Re: Unified Front... [was Re: [seul-edu] M$ Audits (shortened)]

[Doug Loss <drloss@suscom.net>]

"Stephen C. Daukas" wrote:

> At 11:46 AM 4/24/2002, Doug wrote:
> >"Stephen C. Daukas" wrote:
> >
> > > Imagine a School Board meeting considering the motion of "going
> > > Linux".  Imagine someone in the audience asking the simple question of
> > > "does what we run today work on what you are proposing?".
> >
> >I'd imagine that you wouldn't try to get them to commit to converting to Linux
> >completely at the first school board meeting.
>
> Nor would I, but the analogy still remains.  I commented in another thread
> as to what inspired this analogy, but simply stated, you can only go so far
> without permission - so you must seek it at some point.
>

That's not what I meant.  The school board meeting you're envisioning would take
place after the analysis had taken place.  And the analysis wouldn't even be
started without some interest from the school district in the first place.

>
> > > So how do we take advantage of the situation?  (Or, how do we get major
> > > Linux vendors to take advantage of the situation?)
> >
> >Don't plan on the vendors doing this.  It's best done at the grass roots.  Of
> >course, we should try to provide the folks at the grass roots with the
> >best tools
> >and arguments we can.
>
> Actually, Red Hat is extremely interested in this. [...] Red Hat is interested
> working on a K-12 "thing", but they don't know what that "thing" looks like
> yet.
>

They have but to ask.  We've tried to engage them on this subject before, with
little success.  If they want to find out, have them put people on this mailing
list and schoolforge-discuss.

>
> They are hoping
> to be told, as near as I can tell, what they should put together for a
> given grade (almost like a curriculum framework) from those in the
> trenches.  So, at least one vendor is hoping the grass roots can define
> what they need so it can provide a solution.  Could be nice if it worked
> out that way.
>

Again, if they commit to putting some resources behind this we can help.  We've
heard talk from various distros before about their educational committment, with
little to back it up though.

>
> I disagree based on an extrapolation from my experiences in corporate
> America...  No one likes to break ground, nor do they like to stray too far
> from a path that has already been blazed.  My guess is that among the first
> few questions asked by someone involved with the process who represents
> "administration" would be "what have other districts done."  One reason, I
> suspect, that I have noticed so many districts using the same textbooks, to
> use your analogy.
>

If they'd rather not make actual decisions but just follow someone else's lead,
then we have districts that _have_ already done this and can be used as examples.
I'd rather not anoint a winner from many very nice packages for each function, but
if that's what it takes...

>
> The only problem here is that WINE doesn't work well for a lot of
> applications, and doesn't do well at all with win2k applications.   WINE
> isn't really an emulator - it is more of a compatibility layer because it
> only deals with the win32 API and win3.x interfaces.  More than 1000
> applications are listed in WINE's database, but _many_ of them are listed
> as only being partially operational.
>

It's rapidly improving, though.  This is where the initial analysis is important.
Find out what they're using, then _try_ it in WINE.  You'll know very quickly if it
will work or not.  But I'll be horribly surprised if you find any educational apps
that _aren't_ win32 but Win2K.  The vendors aren't writing (I don't think)
specifically for Win2K because it would just limit their market.


> For MAC, ARDI seems to be among the better packages.  They list hundreds of
> MAC applications, most coded green or yellow (meaning fully useable or
> largely useable).
>
> In the end, it still comes down to a willingness to blaze a trail...
>

Executor is very nice, but it currently only works with M68K binaries.  They're
working on SynPPC (a Power PC emulator) but it's not ready yet.

>
> >There are no packaged solutions, nor should there be.
>
> Seems like you and I should agree to disagree.  I'm not trying to be
> difficult here, I'm just looking for the following (to paraphrase from the
> SEUL-EDU purpose):
>
> This is what I mean by a "packaged" solution - an identified list that
> satisfies the above goals.  If we could do that, then we would be in a much
> better position to support (via grass roots efforts) a district willing to
> blaze the trail.
>

I guess I'll have to define my terms, since I wrote the SEUL/edu purpose.  By
"packaged" I assumed you meant something in a shiny box that purports to be a clean
single install that solves all the problems.  That's not going to happen soon if
ever.  But an identified list that satisfies the goals you've listed, that's
something else again.  That we can work towards.  One of the stated goals for
SEUL/edu is to identify useful educational software, package it (RPMs, DEBs, etc.),
and make it into an ISO image with a useful installer, so that any distro vendor
can include it with their standard OS to create an educational bundle.  We haven't
progressed on that for lack of software reviewers and packagers, but if RedHat
would commit to doing the packaging I think we could make major strides there.

>
> >   The school district needs
> >to do a reasoned analysis before deciding to undertake such a large-scale
> >conversion.
>
> But if there were such a "packaged" offering, it would make their lives a
> hell of a lot easier!
>

See above.

>
> >As for fending off the criticism of technophilic parents and other
> >self-perceived experts, it's probably best to draw them into the analysis
> >at the
> >beginning and let them see for themselves what the benefits are.  If they just
> >have axes to grind and won't consider any option other than Microsoft (or
> >Apple),
> >that will quickly be noticed by others doing the analysis.
>
> Which may derail the whole effort, depending on who they are, because all
> we have as arrows in our quivers is opinions.  Depending on the various
> participant's standing in the community the "wrong" opinion, or the
> "uninformed" opinion, may prevail...  If there was a district out there
> that had already made the transition, then we have something other than
> opinions!
>

There are such schools (I don't know about whole districts).  Look at the Case
Studies page on our website.

>
> > > Once we think we have that solved, and once we think we have a solid
> > > understanding of the migration issues, we could try to support those
> > > willing to try to get their schools to move.  We could also approach a
> > > vendor to see if they are willing to join in...
> >
> >As I say, don't depend on a vendor for this.  We've got some good starts
> >already
> >with K12LTSP and Blue Linux.
>
> Don't count out the vendors.  If they see an opportunity to gain market
> share, they'll jump.
> They are already looking at this very issue...  Going back to my definition
> of a "packaged" solution, if we could define one, I think at least one
> vendor would be interested.

As I say, we've heard this before and would welcome their participation, but we're
not holding our breath.

--
Doug Loss                 All I want is a warm bed
Data Network Coordinator  and a kind word and
Bloomsburg University     unlimited power.
dloss@bloomu.edu                Ashleigh Brilliant