Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site brl-tgr.ARPA
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!brl-tgr!wmartin
From: wmartin@brl-tgr.ARPA (Will Martin )
Newsgroups: net.college,net.cse,net.micro,net.micro.pc
Subject: Re: Univ. of VT chooses AT&T pc's
Message-ID: <10207@brl-tgr.ARPA>
Date: Thu, 25-Apr-85 13:47:41 EST
Article-I.D.: brl-tgr.10207
Posted: Thu Apr 25 13:47:41 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 27-Apr-85 02:46:11 EST
References: <376@uvm-cs.UUCP> <285@h-sc1.UUCP><387@ho95b.UUCP><5784@duke.UUCP>
Reply-To: wmartin@brl-bmd.UUCP
Distribution: net
Organization: USAMC ALMSA
Lines: 58
Xref: linus net.college:634 net.cse:301 net.micro:8814 net.micro.pc:3425

>>> > Burlington, Vermont; .... Incoming freshmen ...will be required to
>>> > purchase [AT&T 6300 PC] starting in the fall of 1985. Students will
>>> What if they can't afford it?  
>>> 	marie desjardins
>>
>It's not a bad thing if you are asked to purchase or have a PC of any kind;
>they seem to be forcing the students to buy one brand. Its like forcing me to
>buy only a Honda Civic or whatever because UVM cannot provide parking space
>for other cars. When one spends that kind of money one should be free to
>purchase any hardware within limits. Or is it true, students have no rights ?
>                                                     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>      Balu Raman CCP, Duke University,NC                     |
						 [I thought everybody already
						    knew this! :-]
I think there are a couple issues in addition to those expressed above:

1) Anybody going to a technical/engineering school these days or in the
near future will already have either spent a lot of time with computers 
or bought their own computer. While there is something to be said in
favor of forcing an early familiarity with having to move between machines
and learning many different kinds of OS's and environments, I fear that
a school adopting this approach will have to waste much time forcing
each (or at least most) student to UNLEARN their already-acquired
computer skills to use the school-standard system. Also, for those
who already have their own machines, having to buy another can be a
great imposition. Will the school help them dispose of their previous
systems, or accept their hardware in trade for tuition? 

2) The obvious reason for standardizing is to allow distribution
of software, lessons on diskettes, communications, etc. Can't this
be achieved by FUNCTIONAL specifications instead of mandating
specific hardware brands? While quantity buying can cut prices on the
hardware, this also locks the community into total dependence on
a specific vendor. Competition can never help you when the inevitable
future price cuts occur. Again, using functional specs instead of
explicit hardware lists can help in this situation.

3) Those out there concerned about software theft and unauthorized
duplication/copying should look at this sort of thing with terror
in their hearts. I can't think of a situation more likely to 
encourage such practices.

4) Not too far down the line, the school and alumni will have an 
enormous stock of now-obsolete systems and software. Since so much
of the school's operation and practices will by then depend on 
living in a totally-automated, PC-dominated environment, having to
make periodic mass changes to keep up with the improvements in
the computer industry  (which a school will HAVE to do to stay
competitive) will cost so much and cause such disruption that
every n years the school will, in effect, disintegrate into
chaos for some months while everyone flails about getting changed over.
(I forsee some fun garage sales, though...)

Doomsaying as ever,

Will Martin

USENET: seismo!brl-bmd!wmartin     or   ARPA/MILNET: wmartin@almsa-1.ARPA