ITD's New Deal

by Benjamin Rousch

You may have heard that the way you are charged for computing services has changed this term. I decided to dig into what is different, and whether or not it has changed for the better. Along the way, I stumbled upon some situations which disturbed and concerned me. Before I delve into these distressing discoveries, I shall tell you about what I call the "New Deal" from ITD.

As I'm sure you recall, you used to be allocated $10 every month to spend on various computing services such as printing and remote dial­up access. Also provided to you were e­mail and e­mail storage (3 Megs), IFS storage (5 Megs), your U­Mich login name and password, WWW access, Confer­U, and Usenet News. If you used your entire $10 allocation to print in the sites, you could have printed about 500 pages in a term. If you lived at home, you probably spent most of your allocation on dial­up access, for a total of about 90 to 360 hours per term, depending on the time of day you connected. When your account ran dry, you had to descend into the basement of the Union and wait in line to set up a self­funded overflow account. If you did not set up such an account, you were immediately cut off from printing and dial­up access. I need not remind you of the terrible headaches and stress this caused to almost everyone, but I will anyway. If your account happened to run out of funds on a weekend, you were S.O.L. until Monday, since the Union office was only open on weekdays.

The New Deal promises to be stress­free. You are allocated 120 pages of printing in the campus computing sites, and 80 hours of dial­up time per term. This is roughly equivalent to the old system of charges if you had split your $40 per term (that's ($10 / month) * (4 months / term)) between printing and dial­up time. With the New Deal you are notified (via e­mail) when you have used up half your allocation of printing or dial­up hours, and again when you have used up your allocations. Best of all, after your free allocations are exhausted, charges for any additional printing or dial­up time you use are automatically billed directly to your student account. This means no more weekends without e­mail for off­campus folk, and no interruption of printing services for the campus­dwellers.

As awesome as the New Deal is, there is a hidden cost. You may have noticed that the friendly and helpful ITD consultants no longer staff the NUBS and Union computing sites. The NUBS and Union sites are being converted into 'Key­Card' sites, which means that they will no longer be staffed, and you will need your University of Michigan ID card to enter the site. If you have a problem with some software, or some nasty old Macintosh eats your disk, you will have to go to the Angell Hall or SEB computing sites for help.

Why has funding for computer consulting in the sites been reduced? Money for the computing sites comes from the ITD General Fund, which in turn comes from an allocation from the U­M General Fund, which is also the source of funding for such diverse things as "teaching, research, library services, student aid, and the operation and maintenance of physical properties among other things" (Dino Anastasia, Manager of the Campus Computing Sites, from the U-M Planning Guide for 1997-98). It seems that the money for the ITD computing services (network infrastructure, the Basic Computing Package, printing services) and sites comes from the same source as funding for toilet bowl cleaner and gardening tools. As absurd as this is to me, I can accept that the Administration lumps all of this together. Since this fund is so huge (as it must be to be the source of money for all of these different things), it seems like it could spare a bit more for an important service such as computer consulting. The facts, however, don't agree.

The costs to the computing sites and ITD have risen dramatically in the past few years. There are several good reasons for this increase, of which inflation is only the beginning. ITD undertakes one of the most difficult tasks in the modern world ­ keeping up with new technology. The computers and software that were top of the line a couple of years ago are now obsolete. The Sites have to constantly upgrade their computers and software in order to keep pace with what users need and want. Just last year, the Sites upgraded their IBM­compatibles to Windows NT (finally!). This was a huge improvement over the obsolete Windows for Workgroups; however many of the older machines had trouble running the new software. So, the Sites have acquired several new high­end computers to replace the older ones. This cycle of upgrades is ongoing, and will not stop for many years, and probably decades.

Another rising source of costs to the computing sites and ITD is the users. I remember four years ago when you could walk into NUBS at pretty much any time of day or night and sit right down at a computer. Now this site is full most of the time, and you have to wait for a decent machine, or travel to such obscure and out of the way sites like the one at Public Health Building II, or the Frieze Building. The number of computers in NUBS has not decreased, but the number of users has increased. The sheer volume of people who use the computing sites every day is tremendous. Try to get into Angell Hall some afternoon if you don't believe me. More people in the Sites means more printing, and more consulting, both of which costs more money. The consultants must also be trained on any new hardware or software that the sites acquire, so they will be able to help you when you have a problem. This training also sucks up significant funds.

It is obvious that ITD and the computing sites are under a great deal of financial strain. The funding to ITD, and thus the computing sites, has remained virtually unchanged from last year to this year. This has caused the computing sites management to make some difficult decisions. According to Anastasia, "The costs of consulting services (one­on­one assistance) is very [high]. While consulting services are being reduced, we are also exploring ways of enabling students to be more self­sufficient and assist themselves." So, the lack of funding supplied to ITD and the computing sites has ultimately had a negative affect on you, the computer site user. You may no longer have immediate, personal assistance when you encounter a computing problem.

It is obvious that the funding to ITD and the computing sites should be increased. It is also interesting to note that computers have infiltrated almost every concentration on campus. From Art to Women's Studies, students and professors are becoming more computer literate and dependent. Why, then, has there not been an increase in the computing services available to you? The major task of the University is to prepare you for what you will find in the real world after you graduate. One of the things you will undoubtedly encounter is the computer. The University is not doing its job to the best of its ability. By denying ITD necessary funds, the students are not being fully prepared for life after college.

Surely the administration must have a good reason for denying the students a major part of their education. I do not see one. How much money was spent on uglifying the Diag? How much money is spent on such frivolous majors as Art History or American Culture? How many new computers or consultants could be funded with this money?

The University clings to the ways of the past, and its "rich history" of excellence in basic subjects such as English, political science, chemistry, and physics has secured it a place among the world's great institutions. However, in order for the U­M to continue its tradition of a high quality education, it must invest more time and effort in the future of America ­ computers and computing technology.

The Administration is chock full of traditionalists who believe that the traditional subjects of the past are the key to the future. You want a foreign language? Try learning C++. Millions of the most intelligent and advanced people on planet know it, but you cannot fulfill your language requirement with it. The computer­related majors, which will secure this university a continuing place among the top colleges, are dreadfully understaffed. I have encountered waitlists of more than 60 people for a single class. Discussion sections in LS&A's Computer Science Department, along with the College of Engineering's Electrical Engineering and Computer Science and Computer Engineering Departments, are overflowing due to a lack of GSI's. The Administration needs to take a good look at the world outside of the UM, and compare what is being used there to what is being offered here.

We need to get rid of the frivolous and outdated policies of the past in order to succeed in the modern world. There needs to be more than sufficient funding for computing and related services. In order to remain "the leaders and best," the University of Michigan must lead in the field of technology. MR

This article was published in the 21 January 1998 edition of The Michigan Review (Volume 16, Number 6).
For questions or comments, see the Contact Information page.