<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 12:05 PM, Russell Coker <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:russell@coker.com.au" target="_blank">russell@coker.com.au</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">On Thu, 21 Nov 2013, "Pidgorny, Slav (GEUS)" <<a href="mailto:slav.pidgorny@anz.com">slav.pidgorny@anz.com</a>> wrote:<br>
<br>
If someone does such a course in year 12 next year then the course would have<br>
been designed this year if not earlier (they need to get the training written<br>
in advance). So a year 12 student in 2014 would finish university no earlier<br>
than 2017 and look for work in 2018. It doesn't seem that a product specific<br>
training course from 2013 would be that useful in 2018. It would be about as<br>
useful as "MS Windows Vista" specific knowledge is right now.<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Some might say just as useful as Windows Vista specific knowledge was when it was released...</div><div><br></div>
<div>But seriously... many people of my generation were brought up (home and school) on the Apple IIe, PC XT/286/386, DOS, Windows 3.1, Word 5.1, ClarisWorks, Microsoft Works... almost none of which I used after leaving school and none of which are relevant now.</div>
<div><br></div><div>My first year Uni (1996) included Unix shell scripting, C++ and COBOL programming - which I thought were archaic at the time but looking back I think they were fine for teaching general programming concepts. It also included things with such as some DOS scripting involving piping commands into edlin - basically really dodgy hacks. I always thought this was archaic as well but in the context of this discussion it taught us how to do reasonably complicated things with extremely basic tools. A bit like XO-1s, Raspberry Pis and Arduinos.</div>
<div><br></div><div>Regards,</div><div><br></div><div>Charles</div><div><br></div></div></div></div>