Convincing Colleges to Upgrade Their Classes? 115
Pray_4_Mojo asks: "I'm an engineering student at the University of Pittsburgh, and I'm currently taking a required class known as 'Computer Interfacing'. While I enjoy the instructor, I find most of the material to be severely dated. We will spend the majority of the class covering RS232/XMODEM/Token Ring means of computer-to-computer communication. Almost no mention of USB, Firewire, or IRDa is made within the class. I am trying to convince my professor that this material is relevant, as these types of interfaces will be dominate in the world we future grads will be working in. As an example, I demonstrated that the keycard access system to gain access to the Interfacing Lab has a USB port for data download/firmware programming. The professor seems interested, but it seems that I need to convince the department to revise the course requirements. Has anyone attempted to modernize their CS/Engineering program and met with success?"
Egads! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Egads! (Score:1)
Re:Egads! (Score:2)
The concepts you will learn are the same... (Score:5, Insightful)
In the specific case of serial interfaces, there really isn't all that much different between RS-232, RS-485, and USB or Firewire. They are all serial interfaces that employ the same fundamental concepts. In the real world you'll have to apply that knowledge to any number of serial interfaces.
The same logic can be applied to a discussion yesterday about using MS or open source programming environments in a CS department.
Re:The concepts you will learn are the same... (Score:2, Insightful)
You see this in other fields as well (e.g. psychology, business etc.) As long as you're getting the concepts, it doesn't matter what the mechanics of the course are based on.
You'll learn the real-world applications of those concepts quickly enough in the real world.
Re:The concepts you will learn are the same... (Score:2, Troll)
Re:The concepts you will learn are the same... (Score:5, Insightful)
You are told to forget the technology which was used to convey the concepts, but the concepts are where the value is.
Here's an example.
If you want to learn how to fly a 747 you don't start out on one! You spend many years and tens of thousands of dollars learning on the concepts on smaller aircraft. Granted, knowing the gauge layout of a Cessna has zero relevance to a 747 but the concept of watching your fuel levels applies equally well in either case.
So yes, when you get to 747 school they will say "forget all that other airplane stuff" but they're not really telling you to forget the concepts, just the nitty-gritty details that you don't need any more.
Compres vous?
Re:The concepts you will learn are the same... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:The concepts you will learn are the same... (Score:2, Insightful)
747? A poor example. (Score:1, Insightful)
If you want to learn how to fly a 747, I'm betting there are about a zillion more things that you have to do before even getting to taxi to the runway, as compared to a cessna.
On the other hand, if you want to learn how to program by learning C#.NET, all you need is notepad and a compiler. In other words, the existence of advanced stuff won't get in the way of the basics, and in the meantime, you're learning modern syntax and modern thought patterns.
Not only that, but remember that learning the syntax is
Re:747? A poor example. (Score:2)
Re:747? A poor example. (Score:1, Interesting)
> becoming proficient -- and employable".
> That's only true if you want to be a
> keyboard monkey, and even then, how
> fast you can type is just as important
> as the syntax.
> What good is your education if it
> teaches you short lived information?
> Pay to learn the concepts. If you want
> to learn syntax, go buy a book.
> If you know the concepts,
> you can pick up the syntax of any modern
> programming language in a few days.
i *did*
Re:The concepts you will learn are the same... (Score:1)
Way to copy an AC post and get a +5 for it. Good ole Slashdot moderation.
Re:The concepts you will learn are the same... (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm not sure where you went to school, but I've never studied or taught anywhere that spent ANY money on designing the curriculum. And testing it? Forget it!
Most professors are left to their own devices to cover what they like in class as long as they hit a few basic points. For instance, compare the syllabi of the same Macroeconomics course as taught by a Keynesian and a Monetarist who studied under Milton F
Re:The concepts you will learn are the same... (Score:2)
However, the ability to "do your own thing" varies quite greatly from institution to institution and department to department. In some places the instructor is given almost no ability to deviate from the sylabus that is handed to them. In others they are almost completely free to do what they want.
And of course, we don't even want to get into the whole idea that university profs are hired on t
Re:The concepts you will learn are the same... (Score:2)
On these grounds, I would propose that VMS be reinstated as the standard big iron system, and OS/2 be revived.
I'm not fresh on TR.... (Score:2, Insightful)
This is why CS curriculums include not widely used in industry languages such as LISP; just because they do things radically different.
Re:I'm not fresh on TR.... (Score:2)
In immediate retrospect, I'll grant the expense problem, especially in computers, where "shelf life" tends to revolve right around ten minutes for any given thing.
Re:I'm not fresh on TR.... (Score:2)
You're trying to compare two things that aren't exactly comparable :) TCP/IP is a different layer from Token Ring in the ISO view of things... TCP is layer 4, IP is layer 3. Token Ring is layer 1 and 2, like Ethernet. In other words, you should be comparing TR to Ethernet, not to TCP/IP.
You can run TCP/IP over a Token Ring network, just get a TR network interface card. Just like you can run TCP/IP over a serial line, FDDI, SONET, etc...
Re:I'm not fresh on TR.... (Score:2)
Re:I'm not fresh on TR.... (Score:2)
Re:I'm not fresh on TR.... (Score:2, Insightful)
Fibre Channel.
Well, it's not a literal descendent of Token Ring (is it?). But it's certainly a loop topology. And frequently, the primary cost of deploying a Fibre Channel SAN is in training Ethernet-centric people to administer it properly. (Indeed, the nascent iSCSI market is driven less by a distaste for expensive FC switches than by an aversion to sending one's admins to FC boot camp for six weeks.)
Incidentally... why a loop?
Re:The concepts you will learn are the same... (Score:2, Insightful)
Now, token passing is a valid idea. For networks it may not be used currently, but for systems that cannot withstand collisions of any sort token passing is a valid algorithm.
My point is that just because you cannot find a way to apply a c
Re:The concepts you will learn are the same... (Score:1)
Please don't be so rational - it breaks the flow of nonsense that I usually am able to indulge in when reading "Ask Slashdot" discussions.
Re:The concepts you will learn are the same... (Score:5, Informative)
USB and Firewire are vastly different from EIA-232 and siblings.
USB is much closer to Ethernet than it is to EIA-232. I've done some serial development and some USB development, and the USB development is abstracted from hardware by several layers; while serial is barely abstracted by one layer (in microcontrollers, if you're lucky to get a UART).
It really is different. I would agree that students would benefit from learning more modern interfaces later on, though EIA-232 is perfect for teaching basic communications concepts. I certainly had difficulty the first time I developed a USB peripheral; it had never been taught, if barely mentioned at all.
It makes sense now. The abstraction almost makes it easier to develop for on the PC side, and there are amazing features built right into the protocol. A simple microcontroller can change from a keyboard, to a mouse, to a joystick, or dozens of other devices with a simple change in firmware.
Re:The concepts you will learn are the same... (Score:1)
I'm not actually sure how USB works. I always assumed it used the basic transfer technique that serial does for the actual communications (i.e. high = 1 low = 0, we have a paritiy bit, etc...). What you really need to know about communications though is things like different data encoding methods, handshaking, and the various protocols used f
Fundamentally the same stuff (Score:3, Insightful)
Eventually, USB and FireWire may be what is taught in that class, provided they stand the test of time like *MODEM and RS232 have.
Fake Assembly (Score:2, Interesting)
I started school at BYU this semester. I'm going into CS. The first required class had a horrifying syllabus. We were to learn about C, basic electronics, and assembly language built for a theoretical computer. I was disgusted that we would learn just about NOTHING which would be practical. I transferred out of there so fast. Now, I just hope I can get exempted from that class or take a C++, Java, or X86 assmebly course instead.
void
Re:Fake Assembly (Score:5, Informative)
My suggestion: Go to Chubb.
If you start thinking in the "That's not practical, who cares" mode, you belong in a trade school.
Sorry, I know that's not very politically correct, but it's the TRUTH.
Now, if you want to learn real computer SCIENCE, stick it out.
Learning assembly language for a theoretical computer is a great exercise -- you have to actually exercise that mush between your ears!
My favorite class in CS was Theory of Digital Machines.... designing AND, OR, NOT gates, building some theoretical microprocessors
Again, if you want practical, go to Chubb. If you want to learn something, stick it out
--NBVB
Re:Fake Assembly (Score:2)
That's because CS has been the place to go for the hot jobs. You don't get many people taking physics because they're expecting to get yesterday's hot jobs tomorrow.
Yes, I agree that people taking CS just for the jobs should be going to the local technical college, but these same people have also been taught that University graduates are going to get the h
Re:Fake Assembly (Score:3, Insightful)
Computer Science is not job training. If you want job training, take a CISCO or Microsoft certification class.
A good computer science program will teach you very little that is "practical"; it is expected that you can pick up C++, Java, or x86 assembly language on your own when you are done. If you can't, or if you don't want to, you are enrolled in the wrong field of study.
Re:Fake Assembly (Score:1)
I think that learning about simple technologies is a great way to encourage students to think for themselves, to try to invent their own improvements. As others hav
Re:Fake Assembly (Score:2)
You have to walk before you can run (Score:2)
That said a brief discussion of newer interfaces towards the end of the class is probably relevant.
I know when I was in college we studied the PDP-11 architecture. Well, I've never done anything on a PDP-11 and except for hobbiests I doubt you could find one BUT I do have a solid und
Re:You have to walk before you can run (Score:1)
These interfaces are much simplier and are a good base for moving forward. While your not likely to use them the concepts are the same AND if you go into a lab you have a reasonable chance to use one of the older interfaces.
Absoululty true, I have been taught this way the poster is and it is paying off. Yestersay I has a written and verbaly assesed test on MIPS ISA and it went OK (no previous experience). This is only because I had tuition in basic computing and ISA consturcts. I would say no matter how
The new technologies are bad to learn from (Score:5, Interesting)
If you really want to learn about Firewire, do something with it for your Senior project.
Re:The new technologies are bad to learn from (Score:3, Insightful)
Crank the speed up slowly, give the student a chance to listen to t
Re:The new technologies are bad to learn from (Score:1)
This applies to all sorts of things. The idea of the class is not to learn RS-232 or RS-485 or RS-3.14159 or whatever. The idea is to learn serial computer-to-computer communication, and the best way to do that is to minimize time on the nuances of
More than fundamentals (Score:2, Insightful)
A school teaching the 'fundamentals' using newer technology, like php,
Re:More than fundamentals (Score:3)
Re:More than fundamentals (Score:2)
Students still demand courses that look good on resumes. Students still demand courses that are enjoyable and interesting. The faculty has a responsibility to teach the "right" material, but simple Darwinian survival of the department means that the faculty must teach that material in a way that gets butts into seats. One way to ke
Re:More than fundamentals (Score:1)
Have you ever interviewed a new grad?
Every hotshot college grad learns very quickly that the "practical" skills you learn in school are worth squat. I've only been out of school for a few years but I code ten times faster and better than I did then, no exaggeration -- and that's still ten times worse than the best of my cow-orkers.
Which is why I always prefer to see a solid courseload in fundamentals and theory. Then I know I've got someone who c
Re:More than fundamentals (Score:2)
Sasami [slashdot.org] said:
Of course. But I'm not talking about grads. I'm talking about students choosing courses.
They may learn this once they're out of school - I was talking about the dynamics of students choosing courses, and how that affects an academic department's thinking.
Re:More than fundamentals (Score:2)
Personally, I really don't think that an undergraduate classes should discuss the latest and greatest bleeding edge technology until the students have all the tools necessary to understand how the technology works. It's hard to really appreciate the power of things like Paradigm X and Technique Y until you've had to do it the hard way. Likewise, it's hard to know how to apply Paradigm X and Technique Y in appropriate ways if you haven't seen any alternatives.
This all said, I
Re:More than fundamentals (Score:2)
A degree prepares you for a career, not a job. A career is a marathon, and job is a sprint. It's not about "how to do X with Y", it's about, "how to do $X with $Y" - do you see the difference? The first is like hardcoding everything into your program, the second is like abstracting all your constants into a
Funny you mention that. (Score:2)
In the "Real World" [tm] I have used COBOL, ALGOL, C, C++, Java, Perl and two or three more more exotic.
I would had made no difference to my preparation as a proficient Engineer if I had learned a bigger amount of buzzwords per hour.
RS-232 etc are fine (Score:2)
If one is unable to extrapolate the knowledge gained from studying one form of serial interfaces to another then if the course is modernized you would still be required to go back to school when the USB / FireWire / Whatever the course is taught with fad ends.
Re:RS-232 etc are fine (Score:2)
Real experience modernizing curriculum (Score:5, Interesting)
As it turned out, the real problem was not teaching OOP to the students. OOP is easier to explain to new programmers than structured programming (people use real-world objects all the time - not so much real-world procedures). Half-way through the first semester, the students could implement Tetris.
The real problem was retraining the faculty. Even though they knew OOP was a good thing, it took them a while before they had internalized OOP enough to present, e.g., algorithms and data structures in an object-oriented style. No one believed that you could teach inheritance and polymorphism before you taught loops, conditionals, and arithmetic.
Faculty teaching the intro courses may be in touch with industry and research. That's not enough. The faculty need to rethink an entire course to present the right academic material in a modern, industry-relevant way. If the faculty can do that (and, make no mistake, it isn't easy), they you'll get a course the students love, that will get them a job, and that will prepare them for a strong academic program as well.
For the truly curious, the textbook [amazon.com] for that course is actually still in print, even though it depended on Borland Pascal, which is long-since defunct.
Re:Real experience modernizing curriculum (Score:2)
Re:Real experience modernizing curriculum (Score:2)
d^2b [slashdot.org] said:
It wasn't an "of course" ten years ago, when I was first working on the curriculum.....
I'd disagree. An algorithm works hand-in-hand with a data
Re:Real experience modernizing curriculum (Score:2)
I think this is the essence of where we agree and disagree. Immersing people in OOP from the beginning is a good way to create software engineers, but...
The real problem is.... (Score:1)
The bulk of your education in CS should be theory, optimization and concepts. Implementation and specific technologies you should be able to pick up on the job or as a to
Re:The real problem is.... (Score:2)
Even with CE, though, it's still more important to teach the theory than the implementation. That is why I support teaching RS232 and XMODEM. I do NOT support teaching TokenRing, however, for obvious reasons. I ALSO support teaching USB, because it really isn't THAT hard to learn, and it is obviously the way of the future. There's no point to teaching FireWire
Re:The real problem is.... (Score:1)
Re:The real problem is.... (Score:2)
I tried. (Score:2)
If you want (Score:1)
Interfaces to learn are RS232 and SCSI (Score:1)
Everything else is either based on or pretty similar to those two... well, OK, there's also Ethernet's CD/CSMA paradigm.
THREE things, that's THREE things to learn Cardinal Fang! (And a fanatical devotion to the Pope!)
John Slimick's the guy to learn from at Pitt; he used to teach at the Bradford campus in the frozen north. He's an excellent teacher as well as an all-around nice guy.
Welcome to reality. (Score:2, Interesting)
But, no matter how progressive the school is, they will still be behind the industry curve, unless they themselves are developing the technology. When you get out of school you will not have been fully educated on the latest and greatest technology. That's why you do internships and gradua
Re:Welcome to reality. (Score:2)
LOLLERSKATING. I worked in the computer industry for 10 years before I started college 5 years ago. From my experience, most of my professors' knowledge predates MY entra
sorry, you're an idiot. (Score:2)
crawling is a useful skill to have. and while walking is better for many tasks, you still learned to crawl first.
Re:sorry, you're an idiot. (Score:2)
That's exactly what I was going to say.
I've yet to see USB, Firewire, etc, in use in the "real world" except for consumer-level personal computer peripherals. In industry, RS232 is The Shit, RS485 is a handy substitute for long distances, and people are experimenting with ethernet (some of them are even using Cat-5). Every once in a while you might run into something designed for a parallel connection, but not too often.
All these hot new interfaces ar
Re:sorry, you're an idiot. (Score:2)
Searched the web for token ring. Results 1 - 100 of about 516,000.
Searched the web for ethernet. Results 1 - 100 of about 5,770,000.
Which protocol do YOU think should be taught in schools?
Re:sorry, you're an idiot. (Score:1)
What I really wish, is that 100VG [io.com] had gotten off the ground.
Re:sorry, you're an idiot. (Score:2)
There's merit to teaching a token-based media access control mechanism.
There's also merit to teaching a shared media access mechanism.
If all we taught were the Most Popular (tm) results, music students would study Britney Spears, Lit majors would study Harry Potter, and CS would be nothing but how to use MS Word & Excel.
Sheesh.
Wait till you get to the Real World (tm). You'll grow up fast, I promise.
TR isn't that limited in use; lots of mainframe-type environments still use it. Hell, we sti
Poor example, but I know what you mean. (Score:3)
Meanwhile, and most students don't realise this, but you are allowed to do research of your own beyond the scope of any given class. I know you may not have the funds to pursue everything you want, but neither does the college.
College is not about getting a job (Score:4, Interesting)
For the first group, there is no way that you could possibly gain enough experience in 6-9 hours a week for four years. That's only about 4-6 months of professional experience (about two full-time internships if you're so lucky).
For the second group, employers are more interested in finding someone who is a good problem solver and has the ability to pick up newer technologies quickly. In a lot of ways, as an employer I'd rather have someone who learned COBOL at school for fear that they'd carry bad habits if they knew C++ or a newer language that I'd expect them to use on the job.
<Open Source Evangelizing>
Of course, working on Open Source software can give you the desired experience and prove you have the ability to learn quickly on your own
</Open Source Evangelizing>
Re:College is not about getting a job (Score:1, Insightful)
Boy does this sound familiar (Score:3, Insightful)
After putting intense pressure on this same professor, he did spend a couple of days at the end of the class talking about USB, but it was uselessly superficial. It would have been far more beneficial for us to have done some USB programming in lab, or something.
It is hard for schools to keep up with all of the modern hardware and software and protcols, as the industry moves to fast. But why should they keep right on the bleeding edge? While RS232 may be old, learning about RS232 teaches you the PRINCIPLES of communication, thus better equipping you to learn new interfaces. The same goes for XMODEM. USB and FireWire are pretty fucking complex protocols to jump right into when you haven't covered any time of communication standard before. But I think that considering how ubiquitous USB is becoming, it should absolutely be included in the curriculum.
On the other hand, there's no excuse for teaching TokenRing. For the love of god, spend that time teaching ethernet.
Re:Boy does this sound familiar (Score:2)
Re:Boy does this sound familiar (Score:1)
Not to mention, token ring uses a different way of communicating than any other line protocol I'm aware of. I would love to learn token ring.
Another thing I think should be taught at
Re:Boy does this sound familiar (Score:2)
Besides there were only two or three weeks to implement the token ring stuff. And everything was in assembly. Written in DEBUG. The smarter students used NASM. We developed our own c
How old are the prof's notes? (Score:2)
Don't for a minute think that the professors are there to teac
Toss it in the garbage.. (Score:2)
For what it's worth, a serial port is a serial port and RS232 is a ver forgiving place to start an interface course.
Re:Toss it in the garbage.. (Score:2)
In addition to the other good reasons mentioned here for starting people out on "legacy" concepts, there's also the very important in a budget conscious setting principle that if the student screws up and fries an old piece of equipment, no big deal and they've learned what not to do, whereas if it's all new expensive stuff everybody's going to be too scared of frying it to l
Have never needed to.. (Score:2)
But to higlight an example, the 3d graphics course in 3rd year is revised each year to adapt to new developments in the past year. For example, pixel shaders are taught in the current 3rd year course, and who knows what else next year.
However, the second year introductory graphics course has stayed mostly the same, introducing the basic concepts which are applicable to more than one situation, and dont change very often.
I would assume that a lot of the concept
Teaching would be a great job (Score:3, Insightful)
I teach two undergraduate courses. I know what it's like to have students complaining about the content of a course, and I have two comments about this topic.
Firstly, changing what is taught in a course is very very very very hard work, and a course that has been restructured or had its content changed is very very very likely to have problems with said new content. It is simply not practical to keep updating a course to deal with new technology. Once a course is stable, it is far better to leave it that way. Also, the staff teaching that course must spend time doing research and likely supervising postgrad students. They must do this to keep their job and to maintain the reputation of the university.
Secondly, universities are not vocational training institutes. University teaches the basic theory and concepts behind the technology, and teaches students how to learn these concepts. The student should then be able to apply these theories and concepts in an employment situation.
If you want to learn how to use new technology solely to apply those skills to a job, go to polytech or do a training course. Don't sit around whining to the course instructor, because frankly he probably knows a hell of a lot more about how to run a course than you do.
Re:Teaching would be a great job (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Teaching would be a great job (Score:3, Insightful)
As nearly everyone else has said... it's the concepts that matter. Whether it's at 128kbits or 1mbit, a serial communication
Re:Teaching would be a great job (Score:2)
Sometimes the world moves on and a university should at least be near the advanced state of the art to the point where new students know where to when they are requireed to work on it. Just look at the posts her
Re:Teaching would be a great job (Score:2, Insightful)
Not to be too flip, but this issue is a minor one. The important issue is how to deal with student feedback
Reading your post, I think you missed my second point, which was:
universities are not vocational training institutes
it's also important to expose students to the most modern practices and tools in their field.
No, it is not. It is important to teach students how to learn these things.
This can mean the difference between them getting jobs,
Re:Teaching would be a great job (Score:1, Informative)
universities are not vocational training institutes
This echos what was said before this comment, really. I recall my first night class (I wasn't getting up at 8AM for any class!) as a lowly EE student. The professor plodded into the hall (it was a 200 seat lecture hall), laid down his books and course material on the lectern, then proceeded to write the requirements down on the blackboard. After 5 minutes of silence except for the scraping
*sigh* (Score:2)
Learning (Score:2)
teach a man to fish ... (Score:1)
RS232 Is EVERYWHERE (Score:4, Insightful)
Math (Score:4, Insightful)
counting -- a technology that is certainly tens of thousands of years old
arithmetic -- a technology that is many thosands of years old and was fully developed 5000 years ago
algebra of one variable -- a technology that is a thousand years old
geometry of 2 dimension -- a technology that is over 2000 years old.
And if you are really good at highschool you learn
calculus of one variable -- a technology that is over 300 years old
By college the undergraduates make it up to about the civil war.
____________
There is a difference between education and vocational training. Education teaches you how to evaluate information and how to learn new information. Vocational training teaches you specific information for a specific field. There goal is to teach concepts not technologies.
What you are learning are very simple hardware / software interfaces. Why use complex interfaces of modern hardware that confuse the issues on an academic course? Leave that for vocational schools.
Re:Math (Score:1)
Independant Study (Score:2)
Consider yourself ahead of the game when you look for a job. If the university wants to move ahead in the course outline, they have "supporting evidence" for next year.
Unique to engineering? (Score:2)
I think this problem is unique to engineering. Universities were not created for this kind of thing. Thus you have an inherent conflict between (a) getting a job and (b) learning theory.
Historically, you would get a degree *in a different field* (probably physics or math) then go to professional school, such as law school or medical school (this one would be engineering school) and learn all the latest applied technology there.
I am not saying this i
token ring is very relevant (Score:2)
You wouldn't benefit anyway this time around (Score:4, Interesting)
(This reflects the situation in the UK, where academic teaching staff in Universities almost always have research commitments (and publications are used as a performance metric).
Some of the material you are working with is not so bad, either. Learning about RS232 might teach you several things that are generically useful in designing system interfaces :-
It's been a while since I've worked heavily in industrial interfacing, but I'd be surprised if USB is even relevant to that at all. Think more along the lines of RS422, 10baseT, and optical fibre (often carrying converted RS232, in fact).
I'm not particularly familiar with XMODEM, but I think it's likely to help you undersand valuable facets from the above (bandwidth/reliability tradeoffs, protocol features for catching errors, latency versus throughput, bandwidth-delay products). Token Ring seems an odd choice to me, though. After all the hardware must be tricky to get these days (or perhaps your course has no hands-on component, which would make hardware availability irrelevant).
One of the most interesting hardware interfacing things I've done was implement both ends of a mostly-symmetrical serial protocol. One end was implemented as a set of four cooperating threads, and the other as a state machine. One way of doing it was (in that case) much much easier than the other (less code and more reliable).
Modula-2 for me... (Score:1)
The 'out of date' technology I got to learn was Modula-2, back around '91/'92. I was mortified at the time.
Looking back though, it didn't really matter. I went from that to C/C++, Java, Python, etc. College isn't to teach you a specific technology, but the fundamentals, and how to learn the rest.
a tale from the trenches (Score:1)
When still in college, I upgraded the lab course for assembly programming. The lab course used to be PDP-11 based, and we used a semi-working MS-DOS based emululator. We upgraded to PowerPC assembly - x86 was rightly regarded as way too complicated as a starting point.
Making the new assignments and getting everything to work on the local computer setup (this included writing an eery program that used TCP/IP to communicate between the PowerPC emulator and a custom-built terminal-emulator) took the better p
Universities vs. Trade Schools (Score:2)
Isn't a balance possible? I have been well-served by the general concepts I picked up while working through my engineering degree, but a more practical class or two would certainly have been welcome. I fully expect to be learning new technologies regularly during my care