Windows Cheap Enough For $2B Aussie Laptop Deal

An anonymous reader writes "Windows-based netbooks aren't too expensive to be ruled out of the Aussie government's billion dollar promise to give a laptop to every school-aged child, according to several education departments. The admission follows an earlier report that open source machines based on Ubuntu or Mandriva are the only option to deliver up to four million computers to students for under $2 billion. Microsoft itself claimed it will keep costs per unit down by hosting a lot of the educational software in the cloud rather than on the netbook devices."

Comments

Too bad there won't be a useful

[Anonymous Coward]

internet connection for each of those school children.

Re:Too bad there won't be a useful

[lysergic.acid]

well, since they're netbooks, not desktops, you'd need ubiquitous wireless access in order to match the functionality that would be provided with Ubuntu + OpenOffice. and considering that Australia's one of the few developed countries behind the U.S. in internet infrastructure, that seems very unlikely.

to get the full benefits of the hardware, you pretty much have to go with FOSS or spend a heck of a lot more money.

Re:Too bad there won't be a useful

[unit8765]

No useful internet because of internet filtering in Australia.

$500 a "netbook"?

[Anonymous Coward]

Must be some pretty damn good machines to pay $500 a unit on an order of 4 million units.

Re:$500 a "netbook"?

[Akzo]

Things outide the US are generally more expensive, not including shipping/customs costs and currency differences.

The Pusher

[Forrest Kyle]

Drugs are always affordable when the dealer is trying to get you hooked.

Educational applications in the cloud

[Bruce Perens]

Educational applications on a web server are nothing new. It's funny, though, that Windows would need them. I have one of these small-cheap-light laptops that cost $350 and is intended for use with Windows "only for web browsing and email". I put Debian on it. There's only one thing I have found that it can't do: build the Linux kernel quickly. It's kind of slow at that, but it works. OpenOffice is no problem, etc.

But with a cloud, you can tie all of those kids into a network that Microsoft will be able to monetize, propogandize, etc.

Bruce

Re:Educational applications in the cloud

[Rene S. Hollan]

Duh.

Besides, "code you have on the box beats code that might be available".

What's sad here isn't that Mr. Perens comment is, well, common sense, but rather that so many don't see it as so obvious.

Re:Educational applications in the cloud

[TheRaven64]

You miss the point of this statement:

Microsoft itself claimed it will keep costs per unit down by hosting a lot of the educational software in the cloud rather than on the netbook devices."

It will keep the costs for the hardware down by hosting the applications elsewhere. Or, to put it another way, they will host education apps online for free (now) so that the required hardware specs are lower, allowing more of the total to be spent on (Microsoft) software used to access the (.NET, Windows-only) server side software (which may not remain free for long after the initial investment on Windows laptops has been made and you are locked in).

Re:Educational applications in the cloud

[Bruce Perens]

That's what "monetize" meant :-)

I don't think they're reducing the cost of the hardware, though. $350 USD pays for an Acer Aspire One with 1G RAM and 160G disk at retail. And you can probably get a much better price in a bulk purchase. I think they are budgeting AU $500 per unit. That leaves a lot of money for Microsoft even in the initial purchase.

Save money

[lordharsha]

Wouldn't it be more efficient to ditch Windows and use the extra money to give laptops to more children?

Re:Save money

[Yfrwlf]

Even if Windows was given to them for free, which it very well could be, Microsoft would still get a lot from it and the school district, parents, and students would still lose in various ways.

Teachers were probably the reason.

[Zombie Ryushu]

Of course.

I have a feeling that is what the case will be. The teachers who have Windows desktops in their classrooms took one look at Linux and went "No. You give us Windows or the boxes will wind up collecting dust in the back of the classroom." And that was probably was what alot of the Independent Education software vendors said too. "We have thousands of man hours and workers tied up in this Windows only education software. We will not port our software to Linux. Put Windows on your boxes or we will take our business elsewhere."

Re:Teachers were probably the reason.

[QuantumG]

Yeah, because ISVs often dictate the terms for government contracts.

Re:Teachers were probably the reason.

[jbolden]

QuantumG is correct also look at the quantities. 4m. 4m units you get to set terms to software vendors.

Re:Teachers were probably the reason.

[UncleTogie]

What the Departments and consultants would be saying is...

So counter those arguments as thus:

1. The teachers that get sent off for Windows "training" come back nearly as clueless as to usage to make it a laugh at best. Just pick your apps, train a few staff, and have them take it from there. You tell the teachers what to click, and they do so. This is NO different than Windows or OSX. Once those boxes are set up and networked, there is VERY little a teacher needs to do that'd require anything above "user" level.

2. Key phrase here is "teachers pulled from the classroom". If they're already teaching, then they've already been trained on whichever system they're using that year. It isn't like they're going to be installing RAID arrays and other hardware. That's usually saved for the hardware vendor. Once again, this is showing someone how to show someone what to click. No worries.

Here it doesn't matter if Windows or Ubuntu get picked as they both serve the purpose well.

Sure, were it not for the MS plan to host this in "the cloud"... {Oooo, do I hate that 2-word phrase. It's a network, ya doofs. Fraggin' buzzword bingo. {/soapbox}}

Internet access isn't cheap in Australia. Unless they're considering local hosting, MS's apps will eat bandwidth for no reason other than to run a word processor. Multiply that by just a few hundred students, and it starts looking ugly for whomever's paying the ISP. Multiply this by the number of students in Australia, and it's downright nasty.

I could care less which OS they use, as long as they're using SOME sense about it.

What a great alternative

[meist3r]

Owning a netbook that merely runs a basic version of an operating sytem that the company itself wants to get rid off and as the only reason to chose over a full-scale FOSS option I get an MS version of Google Apps? No thanks, take the Linux computers and spend whatever you're saving on some Tux-savvy teachers.

Cloud == Cheaper??

[Lord Byron II]

I don't think so. It's just a nice way to guarantee that the government will have to buy and maintain some MS servers.

Computer != Education

[Anonymous Coward]

Sure, it's a tool, but wouldn't that $2 billion be better spent on smaller class sizes, better teachers, etc.?

Re:What a surprise

[Yfrwlf]

If it came down to it, M$ would give it to them for free rather than see Linux being used of course. That's why it's up to intelligent employees to realize what the long term costs are, and what they are doing by "selling" the Windows platform to students, so free for them would still be an excellent deal for Microsoft in numerous ways.

Re:Pay now or pay later... you still pay the MS pi

[Yfrwlf]

It's simple, Linux = free. Windows = cost. They want money, they're a business, that's why they push their product. Even if they sold it to them for free, M$ would still benefit from them using it.

So, I don't need to see a cost analysis, and I definitely don't need to see one from M$ to try to justify their existence to me. Money should go into FOSS through paid development, bounties, and support. That should be what all institutions are geared towards, but instead they are stuck in the past.

"Here's a government contract to make the FOSS equivalent of Reader Rabbit for students for our schools. We are now taking bids."

That's the kind of stuff everyone should be seeing from their governments. The amount of money that every single school district spends on individual purchases for close source software, oftentimes it being the same software over and over and over again for all the licenses, would be enough money to pay developers to program every single piece of open source software schools would ever need all over the entire world a hundred times over, and what's more it would be a long-term investment instead of a flash in the pan. When governments wake up to this, the world will be a better place, but they won't wake up until citizens start waking them.

P.S., of course you can apply it to all other branches of governments, to businesses, and everyone else. The amount of money thrown away for temporary software orgasms is astronomical. More cooperation is needed for the new age of software development.