Microsoft to splurge $75m on computer training for kids Microsoft announced on Wednesday (September 16) that it would dish out $75m to teach kids computer science. The cash will be funnelled out over the next three years through the company’s YouthSpark programme. The aim is “to increase access to computer science education for all youth, especially for those from under- …
And Apple does the very same thing.
"Elementary schools in Richmond and San Jose are among the 114 schools nationwide getting Apple computers.
The education grants will supply iPads and Macs as part of Apple's push to bring technology to low-income students, according to a story in the Contra Costa Times.
Stege Elementary in Richmond and Santee Elementary in San Jose are two of the recipients.
The schools are getting iPads for all students, teachers and administrators as well as Macs for staff employees and an Apple TV for each classroom.
The grants are part of a $100 million pledge Apple has made to President Barack Obama's ConnectED initiative."
http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/blog/2014/10/apple-supplying-computers-to-richmond-san-jose.html
Back under your bridge Sparky.
"Hey kids, I've just spoken with spindly Uncle Satnad, and he's got a gift for all of you (but not the girls - that'd be favouritism)! Can you guess what it is?"
"Is it an iPad?"
"Er... No"
"Is it an iPhone?"
"No..."
"Is it a Samsung -"
"NO!"
"Is it a -"
"Look just shut the frick up you HORRIBLE BRATS!
It's a frickin Microsoft Surface running god-damned Windows 10 but only the first 72 million kids (except you girls) will get one, as that's all I've got to give away!
Get it??"
...silence... a few sniffles... then...
"What's a surface?"
"Gaaah!"
...and so on.
This post has been deleted by its author
The OECD report that just came out says so. Whilst learning a coding language might be good for teaching logic and similar, using computers just for computers' sake doesn't help.
http://www.bbc.com/news/business-34174796
More than anything else MS are worried that the next generation aren't being herded onto rent-an-Office and privacyless-Windows.
That $ was funny, 20 years ago. These days not so much. I mean, you can't exactly claim that MS are the world's giant moneybags + root_of_all_evil +world_domination + incompetence when you're also spreading the gospel of "post PC" and "everyone uses linux and macs these days"[1] and "obsolete" and all the other crap.
[1] "Everyone" in this case equating to approximately 7% of the global market, apparently. Commentards on the Reg are a lot like LibDem voters - they don't interact with (or instantly dismiss) anyone who isn't a LibDem voter so they think they're an important majority and are always shocked it turns out that there are actually only nineteen of them.
In my mind, the problem whenever you get a Great Divide (whether that be left/right, open/proprietary, etc) is that there are not actually as many complete bastards on the opposing side as people believe.
eg the hard left may think that the right-wingers are intent on enjoying canapés made from boiled babies with copious amounts of champagne while the sit in comfy chairs made from the skeletons of serfs, and the right may fear that the hard left are hell-bent on taking away their share options and giving them a state-made boiler jump suit and a 2 bed worker apartment in a socialist utopian housing block.
There probably are some, but most aren't like that.
"...so they think they're an important majority and are always shocked it turns out that there are actually only nineteen of them."
Sounds like commentards to me- the ones that are M$ apologists...
(That $ was funny, 20 years ago, when Microsoft were relevant. These days not so much. But still funny enough- it makes foam-flecked spittle marks on Surface screens...)
Micro$oft isn't funny now, wasn't funny then - buts still just as true.
They are still taking $billions out of the economy for products which haven't improved, or have even gone backwards, since the turn of the millennium. Hence the people still on XP and an old version of office.
The intent may be $75M for lobbying rather than technology. Politicians are cheap so $75M will go a long way, especially if they can be encouraged to start barking like trained seals and pledging public resources in order to attract the major share. Same thing was seen in India, a $2M donation by the Bill and Melinda gates foundation to trigger a $2B polio vaccination campaign.
And start typing. Yeah, OK. Then try to find out how to turn off smart quotes, and all the other shite that gets imposed on you. Then answer the question when doing something (at work on Windows7 unfortunately) - "We didn't find what you was looking for" (et al). Who the fuck/WTF is "we"?
With Y-combinator introducing a racist policy for "office hours" events, Intel and various other tech giants introducing racist and sexist hiring (and firing?) policies, and Github adopting a racist and sexist community policy, wouldn't Microsoft be doing more good by funding people who have a difficult time getting acceptance within the industry rather than those who the industry already prefers?
Consider this: 2 people from the same town, fathers absent, mothers work the same job. One is black, the other white. Both have the same access to education and extracurricular activities, one is more likely to be hired by the "progressive" racist tech industry. Someone from Microsoft says to the privileged one "here's some money and training" and to the one facing discrimination "there are enough people who look like you, so you get nothing". How is this even legal? Why do people think it is moral? What sort of a racist can actually face these kids and purposely exclude them on racial grounds and why does Microsoft want that sort of person representing them?
For moral reasons I do not use Microsoft, Intel or Github products (whenever possible).
As Microsoft sees their market share erode with no new markets in sight, they as well as many other companies, try their best to capture the minds of the people. The earlier you start, the more likely you are to make someone believe that your particular product is the future.
Kids + even more computer spending + even more computer science (presumably elementary/high school) == questionable.
Programming is good for many, but not for every one. Many should learn _some_ programming, to the extent that it would be extremely useful in their work, even if not an actual software developer/engineer. But when will this specific context arise? 4-10 years after an initial course on the subject? And that which has been learned as a kiddo might not be relevant anyhow to the needs encountered in the real world. Not an optimal use of scarce time at school. The purpose of elementary/high school is **not** to develop technicians! There is another level of education geared toward just that.
Anyone saw this?
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/09/15/dont_bother_buying_computers_for_schools_says_oecd_report/
Programming is problem solving. A way of making sense of inputs and giving the outputs you desire.
You have to think about data and what it means, functions needed to manage and convert it.
And children are more receptive at an earlier age. Compare with learning a foreign language. Start 'em young when the syllabus is flexible.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2025
