Talk:Smart Board/Archive 1

Archive 1

Further Response

I live in the UK and in our area (Nottinghamshire) we have thousands of these - in our school alone we have one in every classroom, and we have about 120 classrooms; every single board is a SMARTBoard. Every other school I have been to has this brand as well. I think it is fair to say that schools are continuing to use these boards, and I am sure more schools will begin to in the future. 20:05, 23 January 2007 (GMT)

I live in Springfield Pennsylvania, and most of the local school districts have been purchasing them for Large Group Instruction areas. Believe it or not, the article shows a fair view of what is happening in and around the United States.

I live in the Lancaster, SC area, and almost every school in my district has a SMARTBoard, if not every classroom in middle schools. At my school, every teacher will have a SMARTBoard before the year is over, whether he or she likes it or not.  ~Steptrip 13:59, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Aimed at teachers

• Based on this sentence, and some others, the article appears to be aimed at teachers and school administrators who might want to buy this: The software is easy to use and offers a variety of features that enable you to keep students focused on learning and redirect their attention if they go off track.The key word is you. The only people who would want a product to keep students focused are teachers. (from the SynchronEyes section)
• You can interact with colleagues and customers... (from the Bridgit section)
• The "product milestones" section appears to be more of a list of every product the company has ever made.

Ian01 (talk) 00:59, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

History and Product Milestones sections

I noticed these two sections have been deleted in their entirety by an unregistered user... can we reinstate them? The history of the product is important -- SMART actually created interactive whiteboards -- and the Product Milestones section traced the evolution of that technology. Gnu-gnome (talk) 19:21, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Introduction section

This entire section was deleted without comment. Can we reinstate this as well? It describes how the technology works and contains key information. Gnu-gnome (talk) 17:25, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

No encyclopedic notability

Wikipedia does not describe individual products, unless notability is clearly demonstrated - and this page provides not a single source. It's a mere collection of selling points and over-detailed product descriptions.

In an encyclopedia, products aren't more important than companies. Compare this content with the pitiful stub on SMART Technologies, for reference… The article isn't even linked from here - instead, there's an external link directly to the company website. In articles on commercial products, this is always a clear sign of undue weight and notability issues.

If these articles can't assert notability as per Wikipedia's content guidelines, delete them. Or if you must, rigorously trim this content down and include it as a broader description of this company's product lines and business activities on the more appropriate SMART Technologies page. 84.129.170.22 (talk) 14:40, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

• I agree with you on several points! I've added several notations to support the content, and also deleted some erroneous content (other SMART software products sold separately from the SMART Board). I do think the SB interactive whiteboard should remain separate from the SMART technologies page though, as they are really two different topics. Gnu-gnome (talk) 22:26, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Image

If anyone is interested, I have uploaded an image to commons. Cheers, Kushal 02:31, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Necessity for this Article

I'm a teacher. I don't think this article should be deleted because it is a noteworthy product. It needs to be rewritten, however, so it doesn't sound so much like an advertisement. Also, I see nowhere on here how much it costs. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.83.231.41 (talk) 05:59, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

There is no reason to include a price - Wikipedia is not a catalogue. _TalkIslander 08:36, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Can a SMART employee edit this?

I am an employee of SMART Technologies and a newcomer to Wikipedia. I have been asked to rewrite this article to make it more complete and up to date. I have done so, and my revision adds information about the product's history and technology. I have removed subjective adjectives such as "useful" and "helpful", and I believe my version is more neutral than the present article (not written or endorsed by SMART). That said, I have a couple of questions:

1. Can I, as a SMART employee, edit this article without being accused of COI?

2. Would it be considered unethical or impolite to replace the existing article with my rewritten version?

I would appreciate any advice.

Reply:

I would say that it is fine, as long as it is truly neutral. I worked for a very small non-profit organization over the summer, and part of my job was to update the Wikipedia page. Not only does it make an article more complete, but who knows more about a company/product more than it's employees!

Veronicac-f 20:37, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

I suggest you see Conflict of interest anyway. Kushal 02:29, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

and WP:IAR Kushal 02:30, 15 March 2008 (UTC) :P

CONFLICT OF INTEREST! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Unangst (talk • contribs) 02:03, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Controversy

Could someone edit the controversy section? It's poorly written. Sorry. It does need to be included though. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ISeriouslyNeedALife (talk • contribs) 18:23, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Name change

On 27 May 2010 --

Anthony Appleyard moved SMART Board interactive whiteboard to Smart Board: Requested at Wikipedia:Requested moves as uncontroversial (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requested_moves&oldid=364400971#movereq-SMART_Board_interactive_whiteb...) (undo)

Can this please be undone? SMART Board interactive whiteboard is a trademarked product name and proper noun. The capitalization of SMART in SMART Board, identifies the iwb as a SMART Technologies product and distinguishes it from the generic product category of 'smart' - read: intelligent - whiteboards. Thank you! SmeeMcKy (talk) 16:51, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Advertising

Is this really advertising? Doesn't look like it to me. Can someone point out where the advertising elements are? Maybe then they can be fixed. If not, why not remove the tag? Lizyellowsourfruit (talk) 23:31, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

The Smart Board entry is routinely flagged for advertising/overly promotional content. As SMART employees are not permitted to make large changes - and instead only correct factual or other such errors - any promotion has not come from the company. Would someone please be so kind as to point out a few examples of advertising content, or take it upon themselves to correct it since SMART staff cannot? It would be very much appreciated SmeeMcKy (talk) 17:50, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

The introductory lead for a start: "As of January 2010, Smart Board interactive whiteboards lead the interactive whiteboard category with a 60.9% share..." sounds like blurb straight out of the company's shareholder brochure. --DAJF (talk) 01:50, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

It's a fact - SMART Board is the category leader. I can see this being promotional if it read "SMART Boards are the best interactive whiteboards on the market, evidenced by their 60.9% share in the category". This statement is an objective fact. Could you offer a suggested rewrite? Thanks for the feedback, it's much appreciated! SmeeMcKy (talk) 16:46, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was not moved. This is precisely what WP:MOSTM and WP:ALLCAPS speak to and does not meet the exception that iPod and similar fall under.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 14:11, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

---

Smart Board → SMART Board — With all due respect to Wikipedia's formatting style, this page needs to be moved back to SMART Board. This is a trademarked, proper noun that distinguishes the SMART Board interactive whiteboard (the product) from other "smart" (read: intelligent) interactive whiteboards. Other unorthodox naming conventions have been employed successfull on Wikipedia, including iPod, iPhone and iPad, how is SMART Board any different? SmeeMcKy (talk) 17:51, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Those three articles fall under the exception at MOS:CAP for single-letter lowercase prefixes where the letter is pronounced as a letter, rather than as part of the word. I suspect this was put in place because "IPod" or "EHarmony" just doesn't read the same as the versions with initial lowercase letters; it looks weird with the two capital letters in a row. SMART Board (and SMART Technologies, for that matter), on the other hand, suffers no loss in readability or familiarity by typesetting its words normally. "Smart Board" reads the same and has the added advantage of following normal English rules for capitalization of proper nouns. Powers ^T 23:09, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

• Oppose. WP:MOSTM is pretty clear on this. --DAJF (talk) 00:49, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
• Oppose AFAICT, "SMART" in this context isn't an acronym, so per WP:MOSTM, all-caps isn't warranted. Cf. iPod Touch using a capitalized "T" despite Apple's usage. --Cybercobra (talk) 01:31, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
• Oppose – per WP:MOSTM & WP:ALLCAPS. 「ɠu¹ɖяy」¤ • ¢  02:33, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

free to download?

can u download the notebook software on home computer for free without a smart board. i was just wondering since my school uses smart sofware and i would really like to have smart notebook at home for my personal use, but can i download it if i dont have a Smart product actually at my home —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.161.212.248 (talk) 01:54, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Please see WP:TALK - talk pages are for discussing the article, and how to improve it, not for discussing the subject itself. _TalkIslander 12:26, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

you can download the 30-day trial if no have SMART board —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mematman15 (talk • contribs) 14:55, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

THIS NEEDS TO BE DELETED

This is clearly a product marketing piece. Other products offer similar benefits and features. Please SMART marketing person - do not abuse this medium. Wilsontt (talk) 13:00, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

I agree, this page should either be deleted or completely rewritten --Bosse Klykken (talk) 16:54, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

I do not agree that it should be deleted at all. It gave me an idea of what this thing is. There is so much crap already on the Wikipedia and if people don't care about that then I don't see any reason why an article on a cool teaching tool with modern technology should be deleted. However, I came here only to say that this page lacks a section on the critical review of this product and hence it does not tell us its downsides. --70.76.68.118 (talk) 03:47, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

Article Neutrality

I think that overall, this article is a lot more neutral than people think it is, apart from the "Uses" section, which does admittedly sound like the writer is trying to promote the product. However, I do think maybe we should create a section of the article about criticism of SMARTBoards, just to balance the article more. Jprulestheworld (talk) 19:32, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Exactly my thoughts, JP. Does anybody know the products downsides? One will be high cost for sure. --70.76.68.118 (talk) 03:50, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

Is it just me, or does it seem like someone in the company that makes this decided to put their product pitch on the Wiki? In the 2000s article it says something about them "gaining increasing acceptance in schools"

In response:

It is all about your perceptions. Seriously, I would also disagree and I am going to remove the tag and any obvious pitches. They certainly are not the only players but are significant. I was looking to find a link to another product they make/made called a "Sympodium". Again, it is not the only one but I wanted a somewhat neutral place to send somebody for a reference. --Rcollman 21:55, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

I would somewhat disagree. I know a number of schools in the Springfield, IL area that have SMARTboards now, and did not have them a few years ago. Perhaps there could also be increased product sales--and since schools are the company's main market--the assumption could be made that more schools are "accepting" the SMARTboards. DukeOfSquirrels 16:10, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

In response: Independent Market Studies (Decision Tree Consulting)have indicated that Interactive Whiteboards continue to be the biggest trend in educational technology. Over 75% of UK classrooms have one.

SMART is not the only player though. Promethean Activboards seem to have the largest market share in the US and the biggest single deployment of the technlogy in the USA is by Promethean in Sarasota, FL.

In response. According to Decision Tree Consulting, SMART has more market share worldwide than almost all other interactive whiteboard manufacturers combined. See Messenger, Colin. (2007, July 31). Interactive Technologies: Quarterly Insight State of the Market Report. Published by Decision Tree Consulting and available through www.dtc-worldwide.com. CarmenSD 17:25, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

After reading this article now, it still strikes me as very much a pitch for the product. For example, the sentence "You can communicate, monitor or collaborate with students individually or as a group," looks as if it was lifted right out of promotional material. Trimming some of this material would be a long way to NPOV, and adding a criticisms section would help. I've had lousy experiences with this technology myself; I'm sure that a plethora of online materials decrying IWBs in general exist. (iMacWin95, not signed in) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.240.130.72 (talk) 02:54, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Heh, I personally have had very good experiences with this technology - love it, and find it extremely useful. Regardless, couldn't agree more - this article is seriously POV, and needs to be worked on. _TalkIslander 10:22, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Replace "Smart" with "SMART" people!!!

it's SMART not Smart! whoever typed this page totally screwed up —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mematman15 (talk • contribs) 14:52, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

No, its correct per our rules on stylized wordmarks. If SMART actually stood for something as an abbreviation, we could capitalize it. But since it doesn't, we don't. ViperSnake151  Talk  16:35, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Proposed merger with interactive whiteboard

On the topic of potentially merging the "SMART Board" entry with the generic "interactive whiteboard" entry, I'd like to weigh in against it. As one of the first - arguably the first - interactive whiteboard on the market, with the greates market share globally, and as the flagship product for SMART Technologies, I think it warrants its own entry. For example, the iPhone has it's own entry rather than being subsumed under the broader "smartphone" category. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SmeeMcKy (talk • contribs) 17:01, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Neutrality/Advertising

Overall I think this article stays neutral. But I do think there are certain sections of the article that come off slightly biased. There are sections of the article where the writer favors and promotes smart boards. Pontg95 (talk) 02:15, 26 March 2016 (UTC)

Add a section

I think this is a good representation of a smart board but I wish there was a section with related products that are compatible with it. Smart notebook, etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Theresajane2 (talk • contribs) 22:38, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Theresajane2. Peer reviewers: Theresajane2.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 09:32, 17 January 2022 (UTC)