Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uunet!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!UNCVX1.BITNET!UNESTJ From: UNESTJ@UNCVX1.BITNET (Tamara) Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple Subject: Re: Educomputing 2000 Message-ID: <8912301746.AA02488@apple.com> Date: 30 Dec 89 16:44:00 GMT Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU Organization: The Internet Lines: 37 Time : 30-DEC-1989 12:35 > > In article <7143@shlump.nac.dec.com>, erickson@mfgmem.dec.com writes: > > > > This is a call for SPECULATION regarding the grade school/high > > school educational computing environment of the year 2000. > > As impossible as it seems to predict this far ahead in the computer world I > would like to make one observation. I think that the greatest threat to Apple' s > hold on the K-12 market will come as a result of IBM's release of OS/2 and the ir > new bus architecture. [rest of argument deleted] > Bob Church > att!oucsace!bchurch Bob perhaps this is an oversimplification of your argument but I will state it anyway. You seem to argue that most of the decisions about education are based on hardware, whereas I believe it is the educational software which sells the machine to educational institutions. How much educational software has been written for OS2? Why would K-12 need 386s or 486s? What about the investment schools have already made in software and training in that software? Schools are conservative institutions. Change comes slowly. IBM is going to have to do more than just offer a cheaper better machine. I believe they will need a good argument for telling schools (especially their libraries) to trash all the software they've invested in because there's better software out there and that multitasking or speed or any of the other sexy things OS2 proports to do are really going to be useful in this particular environment. Just my humble opinion -------- "Keep On Rocking in a Free World" Neil Young UNESTJ@uncvx1.bitnet