Rilbur

The title was a (bad) reference to a TV show. Not sure what else I'd call the story, to be honest; titles have always been something of a weakness for me.

Speaking of English-language articles, look what was posted right after I finished my morning reading of the news yesterday: http://arstechnica.com/apple/2013/04/apple-ceo-tim-cook-responds-to-chinese-media-promises-better-service/ As far as the rest of your comments HH5... I'm sorry, but I'm not going to be able to reply to them. Between your increasing belligerence and their sheer unreadability, it's just not worth it.

Yes, I read the news. Do I read the same news as you? Obviously not, even ignoring the fact that there is a language barrier involved. Most of what I read is tech focused, from Arstechnica.com and similar -- properly researched, scholarly articles. Sometimes they lag a bit behind other news sites, but that would be because they actually bother with this thing called 'fact checking'. If you're providing something that's translated, it might be helpful to mention that -- along with linking to the original, which should always be automatic. Telling me to go find it is neither helpful, nor appropriate. It's your responsibility to provide links to information you include in your posts, and your responsibility to ensure that your communications are readable in the language of the forum you've chosen to participate in. A simple line of 'translated from article XYZ' would have sufficed. Clearly you've chosen to take my comment as a personal attack, and chosen to respond in kind. If I gave the impression it was an attack, I apologize. It was exactly what it was stated as: that source doesn't sound reliable simply because the grammar was beyond atrocious. It was intended as a subtle hint that you should have included a link to the original, but as I should have recalled, my version of subtlety is often lost on others.

HH5, I don't know where you got that second quote, but I wouldn't consider it a reliable source. The grammar is bad enough that any decent editor would have rejected it.

hh5, I don't think anyone is arguing that we should give iPads to anyone below high-school age (14 years old or so). Below that, you're right -- they're too rambunctious too rough. Beyond that, giving iPads to students is stupid when Android is cheaper and just as effective (Android's primary weakness is fragmentation, by issuing the same device across an entire school you remove that issue). And since Android is open source, that's absolutely no issue with creating a device that's ruggedized to hand up to rougher handling, something that iPads are NOT.

Saving costs is nice. But the point you're missing is that in this case, you're trimming costs that actually undermine the entire process. Maybe you save money over an iPad -- but that's actually debatable, because you'll have to provide multiple monitors in every environment. Instead of 1 iPad per person, you're stocking each classroom with as many monitors as the classroom can hold people. This creates duplication, especially when you add in the need to have additional monitors in facilities like the library. Plus you'll probably need to provide them at home for students. And even if you save costs, you create a situation with trade-offs that, frankly, are not worth it. The point of an iPad is it's portability compared to PCs. You can carry it anywhere, easily. Whip it out at lunch, on the bus, at school, etc etc. You can't do that once you bolt it to a keyboard and monitor. It's just not practical.

The issue with this 'android mini pc' would be portability. You can't whip it out in the cafeteria to study between classes, or on the bus, or at library tables.

Depends on how it's done. That said, that would only be helpful for avoiding pregnancy, not the transmission of STDs. Well, it'd help, somewhat, but...

It's recommended as a safe-sex practice, so...

I can't believe I have to explain that condoms aren't just for 'penetrative' sex -- they're also for oral.

Yes. And No. Even if HTML 5 was fully, 100% implimented, native code is always faster, and has fewer security loopholes. Plus Javascript is just a pain to work with on a serious project, even with JQuery.

The biggest problem with claiming that HTML5 works 'well' on all three is that unless they did it when I wasn't looking, they still haven't finalized the HTML5 spec. Scary thought, yes? Half the internet is running on 'specs' that aren't even finalized yet!

Disney doesn't own THX, so far as I'm aware. It was 'spun off' from Lucas Arts years ago, so Disney didn't acquire it in the purchase. Also, both Macs and Windows machines are easy to update: windows once properly configured does it automatically, the Mac just pops up a window saying 'time to install updates'.

I always buy ebook these days. The advantages outweigh the costs. No wear and tear on the book -- only the device, which you'll replace eventually anyways. Less weight -- can carry a lot more on you Less volume -- contributes to the above Doesn't require an external light source (depending on device) Can't loose your place Easy searching Non-damaging options for marking notes Ability to instantly get definitions on unfamiliar words Can't be lost Can adjust certain design elements (font size, margins) to suit your current needs I'll concede that battery life can be an issue, depending on the device, but 'page always loads' is a BS complaint based on a web browser. Also, visual compatibility is to a large degree a matter of getting proper compensatory devices (glasses). And by 'carry more with you', I mean I carry over three hundred books with me every day. More than that; that's just the best count I can get. I have 231 books in my caliber library (which means in un-encrypted e-pub format), and I think more than 100 books in my nook library. And then there's my much smaller kindle library. And I'm constantly adding more -- both from new releases, and when the publishers are finally smart enough to release older books in ebook format.

Thanks for tracking down that article. I'll retract my previous price point statements, as this guy has clearly done a lot more research than I have the time or interest to manage. I'll simply bring back to the fore that we're moving to an increasingly electronic world, and introducing students to that is likely to help them in life. And a 'school-specific' tablet device based on Android would also greatly improve the cost ratio -- over half the cost is on the device, after all, and Apple is known for it's high premiums.