Microsoft is using Minecraft to vie for kids’ brain space and schools’ dollars
backchannel.com
backchannel.com
From programming aspect, Minecraft makes perfect sense. From a math/geometry perspective, I'd have to see it to believe it. But one thing is for sure... the kids will line up to take that class.
When he was ~15/16, he hit a point where his grades fell hard in high school, and was very close to dropping out. I noticed he was big into Call of Duty games, and suggested that he pick up Minecraft again and try their programming classes -- naively assuming that if you like games you might like most genres. A few years later he was so engaged that he applied to college for a computer science degree.
The shit was so inspiring that I bought a Surface Pro 4 just to support Microsoft (even if I just wanted an excuse to buy one haha)
They also just started getting Tynker at school. I think it's optional at school though. https://www.tynker.com/minecraft/
"In 2015, Chromebooks topped 50 percent of personal computer sales in the U.S. K-12 education market for the first time, with Windows PCs trailing at 22 percent, according to a Futuresource Consulting report."
And looking at the chart in the report [1] is even stranger - Chromebooks have basically gone from 16% of yearly device sales to 50% of yearly device sales [2] in exactly two years. Does anyone else finds the numbers a little hard to believe? Don't the schools have any costs in migrating their systems to support Chromebooks?
[1] http://www.futuresource-consulting.com/2016-03-K-12-Educatio...
Edit:
Based on csharp's comment, changed wording from market to yearly device sales. [2] (For K-12)
The claim that it's "50% of personal computer sales" in schools is completely false.
http://www.cnbc.com/2015/12/03/googles-chromebooks-make-up-h... <- The word "sold" was added to this headline after I pointed out sales figures and devices in classrooms were not the same thing. I am still annoyed they didn't add in the world mobile. Apparently desktops aren't "devices" anymore?
But the other thing is, I don't think you're seeing a "disruption" of an existing market. In 2009 and before, nobody would ever have conceived of the insanity of buying one computer for every student. I think this is closer to a new market than anything else. Because neither iPads nor Chromebooks really infringe on the sorts of purchases most schools' IT purchases were prior: Computer labs and office PCs, which are likely predominantly still Windows. (And oddly excluded from these numbers.)
Minecraft has shown to be a good tool to teach students about different topics. During this years ISTE convention, I talked with a lot of teachers who used Minecraft as a teaching aide. To the point of using Minecraft graphics on their worksheets. I saw a math worksheet where instead of counting apples the student would count creeper heads. The teacher said the student engagement raised after using the Minecraft graphics. Ultimately it is a great tool. MS will find ways to make money off of that. But there is much worse software out there's being sold everyday to naive school boards. Software that does not help teachers engage students in the way Minecraft does. You will not believe how awful most edtech software is.
1. Minecraft
2. Swift Playground
3. Commodore 64 or other old basic
4. Game Salad, or Game Maker,
5. Just learning Javascript in the browser
I know #2 is my favorite experience, but I think #5 is the most useful now. Just wondering if anyone has played around with minecraft to compare.
If I had to teach a kid: #2 > #5 > #3 > can't speak for the others
Also, nibbles.bas and gorilla.bas were very fun games written with QBasic that came with it on every DOS computer.
I began by playing go chopper.
Then explored the file system read some computing magazines that my dad subscribed to and found out about qbasic.
I played gorilla and nibbles and then learned how to use the code files to cheat and experimented with the banana parameters in gorilla.bas[0] to make its explosion and throw distance bigger.
Those are fond (and old) memories.
With a bit of work, and some better documentation I think a real time environment coupled with something that kids are really into could make for a great educational experience.
The reason I thought #5 was the most useful is exactly the opposite: I thought that programming in the browser feels different. There are all these other moving parts, remote libraries, and you have to check things remotely. You're constantly aware that you're plugged into the globe's APIs as opposed to the feeling of being in this little box.
Has a built in code editor. Had the opportunity to run a few workshops around it. Kids seemed to enjoy it.
The core engine is C++ and mods are programmed using Lua.
Luckily some actually get it and use Linux in schools. But in my experience it's not common (in higher education chances are better).
I think the "it" some "get" is not seen as a necessary "it" for the purposes of education, and "Using closed stuff for education is a bad idea" is begging the question.
Linux is 25 years old now. The GPL is older than that. The ecosystem around them has had plenty of time to prove its worth as a superior solution for educational tools; it mostly wallows around in a sea of mutually-incompatible "maybe-we-could" and "what-if-we-tried" initiatives without the kind of clout behind them that make institutions believe the solution's providers will be around in five years and the institution won't be stuck owning 100% of the tool they don't really want to support. It turns out most educators and students would rather have a working solution guaranteed by someone with money in the game than a tool they can fully modify, evidence seems to suggest. The advantage to the MS ecosystem is that when it doesn't work, you can take it to multiple independent companies who will fix it for you.
It's quite clear that depending on some vendor who can dictate what to do for the education system is a bad idea. And entities like MS clearly have that power now to some degree (or strive to gain that power). So using open source in education field is a natural way to avoid that. As I said, some actually get it enough to act on it. I don't think anyone thinks that it's good to have that dependency in general, most just don't go anywhere further than realizing that it's not good.
Isn't all software opinion, regardless of origin?
Answer: it doesn't. It's like arguing that Bröderbund (I hope I spelled that right) weaponized Zoombinis to take over the education market.
In addition, much of the Mojang staff works primarily in Java, as does the modding scene. If Mojang dropped MCJE, there would be a massive outcry, both inside the company (I suspect Searge, and maybe Dinnerbone, in particular, would object) and outside it.
Finally, even if MCJE was dropped, the community might well keep it alive. People still play 1.2.5 for the modding scene, and the jars are fairly well available. The community could probably outpace Mojang - and indeed, with projects like Forge, the OreDictionary, FMP, the FluidAPI, and others, not only have they shown they can do it, they already have the groundwork in place.
Thanks for the info though. I had assumed that MCEE was a continuation of MCFE.
Minecraft at this point has 3 separate codebases: the original one written in Java, the "Pocket Edition" codebase, and the console codebase.
The Java edition was the "original" Minecraft codebase. It runs on most versions of macOS, Windows and Linux. Because it is written in Java, it is very easily moddable and has a large modding scene. Most features arrive here first.
The console port was developed by 4J Studios in C++ and released in 2012 for the Xbox 360. It now runs on most game consoles.
Mojang separately released an iOS/Android port in 2012, known as Minecraft Pocket Edition. This port is also written in C++. The PE codebase was ported to Windows 10 as well (W10 can run the Java version as well).
Back to MC:Ed. MC:Ed is a spiritual successor to a third-party product, MinecraftEdu (Java Edition licensed from Mojang, modded to be suitable for education). Microsoft bought the company behind MinecraftEdu and is replacing it with MC:Ed, which is based on the PE codebase and runs on Windows 10 and macOS (El Cap+).
Small 2D games are cool to look at and kind of fun, but nothing is better than taking a game you already love and scripting it. Far better than making a tortoise walk across the screen, it's more engrossing and rewarding and it becomes sort of a game in itself. You want to make your UZI shoot bananas? Figure out what that weird error is and you can.
Kudos to Microsoft.
https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=minecraft&btnG=&a...
No, there's a creative mode where there's no grinding needed. The player has everything available right away.
> but how is this better than another logic board simulator or cheap electronics?
Children use it.
When Microsoft leverages a massively popular game to promote STEM education, they're weaponizing.
I'll cheer for anyone (Apple, Microsoft, Google, et al) who promote STEM and come up with novel ways to utilise software in education (including interactive games).
Microsoft has always offered educational versions of Visual Studio at discounted/zero cost. I clearly remember getting a student copy of Visual Basic(VS6.0!) for ~$50.
I built all sorts of stupid things with that and while it definitely biased me in favor of Microsoft tools you know what else it did? Helped me into a rich and diverse career in a wide array of technologies and stacks. Anything that helps bridge that gap is a good thing in my mind.
Problem solving, debugging and abstractions are skills that transcend stacks and can be learned in a wide variety of environments. Engagement is they key to this and I think Minecraft is a great avenue.
It looks like they give away many Azure services now as well (https://catalog.imagine.microsoft.com/en-us)
I believe they stopped it a year or two back.
I paid around 150 € in for Turbo Pascal 1.5 for Windows 3.1 with student discount and around 200 € for Turbo C++ 3.1 for Windows 3.1, back in 1993.
Imagine how much that would be in today's money!
Heck back then I got a physical 8" x 6" box, none of this puny CD/DVD sleeve stuff. We had to drive to a store in downtown San Diego that explicitly sold compilers/productivity software/etc. Hard to believe that happening this day and age.
The only real alternative to it was doing games and demoscene programming for the Amiga.
In my experience, flames get to be downvoted pretty quickly, allowing for rational discussion, and providing an opportunity to to be heard, and present rebuttals and counterpoints.
Then again, I also hang out on Slashdot, so my baseline may different from yours...
Alright, I had to look it up:
https://techcrunch.com/2016/06/21/apple-launches-coding-camp...
But yes, Apple was doing the bootcamps pro-bono. Yeah...I don't really mind the use of "weaponizing" in this context.
At least the motive behind selling something is obvious ($$$). The motives behind doing something for free could range from benevolent to evil.
To be clear I support both efforts (to various extents)...just in a fictional ranking context, I (personally) put Apple's bootcamp higher up than Microsoft's Minecraft efforts.
MS is doing the exact same thing. The new Minecraft Education Edition is Windows 10 only. I could live with that. What I find disturbing is that they already killed the orignal MinecraftEdu. Hundreds of teachers are stranded and without support, trying to keep things running.
Worse, MinecraftEdu had modding support. The new Minecraft Education Edition doesn't. Old content won't port over. Instead of embracing the medium, they try to shoehorn classical education principles into the environment.
They had something good, but managed to make it worse. It's sad. I wished there was a free alternative affordable by everyone, irrespective of hardware, OS etc. Alas, it'd require the same mass appeal as Minecraft, which is not going to happen.