Man this guy certainly defines the term fanboy, he absolutely hates things that even remotely look like they might be successful. Let it go DED, we get it, nothing is better than Apple. If you think IDC is incorrect than stop using them as a reference in your stories when their numbers serve you. Also I've seen first hand more and more schools here in Switzerland using ChromeBooks, am I imagining this, so Zurich, Luzern and Zug school districts aren't going with the ChromeBook. There is plenty of market for both platforms to survive seccesfully, and there was defiantly no need to go into such detail as to why ChromeBooks aren't actually doing well in the educational market space. We all know Apple is still on top.
Look at you.
Fighting for your right to be sold invasive, unintuitive, badly thought-out products (under the moniker of ‘openness’) that are propped up with lies, inaccurate information and false advertising.
Searched on-line and found an interesting "white paper" from IDC purporting that Google Chrome books were ideal for education market. Interesting to see that it only took 1 year for this prediction to become true. IDC should start providing stock tips since they appear to be able to see the future especially when they get to be the sole arbiter of the truth.
Kind of a poor comparison. $279 Chromebook vs $259 for an Ipad. It is painfully obvious that you get a larger screen and a keyboard. It would have been a better idea to compare it to a Chrome/Windows/Android tablet. Learning to type on a keyboard is very important. Isn't that why they won't put touch on the macbooks and the imacs?
When I read the original IDC headline I was wondering why schools would buy expensive, underpowered, crippled do-nothing laptop wannabes when better, cheaper alternatives were commonly available. Thanks DED for taking it apart and exposing it for the piece of fiction it is.
I can only speak anecdotally, as my wife is a teacher of 20 years in NYC and Phoenix. The school she just began working at has a fledgling chromebook program, and they seem to be popular with the teachers for a number of reasons. A keyboard is certainly one of the reasons, and the fact that they do certain limited things rather well for a good price. DED gives the impression that a chromebook costs $300 in his article, but the reality is you can get them for well under $200. I would imagine $150 or less in bulk pricing.
One thing that doesn't seem to be addressed by FT is that, in many instances, the Chromebooks are not in any way replacing the macs the teachers use, and the school also has an iPad program. Personally, I see them as a good cheap solution for elementary-grade students who need to work with google docs and other basic tasks. I do not see them as particularly useful for other tasks - I really have no idea why DED started into the business market as there simply is no flexibility in what they can do.
Not too long ago we were all talking about the OLPC initiative. The Chromebook is probably the best best for fulfilling such an ambition. An iPad is still not a notebook, even if it is more powerful and can do more. iOS has too many limitations out of the box that make it challenging to replace a laptop. No keyboard, no pointing device, slightly pricey and fragile, extremely limited printing support - all of these things would give me pause if I were planning on distributing a technology to a bunch of young students. I would rather have a limited set of iPads for use in the classroom, or to be checked out by students if necessary.
But - what i see is that the chromebooks are being used by the students (including my 8 year old who "wants one"), which is important. I don't care how crazy great the tech is, if it's not being taken advantage of it's a waste of money. It's also due somewhat to the fact that the school I'm referring to has their s**t together and is making sure the teachers are well-trained in using the technologies at hand. At my wife's previous school, they had a bunch of aging PC's that did nothing, and a classroom or two that got grants for netbooks, which also ended up being shelved. The iPad mini's they ultimately got were also underutilized, as they had no real model of how to use them in the classroom. So each teacher seemed to pick their favorite apps. Some of those apps even had educational value.
I see a lot of people rushing to defend DED's article (or DED himself, hard to say sometimes). One of the defenders pointed out how the article was about IDC being a bunch of liars. Very true, but the title of the article, in classic DED fashion, gives the reader the impression that it's about chrome books vs. Apple in education, and the beginning of the article addresses that subject. Then, also in classic DED fashion, the article goes off the rails into another subject entirely, dedicates 70% of it's content to that other subject, throws in tons of nice pics and charts, and even self-quotes the author's previous works (which I recall DED getting some flak about many moons ago). Ultimately it loses the plot and becomes a hit piece directed at the media and Apple's competitors, much like every article DED produces. Even though I agree with many of his points, his writing is considered an "Editorial" for a reason.
Google needs to end its fascination with putting every piece of productivity software in a tab of a browser and actually release a real office suite that works best on the Linux OS Chromebook is based on, as well as windows and Mac.
Microsoft has the right idea, and has succeeded and removing Google from the business equation. They transformed office into a service that ties into cloud services like office online and onedrive.
Apple isn't far behind now that iCloud Drive has launched. It's just not competitively priced. Sure you can get iWork for free, but it's not entirely robust in business and Macs are pricey for lower end schools.
Chromebooks have traction in education because it's dirt cheap. There's really not much more to it. They are great machines for browsing the web, I owned the first Samsung model and loved it. It has no place to go in the business world unless Google makes a better productivity experience.
"The Chromebook schools that certain journalists have happened to identify in their research profiling education sales (just kidding!) are described as districts who couldn't afford iPads, making them prime targets for Google's philanthropy."
Except for a few well-endowed private schools, I have never heard of a school district that didn't feel strapped for funds. Los Angeles and New York City, to name two, don't strike me as districts that "can't afford iPads."
"Fallout over the Los Angeles school district's $1.3-billion plan to provide iPads to every student intensified Tuesday with the revelation that the FBI is conducting a criminal investigation into the failed effort."
Crossing the paywall to read the FT is almost as masochistic as doing the same at the WSJ. And paying the same reactionary fools - ultimately - in both cases.
If anything Google is doubling down on Android and wants Androiod everywhere.
Roughlydrafted started outlining problems with Windows and within Microsoft a good 2-4 years before it was obvious that Microsoft was in significant trouble. At the time, there were people commenting that it was embarrassing to even suggest that Microsoft would ever not run the world. You might recall that Windows Vista had billboards erected too.
Also, there was a time not too long ago that Apple was considered to have its "golden age" in the late 80s/early 90s, yet within 5 years the company was in serious trouble. Google is making many of the disastrously wrong mistakes that Apple made in the early 90s, except that Apple was selling hardware tied to a dying platform at a profit, while today Google is selling ads tied to a dying platform at a profit
More interesting than the fact that Google erected an expensive billboard to promote Android 5 are the facts that a) Android 5 didn't come out a year ago as expected b) Android 5 is still making Google very little, as most of its profits come from desktop PC search ads c) Android 5 targets lower end devices rather than having any real ambitions to grow into profitable market segments.
Also, half of Android (the only half that makes any money) just reported a collapse in sales, and looks to be overtaken by the players that make nothing, including LG and Xiaomi. And the people who love Google and Android think this is great because it will result in more cheap devices. Sort of like how Mac fans back in the early 90s thought Clones would help Apple rather than ruin the ability of Apple to make any money. Because fans aren't often financially savvy and seem to think that money & profits don't matter as long as they can buy cheap stuff.
The delusion that you think you are seeing is actually because you are on the wrong side of the delusion field.
"Google's Chromebook initiative originated before the iPad, it just has never gained any real traction as a product."
This first part of this claim is false. The iPad launched in April 2010. Google's CR-48 prototype launched in December 2010, and the first commercially-available Chromebooks didn't arrive until the following year.
Google did announce Chrome OS before Apple announced the iPad, but this is a meaningless given that both initiatives were in development before their initial reveals, and it's anyone's guess which company started work first. (My guess is Apple.)
I can only speak anecdotally, as my wife is a teacher of 20 years in NYC and Phoenix. The school she just began working at has a fledgling chromebook program, and they seem to be popular with the teachers for a number of reasons. A keyboard is certainly one of the reasons, and the fact that they do certain limited things rather well for a good price. DED gives the impression that a chromebook costs $300 in his article, but the reality is you can get them for well under $200. I would imagine $150 or less in bulk pricing.
[There's a graphic (and a link to the source page) in the article that shows what Google thinks Chrombooks start at for education, along with a link. So you say that's "DED giving the impression" of what the price is while you "would imagine" the price is something else. Ballsy! ]
One thing that doesn't seem to be addressed by FT is that, in many instances, the Chromebooks are not in any way replacing the macs the teachers use, and the school also has an iPad program. Personally, I see them as a good cheap solution for elementary-grade students who need to work with google docs and other basic tasks. I do not see them as particularly useful for other tasks - I really have no idea why DED started into the business market as there simply is no flexibility in what they can do.
[Because the only way Chromebooks are going to make any money to sustain the platform is if Google can move licensees beyond small shipments into education at super cheap prices that can't make money. And so far, the answer is no. It's context to examine why. You seem to be trying to explain why that's not necessary or shouldn't be examined. The article outlines facts, not an opinion of what "should" happen or "how things could be okay if we don't critically examine what's going on"]
Even though I agree with many of his points, his writing is considered an "Editorial" for a reason.
[It was published as an editorial. The original FT article was published as "news." Interesting you're upset about one and not the other. Because this editorial doesn't really espouse an opinion, it delivers facts. FT and IDC are pushing an agenda that is misleading and not supported by facts, a theme which this "editorial" clearly outlines from the headline to the lead and throughout the rest of the article.]
Man this guy certainly defines the term fanboy, he absolutely hates things that even remotely look like they might be successful. Let it go DED, we get it, nothing is better than Apple. If you think IDC is incorrect than stop using them as a reference in your stories when their numbers serve you. Also I've seen first hand more and more schools here in Switzerland using ChromeBooks, am I imagining this, so Zurich, Luzern and Zug school districts aren't going with the ChromeBook. There is plenty of market for both platforms to survive seccesfully, and there was defiantly no need to go into such detail as to why ChromeBooks aren't actually doing well in the educational market space. We all know Apple is still on top.
I doubt that Switzerland is even relevant to this conversation, but I except your anecdotal evidence; Switzerland's student age population would be less than 25% of California's. While I'm neutral on Chromebooks for education, Daniel appears to be correct that they are being sold as current generation netbooks by the usual PC builders. My opinion at one time matched Daniel's but for a different reason; he believes Google will deprecate Android to move to Chrome OS to avoid IP issues with Oracle. I believe that Google will move to Chrome OS to regain control of its mobile OS, which it has mostly lost with Android and Android forks; i.e., little in the way of profits for all the marketshare gained. But, maybe just attachment to services is acceptable for an advertising company.
In all ways, I see MS as being much stronger, in higher education especially, and as prices decline, I expect that Surface will be the true competitor to Apple in education outside of primary grades. Of course Google will earn a big place at the table, but I doubt that there will be all that much benefit to Google for that. I don't see Chromebooks of very much value at all in business or enterprise; a cheap PC could do the same.
Oracle's case against Google is still lumbering through the courts, and it's certainly possible that Google will prevail.
It would, however, be pretty irresponsible for Google to not cover its ass, and we are seeing plenty of evidence of that as Andy Rubin leaves, the Chrome guy takes over
Do you see a time when Chrome might emerge as a full blown touch interface mobile OS and start replacing or paralleling Android as a free (or maybe not free this time) product for OEMs the likes of Samsung et al? Last I checked they have Android apps running under Chrome.
If you already wrote about this just give me a link please
In all ways, I see MS as being much stronger, in higher education especially, and as prices decline, I expect that Surface will be the true competitor to Apple in education outside of primary grades. Of course Google will earn a big place at the table, but I doubt that there will be all that much benefit to Google for that. I don't see Chromebooks of very much value at all in business or enterprise; a cheap PC could do the same.
All very interesting. I suspect you are correct about a fight back to relevance by Microsoft in mobile. Microsoft still have their not so secret weapon too, hordes of Microsoft certified IT people itching to be able to throw their weight around again. Anecdotally, I just witnessed my wife's local (and very large) Real Estate company start pushing Microsoft Cloud and OWA on all their Realtors' iPad and iPhone users. After decades of forcing the use of PCs, Macs have finally crept in, in large numbers thanks to the MLS finally being platform agnostic and of course iPhones dominate mobile now. So these poor IT folks have had to get the hands dirty adding drivers for company printers for all these OS X users, always months after PC users of course. I played around with the OWA crap for a while then forwarded Outlook's mail to my wife's iCloud account.
...However, thanks to AI for teaching me a new word: "tendentiously". I had to look that one up!
Nice to know (I suppose) what is meant so I don't have to enquire whilst consuming fine beverages and conversing with my gentleman friends at 'the club' although I fear they may incorrectly opine my utterance to be a foreshortened bout of Tourette's syndrome ¡
All very interesting. I suspect you are correct about a fight back to relevance by Microsoft in mobile. Microsoft still have their not so secret weapon too, hordes of Microsoft certified IT people itching to be able to throw their weight around again. Anecdotally, I just witnessed my wife's local (and very large) Real Estate company start pushing Microsoft Cloud and OWA on all their Realtors' iPad and iPhone users. After decades of forcing the use of PCs, Macs have finally crept in, in large numbers thanks to the MLS finally being platform agnostic and of course iPhones dominate mobile now. So these poor IT folks have had to get the hands dirty adding drivers for company printers for all these OS X users, always months after PC users of course. I played around with the OWA crap for a while then forwarded Outlook's mail to my wife's iCloud account.
I don't think MS is in as bad a shape long term in mobile as reported, but they certainly have missed the easy money. Still, there will be a reckoning in the future where mobile will mostly replace the PC and if MS doesn't screw that up, and if they can keep clawing back mobile marketshare, they will be a viable player.
Whose big in mesh networks? That's who I would watch for disruption. Billions of current mobile devices can play, and it could very well end up being the people's network without all the corporation involvement.
I can only speak anecdotally, as my wife is a teacher of 20 years in NYC and Phoenix. The school she just began working at has a fledgling chromebook program, and they seem to be popular with the teachers for a number of reasons. A keyboard is certainly one of the reasons, and the fact that they do certain limited things rather well for a good price. DED gives the impression that a chromebook costs $300 in his article, but the reality is you can get them for well under $200. I would imagine $150 or less in bulk pricing.
One thing that doesn't seem to be addressed by FT is that, in many instances, the Chromebooks are not in any way replacing the macs the teachers use, and the school also has an iPad program. Personally, I see them as a good cheap solution for elementary-grade students who need to work with google docs and other basic tasks. I do not see them as particularly useful for other tasks - I really have no idea why DED started into the business market as there simply is no flexibility in what they can do.
Not too long ago we were all talking about the OLPC initiative. The Chromebook is probably the best best for fulfilling such an ambition. An iPad is still not a notebook, even if it is more powerful and can do more. iOS has too many limitations out of the box that make it challenging to replace a laptop. No keyboard, no pointing device, slightly pricey and fragile, extremely limited printing support - all of these things would give me pause if I were planning on distributing a technology to a bunch of young students. I would rather have a limited set of iPads for use in the classroom, or to be checked out by students if necessary.
But - what i see is that the chromebooks are being used by the students (including my 8 year old who "wants one"), which is important. I don't care how crazy great the tech is, if it's not being taken advantage of it's a waste of money. It's also due somewhat to the fact that the school I'm referring to has their s**t together and is making sure the teachers are well-trained in using the technologies at hand. At my wife's previous school, they had a bunch of aging PC's that did nothing, and a classroom or two that got grants for netbooks, which also ended up being shelved. The iPad mini's they ultimately got were also underutilized, as they had no real model of how to use them in the classroom. So each teacher seemed to pick their favorite apps. Some of those apps even had educational value.
I see a lot of people rushing to defend DED's article (or DED himself, hard to say sometimes). One of the defenders pointed out how the article was about IDC being a bunch of liars. Very true, but the title of the article, in classic DED fashion, gives the reader the impression that it's about chrome books vs. Apple in education, and the beginning of the article addresses that subject. Then, also in classic DED fashion, the article goes off the rails into another subject entirely, dedicates 70% of it's content to that other subject, throws in tons of nice pics and charts, and even self-quotes the author's previous works (which I recall DED getting some flak about many moons ago). Ultimately it loses the plot and becomes a hit piece directed at the media and Apple's competitors, much like every article DED produces. Even though I agree with many of his points, his writing is considered an "Editorial" for a reason.
To the last paragraph first. DED's work serves two purposes, firstly it is almost always mostly correct in the facts and secondly it also is intended as entertainment. I feel he succeeds in both areas very well for most AI readers who are Apple enthusiasts.
As to the educational aspects, I was also a teacher. In fact it was from that role I got into computers in the UK in the mid to late 1970's and went onto own Apple dealerships. I witnessed the educational systems start of with Apple then a massive anti-Apple movement began, around the same time as IBM cut off VT access to mainframes in corporations and pushed in their own PCs. In the educational sector the push was for cheaper and home grown in many cases and the BBC Micro was born from Acorn. It was inevitable that a low cost product that did what was needed would sell better.
Even as an Apple evangelist I have always been disappointed that Apple has always IMHO messed up education as a market and all that means to future users' future buying choices. Apple have released many E versions as we all know but the 'we never sell a cheap product' mantra simply meant these were semi limited versions of full blown Apple gear and too costly for real volume. Having been both sides of the fence so to speak, I wish Apple had made a low end product range, albeit their usual build quality, for education. Heck I wish they even had a kit such as Raspberry! Physics teachers would have a ball!
Comments
Man this guy certainly defines the term fanboy, he absolutely hates things that even remotely look like they might be successful. Let it go DED, we get it, nothing is better than Apple. If you think IDC is incorrect than stop using them as a reference in your stories when their numbers serve you. Also I've seen first hand more and more schools here in Switzerland using ChromeBooks, am I imagining this, so Zurich, Luzern and Zug school districts aren't going with the ChromeBook. There is plenty of market for both platforms to survive seccesfully, and there was defiantly no need to go into such detail as to why ChromeBooks aren't actually doing well in the educational market space. We all know Apple is still on top.
Look at you.
Fighting for your right to be sold invasive, unintuitive, badly thought-out products (under the moniker of ‘openness’) that are propped up with lies, inaccurate information and false advertising.
And not a single point in the article countered.
You're not going to cry, are you?
Thanks DED for keeping the "marketeers" honest.
http://static.googleusercontent.com/intl/en/chrome/assets/education/pdf/IDC-WP-Quantifying.the.Economic.Value.of.Chromebooks.for.K-12.Education-042013.pdf
I can only speak anecdotally, as my wife is a teacher of 20 years in NYC and Phoenix. The school she just began working at has a fledgling chromebook program, and they seem to be popular with the teachers for a number of reasons. A keyboard is certainly one of the reasons, and the fact that they do certain limited things rather well for a good price. DED gives the impression that a chromebook costs $300 in his article, but the reality is you can get them for well under $200. I would imagine $150 or less in bulk pricing.
One thing that doesn't seem to be addressed by FT is that, in many instances, the Chromebooks are not in any way replacing the macs the teachers use, and the school also has an iPad program. Personally, I see them as a good cheap solution for elementary-grade students who need to work with google docs and other basic tasks. I do not see them as particularly useful for other tasks - I really have no idea why DED started into the business market as there simply is no flexibility in what they can do.
Not too long ago we were all talking about the OLPC initiative. The Chromebook is probably the best best for fulfilling such an ambition. An iPad is still not a notebook, even if it is more powerful and can do more. iOS has too many limitations out of the box that make it challenging to replace a laptop. No keyboard, no pointing device, slightly pricey and fragile, extremely limited printing support - all of these things would give me pause if I were planning on distributing a technology to a bunch of young students. I would rather have a limited set of iPads for use in the classroom, or to be checked out by students if necessary.
But - what i see is that the chromebooks are being used by the students (including my 8 year old who "wants one"), which is important. I don't care how crazy great the tech is, if it's not being taken advantage of it's a waste of money. It's also due somewhat to the fact that the school I'm referring to has their s**t together and is making sure the teachers are well-trained in using the technologies at hand. At my wife's previous school, they had a bunch of aging PC's that did nothing, and a classroom or two that got grants for netbooks, which also ended up being shelved. The iPad mini's they ultimately got were also underutilized, as they had no real model of how to use them in the classroom. So each teacher seemed to pick their favorite apps. Some of those apps even had educational value.
I see a lot of people rushing to defend DED's article (or DED himself, hard to say sometimes). One of the defenders pointed out how the article was about IDC being a bunch of liars. Very true, but the title of the article, in classic DED fashion, gives the reader the impression that it's about chrome books vs. Apple in education, and the beginning of the article addresses that subject. Then, also in classic DED fashion, the article goes off the rails into another subject entirely, dedicates 70% of it's content to that other subject, throws in tons of nice pics and charts, and even self-quotes the author's previous works (which I recall DED getting some flak about many moons ago). Ultimately it loses the plot and becomes a hit piece directed at the media and Apple's competitors, much like every article DED produces. Even though I agree with many of his points, his writing is considered an "Editorial" for a reason.
Microsoft has the right idea, and has succeeded and removing Google from the business equation. They transformed office into a service that ties into cloud services like office online and onedrive.
Apple isn't far behind now that iCloud Drive has launched. It's just not competitively priced. Sure you can get iWork for free, but it's not entirely robust in business and Macs are pricey for lower end schools.
Chromebooks have traction in education because it's dirt cheap. There's really not much more to it. They are great machines for browsing the web, I owned the first Samsung model and loved it. It has no place to go in the business world unless Google makes a better productivity experience.
"The Chromebook schools that certain journalists have happened to identify in their research profiling education sales (just kidding!) are described as districts who couldn't afford iPads, making them prime targets for Google's philanthropy."
Except for a few well-endowed private schools, I have never heard of a school district that didn't feel strapped for funds. Los Angeles and New York City, to name two, don't strike me as districts that "can't afford iPads."
For a different perspective, here's a piece by a school IT administrator in the UK: Going Google: Part 1 %u2013 Why Chromebooks are the future of school IT.
http://www.classthink.com/2014/10/08/going-google-part-1-why-chromebooks-are-the-future-of-school-it/
"FBI seizes LAUSD records related to troubled iPad program"
http://www.latimes.com/local/education/la-me-lausd-ipads-20141203-story.html#page=1
"Fallout over the Los Angeles school district's $1.3-billion plan to provide iPads to every student intensified Tuesday with the revelation that the FBI is conducting a criminal investigation into the failed effort."
Crossing the paywall to read the FT is almost as masochistic as doing the same at the WSJ. And paying the same reactionary fools - ultimately - in both cases.
And yet we see this:
http://www.theverge.com/2014/11/25/7283509/this-is-googles-massive-android-billboard-in-times-square
http://androidandme.com/2014/10/news/new-android-commercials-show-off-the-fun-side-of-a-diverse-platform/
If anything Google is doubling down on Android and wants Androiod everywhere.
Roughlydrafted started outlining problems with Windows and within Microsoft a good 2-4 years before it was obvious that Microsoft was in significant trouble. At the time, there were people commenting that it was embarrassing to even suggest that Microsoft would ever not run the world. You might recall that Windows Vista had billboards erected too.
Also, there was a time not too long ago that Apple was considered to have its "golden age" in the late 80s/early 90s, yet within 5 years the company was in serious trouble. Google is making many of the disastrously wrong mistakes that Apple made in the early 90s, except that Apple was selling hardware tied to a dying platform at a profit, while today Google is selling ads tied to a dying platform at a profit
More interesting than the fact that Google erected an expensive billboard to promote Android 5 are the facts that a) Android 5 didn't come out a year ago as expected b) Android 5 is still making Google very little, as most of its profits come from desktop PC search ads c) Android 5 targets lower end devices rather than having any real ambitions to grow into profitable market segments.
Also, half of Android (the only half that makes any money) just reported a collapse in sales, and looks to be overtaken by the players that make nothing, including LG and Xiaomi. And the people who love Google and Android think this is great because it will result in more cheap devices. Sort of like how Mac fans back in the early 90s thought Clones would help Apple rather than ruin the ability of Apple to make any money. Because fans aren't often financially savvy and seem to think that money & profits don't matter as long as they can buy cheap stuff.
The delusion that you think you are seeing is actually because you are on the wrong side of the delusion field.
This first part of this claim is false. The iPad launched in April 2010. Google's CR-48 prototype launched in December 2010, and the first commercially-available Chromebooks didn't arrive until the following year.
Google did announce Chrome OS before Apple announced the iPad, but this is a meaningless given that both initiatives were in development before their initial reveals, and it's anyone's guess which company started work first. (My guess is Apple.)
I can only speak anecdotally, as my wife is a teacher of 20 years in NYC and Phoenix. The school she just began working at has a fledgling chromebook program, and they seem to be popular with the teachers for a number of reasons. A keyboard is certainly one of the reasons, and the fact that they do certain limited things rather well for a good price. DED gives the impression that a chromebook costs $300 in his article, but the reality is you can get them for well under $200. I would imagine $150 or less in bulk pricing.
[There's a graphic (and a link to the source page) in the article that shows what Google thinks Chrombooks start at for education, along with a link. So you say that's "DED giving the impression" of what the price is while you "would imagine" the price is something else. Ballsy! ]
One thing that doesn't seem to be addressed by FT is that, in many instances, the Chromebooks are not in any way replacing the macs the teachers use, and the school also has an iPad program. Personally, I see them as a good cheap solution for elementary-grade students who need to work with google docs and other basic tasks. I do not see them as particularly useful for other tasks - I really have no idea why DED started into the business market as there simply is no flexibility in what they can do.
[Because the only way Chromebooks are going to make any money to sustain the platform is if Google can move licensees beyond small shipments into education at super cheap prices that can't make money. And so far, the answer is no. It's context to examine why. You seem to be trying to explain why that's not necessary or shouldn't be examined. The article outlines facts, not an opinion of what "should" happen or "how things could be okay if we don't critically examine what's going on"]
Even though I agree with many of his points, his writing is considered an "Editorial" for a reason.
[It was published as an editorial. The original FT article was published as "news." Interesting you're upset about one and not the other. Because this editorial doesn't really espouse an opinion, it delivers facts. FT and IDC are pushing an agenda that is misleading and not supported by facts, a theme which this "editorial" clearly outlines from the headline to the lead and throughout the rest of the article.]
Man this guy certainly defines the term fanboy, he absolutely hates things that even remotely look like they might be successful. Let it go DED, we get it, nothing is better than Apple. If you think IDC is incorrect than stop using them as a reference in your stories when their numbers serve you. Also I've seen first hand more and more schools here in Switzerland using ChromeBooks, am I imagining this, so Zurich, Luzern and Zug school districts aren't going with the ChromeBook. There is plenty of market for both platforms to survive seccesfully, and there was defiantly no need to go into such detail as to why ChromeBooks aren't actually doing well in the educational market space. We all know Apple is still on top.
In all ways, I see MS as being much stronger, in higher education especially, and as prices decline, I expect that Surface will be the true competitor to Apple in education outside of primary grades. Of course Google will earn a big place at the table, but I doubt that there will be all that much benefit to Google for that. I don't see Chromebooks of very much value at all in business or enterprise; a cheap PC could do the same.
I disagree, it's probably much easier for a small school district to afford iPads than a large one.
Do you see a time when Chrome might emerge as a full blown touch interface mobile OS and start replacing or paralleling Android as a free (or maybe not free this time) product for OEMs the likes of Samsung et al? Last I checked they have Android apps running under Chrome.
If you already wrote about this just give me a link please
$1.3 BILLION strikes me as a pretty significant piece of change for LAUSD.
All very interesting. I suspect you are correct about a fight back to relevance by Microsoft in mobile. Microsoft still have their not so secret weapon too, hordes of Microsoft certified IT people itching to be able to throw their weight around again. Anecdotally, I just witnessed my wife's local (and very large) Real Estate company start pushing Microsoft Cloud and OWA on all their Realtors' iPad and iPhone users. After decades of forcing the use of PCs, Macs have finally crept in, in large numbers thanks to the MLS finally being platform agnostic and of course iPhones dominate mobile now. So these poor IT folks have had to get the hands dirty adding drivers for company printers for all these OS X users, always months after PC users of course. I played around with the OWA crap for a while then forwarded Outlook's mail to my wife's iCloud account.
...However, thanks to AI for teaching me a new word: "tendentiously". I had to look that one up!
Nice to know (I suppose) what is meant so I don't have to enquire whilst consuming fine beverages and conversing with my gentleman friends at 'the club' although I fear they may incorrectly opine my utterance to be a foreshortened bout of Tourette's syndrome ¡
All very interesting. I suspect you are correct about a fight back to relevance by Microsoft in mobile. Microsoft still have their not so secret weapon too, hordes of Microsoft certified IT people itching to be able to throw their weight around again. Anecdotally, I just witnessed my wife's local (and very large) Real Estate company start pushing Microsoft Cloud and OWA on all their Realtors' iPad and iPhone users. After decades of forcing the use of PCs, Macs have finally crept in, in large numbers thanks to the MLS finally being platform agnostic and of course iPhones dominate mobile now. So these poor IT folks have had to get the hands dirty adding drivers for company printers for all these OS X users, always months after PC users of course. I played around with the OWA crap for a while then forwarded Outlook's mail to my wife's iCloud account.
I don't think MS is in as bad a shape long term in mobile as reported, but they certainly have missed the easy money. Still, there will be a reckoning in the future where mobile will mostly replace the PC and if MS doesn't screw that up, and if they can keep clawing back mobile marketshare, they will be a viable player.
Whose big in mesh networks? That's who I would watch for disruption. Billions of current mobile devices can play, and it could very well end up being the people's network without all the corporation involvement.
To the last paragraph first. DED's work serves two purposes, firstly it is almost always mostly correct in the facts and secondly it also is intended as entertainment. I feel he succeeds in both areas very well for most AI readers who are Apple enthusiasts.
As to the educational aspects, I was also a teacher. In fact it was from that role I got into computers in the UK in the mid to late 1970's and went onto own Apple dealerships. I witnessed the educational systems start of with Apple then a massive anti-Apple movement began, around the same time as IBM cut off VT access to mainframes in corporations and pushed in their own PCs. In the educational sector the push was for cheaper and home grown in many cases and the BBC Micro was born from Acorn. It was inevitable that a low cost product that did what was needed would sell better.
Even as an Apple evangelist I have always been disappointed that Apple has always IMHO messed up education as a market and all that means to future users' future buying choices. Apple have released many E versions as we all know but the 'we never sell a cheap product' mantra simply meant these were semi limited versions of full blown Apple gear and too costly for real volume. Having been both sides of the fence so to speak, I wish Apple had made a low end product range, albeit their usual build quality, for education. Heck I wish they even had a kit such as Raspberry! Physics teachers would have a ball!