After-all having a working terminal that let's someone code is a hell of a lot more complex and uses a lot more power than a radio.
PS: This ends up getting back to the huge cost benefit of sending rover instead of people. Sure if you ever built up a self sustaining base including the ability to manufacture everything it needs from replacement parts, to CPU's, food, and fuel then sure send people. Until then you don't actually get any redundancy from sending people there.
Secondly, if all of the computers on Earth die we can still go outside and breathe the air, drink water from rivers and lakes, gather plants and hunt wild game for food. None of those options are available on Mars. If the computer controlling life support suddenly fails, what options are there to survive? All of this has to be planned for and taken into account. If there is nobody on Mars capable of repairing the life support system (including its software) then they are utterly dependent on the communication link back to Earth.
Sounds like a major flaw to me. What if communication back to Earth is disrupted? Having the entire mission rely on a communication link is not a good idea. The people on Mars should be totally capable of conducting all manual repairs and bugfixes on their own. All of the software they use to run the entire base should be open source, available in a local Martian repository, and at least two of the people on the planet should be intimately familiar with the codebase and how all of the equipment works.
Ideally, they should also have physical books documenting all of the mission-critical stuff.