perm filename COMPUT[W85,JMC] blob sn#782661 filedate 1985-01-22 generic text, type C, neo UTF8
COMMENT āŠ—   VALID 00003 PAGES
C REC  PAGE   DESCRIPTION
C00001 00001
C00002 00002	comput[w85,jmc]		Clarification of Senate remarks on Stanford computing
C00006 00003	mild version
C00009 ENDMK
CāŠ—;
comput[w85,jmc]		Clarification of Senate remarks on Stanford computing

	My comments in the Academic Senate of Prof. Street's report were
not prepared in advance and were apparently unclear.  Anyway the
articles in the Daily and in Campus Report were unclear.
There are two topics.
	
	First the University is installing a very expensive communication
in system in connection with the new telephone system.  A new phone
system is necessary in order to correct the University's 1971 mistake
of installing 1930s technology when they went to Centrex.  However, the
digital communication system, being installed far in advance of need,
runs the danger of turning out to be non-standard when such systems
become common.  If this happens connecting equipment to it will be
much more expensive than if we wait to see which way the world is
going.  I don't know what the allocation of costs is between the
telephone system and the digital communication.

	My second comment concerns academic communication.  Since
I resigned as Director of LOTS in 1979, finding the official to
whom I reported ignorant and arrogant, the budget of academic
computing has grown from about $500,000 per year to $6 million.
From the beginning of LOTS in 1975, it was my goal to provide
word processing and document preparation facilities to the student
and research community served by LOTS.  At the time it seemed to
me that this could be accomplished by a relatively small additional
expenditure for hardware and software.  However, the relevant officials
seemed to consider this a luxury.

	Now that the budget has grown while the cost of relevant
equipment has decreased, I believe they should set a definite
schedule for providing this service.  In my opinion the management
of academic computing at Stanford has gone into microcomputing as
a fad without a clear goal of what the facilities will accomplish.
Much of the activity has been in response to deals offered by
the computer companies, and it seems that much of the budget
has gone to unnecessary personnel.

	These remarks represent only the expression of my opinion.
The details would be much longer, and would require preparation
and facts not entirely at my disposal.  However, I have reason to believe 
that the Stanford decision makers are not interested in opinions that
might be at variance with what they have decided to do.
mild version

	My remarks at the Academic Senate meeting were unprepared
and apparently weren't entirely clear.  Anyway they weren't
accurately reported in {\it Campus Report}.

	My criticisms of the digital communication plan and of the lack of
word processing for students were of opposite kinds.  My concern about the
communication is that Stanford may be committing itself to a system that
will turn out to be non-standard and will therefore be much more expensive
to connect to than whatever becomes standard.  Since there are few
immediate applications whose goals can't be achieved in other ways,
perhaps combining digital communication with the needed new telephone
system should have been postponed.

	As for student word processing and document preparation,
this was a goal I hoped would be achievable in a very few years
when I organized LOTS in 1976.  Given the amount of money now
being spent for academic computing --- more than ten times the
original LOTS budget --- I think a definite plan and schedule should be
adopted for providing this.  I'm sure I could do it with a fraction
of the money now being spent.

	A final remark.  Stanford's enthusiastic approach to
micro-computing seems to lack a clear picture of what these
ingenious devices are to do for us.  The acquisition seems to
be mainly a reaction to the deals offered by manufacturers.
In particular no-one has yet devised a way of using them
for classes that seems to be as cost-effective and convenient
for all concerned as expanding the LOTS time-sharing system.