Re: laptop vs. desktop :: autocad vs. form.z

I really don't know if the packages (AutoCAD, MicroStation, Form.Z and so on...) are the critical issue when it comes to computers in Academics. Go for the best deal I say (the cheapest, or manufacturer's technical support and so on...)
Academics should focus on the generic concepts, teach the principles of CAD/CAM (on a 486, if need be), or simply teach a few programming languages. I say this because digital technologies develop really fast, most packages and (to an extent) the systems would be obsolete even before students gradate.
Computers are crucial in thinking critically, I think. If one makes a comparison, they represent a technical change as radical as the invention of perspective (or cartography/draughtsmanship). And critical thinking in architecture would have to change in face of the new possibilities opened up by the computer.
The question is, should architects act proactively or react to this change, which is already happening?
The question is, should the manufacturers (especially Apple computers and their cynical marketing techniques) be allowed to influence architectural thinking, by defining the modes and nomenclature?
Partial thread listing: