Ian sent email all the way from halfway around the world to relate his experience with maintaining school networks of both flavors. Is it that Macs are really easier to take care of, or is this New Zealander just up to taking on the work of three men by himself?

I take your point that Macs are more expensive than Wintel PCs to buy but have you any experience with the on-going cost of maintenance? I look after Macs in three local schools, about 130 computers in all, as a part-time on-call job. Another local school with 40-odd Windows PCs has a full-time staff member to look after them.

X is here to stay; XP is about to go
Jamie, who is a member of a technology advisory board for a public school district, sent a very thoughtful email which included these thoughts on computer life expectancy:

Cost is a major concern for schools. However, our findings do not indicate that Windows computers are cheaper. Even the initial cost is minimal between the two if you compare all features and included software. When you add in that the functional life expectancy of Wintel is 2.6 years and a Mac is 4.2 years, things appear quite different. Tech support approaches twice the cost for Wintel boxes, even without considering significantly higher downtime. Viruses and security considerations are noted here under cost and obviously the Mac has a huge advantage here.

A new concern has raised many questions for us and the few answers we have are not what we wanted to hear. It is that Microsoft considers XP as an end-of-life (my words, not theirs) operating system. Although the GUI is pretty and functional, the engine underneath is not so good. They are telling us how great the new OS will be, but then why would I want to spend money with a dead end product. Their own reps play up the new "Longhorn" and discredit the "old" XP. Especially when they indicate software will most likely not be backward compatible. We can't afford to spend our computer dollars and expect obsolescence in a year or two. Apple has already gone through this phase. OS X, their next generation OS, is here today and is just bubbling with potential.

iLife is great! What About iLearn?
Dave F. wrote from Boise ID, where he works as the Instructional Technology Coordinator in the Department of Nursing at Boise State University. Though he emailed me from his G4 at home, his department at school is all-PC, and he "sees no reason to change" right now:

Apple deserves to have the high end graphic & video market -- they have targeted them and most importantly, have developed the apps for them. They are fast deserving a large share of the consumer market -- the iApps are phenomenal, best of class, unbeatable applications (when considered as a whole package -- I couldn't claim iMovie was superior to any Windows offering the way I could claim iTunes is). Plus, for the sake of vanity alone, an Apple computer (or a small network of them) is a classy, sophisticated addition to a household.

... I just hope that Apple keeps making new & different killer apps, because that is the only way they will get market share back in education or any other vertical market. We may use Windows based nursing instructional software now, but I believe Apple could really get some new market share in education if they "think different" and start focusing on making educational content related applications. Then I would consider advocating change -- but for now, I'll keep dealing with PC's, and keep my Mac bias at home.

Are Computers Really Good For Us, Anyway?
This reader loves his Mac, but isn't so sure we should have any kind of gadgetry in our schools. As a Bazooka Joe comic once told me, the best computer there is is the one between each of our ears:

I use computers, but I will not pretend that they are useful in an educational setting. Teaching mathematics has been my only occupation and I've been doing it for fifteen years; never once encouraging my students to use any computer except a hand-held calculator (an optional student purchase). I have a BFA (film) from NYU, an MA (math ed) from Columbia University, and will earn an MS (operation research) from Columbia University this December -- computers helped with the drudge work, but learning was done the hard way: reading and thinking. Computer's are worse than a TV when it comes to learning -- students need to be encouraged to THINK, READ, WRITE and do MATH. Education in my state (NJ) cost about $10,000/student per year! After 12 long years the outcomes are shameful. BTW, I am a loyal Mac fanatic!

Crashing is Good ... It Kills Time!
And, finally, one anonymous reader had this light-hearted, if appropos, bit of advice on Macs vs PC in K-12 classrooms:

My kids tell me they prefer the PC labs at school because when they crash they know that class time will be wasted. They will normally not get the machines up and ready before the end of class. In the Mac labs they restart and resume their work. I worry about the lost time.

I love my Mac, I use OS X, and I use SoftWindows when needed. I also own a PC but I rarely use it. Just my two cents.

Nothing like a computer that won't work to keep the school kids happy, huh? Want to add your two cents to the debate? Send an email!