Anthony Ettinger wrote:
> On 12/17/06, norman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Sun, 2006-12-17 at 14:23 +0100, Olivier Lecarme wrote:
>>> Here is my own modest grain of salt in the discussion:
>> < snip >
>>> Somebody in this list said that teachers have the duty to teach what is
>>> an industry standard. My own strong opinion is that one of my duties as
>>> a university teacher is to try changing the industry standards, if I
>>> think they are inappropriate. If my students need later to learn using
>>> Photoshop or Vista, they will be able to learn them quickly and easily,
>>> and with an acutely critical mind (hopefully). For the present, I prefer
>>> to teach them Gimp and GNU/Linux, and to teach them not to accept any
>>> so-called standard without discussion and thought.
>> Surely, it is most important to teach students the principals involved
>> in a subject so that, at a later stage, they are better informed when it
>> comes to choosing in which direction to proceed. It is the
>> responsibility of Industry, not universities, to provide the training
>> needed for its employees to do the jobs required of them. The new
>> graduate should be able to bring fresh ideas to the world of work not
>> perpetuate the status quo and, thereby, help to ensure that we all
>> benefit from progress and change. I could go on but this is probably not
>> the place to do so.
>> Norman
> As a career development student I'd have to agree that it's more
> important to learn general ideas and concepts, vs. the nitty gritty of
> one particular application/language, unless you want to learn that
> specific level of detail in an application.
> My wife teaches Gimp to her Jr. High computer class, about 90 students
> a quarter...she wasn't teaching any advanced graphic editor at all
> until I showed her Gimp and how it was just as good if not better than
> the "industry standard" Photoshop, which is around $600+ for one
> license (there probably is a "school edition", but you get my point).
> Her students and school would never be able to afford that (nor should
> they in my opinion) when there is a competing product that is open
> source and available to all.
> Also, the "industry standard" is subjective at best and from my
> perspective limited simply by choice. Take for excample programming -
> what would you say is the "industry standard" language? There are so
> many choices it's impossible to say.

Not to mention that "industry standard" is a often a function of 
marketing as opposed to technical superiority or codification by some 
sort of standards body. E.g., Windows.

Bill Lee
Gimp-user mailing list

Reply via email to