My son has done many Minecraft programming courses. He even did a Minecraft programming summer camp. If it wasn't with Minecraft, he wouldn't have done it. I think bringing Minecraft in to the schools to teach development is the right move. I wish all schools would embrace that. It would get the kids excited to learn... unlike... well... everything else besides gym, lunch, and recess.
From programming aspect, Minecraft makes perfect sense. From a math/geometry perspective, I'd have to see it to believe it. But one thing is for sure... the kids will line up to take that class.
My brother had a similar experience, albeit probably outside the target demo.
When he was ~15/16, he hit a point where his grades fell hard in high school, and was very close to dropping out. I noticed he was big into Call of Duty games, and suggested that he pick up Minecraft again and try their programming classes -- naively assuming that if you like games you might like most genres. A few years later he was so engaged that he applied to college for a computer science degree.
The shit was so inspiring that I bought a Surface Pro 4 just to support Microsoft (even if I just wanted an excuse to buy one haha)
Care to share any of the minecraft courses you had your son do? Particularly the more successful ones. I'm homeschooling and would like to get my kids on that train since they're already enamored with Minecraft. I'm just not interested in paying for something they'll end up ignoring.
Considering Chromebooks barely entered the market only about 4 years back.
"In 2015, Chromebooks topped 50 percent of personal computer sales in the U.S. K-12 education market for the first time, with Windows PCs trailing at 22 percent, according to a Futuresource Consulting report."
And looking at the chart in the report [1] is even stranger - Chromebooks have basically gone from 16% of yearly device sales to 50% of yearly device sales [2] in exactly two years. Does anyone else finds the numbers a little hard to believe? Don't the schools have any costs in migrating their systems to support Chromebooks?
Even though the numbers are pretty misleading, there are a couple interesting things in them. Presumably iOS had almost no market share in K-12 in 2009 (pre-iPad), yet it took 39% share by 2013. Then Chromebooks took that share and more. Maybe once a market gets disrupted there is an opening for another player to re-disrupt it since customers haven't had time to grow too attached.
My understanding is very few schools had a plan for making iPads effective classroom devices when they bought them. So for many, the attachment was zero.
But the other thing is, I don't think you're seeing a "disruption" of an existing market. In 2009 and before, nobody would ever have conceived of the insanity of buying one computer for every student. I think this is closer to a new market than anything else. Because neither iPads nor Chromebooks really infringe on the sorts of purchases most schools' IT purchases were prior: Computer labs and office PCs, which are likely predominantly still Windows. (And oddly excluded from these numbers.)
Actually, when this story by Futuresource first came out, it was a lot of fun to debunk. As mentioned by someone else, this is also new sales, not existing devices. But that's not the best part. It excludes desktop computers, which is pretty much the primary form of computing device bought by schools.
The claim that it's "50% of personal computer sales" in schools is completely false.
http://www.cnbc.com/2015/12/03/googles-chromebooks-make-up-h...
<- The word "sold" was added to this headline after I pointed out sales figures and devices in classrooms were not the same thing. I am still annoyed they didn't add in the world mobile. Apparently desktops aren't "devices" anymore?
Minecraft has shown to be a good tool to teach students about different topics. During this years ISTE convention, I talked with a lot of teachers who used Minecraft as a teaching aide. To the point of using Minecraft graphics on their worksheets. I saw a math worksheet where instead of counting apples the student would count creeper heads. The teacher said the student engagement raised after using the Minecraft graphics. Ultimately it is a great tool. MS will find ways to make money off of that. But there is much worse software out there's being sold everyday to naive school boards. Software that does not help teachers engage students in the way Minecraft does. You will not believe how awful most edtech software is.
What I really enjoyed with Minecraft was using a plugin which enabled you to connect a Clojure repl to the server [1]. It was great fun being able to write some code to spawn cows and then blow them up all in real time.
With a bit of work, and some better documentation I think a real time environment coupled with something that kids are really into could make for a great educational experience.
I have a hard time putting into words how little interest I have in Minecraft personally, but I may have to buy a copy myself to see if I can get this working and get my daughter interested in it.
We have Minecraft on our Raspbery Pi connected to our TV, you can write Python code to add/ remove blocks etc. My 5-year-old is happy to open and run these scripts, my 7-year-old will customise simple functions I've written or write them along side me, she understands why and how they work. This is pretty much the level of coding I was doing back when I was their age on our families ZX Spectrum. But importantly the results are MUCH more compelling e.g. make a 10x10x10 cube of TNT blocks centred 20 blocks underground and then detonate them.
The Kano OS also has a fun Blockly/Minecraft integration that is worth looking at. You can access it by buying a Kano kit or just download their OS to an SD card and boot it up on your own Raspberry Pi. Great stuff.
Then explored the file system read some computing magazines that my dad subscribed to and found out about qbasic.
I played gorilla and nibbles and then learned how to use the code files to cheat and experimented with the banana parameters in gorilla.bas[0] to make its explosion and throw distance bigger.
Computer craft, a mod for minecraft, would be a far better experience if extended correctly then most of the minecraft programming setups. I've done a few projects in there and could only see how this would help people. I've been able to do really cool systems in there in my playthoughs.
I started with #5 when I first learned programming, back in 2000. Personally, I think the usefulness part is overrated - once you learn a language, it's pretty easy to learn another, at least for the typical imperative/OO mix - the concepts usually map pretty well. I'd suggest trying multiple and see what they find more rewarding.
The reason I thought #5 was the most useful is exactly the opposite: I thought that programming in the browser feels different.
There are all these other moving parts, remote libraries, and you have to check things remotely. You're constantly aware that you're plugged into the globe's APIs as opposed to the feeling of being in this little box.
If you're a developer looking to fight this, I'd suggest taking a look at Minetest, which started out as a fully libre open-source clone of Minecraft but has really grown into its own project in its own right.
The core engine is C++ and mods are programmed using Lua.
That's actually pretty amazing... given all the weird problems with modding Java Minecraft I wish the community would switch to something like this instead.
Using closed stuff for education is a bad idea to begin with. Especially when there are open alternatives. I'm very surprised many in the education sphere don't get it. Windows, Windows everywhere and so on.
Can you explain why that is? Most people I know who have anything like a computer background from school learned the standard MS Office suite; they then went on to jobs where those skills were useful because their companies also used the MS Office suite. What's the advantage of teaching fundamentals using software the student is less likely to see again?
It's a catch 22 lock-in perpetuated by MS. It should be broken and education system is as good place as any to do it. MS hooked everyone on it, and arguments like "what's the advantage of not being hooked on it, since everyone is" aren't helping.
Luckily some actually get it and use Linux in schools. But in my experience it's not common (in higher education chances are better).
I think you're seeing familiarity with open source tools as an end. If the goal of education is to teach people fundamentals of computer use that are independent of software, the use of open source in that equation is orthogonal to the goal. It's easier to just use what everyone else is using.
I think the "it" some "get" is not seen as a necessary "it" for the purposes of education, and "Using closed stuff for education is a bad idea" is begging the question.
Linux is 25 years old now. The GPL is older than that. The ecosystem around them has had plenty of time to prove its worth as a superior solution for educational tools; it mostly wallows around in a sea of mutually-incompatible "maybe-we-could" and "what-if-we-tried" initiatives without the kind of clout behind them that make institutions believe the solution's providers will be around in five years and the institution won't be stuck owning 100% of the tool they don't really want to support. It turns out most educators and students would rather have a working solution guaranteed by someone with money in the game than a tool they can fully modify, evidence seems to suggest. The advantage to the MS ecosystem is that when it doesn't work, you can take it to multiple independent companies who will fix it for you.
> "Using closed stuff for education is a bad idea" is begging the question.
It's quite clear that depending on some vendor who can dictate what to do for the education system is a bad idea. And entities like MS clearly have that power now to some degree (or strive to gain that power). So using open source in education field is a natural way to avoid that. As I said, some actually get it enough to act on it. I don't think anyone thinks that it's good to have that dependency in general, most just don't go anywhere further than realizing that it's not good.
It doesn't have to make sense. If someone posts about Microsoft someone else has to comment with a twenty year old business strategy from a guy who hasn't worked there in a decade.
I'm sorry, if I wasn't entirely clear. It's not so much about being anti-Microsoft or even anti-Minecraft. I love Minecraft and the new Microsoft is really good as compared to the old one.
But, there's a lot of value in having an open source and libre edition of anything which started out or is maintained as a closed-source, proprietary system.
Consider: Firefox versus IE, Linux versus OSX or Windows, or LibreOffice versus Microsoft Office.
With Minecraft, there is no opportunity for developers to really get on-board to build stuff with them. The source is closed and Mojang is AWOL when it comes to the developer API.
Minetest, on the other hand, is LGPL and is freely available.
Perhaps a better approach would be to simply say that if people are then looking for something a bit above and beyond, in terms of programmability, this is something they can look at, rather than talking about "fighting" Microsoft.
Weaponize? That's just wrong. Minecraft, retroactively dubbed Minecraft Java Edition, is totally cross platform. So, how does this new product help MS dominate education?
Answer: it doesn't. It's like arguing that Bröderbund (I hope I spelled that right) weaponized Zoombinis to take over the education market.
Minecraft Education Edition is a fork of Minecraft Pocket Edition, written in C++ without modding capabilities and only compatible with Windows 10. Minecraft Java Edition is likely going to die eventually.
MC:Ed runs on Macs as well. More details of Minecraft's codebases:
Minecraft at this point has 3 separate codebases: the original one written in Java, the "Pocket Edition" codebase, and the console codebase.
The Java edition was the "original" Minecraft codebase. It runs on most versions of macOS, Windows and Linux. Because it is written in Java, it is very easily moddable and has a large modding scene. Most features arrive here first.
The console port was developed by 4J Studios in C++ and released in 2012 for the Xbox 360. It now runs on most game consoles.
Mojang separately released an iOS/Android port in 2012, known as Minecraft Pocket Edition. This port is also written in C++. The PE codebase was ported to Windows 10 as well (W10 can run the Java version as well).
Back to MC:Ed. MC:Ed is a spiritual successor to a third-party product, MinecraftEdu (Java Edition licensed from Mojang, modded to be suitable for education). Microsoft bought the company behind MinecraftEdu and is replacing it with MC:Ed, which is based on the PE codebase and runs on Windows 10 and macOS (El Cap+).
I don't know why they did that. "Hey guys, let's replace an already well-known product with a more limited version with less features. That will sell us a ton of copies!"
The C++ codebase was originally written because Java didn't run on iOS. In fact, MC:PE has sold more copies than the desktop version. Not sure about MC:W10, probably a desire to unite under one codebase.
I don't think MCJE will die any time soon. It's still the first branch new features land in, and no matter how much MS markets it, MCW10 will be a second-class citizen for as long as that's true.
In addition, much of the Mojang staff works primarily in Java, as does the modding scene. If Mojang dropped MCJE, there would be a massive outcry, both inside the company (I suspect Searge, and maybe Dinnerbone, in particular, would object) and outside it.
Finally, even if MCJE was dropped, the community might well keep it alive. People still play 1.2.5 for the modding scene, and the jars are fairly well available. The community could probably outpace Mojang - and indeed, with projects like Forge, the OreDictionary, FMP, the FluidAPI, and others, not only have they shown they can do it, they already have the groundwork in place.
Thanks for the info though. I had assumed that MCEE was a continuation of MCFE.
Games like this are the best way to teach programming. I first started by programming Counter Strike Source mods using EventScripts that let you write mods in Python. That changed my life.
Small 2D games are cool to look at and kind of fun, but nothing is better than taking a game you already love and scripting it. Far better than making a tortoise walk across the screen, it's more engrossing and rewarding and it becomes sort of a game in itself. You want to make your UZI shoot bananas? Figure out what that weird error is and you can.
Where is the research and what are the arguments that support Minecraft's educational utility? I haven't devoted a great deal of time to seeking them out, but so far I haven't found very convincing literature. Don't get me wrong, it seems like a great creative outlet, but why should a school prefer this over alternatives like music, art, or writing? I've seen a number of references to Minecraft's ability to simulate circuits and create logic gates, but how is this better than another logic board simulator or cheap electronics? For as many interesting lessons as Minecraft offers, the video game aspect of it necessitates a lot of "grinding" and virtual physical labor that doesn't seem particularly enriching. There is real intellectual meat buried within, but to this outsider it looks like "mostly entertainment" rather than "educational and entertaining".
Microsoft has always offered educational versions of Visual Studio at discounted/zero cost. I clearly remember getting a student copy of Visual Basic(VS6.0!) for ~$50.
I built all sorts of stupid things with that and while it definitely biased me in favor of Microsoft tools you know what else it did? Helped me into a rich and diverse career in a wide array of technologies and stacks. Anything that helps bridge that gap is a good thing in my mind.
Problem solving, debugging and abstractions are skills that transcend stacks and can be learned in a wide variety of environments. Engagement is they key to this and I think Minecraft is a great avenue.
It used to be called DreamSpark, and it was awesome when I was in college - particularly since in those days, the Express, single-language free versions of VS hadn't come out quite yet, and the community edition was yet to be a twinkle in someone's eye.
I had this too, it's what started me going with programming and I use visual studio till this day. It probably laid the foundations for my later job in information security.
Sure, but we're also talking about back in '98 where the software landscape was pretty different. It was about the same as a AAA PC game title which was a fair price to my younger self.
Heck back then I got a physical 8" x 6" box, none of this puny CD/DVD sleeve stuff. We had to drive to a store in downtown San Diego that explicitly sold compilers/productivity software/etc. Hard to believe that happening this day and age.
Yeah but for $50 you can build something that someone might find useful and pay you for it. I wished I had more of an entrepreneur spirit in my college days, it would of paid for all those books that I barely used.
HN definitely has this bias and it's not a place to expect reasonable discussion of Microsoft, but if you look at the actual headline of the article instead of the submitted one the use of "weaponize" has more context and makes sense: "Microsoft Weaponizes Minecraft in the War over Classrooms"
I learned to developed a hard skin when discussing such matters on online forums, but back in Portugal in the mid-90's you would hardly find anyone that didn't enjoy using Borland and Microsoft tools as a developer.
The only real alternative to it was doing games and demoscene programming for the Amiga.
I wouldn't say HN has strong anti-MS bias, based on some of discussions that I've seen and participated in here - and I'm a Microsoft employee.
In my experience, flames get to be downvoted pretty quickly, allowing for rational discussion, and providing an opportunity to to be heard, and present rebuttals and counterpoints.
Then again, I also hang out on Slashdot, so my baseline may different from yours...
Yep. And the article doesn't even contain any specific allegations, it is just a clickbait term without meaning.
I'll cheer for anyone (Apple, Microsoft, Google, et al) who promote STEM and come up with novel ways to utilise software in education (including interactive games).
I would prefer everyone to contribute to education out of a kindness rather than wanting money for it. If companies looked towards the future, more might survive. Being known as someone that just wants money or gets money from tax money causes a hostility. Being known as benevolent instead of evil would be a great thing for any company (excluding hidden and niche companies).
IMO both are doing more wrong than good. I ignore the already discussed walled garden Apple is trying to bring to education.
MS is doing the exact same thing. The new Minecraft Education Edition is Windows 10 only. I could live with that. What I find disturbing is that they already killed the orignal MinecraftEdu. Hundreds of teachers are stranded and without support, trying to keep things running.
Worse, MinecraftEdu had modding support. The new Minecraft Education Edition doesn't. Old content won't port over. Instead of embracing the medium, they try to shoehorn classical education principles into the environment.
They had something good, but managed to make it worse. It's sad. I wished there was a free alternative affordable by everyone, irrespective of hardware, OS etc. Alas, it'd require the same mass appeal as Minecraft, which is not going to happen.
Not sure which is worse, Java based MinecraftEdu that wanted manually installing on every computer and kids given write access to the folder, or having to deal with Windows 10 Advertising Edition and Windows Store
When I saw Apple's playground story yesterday, my first reaction was that it would be benchmarked against Minecraft. Perhaps an example of the submarine [1]?
True. But for some reason I look more favorably on Apple for doing something new for free than Microsoft taking an existing platform and monetizing it.
To be clear I support both efforts (to various extents)...just in a fictional ranking context, I (personally) put Apple's bootcamp higher up than Microsoft's Minecraft efforts.
It's interesting to see the term "weaponized" used with education -- I feel like we've (somewhat) done that for math with supermathworld.com. It's great to see education moving in this direction!
I don't think I'd have the job or career I have today if not for a fascination with tinkering with Doom mods back in high school. My daughter is obsessed with Minecraft and if Microsoft can "weaponize" that into something other than her watching incredibly annoying YouTube videos I'd be freaking thrilled.
From programming aspect, Minecraft makes perfect sense. From a math/geometry perspective, I'd have to see it to believe it. But one thing is for sure... the kids will line up to take that class.