Re: Major interview

[Trevor & Ellen Witt <tewitt@es.co.nz>]

Not sure if this is any use but i am a teacher and a principal of a small
elementary school in NZ.

I do not like the balck hole for money that microsoft creates for schools .
i am currently setting up a samall network in the school and am attracted by
Linux. Am trying to educate myself to use it to set up network but have
concerns about what is available. 
want a simple package similar to Claris for kids, Kid Pix Deluxe. Also want
a database for student records. But my experience is staff will not use
things if they cannot just sit down and get straight into it.


At 05:03 AM 9/3/99 +0200, you wrote:
>
>
>Bill Ries-Knight wrote:
>
>> I could suggest that the issue with schools is the cost of a SITE
license.  When you
>> pay upwards of $1000 per school for each of say 30 software titles, that
adds up rather
>> quickly.  It is ENTIRELY possible that this model, with a REDUCED site
license, would
>> be useful in relationship with an OS that did not require a per seat
cost.  If you look
>> at a minimal cost profile for Mirosoft and its planned model:  for the
desktop OS, say
>> $100, PLUS  the Server cost of say $3000 per year, Plus the client acess
cost of $50
>> per seat, PLUS...  The savings in a school with 150 computers could
amount to over
>> $30k per school each year.  That would get the attention of MANY districts.
>>
>
>All of the software I've ever written has included a site licence for free
- I think
>they're a rip off and so do most teachers. And they're right to think that.
This is what I
>mean by "fair" commercial software. I've always provided unlimited tech.
support for free
>too.
>
>This is a compelling argument and one of linux's greatest strengths. The
problem is that
>this sort of data needs to be put before the eyes of the decision makers
and then persuade
>them to let go of all the ties they have with wintel,mac hardware/software
vendors that
>they've so expensively nurtured in the past few decades. Decision makers in
authority will
>often whinge about overbearing costs but at the end of the day it often
boils down to a
>"better the devil you know.." scenario. People just don't like change and
are often too
>afraid of it.
>
>>
>> My Argument would be, reduced development tool costs for Linux vs
Microsoft or Apple
>> platforms should result in lower cost product.  This could be used to
save money at the
>> school level.  More unit sales because of lowered unit costs, means more
revenue
>> Happier and healthier Ed-Soft companies.
>
>Development tool costs are negligable.
>
>The most expensive side of edsoft tends to be gfx and sound recording.
Sound studios charge
>$1000+ per day for example. Artists can be expensive - animation is very
expensive.
>Programmers often work for royalties in edsoft in my experience that keeps
development
>costs down.
>
>Imagine history software where there are many photos. as sources of
evidence each one
>costing more than $50 to licence. Then you have diary entries and other
data which has
>various licences. Postcards, newspaper comic strips etc. Add exhorbitant
royalty and
>licensing fees for radio and video footage and your reaching development
costs that are
>just way too high to give a program away. Especially if you can only
license necessary data
>on a royalty basis - you're then legally bound not to give away the product.
>
>That said, companies should try to keep their prices down as much as
possible. I'm not a
>great believer in expensive licenses or support or even expensive
packaging. Whatever I'd
>port to Linux commercially I'd insist on being "No Frills" with site
licence included for
>free.
>
>Roman.
>
>
>