<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"> <html> <head> <meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type"> </head> <body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000"> Jim Kronebusch wrote: <blockquote cite="mid20071203140748.M56602@winonacotter.org" type="cite"> <pre wrap="">On Sat, 01 Dec 2007 12:07:19 -1000, R. Scott Belford wrote </pre> <blockquote type="cite"> <pre wrap="">I fear that far too often good-willed and well-intending education advocates fail to fully understand the extent of OPM addiction in the American education system. More successful advocates have learned to enable the use of OPM within the schools. They fund this addiction with enticing technology trinkets and strong-armed contractual agreements. </pre> </blockquote> <pre wrap=""> Funny, but sadly true. I find that like with any addiction, the problem starts with the dealers. They make this stuff sound too fun to not try. A quick example of how this hurts schools. We just had 3M give the school a grant to buy some technology. The teachers involved went to a seminar about cool new products in schools. The teachers decided the best way the money could be spent is with EBeam projection systems. They thought this could be as useful as SMART Boards but for a third of the cost. They ordered them. The teachers use OSX as their operating system this year. As part of my schools second wave of Linux integration we were going to move all teachers to Linux next year. EBeam is OSX/Windows only. So now thanks to this grant (OPM), and the flashy presentation by the dealers, we now have a huge obstacle to overcome with making these EBeam systems useful while still trying to switch to Linux. So our $5,000 grant (OPM) is putting our $60,000 savings and all the other benefits of switching to Linux in jeopardy. </pre> </blockquote> Yep, that's OPM, all right. Throw away $60,000 to get $5,000. That's because, for all their degrees and other pedigrees that they wear so prominently on their sleeves, educators are politicians long before they are ever businesspeople. <blockquote cite="mid20071203140748.M56602@winonacotter.org" type="cite"> <pre wrap=""> Other cases are where the dealers of the OPM provide the stuff the first time for free, but in doing so give us new addictions that we cannot afford. Sure we get new projectors, but can't afford to replace the bulbs or the system when it fails. We get software, but can't afford the upgrade cycle. This list could go on. </pre> </blockquote> We call that "lock-in." <blockquote cite="mid20071203140748.M56602@winonacotter.org" type="cite"> <pre wrap=""> Used wisely, there is no problem with OPM. However I believe the dealers are the first in the chain who need to wise up, then the users will follow.</pre> </blockquote> Now, there's where I disagree. The dealers are already "wised-up." That's why they're doing what they're doing. It is the *USER* of the OPM that needs to wise up and tell the dealer to go jump in the ocean. Sadly, the only thing that gets the vast majority of addicts to kick the habit is some major tragedy. It happened in Portland Public Schools in Oregon (the massive Microsoft audit threat). It happened to a major bottling company in Texas (do a Google search for "Chuck E. Owens"). It happened to Ernie Ball, Inc. In the case of Portland Public Schools, it's obvious that their pilot of GNU/Linux was a major part of why they were threatened. "Keep the user addicted at all costs," whether via carrot...or stick, if necessary. --TP </body> </html>