I am skeptical about the value of facts in education except as they inform concepts. I've found that most students can learn enough about the computer and the software in a half hour or less to write and edit papers and e-mail them to me. In another half hour, they learn how to use search engines and what to look for as they evaluate internet sources. Of course, their skills develop as the term progresses and as they need more sophisticated knowledge, but I don't teach computers. However, it is true that experiments like distributed learning at Kent have high front end costs.
New technologies do.
For other online courses, once the hardware is in place, the cost and time are not appreciably greater than developing new traditionally-taught courses. A counter argument here is that once a course is developed, it can easily be modified and reused and at least parts of it are available for students to work with outside class. In addition, there is value in experimenting with alternative methods of offering coursework. Not all courses lend themselves to distributed or online learning, not all students are willing to interact via computers, and not all faculty members are interested in experimenting. Buying a new overhead projector or even a single computer for each classroom will not create the kind of benefit we're seeking by spending money on online instruction.