[zelphirkalt]

They can _choose_ to use whatever they want, as long as the school doesn't force them to use proprietary stuff. It is responsibility of the school system to create an ethical learning environment and not to promote proprietary service providers. Gmail probably doesn't finance schools in Denmark either, so even less of a reason for schools there to do no-cost promotion of Gmail. And that is just one example.

Edit: After choosing something different than the school suggests, the pupils then themselves become responsible for making sure it is a suitable alternative to the non-proprietary ethical solution, that the school suggested.

[EUROCARE]

Email inboxes are one of the many services schools buy, it's not about any promotion and of course Google doesn't promote them, this is a service they provide for money, not some barter. This is like saying they promote a catering provider, furniture manufacturer or paper factory by buying from them... It's not like people aren't capable of using other email providers after using Gmail - email looks just the same regardless of the company (usually works worse though), and people have their own email too, their school inbox is usually not their first nor last contact with it.

Pupils' personal email inbox is their own stuff and completely out of the question. We're talking about school-managed inboxes with addresses ending with the school's domain.

[spookie]

>not about any promotion You sure? Last I checked Google, Microsoft, and Texas Instruments have aggressive business deals with the educational sector to make sure no other company gets an edge there. I had to buy a nspire calculator for example, since teachers received commissions for the damn things (while in obligatory school). In university, we had our own servers for various services such as email, until Microsoft came wavering their money around and literally "offering for free" their products for that university.

The sheer market manipulation these companies do is obscene, there really isn't competition, and our kids aren't offered the high quality and respectful services they deserve. In the case of Texas instruments, parents will have their pockets robbed. Thing cost my parents 200 bucks, and the only thing it was used for, was rendering some fancy parabolas.

Anyways, I didn't mean to throw private contracts out the window completely. And, have since clarified that in another reply to this thread.

[EUROCARE]

> You sure? Last I checked Google, Microsoft, and Texas Instruments have aggressive business deals with the educational sector to make sure no other company gets an edge there.

That's because it's a lucrative market you can take with much less negotiation than individual small companies. Every company does that, only few are dealing with the government on the level of Microsoft/Google though.

> I had to buy a nspire calculator for example, since teachers received commissions for the damn things (while in obligatory school).

That sucks, but this is about schools buying Gmail for students' school managed inboxes on the school domain, not about students being forced to use Gmail. This is just like internal company email for example. Students still have their own personal inboxes at whatever service they please.

> The sheer market manipulation these companies do is obscene, there really isn't competition

If there isn't competition, then it's not market manipulation, it's just that they're the only market.

> and our kids aren't offered the high quality and respectful services they deserve

Gmail (and Outlook365) is the highest quality service currently on the market, and since the school is paying for the inbox, Google is not reading the data for ads. You can go for smaller companies with worse offers and much less software included in the subscribtion... But I don't think that's going to be a benefit to the students.

> Thing cost my parents 200 bucks, and the only thing it was used for, was rendering some fancy parabolas.

Again, that sucks, but this is not about parents paying Gmail.

[spookie]

>If there isn't competition, then it's not market manipulation, it's just that they're the only market. The USA, Europe, and some European countries are already filling antitrust cases against Google and others like it. It's unfair competition. And if you can't see it, then I'm sure that there's nothing I can say to dissuade you.

This isn't just like an internal company email, and I am not saying this is their personal email. Like you're trying to imply.

These companies are trying to create habits and gain trust from naive kids. Making them their future clients. This creates a neverending circle, and the ones inside of it are so blinded, that'll always turn an eye to alternatives. In a space like this, its near impossible for other companies yo gain an edge, even if their product is better. It forms a rather powerful emotional allegiance to them, and their products.

Our kids should never be their clients, simply by the fact that their moral compass doesn't adhere to the simplest of market rules, and common sense. They undermine capitalism, they undermine freedom. And if you can't see this, you're blind.