Re: [lias] Age IT Software News: Schools open for business

[Telford Tendys <telford@eng.uts.edu.au>]

> ... still based on ancient text based clients

Hey, don't go knocking text based clients, I've yet to see a graphical
web browser that worked as smoothly, as easily and as quickly as lynx.
For that matter, most graphical front ends are designed to be as attractive,
interesting, entertaining and useless as possible... but that's just
my experience.

As for OASIS, can't say I've used it. Sure there is good and bad user
interface design in both the graphical and text based worlds but being
text based is rarely a bad thing in itself -- especially when most
admin type applications are fundamentally based around the manipulation
of text entities.

> 	However, noting from the way things are panning out at the
> coal face, a lot of schools have a TCP based network for the web
> connectivity, and a second network for the OASIS system. Support
> crew are often hesitant to go near the OASIS network since more often
> than not, it is not well understood.

I have to agree here, using standard network protocols has a lot to
be said for it.

> 	For small schools, this is a major pain since PC's are a scarce
> resource and having separate machines and networks for these functions
> is not practical.

I would think that low end PCs should not be scarce, they are everywhere
and people can't wait to get rid of them. The trouble is that everyone
decides that if they can't have the latest and greatest then they won't
settle for something crappy. Dedicating a 486 box to a text-based admin
application but putting it onto a standard TCP network and using standard
socket IO for the connection would be my suggestion.

* the 486 box is cheap, once up and running it should need next to no
  maintenance because it only does one job, and it does it constantly.

* the network can be shared with web browsers or other internet apps,
  some text pages are going to do nothing at all to dent your LAN bandwidth.

> A far more suitable solution would be to use a web based
> interface with an SQL backend running on some form of *nix box. I would
> go as far to say that much of a small schools infrastructure could be
> adequately handled by a single server providing connectivity and
> firewalling, along with a web based OASIS system...

I see good and bad in web based interfaces, often they are clunky and
difficult to use even though they look cool from the outset. For example,
a custom client usually has custom keys dedicated to the application,
hit F1 in a browser and you don't get help that is specific to the
site you are using. Now I'll admit that with enough java code you can
make anything run in a web browser, but there comes a point where you
have to wonder why the browser is there at all.

> 	Anyways, almost every school across N.S.W. has a brand spanking
> new Celeron 366 or 400 running Novel 4 and OASIS hooked up to two or
> three
> workstations all on their own separate network....whilst everything else
> will usually end up living on a seperate TCP network. What a waste...

It should be possible to share the wires between Novel and TCP. 
The old IPX packets don't get confused for IP packets and vice versa,
our uni network manages to share the wires between IPX, IP and
even Microsoft's net-bui without much problem (other than congestion at
times because about 500 machines share the one logical network which
is all 10M coax). Actually, Novell is shifting towards TCP anyhow.

There are some hazy security reasons why splitting an admin network
off anything internet based is a good idea. It isn't actually NECESSARY
but if you expect most of your security to be at the mercy of fairly
clueless people then having physical separation is something that
is guaranteed to work and anyone can understand. If someone strange
sits at an admin terminal then everyone notices and questions what they
might be doing, rather than access coming from arbitrary places.

> P.S. Just as a last pointer, reports have floated in to me that the
> N.S.W.
> dept of Ed. signed a contract with MickeySoft for a copy of Office 2K
> AND
> a copy Win2K Pro for every machine in every school across N.S.W.. I
> wouldn't
> mind knowing exactly how much of our taxes got pumped straight into
> Billies
> pocket for a product that teachers are shying away from and another that
> isn't even released yet... 

I feel sick.

> 	The problem with Office 2k seems to be if one doesn't load the clip art
> library, then office will ask for the install cd when one uses it. The
> second
> problem is M$'s insistence on doing the 'behind the back' upgrade on
> each
> document as it is opened and modified. Once touched with Office 2k, the
> document then cannot be opened with office 97. Hence preventing schools
> with
> O2K from sending documents to schools using Office 97. So much for a
> company
> that supports 'interoperability'. Bleh...

Same happened here with MS-office 95 being installed as a site licence
and then students buying new machines get MS-office 97 installed, they
touch their files at home, bring them in, can't read, etc. It is a system
that squeezes the institutions into forking out for constant upgrades
that they don't need. There is actually a patch for MS-office 95 that
allows it to read 97 files but most people don't know about it nor how
to install it so you end up spending the money in support anyhow.

The thing that ticks me off about the govt trying to ``standardise'' on
Microsoft products (other than our balance of trade being trashed while
we get worthless promises in return) is that those products are not a
standard. They change regularly in undocumented ways, they store their
files in unreadable and unspecified formats. The belief that all of the
IT compatability issues will go away by using only one single supplier
is very much akin to commenting on how warm and safe we are not that we
have our heads stuck in the lion's mouth.

	- Tel

-
ComputerBank Australia -- http://www.computerbank.org.au/