Personally can't see any reason that a person might want to:
Send themselves a message if they forget to arm their security system when leaving their house
Automatically turn on the lights in their home when they arrive after dark for safety and security
Set their thermostat to more energy efficient temperatures when they leave home or comfortable ones when they arrive
Notify themselves if a window or door is open when it starts to rain
Automatically turn off the lights, TV, lock doors, and close the garage door when they leave
Turn lights and TV on and off randomly when they're not home to make the home appear occupied to potential thieves.
Turn on all lights if the smoke alarms go off at night so that the home owner can see to evacuate safely
Send a message if their kitchen sink starts to leak
Frankly I'm surprised that
I can't say how it compares to other university programs. I also can't say how well it would prepare a student for a career in the field. I had been working as a software developer for 10 years when I decided to "upgrade" my minor in CS to a B.S. (Original degree was Applied Mathematics). As someone who was already familiar with most of the subject material I found it to be a fairly easy program. Other students seemed to find it more challenging.
If you decide to choose it, be careful, FSU has a more stringent foreign language policy than some other universities in the state university system of Florida. All degrees require 3 semesters of a foreign language or appropriate scores on a CLEP test.
As a scuba diver I have to say, the experience is not the same. Static images don't give you enough information or the same feel as being there in person. You can't see (or experience) a cleaning station from pictures. You can't experience the sensation of floating in mid-water while watching a shark swim back and forth around a reef below you. You can't hear the sounds, feel the water.
What it does do is give people the ability to see something that they may otherwise never experience in person. Never a bad thing.
The point is more to why a professional violinist usually tends towards older instruments rather than newer ones. If a violinist can find an older violin in the range between $40,000 - $100,000 range that they like, chances are they would purchase that one before they would buy a newer instrument that costs the same. Also a good number of the highly regarded luthiers have a waiting list of over a year or more for new instruments.
The fact is that most professional violinists cannot afford an instrument that costs as much as a Strad or a del Gesu. Those instruments tend to be purchased for private collections or by organizations that loan high quality instruments to promising musicians. The few violinists that do own an instrument like that are very highly paid concert soloists.
There is one key thing that people tend to forget when these kinds of test results come out. As the wood in the violin ages its sound will change. After about 300 years or so (the average age of a Strad) the sound won't change much. With a new violin (average cost for a handmade one by an expert lutier being around $20,000) you have no way of knowing how the sound will change as it ages. Sure it might sound good today, but what happens in 10 years as the wood ages? There are violins made by Stradivarius that don't sound good because the wood didn't age well, and he was known to experiment with his instrument design a bit (for example the Chanot-Chardon Stradivarius violin is guitar shaped). That same problem could happen to a modern made violin leaving the musician out the price of a small car and a nearly worthless instrument. Safer to buy an older instrument that has had time to age.
And on another note chances are if anyone buys a $100 violin they've bought a cheap poorly setup piece of junk that is almost unplayable.
If all else fails, lower your standards.