

Mac's dominance in the field of mediocre arts. If I want to make the cute and cheesy shit, I'll stick with a Mac and it's software.

If I want to make REAL CGI animation and big league art. I'll pick up a graphics station PC, b/c we all know what the hell Hollywood uses. Mac's dumb down their system far too much and limit their capabilities in order to support a parade of idiotic users who can't even manipulate an automatic can opener. Real code and graphics are FAR too complex for their feeble minds.

They aren't just an arts college (1)

nicholasjay (921044) | more than 7 years ago | (#18385071)

They do have technical programs such as Electrical Engineering, Mechanical Engineering, Computer Science, etc.

See more here

http://wilkes.edu/pages/143.asp [wilkes.edu]

5:11 AM? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18384119)

gb/2 bed hal

Major university... (2, Insightful)

feranick (858651) | more than 7 years ago | (#18384139)

Wake me up when a major US university does the switch...

Re:Major university... (2, Interesting)

Hamster Of Death (413544) | more than 7 years ago | (#18384213)

Re:Major university... (1)

Psychotria (953670) | more than 7 years ago | (#18384267)

That's actually more interesting than the actual story. Thanks

Re:Major university... (1)

feranick (858651) | more than 7 years ago | (#18384305)

Nothing to see here. Having an Apple supercomputer designed in a university, doesn't mean that university is switching. If that was the case, there would be way more US universities switching to Linux, since most of supercomputing clusters actually runs on Linux. So I get back to sleep.

Re:Major university... (0, Troll)

Overzeetop (214511) | more than 7 years ago | (#18384685)

You won't find an engineer with a Mac at VT. They have to get real work done.

*ducks*

Re:Major university... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18384921)

hmmm.. engineer here. at VT. with a macbook. getting work done.

Re:Major university... (1)

that this is not und (1026860) | more than 7 years ago | (#18385021)

The irony is that they make their most productive use of Macs at VT by disconnecting the keyboard, monitor, and mouse.

Well, maybe it's not irony.

Re:Major university... (1)

phoxix (161744) | more than 7 years ago | (#18384931)

I fail to see how creating a cluster based on macs is considered switching. If that were the case, many organizations switched to linux ages ago.

Productivity .. (0, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18384145)

> By standardizing, the IT department should be more productive

Translation : Having much less computers to fix, they'll be able to spend more time posting on Slashdot about how great Apple products are.

I don't get it (1, Troll)

El Lobo (994537) | more than 7 years ago | (#18384155)

I don't get it... In the previous article you were saying that Linuzzz (Unbuntu) was now ready for the dessktop. Why they don't use it then? Oh, wait...I get it....repeating a lie a 1000 times doesn't make it a true. Or maybe nobody cares ;-)

Going to Linux (1)

orin (113079) | more than 7 years ago | (#18384167)

If they migrate to Mac OSX, does that make it less likely that at some point in the future they would switch to Linux? If people are having a hard time convincing people to move from Windows to Linux, isn't the job going to be harder getting them to move from Mac to Linux? It isn't really Windows that is the challenge to Linux, it is Mac OSX. Is it really a great thing for Free/Open Source software that people that many who are migrating from Windows are choosing Mac OSX?

Not Going To Linux (1)

Jacob Moogberg (876462) | more than 7 years ago | (#18384281)

When you go Mac, you don't go back.

Re:Going to Linux (1)

toejam316 (1000986) | more than 7 years ago | (#18384325)

I wouldn't think so. Mac OS X is unix based, and so more or less, you can use this, "Hey, you more or less already know how to use it, but you wont EVER need to buy a new machine for the newest version AND you never need to pay for the newest version! (Ala Tiger to Leopard (AFAIK, flame me and stab me and etc. if I'm misinformed))". Now, isn't half the reason you cant get them from Windows to Linux BECAUSE they dont understand what the hells going on?

Re:Going to Linux (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18384449)

Hey, you more or less already know how to use it, but you wont EVER need to buy a new machine for the newest version AND you never need to pay for the newest version!


I couldn't install the latest version on OpenSuse on my old computer. So I wouldn't say EVER.

Re:Going to Linux (1)

rvw (755107) | more than 7 years ago | (#18384331)

If they migrate to Mac OSX, does that make it less likely that at some point in the future they would switch to Linux? If people are having a hard time convincing people to move from Windows to Linux, isn't the job going to be harder getting them to move from Mac to Linux? It isn't really Windows that is the challenge to Linux, it is Mac OSX. Is it really a great thing for Free/Open Source software that people that many who are migrating from Windows are choosing Mac OSX?

I don't care about OSX (BSD) vs Linux. Both have the same (or similar) underlying structure, which makes it stable and safer than Windows. If people move away from Windows, either to OSX or Linux, that would be a good thing. OSX is the more logical choice, as it is more mature as a desktop system, and Apple has a good name here. I don't care if people don't make the next step to Linux.

I moved from Windows to the Mac six years ago, when OS9 was still the Mac OS but knowing that OSX was coming. I have used OSX to learn how to work with a UNIX-like system. I've tried to use linux then, but it was too much to handle at the time. I'm probably not the typical user, but for my next computer I'm considering moving to Ubuntu.

Re:Going to Linux (2, Insightful)

karmatic (776420) | more than 7 years ago | (#18384461)

No, it's a good thing. The transition from Mac to Linux is much easier since they already lost compatibility, application support, gaming, and driver support anyway.

Re:Going to Linux (2, Interesting)

NickFortune (613926) | more than 7 years ago | (#18384463)

If they migrate to Mac OSX, does that make it less likely that at some point in the future they would switch to Linux?

Possibly, possibly not. After all, in a lot of ways the jump from OS/X to Linux is a lot shorter than the one from Windows to Linux. They're both Unix descended systems and have a lot of apps in common. And when it comes to Linux, the price is always going to be had to beat.

On the other hand, I have to say that it doesn't much bother me. What I'd like to see is a bit more diversity O/S world. I suppose if Apple ever attain Microsoft's market share, they might well turn out just as bad - I doubt we'll ever know. In the meantime anything help break Redmond's dominance of the market is to be applauded.

Monoculture bad ... (4, Insightful)

IchBinEinPenguin (589252) | more than 7 years ago | (#18384183)

... diversity good.
Even it it's a 'non-evil' monoculture.

Re:Monoculture bad ... (2, Insightful)

geekboybt (866398) | more than 7 years ago | (#18384229)

How is this different from them buying all Dell (or HP / Brand X / Whatever)? Just now that by buying Apple, every computer can use an OS that runs Photoshop, et. al. that isn't Windows, not just 50% of them.

Before the switch, every user had a choice - Mac or Windows. Every user still has a choice - OS X or XP/Vista - just now they can standardize on the hardware. Unless you have a real beef with Apple hardware (and every hardware vendor has its critics), I don't see a downside to this policy.

Re:Monoculture bad ... (1, Insightful)

IchBinEinPenguin (589252) | more than 7 years ago | (#18384355)

If you want a windows PC, buy a windows PC. Don't lobotomise a Mac.

Windows` strength is the diversity of third-party support, both hardware and software.
Why give half of that up and run only on mac hardware?

To answer your question, it's no different from only buying Dell or Brand X or whatever. It's just as wrong.

Re:Monoculture bad ... (5, Informative)

macs4all (973270) | more than 7 years ago | (#18384957)

If you want a windows PC, buy a windows PC. Don't lobotomise a Mac. Windows` strength is the diversity of third-party support, both hardware and software. Why give half of that up and run only on mac hardware? To answer your question, it's no different from only buying Dell or Brand X or whatever. It's just as wrong.

You obviously have never tried to maintain more than a few computers at a time.

The main reason IT departments tend to be "monoculture" when it comes to hardware is the sanity of their IT staff.

You will note that they did NOT create (another) OS "monoculture". The users now have the choice between the two top-selling OSes, and the University gets to buy less hardware.

Oh, and since they are Macs , they can, through Parallels, even designate some or all of the machines to run nearly any other OS on the planet.

No other hardware vendor can offer that (at least not legally).

None. Period.

Re:Monoculture bad ... (1)

that this is not und (1026860) | more than 7 years ago | (#18385099)

I almost exclusively run NetBSD on my Apple hardware. And since it's all hardware old enough to be incapable of running OSX, I find your term 'lobotomize' to be laughable.

I guess it would be 'lobotomizing' an SE/30 or my Quadra 650 to run Bochs on it in order to run Windows on it. The Windows on Bochs on NetBSD would make the machine even more pathetic than the original MacOS made it. And that is a real accomplishment.

Thank goodness there was A/UX back in the day....

Re:Monoculture bad ... (1)

Whiney Mac Fanboy (963289) | more than 7 years ago | (#18384359)

... diversity good.
Even it it's a 'non-evil' monoculture.


Two points.

1) Plenty of (software) diversity here (more than most places) - students can choose osx or windows (pity there's no linux)

2) Google is the 'do no evil' company (hah!). Apple sues its customers, pushes DRM, etc etc. They just make better products than MS, so we don't care as much about their evilness.

Re:Monoculture bad ... (1)

KDR_11k (778916) | more than 7 years ago | (#18384933)

In an educational situatiopn I'd expect there to be Linux comps somewhere. The first uni I was at had Linux and Solaris machines for the CS and math students while the less technically inclined got Windows and Mac computers. Maybe that's because all the expensive CS and math software is available under Linux while things like Photoshop don't support it.

Confused (3, Informative)

Saint Stephen (19450) | more than 7 years ago | (#18384187)

Dumps Windows because the new Macs can all run Windows?

Two possible reasons (1, Interesting)

Sycraft-fu (314770) | more than 7 years ago | (#18384459)

One is that they may have determined they have enough Macs anyhow that it would benefit going for a sole source situation. There's something to be said for having one point of contact for all ordering, support, billing and so on. The university I work at sole sources various things. Thus if you feel that enough of the computers you order anyhow are Macs, you simply make them all Macs.

The other, and the one that is more likely, is that there's one or more Mac zealots in the position to make these decisions and they pushed it and people bought in to their justification. Unfortunately, this kind of thing does happen. People push their personal preferences on others and often try to cage it as being "easier" or "saving money" when in fact that's not the case, it is just what they want.

I say this is more likely since while Macs can run Windows, they are hardly an ideal solution. Boot camp is a beta and isn't supported as well as a PC natively made to run Windows. It would seem to make more sense to sole source another vendor for Windows PCs. That's what we do where I work. Gateway is our sole source (barring justification) for Windows PCs. However if I want a Solaris machine, I am free to buy Sun. Sure, you can theoretically get Solaris x86 running on a Gateway, but it is a much better idea to get it from Sun. Same for supported Linux solutions (don't get me started on Fedora problems on the Gateway blades).

To me it sounds like a Maccie wanting to push their platform. The hope is that everyone will use MacOS, I'm sure, but they said "Oh well this is easier since they run Windows too!" It isn't a seriously good idea because, as Apple notes:

"Warning: Boot Camp Beta is preview software licensed for use on a trial basis for a limited time. Do not use Boot Camp Beta in a commercial operating environment or with important data."

Re:Two possible reasons (1)

am 2k (217885) | more than 7 years ago | (#18384579)

Bootcamp will be a part of Mac OS X Leopard, and will be non-beta. If they got this plan finished lately, the first Macs they're going to get will already run Leopard anyways.

Maybe so (1)

Sycraft-fu (314770) | more than 7 years ago | (#18384777)

However that is still a bad idea. I am not going to commit to something as a solution before I've tested it. If I was going to use bootcamp for something I'd need to see it in its final form before I'd recommend it, if I was trying to give an objective analysis. Also there's the issue of release times. Sure, Apple says it'll be final with Leopard and they say it'll be out spring of this year. Fine, but what happens if that's not the case? There's no reason to believe it won't be, but that happens. Companies miss release dates all the time, or release with less features than expected.

All in all the just speaks of a biased decision not made on good facts. Unfortunately I see it all too often at universities. They are very political entities and as such, don't operate as logically as we might hope.

Re:Confused (1)

uhlume (597871) | more than 7 years ago | (#18384647)

I'd be tempted to call this one of the stupidest and most misleading Slashdot headlines I've ever seen. Unfortunately, I've been reading Slashdot far too long to make that claim.

Fewer computers? (1)

Baricom (763970) | more than 7 years ago | (#18384189)

The school...will reduce its inventory from nearly 1,700 computers to around 1,450 after the change over.
I may be a Mac fanboy, but I don't see how fewer computers can be a benefit for students.

Re:Fewer computers? (3, Insightful)

Whiney Mac Fanboy (963289) | more than 7 years ago | (#18384235)

I may be a Mac fanboy, but I don't see how fewer computers can be a benefit for students.

RTFA.

The classes used to have (all number pulled from my ass) 15 windows PCs & 15 Mac PCs. In a class of 20, 10 would go unused.

Now, they'll have 20 PCs capable of running OS X or Windows. All students still have access to a PC.

Re:Fewer computers? (1)

Baricom (763970) | more than 7 years ago | (#18384249)

I did, and I suppose that if all classes are truly overstocked, then a reduction in machines is great. In practice, however, it seems to me that computers are often unevenly installed, so one class consistently has too many, while another has too few. I guess this all hinges on the newly-gained "productivity" of the IT department.

Re:Fewer computers? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18384499)

In practice, however, it seems to me that computers are often unevenly installed, so one class consistently has too many, while another has too few. I guess this all hinges on the newly-gained "productivity" of the IT department.

I agree that PCs are often unevenly installed, but the reasons do not necessarily depend on the IT department itself.

It could depend on the IT department being given accurate operational requirements by administration or academic units before IT-related decisions are made. It also hinges on how the user departments dedicate the resources that are available.

An academic unit may not properly communicate their requirements at the appropriate time. This can be due to the poor administration of the academic unit or it could be due to the academic unit's requirements being unknown at the appropriate time.

Sometimes the academic side may not use its resources as efficiently as it can. A lab can go unused by one group it's dedicated to while a different unit doesn't have enough lab resources. In most schools, the IT department does not decide class or lab scheduling. In particular, some academic units at some schools are territorial over their own resources because the minute they let somebody else use it, they lose it and then they don't have it when they need it.

Generally, the IT department is a support department. They depend on accurate operational requirements, as much as anybody else.

At a school, learning is supposed to first, whether it's teaching or research. The IT support department has to work within these operational requirements and has to respond to the operational requirements that are communicated to it.

Re:Fewer computers? (1)

Oscar_Wilde (170568) | more than 7 years ago | (#18384239)

I may be a Mac fanboy, but I don't see how fewer computers can be a benefit for students.

Not all of the resources at a university are there for the students. I think the reduction in the number of computers would be due to researchers who previously needed a PC and a Mac now getting a single box.

Re:Fewer computers? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18384893)

I don't see how fewer computers can be a benefit for students.

That's because you didn't rtfa.

Not even dumping windows (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18384215)

That title is very misleading, it is only the hardware that is switching to mac, no the OS. It says they plan to use boot camp to dual boot OSX and windows. Hardly what you'd call a mac campus. They're just making it so that hardware wise they only have to buy macs rather than macs and pcs.

Headline Incorrect. (5, Informative)

Whiney Mac Fanboy (963289) | more than 7 years ago | (#18384227)

The university is not dumping windows at all.

They're dumping generic PCs in favour of mac PCs. They'll still purchase windows licenses & allow dual booting.

It's a hardware story, not a software story.

Re:Headline Incorrect. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18384255)

Oh, but it's even better than that. The price of a store-bought copy of windows is several times the royalty paid for an oem windows install. So it's a net win for microsoft. And as was pointed out earlier, this decision will leave classrooms with fewer computers for students -- so it's a net loss for the students.

I get the feeling I could take a shit in a cardboard box and write the word "linux" on it and get it posted on slashdot.

Re:Headline Incorrect. (4, Insightful)

Whiney Mac Fanboy (963289) | more than 7 years ago | (#18384323)

The price of a store-bought copy of windows is several times the royalty paid for an oem windows install. So it's a net win for microsoft

Um, unless they just use the XP licenses they already have?

Anyway, MS licensing works differently if you're a 2000+ seat university compared to some lone windows fanboy running vista ultimate.... I don't think this is going to be a gain for MS at all.

Re:Headline Incorrect. (1)

jimicus (737525) | more than 7 years ago | (#18384705)

Um, unless they just use the XP licenses they already have?

Anyway, MS licensing works differently if you're a 2000+ seat university compared to some lone windows fanboy running vista ultimate.... I don't think this is going to be a gain for MS at all.


Quite correct. Butthe immense likelihood is they don't have any XP licenses. They may have thousands of OEM licenses - which are tied to the PC they were bought with - and thousands of XP upgrade licenses (which are about all you can buy through Microsoft's volume licensing scheme) but without either an OEM or full retail licence to begin with, you can't legally use the upgrade license you get in the site license.

Re:Headline Incorrect. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18384399)

I get the feeling I could take a shit in a cardboard box and write the word "linux" on it and get it posted on slashdot.

Only if someone posted it on Digg first.

It has actually happened (1)

PopeRatzo (965947) | more than 7 years ago | (#18384455)

I get the feeling I could take a shit in a cardboard box and write the word "linux" on it and get it posted on slashdot.


It has actually happened. On August 12, 2005, user "get_me_high"*(25102) in fact took a shit in a cardboard box and wrote "Linux" on it. He was modded +5 Interesting.

The amazing thing was that the cardboard box actually ran Linux, although there was some trouble getting a wireless connection. It still runs today.

Re:Headline Incorrect. (1)

dreamchaser (49529) | more than 7 years ago | (#18384601)

I take it you've never seen the pricing Universities get from Microsoft most of the time...

Re:Headline Incorrect. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18384427)

Actually it's both hardware and software. They are dumping PC hardware and for once having Windows and Mac go head to head on identical hardware with access for everyone. Not everyone is going to jump ship but I'd be curious how many converts there are and which direction they go, Windows to Mac or Mac to Windows. It's a rare change for a large number of college students to have a chance to try both systems. I hope there's a follow up story.

Re:Headline Incorrect. (1)

GreatDrok (684119) | more than 7 years ago | (#18384623)

Don't these schools typically have Windows site licences anyway? By buying Macs and installing Boot Camp the users get the choice they want and the school can install a copy of Windows as usual due to their site license. MS doesn't get paid twice for each PC which can only be good IMHO. Personally, I wouldn't give the users the choice. I would do a deal with parallels or VMware to allow the Windows software to be run while encouraging the users to run OS X all the time.

hrmm.. (3, Insightful)

mrsym0r (1068436) | more than 7 years ago | (#18384261)

fta:

"Although the $1.4 million three-year switch - which started last year with the purchase of approximately 500 Macs"

$965 per apple? including the installation, planning etc? Over three years, in which time period the current macs would be outdated and require hardware upgrades in order to use the mac OS that will be in circulation by then?

Methinks their budget may fall a tad short..

Re:hrmm.. (1)

feranick (858651) | more than 7 years ago | (#18384315)

You also need to add the $$$ for licenses of MS products...

Re:hrmm.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18384389)

Over three years, in which time period the current macs would be outdated and require hardware upgrades...

Never owned a mac, have you? Say what you will about them, they have a history of being able to live a long, long time - usuably so - compared to most other hardware. A usuable life for most models is in the range of 5-6 years before you really have to worry about upgrading. We've got 1999 models here that still perform more than adequate yeoman service, though they are admittedly looking a little long in the tooth and are on the list to be retired.

The model isn't "replace/upgrade everything every few years" but rather, "Bring in the latest when and where needed, adding to your population." I'm sure in many academic circles, that longevity is considered an important plus when making decisions like this.

Re:hrmm.. (2, Informative)

djfake (977121) | more than 7 years ago | (#18384637)

plus Apple care of $119, plus AMP agreement of $79.

nope. in practice macs go 5 years (4, Insightful)

jpellino (202698) | more than 7 years ago | (#18384707)

often longer. every fw imac, cube, power mac and ibook we ever owned is running tiger and doing better than previous OS versons - every non-fw g3+ is running 10.3.9 and doing very well.

installation? ard.
planning? has to be done anyway.
etc? macs have less etc.

Re:hrmm.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18384819)

Actually, my 7 year old Mac G3 can run the current version of MacOS X without any hardware upgrades, and it has fine performance under things like Microsoft Office 2004 for Mac, or any of the Apple iLife applications.

I fully expect the Mac G3 to be able to run MacOS X 10.5, due out shortly, also without hardware upgrades. Apple isn't Microsoft. MacOS X isn't Vista. Moving MacOS software versions generally does NOT require one to upgrade or replace any hardware.

So, to be brutally honest, the parent comment seems both silly and uninformed.

I wonder (0, Troll)

Kaitnieks (823909) | more than 7 years ago | (#18384275)

Would "US University Dumps Macs to go All Windows" make Slashdot news?

Re:I wonder (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18384291)

No, but "Microsoft Utilizes Anticompetitive Practices to bribe US University into banning Macintosh" would.

Re:I wonder (1)

jrothwell97 (968062) | more than 7 years ago | (#18384867)

It'd probably appear under the headline "Evil Ballamer giggles as children die clinging on to their Macs".

major kusanagi said... (1)

acedotcom (998378) | more than 7 years ago | (#18384313)

"over specialize and you breed in weakness"

This is good news... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18384401)

but it would have been better if they shoved the old PCs up Ballmer's butt. Then his ass would be like all beep beep beep and stuff.

Mac? (0, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18384475)

At my university, we have half Windows and half Linux. And in one lab, we have 1 Mac. I have never saw anybody to use it more than 10 minutes.

Re:Mac? (2, Funny)

Ino (68074) | more than 7 years ago | (#18384621)

> At my university, we have half Windows and half Linux. And in one lab, we have 1 Mac. I have never saw anybody to use it more than 10 minutes.

That's because they're so efficient on it, their work is done in 10 minutes. Duh... PC!

Ino!~

Makes total sense (4, Insightful)

PhotoGuy (189467) | more than 7 years ago | (#18384663)

I've said it before, I've said it again; I bought my first Mac(book) recently, and the thing that pushed me over the edge to do so was the fact I knew I could fall back to Windows when I needed to, or completely stay in Windows if the OS X experience wasn't a good one. But like most people who try it, that "security blanket" of Boot Camp is more of an insurance policy, or peace of mind (or gaming option), rather than something they end up using in real life. I have my MS Office and OpenOffice, Opera/Firefox/Safari, and even IE under Crossover Office or Parallels. (I tend to use Parallels for IE testing purposes of my websites).

The only reason I reboot to windows now, is for the odd game; and even that's rare with me. Windows seems so much peppier, too, when I do go to it; since I only go there occasionally, the system doesn't get bogged down with addons, startup items, spyware, etc.. (The old reinstall-windows-every-six-months can be extended greatly, if you only use Windows occasionally.)

I think for a multimedia course that needs to teach students both Mac and PC skills, it makes all the more sense; both OS's on one machine: of course it's an overall savings, and somewhat of a no-brainer.

Yes, Mac hardware is single-vendor (unless you do the hackbook thing, not viable for a commercial enterprise); but in my experience, it's well designed, solid, stable, fast hardware. My only lament is that I'm a big fan of sub-nootbooks, like Librettos, and Apple has no such option currently. But I can live without that, for all the other benefits that OS X brings.

Yes, I'm a recent fan, and I am a boy, so fling away with your "fanboy" insults. Meanwhile, I'm productive and enjoying the experience immensely :)

I'm a Mac (-1, Redundant)

DoofusOfDeath (636671) | more than 7 years ago | (#18384671)

I can see it now:

Mac: I'm... a... um. a... Mac!

PC: I'm a PC. Are you high?

Mac: (Burst out laughing) Nooo...... no.. What? I just know how to have a good time.

PC: You *are* high! I've never had a joint in my life!

Mac: Is that right.?

Umm... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18384781)

*** We think it will save $150,000 directly, in buying fewer units - even though the Macs cost more per unit than PCs ***

Is this guy a retard? If you need 40 computers in a classroom, you need 40 computers. Doesn't matter if they are Windows, Linux, Mac, whatever. So, if you are replacing units, you actually spend more, since you're paying more per machine. Plus the XP license that you have to have to run Boot Camp on each machine...

So, like, they are actually paying quite a bit more than they currently do, in Apple-crappy-hardware alone, plus the license for XP...

I personally don't give a rat's ass if they switch to all Macs, but to say they are saving money like that is insane.

That's not what he's saying (1)

tkrotchko (124118) | more than 7 years ago | (#18385075)

"If you need 40 computers in a classroom, you need 40 computers. "

What he probably means is that if you have 30 student in a room, and you know a certain percentage will use Macs, and a certain percentage will use PC's, you need to have more than 30 computers total to satisfy the total student population.

Or to put it another way, you can probably break the students down into 3 groups:

Group 1 only knows how to use Macs
Group 2 only knows how to use PCs
Group 3 can use either.

Since the percentage of each group will be random in any one group, you have to put more total computers in the room to satisfy every student, unless you can have computers that can boot to either Windows or Mac, then you can more closely match the total computers to the total number of students.

They probably got significant discounts from Apple as well to go to an all-Apple solution.

Umm dumping the PC not the MAC (2, Informative)

nurb432 (527695) | more than 7 years ago | (#18384845)

Even in the summary, it states they are intending to use Bootcamp: "With Boot Camp students at the Pennsylvania liberal arts college will be able to switch between Windows and OSX, choosing which applications and OS to use at any given time."

So they arent dumping windows, they are just going to a more manageable single-source hardware vendor, whch just happens to be Apple.

Sure, its a good thing as more students will get a taste of OSX, but please be a bit more accurate here of what is going on. Geesh.

Grrrr .. Mistakes... Grrr! (1)

nurb432 (527695) | more than 7 years ago | (#18384859)

I meant to say not dumping *windows*.. Geesh. sorry people.

Would be nice if you could go back and edit your posts for when you make stupid mistakes you dont catch until after you hit submit.

Big Deal (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18384899)

So somebody with a pet love of Apple computers got into a policy setting and purchasing position, indulging in bias and personal preference then masquerade as a conclusion formed with proper technical and strategic analysis of requirements. The students will have to get by by doing their real work on their own pc's.

Windows only = cheaper + same results (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18384967)

I didn't think a university would have the budget to buy the overpriced Apple stuff. And they still have to buy all the windows licences.

If they went all windows, they would save a lot more money because they only need to buy 1 OS and PCs are cheaper. Also the administration-costs would be lower if they supported only one OS. Also the students can already choose to work on windows, so they wouldn't lose functionality.

The only real reason for using Macs are the Apple-Fanboys, of which there are plenty in every Art-Departement.

Of course switching to Linux would be the cheapest, but I bet they absoultely need Photoshop or some other overpriced crap which doesn't run on Linux.

Apple is cheaper? (3, Insightful)

LaughingCoder (914424) | more than 7 years ago | (#18385001)

Wilkes decided to go all-Apple because the new Intel-based models and the Boot Camp dual-boot software - would let the school reduce the number of machines campus-wide. "This is an aggressive technology refresh," Byers said.
OK, now I get it. It's cheaper to standardize on Macs because they dual boot - therefore the same machine can be used to run Mac OS (and hence Mac-only apps) or Windows (ditto). So they aren't standardizing on Mac OS (as the headline implies), they are standardizing on Mac hardware because it can run Windows too. This has nothing to do with the OS wars, it is purely a financial decision.

I'm old enough that this doesn't seem like news (1, Interesting)

xoundmind (932373) | more than 7 years ago | (#18385005)

I began my undergraduate days in 1986 and the entire university was a mix of Macs and UNIX workstations [cmu.edu] . I do recall a few stray IBM (and yes they were IBM) machines in the computer center, but those were more of an oddity than anything else.
My first response to sitting down in front of an MS environment was, "What the hell is this and why would someone use something so clumsy?"
Hopefully we're heading back to those days, albeit slowly.

Other Mac Colleges? (1)

sevenfactorial (996184) | more than 7 years ago | (#18385093)

Beloit in Wisconsin has been doing the same thing since at least 1995.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?