One of the most convincing arguments I have heard for this
strategy, is that it is very difficult to keep up with
hardware requirements. University budgets for computers are
like black holes, they suck in whatever finance is around.
Then within a year or two, the high end machines they laid
out for, are slow clunkers nobody wants to use except for
word processing.
By putting the onus for hardware on students, the argument
runs, universities can concentrate on infrastructure, like
networks, plotters and printers, and perhaps good quality
monitors for the laptops to plug into. (3D modeling on small
screens
is painful).
Michael Mullins
+AD4-On Mon, 26 Apr 1999 14:14:53 -0400 Joan McLain-Kark
+ADw-jmkark+AEA-VT.EDU+AD4-
+AD4-asked about the number of schools requring laptops for
design students.
+AD4-
strategy, is that it is very difficult to keep up with
hardware requirements. University budgets for computers are
like black holes, they suck in whatever finance is around.
Then within a year or two, the high end machines they laid
out for, are slow clunkers nobody wants to use except for
word processing.
By putting the onus for hardware on students, the argument
runs, universities can concentrate on infrastructure, like
networks, plotters and printers, and perhaps good quality
monitors for the laptops to plug into. (3D modeling on small
screens
is painful).
Michael Mullins
+AD4-On Mon, 26 Apr 1999 14:14:53 -0400 Joan McLain-Kark
+ADw-jmkark+AEA-VT.EDU+AD4-
+AD4-asked about the number of schools requring laptops for
design students.
+AD4-