Raspberry Pi To Embrace RISC OS

[commodorejohn]

Well damn, I may have to get one. It is encouraging as all hell to hear someone talking about really getting kids into a programming mindset again, especially when so much of the rest of the industry seems to be moving towards computers as vendor-controlled vehicles for content consumption...

[commodorejohn]

I always thought RiscOS was kinda ... not very good looking.  Very cluttered desktop.

Never used it myself, but simply from the article talking about it being one of the last OSes "that one person can understand," it's encouraging to know their heart's in the right place. These are the people we need teaching the programmers of tomorrow, not washed-up business majors who cross-trained in VB and tried to parlay it into a teaching career.

[commodorejohn]

What a useless piece of crap. The cpu is a steaming pile of manure. Come on, what can u use it for. It will stand like a retarded lame duck on the desk. A monument to failure. Cheap sticker on the side. Weak, useless, powerless, utter crap, and it have a bum OS on top of that .

It's underpowered for daily-use computing, sure - but as it says in the article, that's exactly what they're trying to avoid it being used for. It's not a replacement for a modern system, it's a machine on which students can learn how to make the computer work themselves. It's like an updated version of a home computer running Basic. And that, I think, is exactly what schools these days are missing.

RISC OS is crap and trying to use it for educational purposes is a waste of time. If one needs a system for teaching students with the goal of being able to understand every facet of the device, a micro controller is a more suitable platform. If the goal is to teach students how to write programs that run under an OS, linux or windows is far more suitable as those skills can apply directly in the real world.

There's a pretty big difference between learning how to write programs in an operating-system environment with interactive debugging and trying to write low-level hardware-banging code, and I don't think too many kids will be open to learning the latter before they've figured out the former. And while Windows or Linux are certainly more commonly used, neither one is something that a grade-school student just getting their feet wet would ever have any hope of understanding. Something simpler and more easily comprehended is definitely called for, and while I don't know if RISC OS is it, it's certainly a hell of a lot closer.

Also, the moment you start talking about putting the kibosh on learning things that don't "apply directly in the real world," you've abandoned real education for the churning out of factory and office drones (the thing that currently characterizes the American school system, which as you may have heard, sucks.) The hell with that.

[commodorejohn]

Kids seem to be getting along just fine these days with python on windows, linux and macs. Python is the new basic. It's amazing what they have access to and can accomplish.

I have my beefs with Python (literal whitespace? In the 21st century? Really?) but yeah, it's pretty all right, and I'd definitely prefer it over Java as a teaching tool. But! I think there's a lot of value in giving kids tools and an environment that let them (when they're ready) look past the interpreter environment and the standard libraries and discover the rest of the system, and while Python does provide facilities for that, they're not particularily good facilities, and it doesn't really encourage that mindset. (Though to its credit, it doesn't actively discourage it like some other languages...)

I can't imagine in this day and age foisting RISC OS on a kid as some kind of educational endevour. Forcing them to slog through all that ancient esoteric crap would be sure to loose their attention.  The only people who really think that's a good idea are middle aged nerds pining for the olden days shaking their fists up in the air about how things ain't as simple as they used to be.

Again, I'm not advocating for RISC OS specifically - I haven't used it or programmed for it, so I don't know whether it's as arcane as all that. What I do think is that there's value in giving students an OS environment that's functional, but simple enough in both principle and implementation that they can really understand it. I believe the original Amiga OS approached this goal (though it had its flaws,) I don't know if RISC OS does or not. But from what was being said in the article, that's their goal here, and putting aside the question of any specific OS, I find that philosophy very encouraging.

And yes, stuff that can be used in the real world matters. Give a guy a tool he can use in the environment he lives in and stuff gets built. Give a guy a tool he can't use in the environment he lives in and nothing will ever be accomplished.

Not so much. It's certainly true you'd have very limited application in the real world for the API specifics of such a niche OS, but that isn't the point - the point is to instill in students a mindset of "computers are not magic, this is stuff that I can learn and understand myself." A mindset like this is the difference between someone who churns out template code because he's paid to and someone who really understands, enjoys, and is enriched by programming - and it's something that damn near nobody teaches these days.

90% of learning to program is getting into the right mindsets - learning to think about structure before you start banging out half-formed implementations, learning to always check your assumptions when debugging, etc. These things are universal; a good programmer is a good programmer no matter what OS, language, or toolchain they're using.

(Except COBOL.)

And as far as the educational system in the USA goes, it's not that bad. The problem is the parents who expect the government to turn their kids into successful people while barely lifting a finger themselves.

While parental disinvolvement is certainly an issue, I've spoken with teachers and former students alike who agree that the system as it stands is geared towards producing ready-made drone workers fitted with predetermined skillsets, not educated at all (because that would take more effort, require dealing with students as individuals instead of as faceless numbers, and might make them troublesome in the workforce.) I was fortunate enough to be home-schooled and never had to deal with the educational system until I reached college, but everything I've seen confirms this.