An Open Letter To Schools That Continue To Ban Dual Boot Capable Macs

[GCoop]

The real answer here is to treat people like adults and not use any kind of exam software.  If your hardware fails, then have a paper/pen or loaner backup strategy, but ... treat people like adults.

I guess I agree and don't agree. I think that people should be treated like adults, but what's to be done about the guy who chats with a friend back home giving him the answers? I guess they could kill wireless during exams or something

You deal with it in terms of the honor code.  He gets suspended or expelled.

A school specifiying that laptops that computers have wireless cards only with specific chipsets is just moronic.  Support one of the standards (b/g/a whatever) and let it be.  I am skeptical of that level of specificity; it makes me wonder if the school gets a kickback on purchases of their "recommended configuration, direct from this link to our 'preferred vendor'"

That's one way to think about it, and perhaps the case, but the other way to think about it is a page out of Apple's book. When you use the exact same hardware in a computer, you know exactly what to expect, and you limit your range of problems. It isn't absurd or pathetic... it's a good way to streamline support. When was the last time you could go buy all the components for a computer and then install an Apple OS on it? I vaguely remember when Apple leased out its OS and other manufacturers built the hardware, but that certainly isn't the case now. Restricting hardware makes for easier support, as anyone with an Apple can attest (or a videogame console -- that'd be another example).

The obligation of a University's IT department is to provide support for the widest variety of equipment possible.  If I make a CHOICE to buy into a platform with limited hardware (like Mac), then I've made that choice.  Forcing me to buy the Dell XXX because the IT department of the school I'm attending is too lazy to support anything but a specific Broadcomm 802.11 chipset (extreme example) is wrong for numerous reasons.

You say that Apple's require non certified drivers, but many PCs ship with uncertified drivers as well.  This is neither unique nor different.  The fact of the matter is, a Mac booted into Windows XP Pro from Boot Camp is no different than a generic PC booted into Windows XP Pro.  That the initial boot comes from EFI and not BIOS plays no role in any of the software running in the OS.

I wasn't saying the PCs didn't do that, though I would say it isn't a prevelant process. Windows even has drivers for 5-year old hardware in my PC made by a manufacturer that doesn't exist any more. There are certified drivers for VMware virtualized hardware that doesn't even physically exist. Not certifying drivers is lazy. My point in mentioning it in the context of Apple was intended to initially show that the BootCamp suite isn't "just a bootloader" and later to clarify that it wasn't just issues with an Apple motherboard that could cause a problem.

I contend that running Windows through Boot Camp on a Mac is no different than running Windows on a Dell Latitude laptop.  Just as the Dell ships with drivers (theirs may be certified) for video, network adapter, etc., so to does the Mac running Windows XP.  A school wouldn't ban an eMachines, a Toshiba, or another PC that doesn't have 100% certified drivers, they shouldn't do the same for the Mac.  Furthermore, dozens of schools have been allowing Macs with Boot Camp for quite a long time, with no major problems reported.

Boot Camp is no more than a bootloader, plus a disk of drivers similar to the disk that would be provided if a user were to do a fresh install of Windows onto their laptop.  That is all.

Banning Macs from law schools/law school exams is merely lazy.

I disagree, which I suppose is obvious, but I certainly understand how it appears that way.

The whole thing stinks to high heaven of an IT department that at best is too lazy to support more than a few configurations (these are typically the kind of IT departments that start their diagnostics by trying to find ways to disqualify you from taking advantage of their help rather than trying to solve the problem at hand), and at worst, setting up policies to force their incoming students to make a purchase that directly or indirectly benefits their bottom line.

[dcforlife]

You deal with it in terms of the honor code.  He gets suspended or expelled.

I guess my point was what if he isn't caught...

(anything relating to an IT department)

I think I've pretty much had to say what I've said on this angle. I am part of an IT department in a non-law school academic environment and can vouch for the fact that we do limit new technology from time to time for a variety of reasons, none of them laziness. I should qualify that by saying, however, that we provide public computing resources, and aren't in the business of forcing students to purchase laptops to specific specs and then supporting them. A bit different, but similar concepts.

We work very hard to provide the latest technology and widest support to students, but our core value is never to let anything in the field unless we're certain it works. We allocate resources to ensure that x number of products work at 100% - the alternative would be a variant like 2x number of products worked at 50%. The people upstairs feel that students are better served with a quick, correct answer to their trouble than a slow guess because we hadn't had the resources to get to 100%, and I have to say I agree, having seen both options in practice. It delayed the upgrade to Windows XP, it will delay the upgrade to Vista, and it will delay the rollout of Macs, but it is the better choice. I won't try and issue a blanket statement that no IT department is ever lazy, but I can certainly say we aren't. I completely understand why it seems that way, but the best I can do without you being in my shoes is to suggest that you try considering reasons in addition to - and perhaps aside from - sheer laziness.

I contend that running Windows through Boot Camp on a Mac is no different than running Windows on a Dell Latitude laptop.  Just as the Dell ships with drivers (theirs may be certified) for video, network adapter, etc., so to does the Mac running Windows XP.  A school wouldn't ban an eMachines, a Toshiba, or another PC that doesn't have 100% certified drivers, they shouldn't do the same for the Mac.  Furthermore, dozens of schools have been allowing Macs with Boot Camp for quite a long time, with no major problems reported.

Boot Camp is no more than a bootloader, plus a disk of drivers similar to the disk that would be provided if a user were to do a fresh install of Windows onto their laptop.  That is all.

I think the only point I'd disagree on would be the initial installation of Windows - Macs simply handle it differently than PCs. But if you limit it to "running", then yea, I'd have to agree. When it's out of beta, and when it gets to the point where you can order a Mac with Windows pre-installed, then even more so. Though how do you right-click?

On the definition, of course, I definitely agree - that's pretty much verbatim what I said.

[Gopherit]

.

[slacker]

The obligation of a University's IT department is to provide support for the widest variety of equipment possible.  If I make a CHOICE to buy into a platform with limited hardware (like Mac), then I've made that choice.  Forcing me to buy the Dell XXX because the IT department of the school I'm attending is too lazy to support anything but a specific Broadcomm 802.11 chipset (extreme example) is wrong for numerous reasons.

Obligation? From where does this "obligation" originate? (To clarify, a source other than a sense of entitlement.)

Cf., dcforlife's post for a view of real-world concerns of IT departments.

[h2xblive]

Obligation? From where does this "obligation" originate? (To clarify, a source other than a sense of entitlement.)

Cf., dcforlife's post for a view of real-world concerns of IT departments.

Unless they're providing the laptop for free, it's their obligation to support what I bring.

hth.

In law school, I would have assumed the opposite: As long as I bring what I want, they have no obligation to support it - I use it at my own risk.  If I want to use a G4 or Intel Mac to take an exam and it gets all screwed up, that's my problem.  If I use a laptop that the school requires and it gets messed up, it's their problem.

[h2xblive]

In law school, I would have assumed the opposite: As long as I bring what I want, they have no obligation to support it - I use it at my own risk.  If I want to use a G4 or Intel Mac to take an exam and it gets all screwed up, that's my problem.  If I use a laptop that the school requires and it gets messed up, it's their problem.

What I really meant was: I don't want a specific predetermined system unless they're providing it for free.  I'm willing to look at a list of standards that must be met and decide for myself based on that.

Better?

I will be disappointed with anything less from the school I attend.

[Catherine Morland]

tag

[_____________________]

i love the mac law students blog.

i HATE dell with a passion, and i can't see myself choosing to attend a school that requires them.  i use a dell at work and its a total piece of cr@p.  i love my ibook.  the service with apple has always been excellent.  ive had it for three years, had only two problems, both which were resolved promptly and professionally. 

i went to columbia for undergrad and initially wanted a mac but my father and the IT dept were not terribly encouraging.  instead i got a vaio.  it was a reasonably good machine, top of the line pc, much better than dell, and i still had gobs of problems with it.  it crapped out after 2.5 years.  i was finally allowed to purchase a mac and life was beautiful.  the battery life was excellent, it was easy to take back and forth to class, i cant say enough good things about my machine.

i can understand why IT departments may not want to support macs, but i think students should have the choice.  for example, at columbia, macs are unsupported.  if anything went wrong with it, id have to bring it to the apple store to deal with it.  this is no big deal to me, as the service at the apple store is a lot better than the columbia IT dept that served undergrads.  i dont think it would be unreasonable for law schools to adopt such a policy.  id much rather pay 350 for the apple care plan and get my support that way than have to buy a bad machine i don't like and have to deal with law schools IT.