Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
First Seven iPad-Only 'Steve Jobs Schools' Open in the Netherlands
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I think iPads are wonder fools for education, but their just that: a tool. Not a crutch, not replacement for teachers/tutors. I see so many people using the calculator to do basic math (addition, subtraction, multiplication, division) that they should be able to do in their head. Or remembering who the first president was or other important skills/facts. It's sad. I just hope this doesn't totally replace teachers. As good as an iPad is, it can't answer nor teach everything.
Excuse me, good Sir, would you please care to tell me how the classic Linear Algebra and Its Applications, now in its fourth edition and basically unchanged since 1976, is all of a sudden "outdated"?
How is the Oxford Aristotle suddenly unsuitable to liberal arts students?
How all of a sudden Hanon is "outdated" and unsuitable to today's piano students?
Oh, please, do tell how even Tanenbaum's Modern Operating Systems, which has basically stayed the same for 25 years now, won't be good enough for next year's computer science freshmen.
No, because frankly you don't seem so sane.
You speak like a character from an ad.
Or from a dystopian novel.
All of a sudden textbooks can be "outdated" the day they come out of the presses.
Which is obviously false for most subjects and for basically all good books.
Books are designed to last for a lifetime.
I don't know in which profession you are in, but I don't believe you don't still use some college textbooks as a reference.
And more importantly what you say does not change the fact that we can't afford anything else in the mid term.
Period.
Last edited:
I'm pretty sure I would have hated Jobs with a vengeance if he were my boss.
I send him email once. He replied within a few minutes, and I contemplated to fly half the world to punch the arrogant bastard in the nose. Five years later I have to acknowledge that his answer was spot-on, business-wise.
Jobs isn't a loveable man. Even likeable seems to be quite an unreasonable expectation.
Business-wise he's spot on, ever since deciding on the look and feel of NeXT.
One of the great things about this forum is to see responses from people all around the world. The need for higher levels of education, with reduced resources, is a worldwide problem. Hopefully Apple can help bridge the gap for the benefit of all concerned. Having been in the Regents Street store in London today it was noticeable that Apple is very focused on mobile computing.
Fascinating times ahead for those involved in education.
Fascinating times ahead for those involved in education.
Sales blurb on Tanenbaum's (Bolding added by me):
The widely anticipated revision of this worldwide best-seller incorporates the latest developments in operating systems technologies. The Third Edition includes up-to-date materials on relevant operating systems such as Linux, Windows, and embedded real-time and multimedia systems. Includes new and updated coverage of multimedia operating systems, multiprocessors, virtual machines, and antivirus software. Covers internal workings of Windows Vista (Ch. 11); unique even for current publications. Provides information on current research based Tanenbaums experiences as an operating systems researcher. A useful reference for programmers.
Sales blurb from Oxford's Aristotle:
The Oxford Translation of Aristotle was originally published in 12 volumes between 1912 and 1954. It is universally recognized as the standard English version of Aristotle. This revised edition contains the substance of the original Translation, slightly emended in light of recent scholarship; three of the original versions have been replaced by new translations; and a new and enlarged selection of Fragments has been added. The aim of the translation remains the same: to make the surviving works of Aristotle readily accessible to English speaking readers.
And since you helped me to prove my point, and were personally insulting to me, I am finished conversing with you, my good sir.
You don't say, the new edition has additional material?
Of course it has, you genius.
It is also mostly irrelevant to the core of the book and ignored in more or less all courses - also because concurrent programming and stuff is taught elsewhere, better.
The important parts of the book remain unchanged.
The material covered in any class is absolutely, firmly, unchanged.
The old edition is not, in any way, "outdated".
But of course you'd have to at least read it.
And we are talking about a supposedly "fast-moving" field, mind you.
You don't say, the new edition is "slightly emended".
Just wow, this makes the previous edition completely outdated and useless.
More importantly, it's definitely nothing that can be fixed with a 5-page xeroxed errata - or the lecturer's notes.
What a waste of paper, eh?
You have not proven anything, if not that you have seemingly no idea what a textbook is for or how it is used in class.
May I, again, dare asking in which profession are you, which are the "classic" reference texts and which ones of your college textbooks are now 'outdated'?
May I, again, ask you if you realize what's the cost in energy and ores of an iPad - or of *any* digital device compared to a printed book?
That's what I'd do as well to spare myself any further embarassment.
Too bad that you will spew such nonsense again, elsewhere.
Last edited:
It seems to me that the only person who
a) is denying the obvious fact that most college textbooks do not get "outdated" in a person's lifetime and
b) that printed books are more durable and cheaper to make than iPads by several orders of magnitude
is you.
Coincidentially, you are also the same person who is failing to address any my points or answering any of my questions.
I can't say I'm surprised that you are backing out, then.
Actually, you reinforce my suspicion that you used the best pages of your textbooks to wrap pizza and roll joints during your time in college, which obviously failed to instill you - if nothing else - the most basic values about education and science.
But hey, enjoy your iPad.
It seems to me that the only person who
a) is denying the obvious fact that most college textbooks do not get "outdated" in a person's lifetime and
b) that printed books are more durable and cheaper to make than iPads by several orders of magnitude
is you.
Coincidentially, you are also the same person who is failing to address any my points or answering any of my questions.
I can't say I'm surprised that you are backing out, then.
Actually, you reinforce my suspicion that you used the best pages of your textbooks to wrap pizza and roll joints during your time in college, which obviously failed to instill you - if nothing else - the most basic values about education and science.
But hey, enjoy your iPad.
I answered your points. You refuse to acknowledge it. Your statement that your classic textbooks have basically not changed in 25 years is clearly not true. Significant changes were made. Once I pointed that out to you, your argument started to morph.
Can't have your cake and eat it, too. Which is it? Did the books change, or didn't they? Pretty simple question, and it bolsters my original point.
And way to continue the personal attacks, BTW.
No, you have not.
a) You have not shown how textbooks become, as a rule, "outdated" in less than a decade
b) You have not addressed the issue of books being cheaper and durable
c) You have not addressed the issue of iPads used in lieu of everything being unsustainable
d) You have not told me in which profession you are and how your textbooks are completely useless today
That was not my statement.
My statement was that they do not become outdated.
It is a truism that the new edition is different from the old (it would not be billed as 'new' otherwise).
But,
a) The changes to the main sections are trivial and what you get is often an appendix or an added 'bonus' chapter, often af the insistence of the publisher, which is promptly ignored by lecturers.
b) This does not make the old one outdated in anyway.
The principles, the notions, the pedagogical approach and the clear structure that make a book a classic are all there.
It is still a perfectly good learning resource even without the added 2-page appendix.
Pareto principle applies here.
80% of the value of a book is made up of 20% of the pages or maybe less.
Also, that was only part of my argument: even if books did become in some non-negligible measure outdated (false), would this make it an optimal choice to "replace" them with iPads?
No.
Actually, rebuying the same books every semester for 5 years is still cheaper on energy and ores than an iPad.
Abosolutely false.
My original argument was:
a and b., which can be rephrased as "using iPads in place of toiled paper just because you can is unsustainable" was not addressed.
c. still stands - "slight emendments" do not make the old edition unsuitable for teaching.
d. was not addressed.
e. still stands - the first edition is still good enough and still used in colleges all over the world, the added sections you cited are ignored.
My argument has not morphed.
Your not-very-sane, partial, counter-argument sounds like "hey, Dell has released a new machine which is 0.1% faster than the latest MBP refresh - all Macs are useless and unsuitable for doing work!!! Just buy the new Dell!"
Which personal attacks, sweetie pie?
