Apple and PAUSD Schools & Kids, posted by A parent, a resident of the Charleston Meadows neighborhood, on Jan 24, 2012 at 10:49 am
As a parent, I found out that all the computer products in the PAUSD district office and schools are Apple products, with very few exceptions. Apple products are expensive, plus most peoples' home computers are PCs. Does PAUSD really need to use Apple products? especially in a state of budget crisis? Do anyone know the reason?
Posted by MacFan, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on Jan 24, 2012 at 11:42 am
If you use a Mac for a week...try going back to a PC. I mean, honestly...try it. No, I'm not saying every Mac is perfect, but its so far and away better than PC's its not even funny. I'm not trying to start a "Mac vs. PC" war - because, that's just impossible. It would be like a UFC fighter taking on an injured earthworm. Even THAT would be more of a fair fight.
Posted by A parent, a resident of the Charleston Meadows neighborhood, on Jan 24, 2012 at 12:22 pm
We came from another district, and my kids also studied in a private school before. Never have we seen so many Apple products in those schools. In fact, never any. If Apple does give huge education discounts, why other districts didn't purchase them? Or is it because PAUSD simply has the luxury to indulge with all the tax and donation?
Posted by Never going back, a resident of the Old Palo Alto neighborhood, on Jan 24, 2012 at 2:25 pm
I'm an old fart that started on mainframes (cards!), built kit PCs, coded in assembly, worked for years on Unix systems, moved to PCs, and was stuck with PCs (company dictate). When my last PC was so overwhelmed with what I needed it to do, I was finally able to justify tossing it out and to buy my own personal iMac. I had it for years and it never froze, choked, or blinked regardless of how many tasks were running at the same time. I never had to waste endless hours updating virus software or doing general system admin... In fact, I gave it to a friend (who is still happily using it) when I upgraded a few years ago. Expensive? Depends on how you look at it. There was no maintenance or repairs and no need to replace as early as my PCs! Hours of my time saved, priceless.
I will never, ever, ever go back. And no I don't work for Apple.
Posted by Me Too, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on Jan 24, 2012 at 5:55 pm
Apple used to dominate education. I believe Dell took over the #1 spot in the 1990s based on price (and decent product); Apple last I checked was #2, the rest way behind. My guess is that most districts standardize on one or the other, to simplify training and support and to concentrate purchasing volume/discounts. My guess is that the switching cost would be material esp. since you'd have to train all the teachers on new hardware/OS and possibly software. It's a fair question (heck, any cost-saving question is fair), but I think this is a legitimate choice on the district's part.
Posted by Keri, a resident of the Charleston Meadows neighborhood, on Jan 24, 2012 at 8:35 pm
From a support perspective, Apple machines are the only way to go. You might save some bucks initially buying PCs, but then you need an army of system admins to keep the bloody PCs running. Compare the cost difference with say, at least one new system admin per site and the associated salaries/benefits/retirement costs. Macs are worth every penny.
Posted by Duveneck Parent, a resident of the Duveneck/St. Francis neighborhood, on Jan 24, 2012 at 9:19 pm
I always wondered, so I asked one of the tech people at my school and they told me that their manager came from a pc company. They said he initially wanted to use PCs to save money but changed his mind pretty quickly. The tech said that they spend most of their maintenance time on the few pcs they have -- they get lots of viruses. They also said the pc laptops last about two years before they start to break while the macs last five or six. Sounds like the district is making a pretty good investment to me.
Posted by sorry, a resident of the Crescent Park neighborhood, on Jan 25, 2012 at 8:29 am
It all depends on the size of memory and processing speed and storage units. If you need to install Unix to run serious programming software,then both pcs and apple are expensive, if you just give those computers for kids to play,then simple not expensive pcs will do the work,after all you can get new things every two to three years since it has changed so quickly, just wait to see cloud computing to become main stream,then you only need e-reader for kids.
Posted by CrunchyCookie, a resident of the Greenmeadow neighborhood, on Jan 25, 2012 at 4:35 pm CrunchyCookie is a member (registered user) of Palo Alto Online
Not news; Apple and PAUSD have been in bed since at least the 80s. Hasn't the deal always been for Apple to give away (or nearly so) 100 computers to each of our middle/high schools in the hopes that 1,000 kids will gain a lifetime addiction/loyalty?
Posted by Walter_E_Wallis, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on Jan 26, 2012 at 11:52 am Walter_E_Wallis is a member (registered user) of Palo Alto Online
iPad is almost as good as all the other tablets. You can get a decent tablet for 99 bucks. Apple is bullet proof because it is limited in the applications it can run. PCs are open to many programs and so are also more open to crap. All in all, Apples aren't worth the premium. iTunes is O.K. and Pixar too.
View in an RSS Reader
E-mail this topic.
Print this topic.
