That man is a sheep amongst sheep
|
|
|
Council wastes £40,000 on Ipads
THE DANGERS of allowing Apple fanbois into local government with their distorted sense of perspective has been highlighted after Leicester City Council wasted £40,000 buying its councillors Ipads.
It admitted splashing out on the gadget boondoggle the same week that it announced the layoffs of 1,000 council workers in a bid to save money.
The Apple fanbois running the council insist that paying over the odds to buy £170 worth of technology for £700 from Jobs Mob will save money.
Labour councillor Sarah Russell is awaiting delivery of the highest-spec 64GB model Ipad. She said, "We're trying out the Ipad to see whether it improves the way we work as councillors."
She said she has a laptop but it is too heavy and besides the council spends £90,000 on paper agendas for councillors every year. However there have been no plans to actually cut paper agendas out, since they bought the Ipads before they thought up that excuse.
Just to prove that Apple insanity crosses the political spectrum, Conservative group leader Ross Grant, who has one on trial, claimed the Ipad made him "more productive". He said that whenever a constituent stops him in the street he can write down and begin researching their problem immediately on the Ipad, because he's connected to the Internet all around the city.
It sounds like both would have their problems solved with a £300 netbook rather than a swanky £700, "locked in to Steve Jobs'" walled garden toy.
But actually the reason all the councillors are getting Ipads is because they heard that the group leaders had been given the perk and they wanted a slice of the free cake.
Matthew Sinclair, Research Director at the Taxpayers' Alliance, told the Daily Telegraph that while it was right that the council should try to avoid wasting paper where they can, it was incredible that they think that means providing councillors with flash new Ipads at a cost of tens of thousands of pounds.
He pointed out that a small affordable laptop would do the same job for half the price but it would not be such a fashionable perk for the councillors.
We would be surprised if this perk would pass a Government Auditing Office check. It will be interesting to see how Leicestershire City Council will justify spending double the reasonable price for a netbook without a keyboard just because it has an Apple logo on it to accountants who will want to see some benefit to council tax payers to justify the cost.
More than 1,000 Leicester City Council posts could be lost with 650 jobs going at County Hall. A further 400 are also being cut at the Leicester's three hospitals. Still all those jobs are far less important than giving councillors high tech toys without checking to see if there is technology out there that is better and cheaper.
Since Leicester will have so many fewer workers on its payroll soon, perhaps it can do with several fewer councillors, too. Like maybe the ones who decided that buying them all Ipads was a good idea. µ
Share this:
Share
Are you aiming to compete with rocks? If you haven't figured it out from subtle clues (like spelling, phraseology, understanding things about other parts of the world etc) then you should know that I'm not American, I'm English and live in the UK. Also, in the fairly likely event that you don't understand what IQ scores are, they're a standardised test of a range of mental capacities. As logic and reasoning are part of the test you're doing badly here.
Nick rarely, if ever, comes up with his own stories. You were quoting facts that didn't come from him or the story he linked, ergo you were BS'ing.
Netbooks have improved little over the last two years. Partly because Intel have enforced a maximum spec for their screens and priced the Atom chipsets in such a way that it's uneconomical to do much to improve their performance. The latest N450 based Samsung N150 has the same sized screen, lasts 1/2 hour longer on battery power, is 90 grams (7%) lighter and 60Mhz faster than the old NC10. Not much of an improvement in two years is it?
I assumed nothing about the council giving up printed documents. I said that IF it costs £90,000 to print and post documents to 54 councillors for 1 year (and the larger proportion of that is going to be postage) then each one who opts for electronic copy is going to make savings equal to the cost of a top end iPad in less than 6 months. Whether they want to use an iPad, laptop, netbook, paper or whatever is a choice for each councillor. Providing they work within their existing budgets and save money then who are we to tell them which manufacturer's kit they can and can't use? Perhaps you can explain why not printing and not posting paper copies won't save any money? Thought not.
Firstly, I'd like to point out the fact that you believe 'IQ' to be an accurate representation of anything is starting to hurt me. How very American.
Secondly, yes I did take the report at face value, as at the time it was my only source (the W3 report is a response to the initial reports). Likewise if you honestly had that source when you started commenting you would have put an end to what is now a tangent given the fundamental change in what's being reported. So I'd suggest not tying to make out that this affects my 'IQ' when you rather clearly made the same mistake when you began this discussion.
I also stated "from what I've gathered" by reading other reports about where the budget was coming from. I'm not stating this is a fact or confirming that it is correct. It was based on a report stating that trials were from personal budgets with consideration of a roll-out to all councillors, which implies it would not have come from a personal budget; unlike your attempt to state like a fact that the N10 is three times heavier than an iPad when it is in fact under two (0.73KG vs 1.25KG).
You also fail to factor in that the N10 product is almost 2 years old. Portable technology moves on at lightening speed and as already proven by my product list, there are viable products already out that much better match and surpass the iPad, with even better products a stone's throw away.
You're also assuming that the council will be willing to scrap paper in favour of pure electronic transmission, which even with a councillor using an iPad seems unlikely. Especially given that this IS a personal choice. For example if only one councillor uses an iPad it's not n/54 prints saved, as all other councillors would use, give and expect paper printouts, there's actually no change. Realistically it's n/54 if two councillors use an iPad, and that's assuming that they don't have to provide paper sources to third parties, which with a £90,000 a year paper bill, seems like the most likely scenario.
steve t:"I'd rather have a councillor that can represent my views to the council and push an agenda that I agree with than type word documents."
If your expecting these councilors are not going to type documents, then why the hell give them devices for typing in the first place. let them/their secretary use pen and paper, the basics.
iPad is a luxury item for browsing the internet/documents. people with more money than sense buy these, hence iDiots. So why do you keep on saying other people have low IQ?
congratulations, my estimate on your IQ has gone down again based on that last post.
Firstly you believed a "fact" posted by Nick, without corroborating evidence, in one of his rants against Apple. The £90,000+/year cost to Leicester council is in printing and postage of documents to councillors. If one or more of them ask for electronic copies instead then that then the cost reduces by n/54. Even a top of the range 3G version has a payback period of 5 months on that basis, unless you're trying to claim that council officials would deliberately ignore the request and keep printing and posting the unwanted copies.
Secondly you've taken to making facts of your own up. Nowhere was it mentioned that a separate budget would be provided for iPads. If you bother to check the reporting from a less hysterical source (the Inq's parent V3 for example, see http://www.v3.co.uk/v3/news/2267545/leicester-city-council-denies ) you'll find that (1) only 4 units are being tested, (2) it's up to the individual councillors to chose what they want, with a budget of £1600 in the first year of office and £800/year thereon after. They could have chosen to spend more than £1000 each on ultralight laptops and no-one would have said a word.
Thirdly I own both a netbook (the well respected Samsung NC10) and an iPad. There is no comparison in the portability and usability departments. The 1024x600 (16:9) format, landscape only screen of the Samsung is much worse for document reading than the 1024x768 iPad screen, which can be used portrait or landscape. Have you not noticed the jihad against 16:9 hereabouts? Add to that the fact that it weighs twice as much, is more than 3 times as thick, is less sturdy, has only 2/3rds of the battery run time, the track pad is tiny and difficult to use to scroll around documents, it doesn't support easy zooming, panning and scrolling around a document or web page etc. I could go on and on, but suffice it to say I wouldn't chose a netbook over an iPad for document reading, email and web.
Your final point of idiocy has to be the idea that the ability to use a laptop is more important than political and management skills. I'd rather have a councillor that can represent my views to the council and push an agenda that I agree with than type word documents.
Firstly, I'm going to apologise using the word wages. It's confusing when councillors use their expenses much like one.
From what I gathered when making that comment, the trial councillors paid for the iPad using their support allowance, but that an entire roll-out would come from funding elsewhere (thus increasing overall councillor funding).
I'd also like to point out that just as the INQ states, they have no plans of scrapping a paper system any time soon (probably because they know the iPad isn't a viable alternative), so waiting for a buy wouldn't cost them anything. To also assume that alternatives wouldn't be any good is going too far as well. We've seen the specs, played with pre-release models and and know the operating systems going on them like Google Android, Linux, Windows are all good systems.
Pointing out again, a councillor should step down (notice how I didn't say get the sack =O) because there are plenty of youth wishing to take part in politics that are up to the challenge of handling both tasks. I'll also point out again, if a councillor can't use an OS like Windows 7 in a most basic manor then why would I want them around making decisions? A complicated issue arises and rather than take time to fully understand all approaches they op for hmm I don't know delegation?
Agreeing with John, your assumption that a laptop is somehow more cumbersome that an iPad is going a bit too far. You can get netbooks that have a weight and size around the same. The model I quoted was a full blown laptop with similar dimensions to an iPad (a little bigger because the screen's bigger - good for OAPs with bad eyesight ;)). The only difference is it's twice as thick and heavy (700grams? Half an Inch maybe?), I carry my thicker older model around as if it were a book or slide it in between documents, I never bring my charger to work during an 8 hour day, that includes always on use during 5 hour long meetings etc.
Kicking myself as I fall into this portal of pointless commenting.
Why would lugging around a netbook be any different than lugging around an ipad?
Also can you explain how an ipad will reduce printed agenda's. I thought netbooks going to solve that.
In reality printed agenda's will still get printed (just in case). The ipad will be a short term gimmick, a plaything. There will be no real cost savings over the year hence the term 'possible savings'.
I don't understand any real benefit that an ipad would have over a netbook beyond costing more and not being able to view flash websites?
I would expect my counsellor to be able to use a laptop and every council has a huge IT dept (with much more experience of windows) if anything goes wrong.. go figure.
Please lets have some critical thought.
Until I asked for a demonstration and to find out exactly what the phone could do vis-a-vis syncing with my computer. The iphone really doesn't do much so I bought a Samsung Wave which does everything for a lot less money and has a much better screen. The PC software suite that comes with it is great and I'm free to use any service provider I want.
Same as with the ipad and anything apple makes: one must pay much more to get much less.
You're not doing anything to raise my opinion of your IQ.
Firstly you should know that local councillor is an unpaid position. They get expenses but thats it. Because of this many of them are pensioners. You want them to pay for their own IT equipment so they can perform their (unpaid) job?
Next you have this frankly bizarre idea that a primary requirement for the job is a desire to learn how to use a laptop, and to lug it about with them on a permanent basis. The rise of eReader devices shows that most normal people don't want to do this either.
Finally you've got this idea that (possibly) cheaper jam tomorrow, is better than buying a perfectly workable solution today that allows them to start saving immediately. We've got no idea how well these devices will work, what the supply situation will be like etc. By the time they've sorted out these issues, the equipment has been trialled etc you're going to be 3-6 months down the line. If the £90K number is anything like correct then you've blown any possible savings and more.
i hate apple more then probably the next guy but, i agree keeping useless people around costs more then apple computers and transmitting documents over a secured network would be quicker and cheaper in the long run. i give apple some credit tricking "intelligent" people into buying what they don't need but they do have benefits.
If a council member's iPad is used for porn, he dhould have his pecker cut off.
Nice use of the word idiot, idiot. Completely out of context what you say holds some truth. However in the real world you would transfer documents via USB or use the free provided e-mail address for WiFi (set-up a forward if you wish).
I'm not saying that the Kindle is there to fill in for the job of a phone or computer but it's a cheap electronic alternative to paper based systems (going to point out now that Kindle + iPhone/Android Phone still cheaper than iPad).
If councillors want an iPad then leave them to buy their own from their own wages. It's a luxury item not a functional one. It's great being easy to use... provided you can actually do relevant jobs with it. I'd like to see someone productively write and format a document on an iPad or perhaps view a flash demonstration or product video.
If they fail to use a simple laptop then there's plenty of shell systems that can provide an easy to use interface. The choices for council IT are fairly endless and effortless to implement. If they want they could give them 4 buttons: Read, Write, E-Mail, Internet.
Personally however, if a councillor isn't willing to tackle and grasp a handful of basic functions on their laptop, then they should be stepping down and allowing someone to take their place that can do their job and use a computer, there will be no shortage. I'd certainly question their ability to tackle new issues in government if they can't tackle Windows 7.
Should you wish to mute all the above arguments, then I ask, why not wait a month or two when there's an expected tablet boom, do a price/functionality comparison and make a purchase then? We already know there are better direct alternatives to an iPad both out there on the way.
iDiots now 4 million plus and counting. it now proves that iDiots comes in all walks of life.
they ignore the two important questions. Firstly will it actually save them money on printng (and to the idiots who suggested using Kindle devices I'll point out that Amazon charge you money to upload your own documents, not a great option. It's also distinctly third rate for email and the web browser is pretty shonky). If it DOES save them more than the purchase cost in a year (even in two is OK) then its been a sensible use of cash.
The second question is can the technical illiterates and semi-literates who work as local councillors use it without problems. Giving them all laptops is doomed to fail as many will look at the complexity of such a device and run a mile. Cost in that case is printing + laptop, so a negative saving. If you give them something that is both easy and they WANT then there's a decent chance they'll use it.
You people who think it's a "good use" of money because the costs of iPads are less than the 1000 workers are completely missing the point.
This incident is more like those idiots who take a second mortgage out on their home, and rather than using it to invest back into the house, they buy luxuries for themselves as if it's "free money."
Come on, the fact that they already have found the money to pay for the iPad's by firing 1000 workers just shows how serious they are about balancing their budget.
Well done.
and
Though the Inq thinks the tablets/iPad etc are worthless look at the Courier movie from Microsoft. I want one. I want to make my own notes from magazines, books etc and that can only be done on a tablet with a stylus. I want an Android based one and be able to borrow books from the library.
If I could borrow ebooks from the library and/or pay 1$ per ebook I bought (lets say you could keep the book for 30 days), I would buy an ebook/emagazine at least every other day.
I've just posted a response regarding available alternatives though it was a big one so may not show up until it's mod approved.
I agree sometimes paper wins end of story.
For reading Kindle is more on the go than the iPad by a long shot (I have tried most devices I talk about so I'm not just going from tech specs)
There are good alternative tablets aroudn but I think real iPad killers in a month or so such as the ICD Gemini or the Adam Tablet.
There are also now great notebooks out there that have netbook size/weight and battery life but have powerful CPUs and full versions of windows 7 for less than £700, try the Acer TimelineX (I have the older 13.3" Timeline model and can vouch for its portability).
Kindle Wireless Reading Device, Wi-Fi, 6" Display £90
Pros vs iPad
More compact – Long proven usable 6” screen size but device is thinner than a pencil and the same height as one and weighs only 241grams (iPad weighs 730grams)
Better Battery Life – Up to 1 month (iPad up to 10 hours)
Screen quality – Special E-Ink screen designed to reduce eye strain and flicker allowing for a serious replacement to paper, 167pixels per inch (iPad 132ppi – lower effective quality)
Price – 7 times cheaper than top end iPad
Cons vs iPad
Can’t install iPhone apps – Skype… that’s about the only app I think I’d want to use with an iPad
ICD Gemini – Not yet released, expected to be several £100 cheaper than iPad
Pros vs iPad
Larger screen with higher resolution (11.8” 1366x768 pixels as opposed to 9.56” 1024x768)
Google Android OS – More flexible app system, free to develop for and expand, more configurable OS allowing many devices and file formats to be supported, usually for free
Power – Far superior Tegra2 CPU, similar memory and flash, full HD video playback, 3G voice calling, cameras, USB peripherals, GPS
Battery Life – 40watthours as opposed to 20
Cons vs iPad
None
Acer TimelineX – 11.6 or 13.3” sizes, ~ £50-£170 cheaper than iPad
Pros vs iPad
High powered intel i3 cpu, several GB or memory and full Windows 7, capable of running ALL modern programs that would run on an ordinary PC
Large keyboard (98% of a full size keyboard in 13.3” model) allowing for realistic taking of notes/amendments/high speed browsing
Superior screen, sound, hard disk, memory, cpu, graphics, software support
Notes
Although a full PC, only twice as thick and twice the weight as an iPad (that’s not much!) Depending on model and battery 8-12 hours battery life – approximately the same as an iPad and so no charger needed during an 8 hour working day.
With these products on offer, does the council not look like either stupid or arrogant to buy an iPad?
In response to Richard, how would an iPad solve licensing costs? Most useful apps and custom apps cost money, assuming that the functionality you want is even available or possible on an iPad.
to alistair:
"The council should have all invested in the new kindle instead for many £100s less or at least a decent computing tablet that actually does something well."
What decent computing tablet is there that is more functional and portable than the iPad. For what this kind of deivce is supposed to be (reading and truly "on-the-go" research), I don't think you'll find anything better than the iPad, which might be more an argument to stick with paper than anything else. After all, its not that simple to highlight and write notes in the margin on a computer. you can't lay out multiple pages of a document all over the desk in order to get the big picture...
Other reports on this story suggest that 5 ipads are being trialled for a possible implementation that could - if greenlighted - cost £40K. It seems that the confusion could have started with the Daily Mail, which - it is claimed - mispreported this initially. Can the INQ confirm what they did to confirm the story? With so much confusion on this, it would be good to hear if this is actually an example of stupid gov spending or not.
I don't blame them for wanting a small device and to reduce paper usage, but iPads are crap. You can do very little with them in reality limiting their overall worth to the council. The screen is too low res and flickery for use as a full on replacement to paper.
The council should have all invested in the new kindle instead for many £100s less or at least a decent computing tablet that actually does something well.
"The usual Jobs fanboi comments from people who obviously come to this site looking to be offended. Hillarious :D"
There are fanbois and then there are people that appreciate good form, factor and functionality. I'm not in love with Apple but have to admit that they are streets ahead which is why this article is such a waste of webspace!
A good use of money? what about the knock on effects? that's another 1000 people on benefits, lost tax revenue and so on. If these had been voluntarily redundancies fair enough but ask yourselves how you would feel if you got canned so your boss could buy a new car with the wages saved?
The usual Jobs fanboi comments from people who obviously come to this site looking to be offended. Hillarious :D
I work in Local Government, and can confirm that the use of Ipads for cllrs. In local government world a laptop costs around £700 with all of the licences required.
This article seems like a bit of anti apple propaganda to me. How much money is wasted on Microsoft products in L.G. every year that are under utilised ??
Do your homework Mr. Journalist before firing off....
Instead of spending £40K on iPads, they should have kept those 1000 people on the payroll and paid them each £40. What a stupid comparison.
The author obviously hasn't been watching how businesses are using iPads, from hospitals to surveyors to lawyers. Workers are more productive with a tablet that comes on instantly and doesn't require a lot of fiddling. It's cheaper and less clunky than any laptop. And for now, it's the only option in the market.
ADL
If they are sacking 1000 people, surely £40000 on technology that actually works well is not a big issue. I appreciate you can get a netbook for half the price which will take a minute to boot up and then another minute to shut down and be heavy and cumbersome and probably crash quite a lot (not to mention having to train employees to use the countless number of programs etc) but I believe the decision to get ipads is an excellent one and is a testament to the functionality and ease of use of the iPad. I guess it is viewed upon sceptically only because it is made by Apple and happens to be a best selling gadget.
The difficulty here is that it is very hard to measure how much money will be saved by employees using an ipad over a netbook. Time will certainly be saved so that is a factor.
They is also the employee satisfaction factor which is hard to measure. Will employees work better and more efficiently by using an iPad?
Debateable.
Is it just me or do all INQ article about Apple sound exactly the same?
Yes we get it you dont like Apple and everyone who has a differing opinion is an idiot.
And i'm sure Jobs is crying himself to sleep as we speak in his pile of dollars.
So the author made one typo. Big deal -just think how bad it would have been trying to bash-out this piece on a dratted touch screen device with no keyboard !
The iPad is a preposterous gimmick, plain and simple, and not a tool for local government.
When will the scales fall from the fanbois eyes ?
I blame an upbringing based on games consoles - no-one had time to read 'those people' the fable of the Emperor's new clothes.
Sceppers
They may spend £90,000 on agendas but that is obviously for a much higher number of people, and whoever doesn't get an IPad will still require an agenda.
If you bought each agenda for £10, then each councillor would have to go through 70 agendas in a single year to justify the price of the IPad.
Netbooks with their powersupply etc are nowhere near as portable. Nor do they have as long a battery life.
I agree with the point that the £700 models are a bit OTT, and the lower end one's should have been bought. But I'd think they can still put them to good use
SHAME!!
And 1,000 workers probably costs the council £25,000,000 a year to hire, give or take a few million. £40,000 is nothing in comparison, and it's a one-off cost (every three years maybe), compared with £90,000 on agendas each year, even if the agenda costs are barely reduced (they've bought under 100 iPads, those agendas don't cost £1000 each do they!).
And I have a netbook. They're fiddly and have all the drawbacks of a laptop whilst being fiddly as well. The £300 ones won't last a year, and still require the Microsoft Office tax on top.
I actually think the iPad is a good fit for these uses. However I don't think they need a 64GB version, the 16GB 3G version is enough.