CIO On Windows 8 Tablets: "Best Solution Currently Available"
Summary: Last week, I argued that Seton Hall University's choice to standardize on a single platform - Windows 8 tablets and PCs - was the wrong strategy in the age of BYOD and end-user choice. Here, I give Seton Hall's top tech official a chance to rebut my claims.
My blog last week, "University Deploying Thousands of Windows 8 Tablets Is Smart Tactics, Flawed Strategy," generated quite a bit of reader reaction.
I'm actually quite excited about what Windows 8 will deliver. But I felt that Seton Hall's plan to standardize completely on Windows 8 tablets and ultrabooks (initially all from Samsung) and effectively ban Apple and Android devices from classroom use was overly restrictive, out of touch with student preferences, and could cost the school more money in the short and long run.
One of those who responded was the architect of the Windows 8 plan, Seton Hall CIO Stephen G. Landry. His e-mail was both surprising - did you know Seton Hall has been giving out free laptops to students since 1997? - and predictable - the decision to restrict to only Windows 8 came down to a real-world analysis of the financial cost-benefits.
Credit: Seton Hall University
Landry actually acknowledges that Seton Hall is swimming against the tide. Most schools and companies will choose to support BYOD for a diversity of platforms, he writes, but going Windows 8 was "the best solution currently available" for the school.
While the e-mail didn't make me change my mind, I thought it was well-written and illuminating. The fair thing to do seemed to be to run it in its entirety below, and ask you for your thoughts. Text is bolded by me for emphasis.
-------------
Thank you again for responding to my tweet on your ZDNet article. I found your comments both interesting and informative. I certainly agree with you that our program’s use of Windows 8 Tablets is smart tactics. I also agree with you that in the long term most successful IT organizations will implement strategies to support a variety of devices that users bring to work or school. However, some background about Seton Hall might give even more weight to your assessment that SHUmobile was the best solution for us at this time, and not necessarily a flawed strategy.
For the past fifteen years Seton Hall has been a ubiquitous computing campus, that is, we provide a standard laptop to undergraduate students and their faculty as part of their tuition and fees. One of the core principles of this program is that in today’s world access to appropriate technology is important for academic success. Our president, Dr. Gabriel Esteban, put this well in his announcement of this program to the University community when he said, “By putting the most advanced mobile computing system in the hands of all of our students, regardless of prior experience or socio-economic background, we are leveling the playing field and creating opportunities for tomorrow's servant leaders.”
In designing our ubiquitous computing program, we’ve found that standardization enables us to provide excellent computers to our students at the lowest overall cost. This standardization also allows us to provide a very high level of service and support. This high level of support has been especially important to our faculty who want to incorporate technology-based activities, courseware and e-texts into the classroom. Until technology evolves that will allow us to provide the same level of support in a diverse environment, or our community is willing to accept greater responsibility for their own technical support, our objective is to provide the best technology package for the price we’re able to pay.
The Samsung Series 7 Slate PC with Windows 8 did this, while solving several instructional technology issues. In particular, it allowed us to consolidate students’ laptop and tablet experience. This was less expensive for us than issuing both a laptop and a tablet, or issuing a convertible laptop/tablet, as we have done with science and honors students in the past. Once we made the decision to join Microsoft’s First Wave Program and adopt Windows 8, Nokia and AT&T also worked with us to implement and distribute a Freshmen Experience app to support greater student engagement with their classmates, suitemates, instructors, mentors and peer advisors, and to help them navigate the campus (both physically and by providing online services from the Financial Aid, Bursar and Registrar’s offices).
Here are some Web pages that provide some additional background on our program:
IT News Blog: http://blogs.shu.edu/doit/
SHU Mobile Computing Program page: http://www.shu.edu/offices/
SHUmobile Web page: www7.shu.edu/technology/
I’d be happy to provide you additional details about our program, our decision to adopt Windows 8, and why we believe this is the best solution currently available that meets the University’s instructional and technology requirements. Please give me a call (my office and cell phone numbers are below) or drop me an email at your convenience. And thanks again for reaching back to me for my point of view regarding this program.
Best regards,
Stephen G. Landry, Ph.D.
Chief Information Officer
Seton Hall University
Twitter: @landryst
Facebook: www.facebook.com/landryst
Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.
Talkback
CIO On Windows 8 Tablets: "Best Solution Currently Available"
Landry also says "best solution for us AT THIS TIME"
And Landry himself admits that he thinks that most other IT shops will not do as Seton Hall has done, but will embrace BYOD and multiple platforms.
Makes a lot of sense to me
As android drops to irrelevence in the tablet space some of this
Wake Forest
My comment is directed to Seton Hall University's president, Dr. Esteban
Your present choice regarding the selection of the aforementioned Microsoft hardware and software products will serve your student's needs admirably in the years to come.
But, if I may, I would like to illustrate some personal philosophical differences which some ZDNet readers may have (myself included) over your world view expressed in a quote attributed to you by Mr. Landry.
In announcing this program, you were quoted as saying, "By putting the most advanced mobile computing system in the hands of all of our students, regardless of prior experience or socio-economic background, we are leveling the playing field and creating opportunities for tomorrow's servant leaders.”
Mr. President, IMO based upon a full professional career, life is not played on a level playing field. Regardless of your noble democratic motivations in this matter, one student's "most advanced mobile computing system" is not necessarily the same for another student. That one key point frames the entire argument and illustrates the reasons for the acceptance of a BYOD philosophy or policy.
It follows, of course, that by restricting one of the most personal of choices a student will make in his attempts to advance his educational experience, that is, his choice in which computing device and associated software applications the student feels can best meet his or her personal and career goals, your attempt at "leveling the playing field" may only serve to hinder certain students from achieving their full potential at Seton Hall.
The counter argument to the above statement, of course, is that the choice to attend Seton Hall is purely optional. However, a BYOD policy would avoid that Draconian choice in the first place.
I fully understand the financial motivations that prompted your choices in these matters. I would concur with those choices myself. But basing policy and career guidance on the "lowest submitted cost proposal", although best for your school institution's bottom line, may prove short sighted and inadequate in the not to distant future. Technology changes fast, Mr. President whereas a student's ability to advance himself should never be curtailed by any prestigious institution of higher learning.
What if it where iPads?
As a productivity machine Windows 8 tops the iPad hands down, it support keyboard and mouse natively and can run real productivity software, included free Microsoft Office replacements that blow away even the most sophisticated iPad or Android Office replacements suits.
Supporting multi platform is costly, cumbersome and time consuming, standardization remains the top choice, at least until computers become just pure dumb terminals and everything is ran from the cloud.
What if it where iPads, would I complain? Even though I sense you framed
But first, please allow me to recap some key points, runner507823.
One: I believe in the BYOD philosophy and program adoption at the University level.
Two: Seton Hall's program is a bit different from other institutions in the sense they actually supply a computer (and/or compatible software applications) to incoming students rather than simply requiring a student have a computer and leaving the choice of hardware (and software) up to them.
A consequence of that policy is definite cost benefits to the university - as you pointed out in your post and what has been pointed out in several blog articles on this topic. However, this is not germane to the question you asked of me. I'll repeat that. Cost benefits are not germane to your query.
So now I can answer your original question. If asked for a comment, I would definitely complain if Seton Hall chose the Apple/iPad platform as a single source solution for both students and university requirements.
And, if you read my post to Seton Hall's President, you should not be surprised by that answer.
When it comes to technology, I don't believe in single source solutions. IMO, that philosophy or policy never "levels the playing field". It only serves to stifle creativity and productivity.
That basically answers your question but I'll supply a bit of background trivia for you.
Did you like the London Olympic games, runner? I enjoyed them. I can also remember the 1996 Summer Olympic games held in Atlanta, Ga. Here is a little bit of trivia about those games that you can read on this web link. http://gtresearchnews.gatech.edu/reshor/rh-win96/olympics.htm
However, the key points from that link and the points I'm going to make can be framed from two paragraphs from that site.
"With assistance from Georgia State University and several private companies, researchers in 1989 created a high-tech multimedia interactive program for the 1990 final proposal to the International Olympic Committee in Tokyo. The presentation won a Computerworld Smithsonian Award in 1992 and a New Media Invision Award in 1994 for its innovative use of information technology.
The Olympic projects relied on cutting-edge computing technology, incorporating three videodisc players, three computers, computer-composed music, digitized narration and the touch-sensitive interaction system. A Commodore Amiga computer controlled the presentation, along with an Apple Macintosh IIcx and a smaller computer interface device."
What does Georgia State University, Olympic Games, Commodore Amiga computers have in common with Seton Hall and Microsoft?
As I stated in my original post, technology changes fast. No single platform (no matter how good) can be the perfect solution to everyone. That observation is just as true today as it was twenty years ago.
When the Atlanta committees IOC presentation was being created, the Apple platform and the Microsoft platform (or ecosystems, if you prefer) at that time period could not, COULD NOT create a multimedia presentation on the scale needed. The Commodore Amiga platform DID have that capability but, as the article quoted, it also used some Apple computers as well. (I believe to create some of the graphics used).
Which means, of course, the Georgia State students and staff supported a BYOD (or open) policy back then over a single sourced solution.
No matter how good Microsoft's hardware and software products are (or for that matter, Apple's or Android or "any other platform") a single source never, ever levels the playing field. It only supports mediocrity, at best.
PS. I could supply other current examples of the benefits of a BYOD policy from two Universities that I'm most familiar with: The University of Michigan and Michigan State University. Both enjoy academic reputations for excellence. Both support a BYOD policy. But I trust you have already understood the points I have been attempting to make.
Awfully long explanation for your previous long post, and weak argument
What is stopping these students from ALSO using their own devices for whatever else they choose to do - there is no limitation there at all. The university is not stating that the students are no allowed to go out and buy additional devices of their own and use them too, so they CAN be more creative or less limited.
There you go, only 6 lines... :)
Best Solution Currently Available My Butt
Sure, "on-paper" Windows 8 might sound great - and when it reaches general availability it might even live up to what it promises on-paper. But, to say it is the best solution without actually having the product in your hands, deploying it into your students hands, and wiring all the networks and information flows together.. Well, that is just disingenuous, this man is talking out of his butt to say "it is best." It is unproven, once it is released put it through some honest to goodness field trials before slapping a "best" sticker on it.
Response to BP314
Usage patterns of students
Only real solution for students...
You could give everyone iPads - they would still need a laptop
I don't care if it's MS or Mac or Linux, students need a real computer.
He's absolutely right
I pay tech fees as part of my tuition... and we certainly don't get anything as cool as a laptop or tablet.
Windows 8 vs iPad vs Android
- USB device support - printers; memory sticks; MIDI over USB etc
- Expansion memory support
- Open applications development environment(s)
- External monitor support (micro-HDMI)
- Two-way transfers of data supported when connecting to other computers
- "Open standard" file types supported as native file types
- FTP, RSH and other remote access technologies included
Both the iPad and current Android devices are closed environments requiring "approval" from either Apple or Google to develop and run apps and transfer media. The iPad does not permit two-way transfers of its data between other computers (iTunes is one-way download only to an iPad leaving users locked to a single desktop station for synchronization of apps, music, video etc). There is no external monitor support, no native FTP or RSH mechanism, and file types are proprietary and locked in.
Why would a university promote closed tablet systems such as iPad and Android when there is now a much more open commercially supported alternative?
Agreed - more positives than negatives to be sure
No brainer.