COLLOQUY Responses
|
|
COLLOQUY Responses
|
 I feel that first off, Microsoft is only in this for the money and nothing else. When Bill Gates sees a opportunity, nothing (including humanity) will stand in his way for the almighty buck. And education is one of the most lucrative markets that one could tap into. Moreover, this "plan" by the CSU system would have resulted in a enormous cost increase to the upcoming students, (can we say "charge" for the use of the computers on campus???) more cost to the faculty and staff as they try to keep their machines running with the latest software from Microsoft, and even more headache for those whom have to keep up the machines in the first place. Never mind that there are those who this doesn't bother -- they're too busy receiving checks and kickbacks from Microsoft to care about education. In my own opinion, those colleges, universities and other higher education areas whom would see Microsoft and other companies dictate to these same EDUCATIONAL institutions what type of technology should be bought, taught, and learned shouldn't be teaching or in existence at all--or, at least should let those in attendance know that they only prescribe to and are maintained by Microsoft. Which leads me to my main point about Microsoft and others of that ilk: Greed and inferior product have no place in education. We have education to learn and expand, not be turned into mindless drones that have a linear concept of what is. I for one, say keep Microsoft out of our classrooms; greed, deceit and ineffective technology isn't (or at least shouldn't) be part of the curricula. Just one man's opinion.
|
IN THIS DEBATE: The question Background Responses Join the debate IN THIS SECTION: Colloquy Letters to the editor Write to us Help |
|||
|
||||
previous response