Aussie Uni Dumps Dual-Boot In Favor of Linux
kNIGits writes "News.com.au is reporting that the University of Wollongong have dumped their previously dual-boot installations in favour of booting Linux only. Among other reasons, staff enjoy the ease with which they can 'lock down' first year students, stopping them messing with the systems prior to learning anything about them."
I've met a tech who was working for a high-school, and 90% of his time was used in fixing Windoze computers after students messed-up with them. That changed when they installed some cards (don't remember the name of the cards) with RAM on them that effectively made the hard disks read-only, and stored in RAM whatever was written on the hard-disks.
So, whenever a PC was screwed-up, all you did was power-cycle it once!
The Uni of New South Wales Computer Science and Engineering department has been running unix/linux for years, no duel boot.
8 years ago it was Sun Solaris.
5 Years ago they moved to Intel Solaris
Now they have (or are) moving to Intel Linux.
anyway, good stuff at Uni of Wollongong.
I'm not fully versed in all its wonders, but the Windows Policy Editor (or whatever its called now) can completely lock down a machine. It's a vastly underutilized tool for environments where you don't want users messing with the machines. I remember getting annoyed the first time I sat down at a box which wouldn't let me even look at the start menu. Any and all Windows admins should look in to its proper use in their environment.
"Moderate drinking can help prevent amputated limbs" -- Abigail Zuger, NYTimes, 12/31/02
By locking down, I think they mean students can go in and randomly format the drive like they could in a stock Win9x setup.
They also mention that they like linux because it's easy to give to students. They don't have to worry about costs or licensing, they just hand the students a CD and they're on their way.
"We'd rather explain how things work. We do that by taking things apart and putting them back together again, rather than just showing people how to use particular GUIs that other people have designed. It's our belief that open-source software better explains those concepts," he said.
That seems pretty logical to me. The article really wasn't about taking away freedom at all.
The man who trades freedom for security does not deserve nor will he ever receive either. - Benjamin Franklin
Yes, you *could* use windows policy editor, but there are some major issues with it (having just locked down a standalone windows box for kiosk use I'm well versed in the pain of poledit for Win 2000..)
Note that policy editor is now primarily designed for a computer in a Active directory tree - without active directory you have to edit a "local" policy, ie edit the registry directly.
A disclaimer: maybe an active directory policy is nicer to play with, I don't know - local policies were enought of a pain for me as it was..
here's the fun with local policies..
firstly - the policies affect ALL users, INCLUDING the administrator. (WTF?!?!? you say?) so.. lock out all registry tools, disable "command prompt" and run on the start menu - and you're screwed - no more windows administration. time to reformat the box. (or at least attempt to "rescue disk" it..
second - policies quite often are applied in REAL TIME. hmm.. disable registry editing.. (screen flashes) - oh bugger, policy editor has stopped working..
The way to get around this is to remove access to the %winnt%/system32/GroupPolicy dir for the administrator (that's right, you remove access to the root user to prevent the policy applying to that user.) of course, this dir has to be accessible to make any changes. And the changes apply immediately. Forget to reapply the restictions to the admin user and it's reformat time, again.
if you want to use policy editor I suggest having a recovery cd lying around, as I guarantee you *will* be locked out of your system, unless you're extremely careful.
I love windows security, it rocks.
If all you want is to be an MCSE, then why waste you time with college? You can take a weekend course for a few hundred bucks (instead of 4+ years for several thousand dollars). This quote from the article by Dr. Chris McDonald of UWA pretty much sums it up:
Exactly. Showing someone how to point and click isn't teaching them anything. It's only training them how to use someone else's tools (and there are books that can teach you that in 24 hours). Real computer science education, where you gain a fundamental understanding of both high and low level concepts of the computer requires more than just clicking a start button.People have been saying for years that Slashdotters don't read the article, so I thought that I'd test the theory. I'd submitted the story and highlighted something insignificant about the article in the submission. Browsing through this page, I see lots of people discussing merely what I wrote at the top - 'locking down' students. If people actually read the article, they'd see that it was more about teaching software development in an open source environment, and also the fact that they can give free Linux cds to the students to replicate their training systems at home.
What I'd like to know is - how can the Slashdot Effect exist when no-one clicks through to read the article?
This karma-reducing social experiment was proudly brought to you by kNIGits in Australia.
"Dr McDonald said in teaching open-source platforms to students it is important not to "just ram open-source issues down their throats. It's important to explain why there is a difference in philosophy, why it's reasonable to not to totally tread the path of one particular vendor, one particular monopoly."
I wonder WHICH monopoly he refers to?
I think it's important to teach skills and not languages. The platform shouldn't really matter. But what I read there is "we're gonna teach non-proprietary solutions". I don't think the OS matters for the undergrads.
I learned programming on Solaris and later Linux, and honestly there's no real difference between them for 95% of what you do in school, since you are NOT administering the box, and the interesting tools are opensource, portable, and provided by the school - you just have to USE them. This probably holds true for BSD as well.
I do believe that we shouldn't be teaching kids to develop in MSVC++ and MFC. I think that's god-awful - we should learn to use makefiles and know the dependencies in our code, and not waste time on things that aren't portable to our jobs, on a yet-to-be-determined platform.
>The Uni of New South Wales Computer Science and
/J
>Engineering department has been running
>unix/linux for years, no duel boot.
Well, duel boot, that is something I would like to run. Just install windows and a few linux/BSD dists, turn on the machine and leave it over night. Then we finally could settle this thing.
Ps My bet is on that spiky fish eventhough that little red bastard with the fork might be nasty. I mean, how hard can it be to beat a geek from redmond or a penguin? Hmm, could be a whole army of penguins of course, well that might get tricky.
(You all know what comes next:) BUT, I don't think that Windows should be completely eliminated. Windows is still the de-facto standard in industry and universities owe it to their students to give them skills they can use. It is also essential that universities maintain neutrality in the sense that they do not give the impression that they are promoting one system over another - a university's role is to eductate and do research, not dictate what the world will do or follow current fads.
Before everyone gets the wrong idea; I use the same argument to motivate the use of Linux at the university where I work (it is a very good way to teach students UNIX rather than only teaching them Windows). So what is needed is a balance.
At my school the math section has linux-only PCs for the students. The CS section has Solaris (SUN) and Windows-only machines, and they justified the no-linux by saying that the companies use Windows so no point in teaching Linux to the students. I think they got it all wrong: more and more companies are migrating to Linux, and in a couple of years there will be a need for Linux experts.
GNUWin: open your Windows!
I worked as a tech at a local high school for a year.
I can tell you that the lab tech who obsesses over Quake is going to lose. You've got 0 budget and the products to secure the network are chosen by unqualified people who got the job of head of IT in the district because in 1985 they were teaching second grade and happened to tinker with an Apple II at home...
The smart ones just secure against the stupid people and look for the smarter ones and bargain with them that you'll let them play quake if they keep out of the pr0n and viruses, and they kind of keep their eye out for stupid people trying to ruin it all for them.
BTW, Rarely are the colleges any better. They have better heads of departments, but their main workers are CS students without the motivation to find a higher paying job in industry. (I generalize, of course, but I haven't seen many exceptions.)
_____
(OBTopic: nice win for Linux. I always thought that Linux might make a superior corporate solution for precisely these reasons. In a non-development environment, only a system administrator should be able to install an applicaition, for example.
However, I know that Apple tried to play both sides of the fence as well, and they never had much success breaking into the desktop side of Multinationalica.)