Public
Great article, but I think it's missing a key point, the failure of iPads (which the highlighted graph shows). Into that vacuum, Google stepped in with a cheap and simple Chromebook solution for both consuming and producing content that had minimal administrative overhead and training, and sold it very well.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/13/technology/google-education-chromebooks-schools.html
Failure of iPads:
https://www.wired.com/2015/05/los-angeles-edtech/
Note also that Microsoft is flat in this graph, Apple down since 2013, and Google skyrockets.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/13/technology/google-education-chromebooks-schools.html
Failure of iPads:
https://www.wired.com/2015/05/los-angeles-edtech/
Note also that Microsoft is flat in this graph, Apple down since 2013, and Google skyrockets.
How Google Took Over the Classroom
nytimes.com
I think it's more of a mismatch of expectations. In the early years of microcomputers, the devices were used for fairly targeted things, and switching platforms was expensive. Today, these devices are just part of life, not really an end unto themselves.
In that light, iPads really suck (as do Android-based systems like Pixel C). Without keyboards, using them to get work done is horrid, with keyboards it's still very sub-par. Chromebooks come pretty close to the minimally acceptable intersection of being adequate for both consumption and creation. I swim in devices at home, and routinely pass over both my MacBook Pro and my iPads for a Chromebook.
And that's before considering the management advantages. I don't think Apple or Microsoft can easily replicate that (heck, Google's Android is already much worse than iDevices on that front).49w
Add a comment...