Thanks for taking the time to reply in detail. its especially useful as a concerned parent to see the other side of the coin.

I really wasn't aware that ipads were so physically rugged compared to most Android pads. Given that cases are also available for most android tablets, and the approximately 3 android pads to 1 iPad purchase (and therefore replacement) cost ratio, I'm still not really convinced that the iPads increased ruggedness over any/all other Android pads is really as much of a justifiable argument for iPads in schools as you suggest.

I also still think Apple (or Microsoft) is the wrong way to go a a de-facto standard in educational computing tools because vendor-lockin means unavoidably brainwashing kids with the idea that the entirety of computing is only one corporations products. This is an especially bad thing to do when other more open, relatively brand-agnostic and still approximately functionally equal options do exist.

Also I really don't like the idea that this is all still an experiment to see if pads in the classroom are really a good/bad thing or not. My kid's education and therefore his entire adult life is directly at stake here, and there is no chance of a do-over if pads do turn out to be a bad idea.

I myself was similarly permanently fucked in the 1970's by the introduction of an experimental math program called SMP during my critical years at school. After a couple of years it was generally accepted that SMP was a massive cock-up and math teaching goet very quickly reverted back to the classical style, but it was too late for a whole generation of English kids upon which the damage had already been done.

COnsequently If there's still any doubt at all that pads might not be the best approach in school, I'd strongly prefer we take the low-risk option and stay with a traditional method (books etc) that we already know from centuries of experience works well enough.

>> Not an argument pro or anti Apple per se, but standardising on a device means less time spent working out how to set up each device and worrying about app compatibility,

I can certainly see the wisdom in that, but the question is why would a supposedly strapped-for-cash organization pick the most expensive (by far) tablet out there that is also arguably functionally inferior, with more locked-in and expensive apps, and less flexible than many much cheaper (android) pads? It seems so badly ill-considered to even be reasonable to think it could be blatant corruption, especially knowing that literally millions of pad purchases hang on that decision, and that for even reasonably well off parents, $400 is still a very non-trivial sum to find.

>> Ubiquitous tablet computing is very new - but it's not going away and we do need to teach our children how to use it well.

Thats like saying we need to have lessons on teaching kids how to operate a phone or a microwave. How to use a pad takes about 5 minutes for a moderately intelligent adult to work out, and about 30 seconds for the average kid. Its easily just one of the things you learn just by being alive these days.

The school my 9 year old son is at is pushing for parents to donate so they can buy iPads too.

Given iPads are like $400-500 each and a good Android tablet is maybe $150 (and also has access to a lot more useful free software than iPads do), this kind of crap makes it obvious that the education sector is at least very badly managed and more likely very corrupt. I'll bet that someone high up in the education department is getting a very nice fat kickback from Apple.

Just because of this locked-in pro-Apple money wasting mentality I refuse to donate or vote for the very populist local props in my area that want to raise our taxes to give more money to supposedly underfunded schools. Its already very clear that all they are all planning to do with any extra money is blow it on yet more overpriced Apple products.

I'm also having a hard time understanding why a 9 year old kid needs an ipad at school in the first place at all. After talking to the principal and class teachers at my sons school its very clear that they think that ipads in the classroom are somehow a self-evidently good thing, and have no solid justification other than "because tech===future". They are clearly just throwing iPads at kids and hoping something good will come of it, rather than the iPad actually being a necessary tool and part of a larger well-considered strategy with already tested/proven benefits.

I'm sure most kids would say they need an iPad too but if my 9 year old son is anything to go by, at least 99% of them secretly just want it only for gaming or as some kind of trendy fashion accessory.

See I've been there myself. I remember back in the 70's when I was a kid, the excuse/lie that a PC would help with homework was the standard and accepted way by me and all my friends.of getting a new gaming machine.

As such I believe that the onus still lies with the schools to show that iPads in the classroom are not actually just another distraction that comes between the student and the teacher. Assuming they can do that, then they still need to show some real justification why 3x $150 Android pads is worse than 1 $450 iPad with respect to actual benefit in the classroom.

>> After all, by definition these other universes are not part of ours, so we can't get at them.

I'm not clear how your conclusion necessarily follows from your statement. I'll agree that we probably can't get to them just by changing physical location within our own universe, but that's about it.

>> I think conservation is always a good idea when practical,

Just like every other change, conservation will require some compromise somewhere else, so if you always prioritize other sources of endless short term issues (such as business/economics/politics) above long term planning activities such as conservation, no conservation will ever get done at all.

It always amazes me to see how completely short-term most thinking in the US is. It is truly bizarre to me how most Americans will make excuses for some company permanently damaging the environment to make their CEO's annual bonus even bigger this year.

Its like many Americans apparently feel literally no sense of responsibility to protect the earth we all need to survive on, or care about what we are handing to the next generation, especially if there's a quick buck to be made.

>> it's time to send probes into a few of these pits to see what they're like

Great! Finally we will now discover all the moon-alien hives and secret Nazi UFO moonbases!

None.
I wish they'd just collapse and die already.

>> I don't think there is much debate that we impact the climate by some amount

It really does appear that pretty much the whole world has already reached this inevitable conclusion a long time ago, with the notable exception of a surprisingly large group of particularly bone-headed US citizens that refuse to accept any of the overwhelming amount of scientific evidence that humans are damaging the climate. Many of them are apparently even living in denial of any climate change happening at all.

I really don't understand how and why so many Americans (only) continue to apparently honestly think that.

You sir are clueless.
I work in the aviation industry and trust me, Software Engineering is a matter of life-and-death real.

Its not clear to me why either one of them would actually want to be considered most like RR.

..and of course It is completely not in any way in Microsoft's (a.k.a. the sock-puppet of the NSA) actual interest for people to read this then use the same password for everything.

>> Did the IEEE ever manage that exam?

Actually my CS honours degree is both IEEE and RCS accredited.

>> Even then, it's laughable to compare software development to actual engineering. You do a disservice to those professionals.

No actually you're the one doing disservice to proffesional engineers. You're obviously one of those people that cluelessly usess the word "coding" to describ the entire job of what Software Engineers actually do.

>> Software engineering is real. Many of them are even licensed as professional engineers now. Your conception of who they are, what they do, and their importance to your way of life appears to be flawed.

Where do you see anything in my comment where I am suggesting Software Engineering isn't real? My comment is actually promoting the high value of actual Software Engineering.

>> Your conception of who they are, what they do, and their importance to your way of life appears to be flawed.

Where are you getting any of this from in anything I wrote? Please respond to what I actually wrote not what you imagined I wrote because you couldn't be bothered to read it fully before launching into a personal attack.

Pointing out a problem with the current system is NOT elitism.