Re: Re: (Univ that only teaches unix/linux)

If you think I missed your point, then you don't agree.  You can learn
c# and .net from the "* for dummies" books.  You can't learn computer
science by learning c# and .net.

On Mon, 2003-09-15 at 16:32, Jay Smith wrote:
> Lawrence,
> 
> I agree, but you may have missed my point.
> 
> Familiarizing students with an environment that they are highly likely to 
> encounter (and upon which their employability may depend) in the real world 
> is beneficial to the students -- and to their future employers.
> 
> I am *not* suggesting that university is the place to teach every possible 
> "flavor of the day".
> 
> At the same time, I don't think it is appropriate for a CS department chair 
> to pretend that MS stuff does not exist.
> 
> I have talked to plenty of Windoze people who have been on the job for 
> several years and would have a difficult time explaining what a linux is. I 
> just don't want newly minted Linux /Unix people to have that same level of 
> ignorance in the other direction.
> 
> Jay
> 
> Lawrence MacIntyre wrote:
> > Jay:
> > 
> > You missed the point.  What we are saying is that the University is
> > teaching you to fish*.  If I taught you c# and .net, I would be giving
> > you two fish.  However, they will be gone soon, and other languages will
> > take their place, and knowing them will be useless.
> > 
> > We say teach Linux because you can read the source code and experiment
> > with it and add features and change them.  You can't do that with
> > microsoft stuff.  The universities would be defrauding their students if
> > they simply taught them to use programming languages and called it a
> > Computer Science Degree.
> > 
> > *If you give a man a fish, he will eat for a day.  If you teach a man to
> > fish, he will eat for a lifetime.
> > 
> > On Mon, 2003-09-15 at 15:13, Jay Smith wrote:
> > 
> >>Lawrence,
> >>
> >>To quote yourself:
> >>
> >>   "A university education is supposed to provide you with
> >>   a broad knowledge base."
> >>
> >>I submit that (in the context of a CS degree) the definition of "broad" 
> >>*does* include products that operate in an MS product environment 
> >>regardless of whether you like them or not or whether they are inferior, 
> >>superior, or whatever.
> >>
> >>For the same reason, a university education should include classes on all 
> >>sorts of things that aren't exactly to one's current taste.
> >>
> >>As for the job market, I believe that (rightly or wrongly) most 
> >>college-bound young peoples' thoughts are focused on getting jobs more than 
> >>getting a well-rounded education that helps them be better people that will 
> >>benefit humanity, their community, and themselves.  My observation is that 
> >>they don't yet know those other things exist.  They do, however, know that 
> >>they need jobs and thus need whatever skills employers demand (rightly or 
> >>wrongly).
> >>
> >>I suggest that all the "don't teach MS at my university" passion should 
> >>instead be addressed to the corporate CEOs, CFOs, boards, CIOs, etc., who 
> >>need help learning what linux, unix, and the world of open software and 
> >>systems has to offer.  These people believe the MS adds they see on TV and 
> >>they instruct their subordinates to buy MS products.
> >>
> >>Change has to happen both at the top and the bottom.
> >>
> >>Jay
> >>
> >>Lawrence MacIntyre wrote:
> >>
> >>>If all you want is training for entry-level coding jobs, then don't go
> >>>to a University.  Go to a 2 year Community College.  That is the role
> >>>that those schools fill.  A university education is supposed to provide
> >>>you with a broad knowledge base.  The 2 year school will give you some
> >>>background in operating systems and architecture, but will focus on
> >>>training for the job market.
> >>>
> >>>On Mon, 2003-09-15 at 14:24, Jay Smith wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>Sawan,
> >>>>
> >>>>While I agree in principle about the goodness of unix/linux, etc., I am 
> >>>>concerned that young people coming out of school need to get JOBS and 
> >>>>*part* of the University's role to give them the training and credentials 
> >>>>they need to enter the world of work.
> >>>>
> >>>>The ugly truth is that there are a lot of shops out there that run *only* 
> >>>>MS products.
> >>>>
> >>>>While the student might get a better education if they only learn 
> >>>>linux/unix, they might not be as well equipped for the work force if they 
> >>>>don't know MS stuff too (regardless of the quality or worthwhileness of the 
> >>>>MS products).
> >>>>
> >>>>Students and there parents are well advised to consider all angles of this 
> >>>>and address such questions with the CS department heads.
> >>>>
> >>>>Jay
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>Sawan Vithlani wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>>Sadly, the lessons of this text are seldom taught in Universities. On a
> >>>>>>recent tour of colleges with my son to select a computer science school, 
> >>>>>>had a conversation with the Dean of Undergraduate CS studies at a
> >>>>>>prestigious school. The Dean told us that the school focused on Linux,
> >>>>>>Solaris and Java. I asked what my son might learn about new technologies
> >>>>>>like C# and .NET during his four years at the school. "Nothing, if we can
> >>>>>>help it!" was the answer.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Sorry, dont mean to troll or anything, but I would say this is a topic of 
> >>>>>deep argument and flamewars among people who really understand UNIX and 
> >>>>>people who are relative newcomers. If you are an experienced UNIX user 
> >>>>>then I apologise for all this.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>For example, some of the utilities/programs have to be maintained as they 
> >>>>>are to maintain compatibilities/portability between similar systems 
> >>>>>(Solaris/Linux as an example). Again, if you use this stuff day to day, 
> >>>>>you will understand the quirky behaviour and appreciate why it was 
> >>>>>introduced.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>As for the CS Dean, sorry but he is absolutely right. First of all C# 
> >>>>>and .NET have nothing to do with Linux/UNIX, their design/implementation, 
> >>>>>or annoyances. C# and .NET are not "new technologies" they are merely 
> >>>>>a device invented by a corporation to further their monopolistic policies and 
> >>>>>ambitions. .NET is a direct respone to JAVA, which was eating up their 
> >>>>>market like anything. .NET allows them to have a greater stranglehold 
> >>>>>over the devloper.  
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Also look at it this way: if you consider Linux/JAVA to be more low level 
> >>>>>stuff, learning it will enable your child to easily grasp higher 
> >>>>>technologies. It is much more harder to go from .NET to .CAPUCCINO if all 
> >>>>>you know is high level .NET style stuff. Knowledge of low level stuff 
> >>>>>enables easier transitions. Things like Linux allow your kid to poke into 
> >>>>>the very heart of the system and mess around and thus, learn something. 
> >>>>>.NET and related stuff will only allow her to make "higher level " 
> >>>>>software (web pages, apps, etc) which, frankly, any one can do in these 
> >>>>>days of point and click developer tools.  
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Another thing: if you are a fee paying parent, be grateful that the Uni 
> >>>>>is using excellent and free software to teach you child. If they use 
> >>>>>proprietory stuff, who do you think is going to finally foot the license 
> >>>>>bills? Who do you think is going to repay the same bills after a 3-5 year 
> >>>>>cycle as the Uni is now into a "forced to upgrade to newer version" mode?
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Sawan
-- 
    Lawrence MacIntyre     865.574.8696     [email protected]
               Oak Ridge National Laboratory
High Performance Information Infrastructure Technology Group

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQA/ZiY1CNjP8rawCW4RAsOCAJ4sLniv9ukXrNcWP87AXb/mZcybGgCeLdWh
dXHRP71q1Yfn34ah3Oqo2cg=
=tmI1
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----