Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 18 submissions in the queue.
posted by LaminatorX on Wednesday August 13 2014, @11:42AM   Printer-friendly
from the right-tool-for-the-job dept.

Robert Pogson reports:

Recent news about the popularity of Chromebooks with schools may seem puzzling.

Schools in Hillsborough, New Jersey decided to make an experiment out of its own program. Beginning in 2012, 200 students were given iPads and 200 students were given Chromebooks. After receiving feedback from both students and teachers, the schools sold off their iPads and bought 4,600 Chromebooks.

After all, a keyboard is a great input device and writing is one of the three "Rs" but why not just [buy] a notebook PC? The answer is that the high cost of maintaining the legacy PC is too great. Keeping content on the server makes the job easier and with Chromebooks, schools don't even need to own the server.

...then there's the malware, the slowing down, the re-re-rebooting with that other OS.
That makes the ChromeBook a winner in education and probably a lot of organizations large and small, even consumers. Of course, they could get those benefits with GNU/Linux but it would take more technical knowledge. Again Chromebooks win.

See iPad vs. Chromebook For Students

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 4, Insightful) by DeathMonkey on Wednesday August 13 2014, @06:50PM

    by DeathMonkey (1380) on Wednesday August 13 2014, @06:50PM (#80929) Journal

    What kills me is that we're starting this whole loop all over again. People thinking mainframes are godly without realizing the fact that in being a thin client you're offloading control to whoever has the server. This shit is why we deprecated them in the first place.
     
    I think you are begging the question about whether mainframes are actually worse.
     
    Did we get rid of them because they were worse in general. Or, did we get rid of them because local computing resources became much less expensive than networked computing resources.
     

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +2  
       Insightful=1, Interesting=1, Total=2
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   4  
  • (Score: 2) by Lagg on Wednesday August 13 2014, @09:43PM

    by Lagg (105) on Wednesday August 13 2014, @09:43PM (#80981) Homepage Journal

    Both really. Thin clients became pointless and the cost of mainframes was no longer worth it as well as the fact that thick clients are simply easier to deal with for specialized tasks, they're technically and economically superior. They still are too since even chromebooks have been proven to not need "The Cloud" and run just fine given a decent linux distro or even Windows. This Cloud nonsense is mainframes without the technical or economical advantage. It's stupid marketing for stupid people, and yet it's being bought into.

    --
    http://lagg.me [lagg.me] 🗿