Why wouldn't he? After all, Google has stolen Apple's spot in the classroom and like any good 1st grade quarrel the only way to get even is to spread BS to make them look bad.
In an interview with C-Net, Apple's Senior Vice President of Marketing Phil Schiller claimed that Chromebooks are "cheap testing tools" and that students are "not going to succeed" when they are used for anything but. As a high school student who actually uses a Chromebook in the classroom almost daily, I can verify that this claim is nothing but a marketing ploy to undermine the usefulness of the Chromebook and Google's collection of apps which provide more for the average student than an Apple logo, and a school district in debt can.
First, let's understand what Phil said. In both the C-Net interview and a follow-up tweet, he in different ways said that "You need to have these cutting-edge learning tools to help kids really achieve their best results." and he seems to hint that Chromebooks don't offer this. Now, I could see an argument for this with younger students mainly those K-6 where there is a larger collection of semi-useful education-focused apps that may help engage students in the work they are doing in the classroom. Though in reality, having been a student in the age of accessible internet access in elementary, middle, and high school I can say that not only were many resources available online for use then and even more now, but most of the things that teachers did use in the classroom were not engaging when I was in elementary school. I remember when Rosetta stone, replaced Spanish teachers that didn't go well or how I hated going home and having to do Study Island homework online of course with an iPad, or another device that was not school owned. But at the same time teachers have used computer access for trivia based competitions on what we're learning to help study for a test which most students enjoy. In my opinion, all the resources are there with any device that a student has, it's the teacher who ultimately is the one who has to make their students interested. You can give a class iPads and the teachers can have their students reading from textbooks on it, but at the same time you can give a class Chromebooks and the teachers can have their students working from interactive online models and competing in Kahoot games, it all the depends on the teacher, not the device.
Google's suite of apps proves itself to be the best for collaborative classroom work, so why not use the machine-made to run them?
As a junior in high school, I have been using Google's collection of apps over 3 years now, even while the district was piloting the use of Chromebooks, which I was not lucky enough to be part of, I used Google Classroom as well as Google Docs, Slides, Drive, Gmail, etc. to submit classwork done online and collaborate with other students on group work. Before using this, we used Microsoft's Office suite of apps which I don't have many complaints about other than the fact that Office 365 cost the school money Google does not yet still offers the same experience as Office did. Plus it adds the bonus of having Google Classroom a place where teachers can assign work and receive it. For example, this afternoon I walked into English class to find a prompt on the board to complete the do now found on Classroom, This posting on classroom allowed students in the class to see each other's answers which allows the class to discuss the question. Things like this are not uncommon to see, and I have yet to understand how this kind of encouragement for collaborative work in the classroom doesn't "help kids really achieve their best results."
So if Google's education and work apps are the best in the business why not use the hardware that is made to run them. Chromebooks give fast startup times, fast load times, hardware that doesn't break the bank while for the most part being durable enough to withstand drops. You get a standard keyboard, great for typing up written work unlike iPads, and unlike most new MacBooks (excluding the new 16" MacBook Pro) they keyboard is a standard mechanism, which means a tiny piece of dust can't break it. The one drawback is if it does break you're on the hook and it, at least in my district, and it could cost up to $400 but of course this price is cheaper than what iPad or MacBook repair and replacement cost would be.
The Chromebook is a handy tool for classrooms and Apple just has to face it, Google made a compelling product that has removed Apple's once-dominant hold on classrooms and the only ones they have to blame for it is themself. Instead of making statements like Phil did to try and trick people into buying their electronics they should be focusing on making a competing product because right now there just isn't much justification for anything but a real Apple on a teacher's desk.
Now let me get back to studying for a Spanish test using this online game given to us by our teacher on our Chromebooks. If not for this game there is no way I would have remembered these capitals!
