Well, this thread turned out exactly like I thought it would.
This is a horrible idea. Nothing anyone can say will ever change my mind.
Agreed. Iunno why, but somehow before I even clicked the thread, I knew that Irock would be in here wildly defending Apple.
I'm defending technological advancements in the way students learn, be it on the iPad, the (not real) Microsoft Courier, or some sort of Android tablet. Everyone here is completely ignoring the educational benefits of a tablet.
A student is going to be more drawn into learning and will learn more when they can flip around 3D models of elements, as opposed to looking at a table or viewing still images. (we didn't even get to see still images to get an idea of what the elements looked like) A student will learn more when they can see animations, use interactive maps, hear audio, see video, and look at 3D models. People learn better when they're not
just looking at plain text and still images. I don't understand why anyone would be against greater tools for learning.
To those bitching about how they have to pay for it and pay for replacements, it's a private school. They don't have to go to school there if they don't want to.
This isn't Rand-Land; corporations do bad things.
As long as the government stays out of the market and there's competition, "bad things" will only hurt the company.
Enron did pretty much cause the crisis. They helped convince California to deregulated the market, then Enron jacked up prices and people refused to pay. Power was cut across the state, there were rolling blackouts, and all in the middle of wild-fire season. The point is that when companies can start weaseling their way into things that they normally can't get into, they start to abuse their new found power (and I'm not specifically speaking about Apple).
Based on the Wikipedia article, there were many other variables. The problem; price caps which (obviously) lead to rationing which lead to market manipulation which lead to dependency on whoelsalers. Enron wouldn't have been depended on without the government price caps. With the iPad and education companies, we're talking about a free submarket, and the California energy crisis was caused because the market
wasn't free (pricecaps). That's the way I interpreted it.
You don't need an ipad to have a textbook.
You need an tablet to do the great things a tablet can. Think outside the book. It's time education starts heading in a better direction.
The point of education is to teach, not to profit. (Also in before the obligatory "Why wouldn't they want to make money?", they need to make money, yes, but schooling shouldn't be for-profit.)
Oh! Then maybe teachers and school staff shouldn't be paid, and school supplies should just be given away! That's dumb. Profit drives competition, innovation, and advancements. You get better products at the end of the day because the companies are competing and are trying to make profit. If they weren't getting profit and were just earning enough to cover the costs of making the products, there wouldn't be any products, because there's no money to be earned. If there were products, there would be no innovation, no advancements, and no will to make the best product. Profit is one of the single most important factor in any market. It's basic economics.
Discord
Light Style