Ditching Microsoft Could Save Education Millions

ElvenMonkey writes "The Times Education Supplement has published the results of a BECTA (British Educational Communications and Technology Association, the Government's ICT agency) study, to be published next week, into the TCO of using Microsoft products compared to using Open Source products. The report shows an average saving of 24% per computer in schools using Open Source over those using Microsoft systems. Now if only the government wasn't insistent on locking schools into using Microsoft in arguably illegal ways."

Comments

After graduation

[Myridon]

Now our high school graduate applies for a job...

Can you use Excel?
No
Can you use Word?
No, Kedit
Can you use Windows?
No, Linux

Thanks, we'll get back to you (in a million years)...

yes, let's train our students...

[saleenS281]

Let's train our students on software that they'll never see in the workplace so when they get into the real world and someone says "what's your experience with Microsoft office?" they can respond with "uhhh... none?"

I'm *SURE* the businesses will just change to open source though and spend billions of dollars instead of outsourcing to countries who have experience with microsoft office... I mean... look how hard they're trying to keep jobs in this country right now... oh...

there's a way to get free microsoft windows

[tofucubes]

maybe schools should try it...they find a talented college kid getting locked up in prison his whole life anyway from the RIAA and make him pirate a few hundred million copies of windows for schools. http://www.microsoft.com/genuine/purchase/QualifyI nfo.aspx

Re:Further proof

[AKAImBatman]

Further proof that I am 5 to 10 years ahead of my time.

You mind filling in those of us outside your fan club who have no idea what you're talking about?

And to delve into poor form (by answering a stupid sig):

General Relativity is only a theory.

It is. Just a theory, that is. We know for a fact that it can't be 100% correct because otherwise Quantum Physics couldn't operate (which is also "just a theory"). The catch 22 on these theories is that they have been probabilistically proven to be "correct" to within a very small margin for error. This means that the theories are "mostly correct" to the best of our current knowledge.

Your obvious point of making the "Evolution is just a theory" statement sound silly doesn't work. Evolution is just as much "just a theory" as Relativity, with the exception that it has yet to produce any mathematical probablities for its correctness. Indeed, the very physics required seem to argue against the concept! Barring any undiscovered advances in the theory, the probability of an evolutionary occurance is lower than (if you'll excuse the overused analogy) a 747 being accidentally put together by a tornado storming through a junk yard.

So, instead of having such an amazingly lame signature, how about having an amazingly lame signature that links to something that argues your point? Or you could just link to an Amazon deal like myself. Or perhaps an Amazon deal that makes your point? ;-)