The following was sent from South Africa from our friend Teresa Peters of Bridges.org. , an international NGO based near Capetown, and speaks to the discussion we have been having about Microsoft and Open Source.  Regards, Jim

----Original Message-----
From: Teresa Peters [mailto:tmpeters@bridges.org]
Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2002 4:54 PM
To: Jim Moore; Finbarr Livesey; Diane Cabell
Cc: Ewan McPhie
Subject: Bridges.org commentary: debate between open source and proprietary software becomes real for developing countries

I thought you might be interested in this comment that we have circulated on a policy issue heating up in South Africa which will have broader implications in developing countries. 

Regards,
Teresa

-----------------------------
BRIDGES.ORG COMMENTARY:  DEBATE BETWEEN OPEN SOURCE AND PROPRIETARY SOFTWARE BECOMES REAL FOR DEVELOPING COUNTRIES

Two recent announcements in South Africa raise sharp issues that characterize the raging debate between open source and Microsoft operating systems -- a debate that will ultimately affect developing countries around the world.  Last Friday President Thabo Mbeki announced in his state-of-the nation speech to Parliament that Microsoft will provide free software for all of South Africa's 32,000 government schools.  Previously, the South African Government's National Advisory Council on Innovation (NACI) declared its strong support for open source software, saying that it "has the potential to empower people in ways that proprietary software (such as Microsoft's) simply does not allow".  For a nation that is counting on information and communications technology (ICT) to help address monumental social and economic problems, Microsoft's generous offer can make a real difference.  However, many argue that open source software is more appropriate for the technology realities in developing countries.  The Government -- and public -- should be aware of the implications of adopting the proprietary operating system in schools, and plan wisely to gain the benefits without suffering the consequences.   

The Microsoft donation is an example of a big international company that is taking concrete action to tackle the digital divide by giving the kinds of things that it is easy for it to give.  This gesture by Microsoft sets a standard that other companies should strive to meet.  The initiative will help schools teach pupils about computers and computing.  And the more skills built among the nation's youth -- and especially technology skills -- the better for South Africa as a whole.  The hope is that Microsoft's move will be a catalyst to draw similar support from other companies, such as offers of hardware, networking equipment and training courses.  The solution to the problems of the digital divide will be founded on effective cooperation among the private sector, government and civil society.
 
Yet, while the Microsoft action is worthy of praise, it should be approached with wide open eyes.     Offering free software to schools is not only good corporate citizenship, it is good for business:  if MS software dominates South African schools, it will be good for Microsoft's bottom line and may limit the adoption of other kinds of software in this market.  Embracing the Microsoft donation is a smart short-term move in a country where free access to up-to-date software like MS Office and Encarta will be a boon for many schools that would otherwise need to pay for software licenses.  However, open source proponents point out that the real issue for schools is not software licenses, but the challenges and cost of deployment and maintenance of sustainable ICT infrastructure. Microsoft products have rapid product cycles and quick obsolescence, along with expensive long-term maintenance and support implications. Open source software offers a more affordable and stable option, along with "thin-client" solutions that can be run on recycled computers.  The latest Microsoft offerings use far more computer resources than the open source alternatives, requiring relatively high-end systems with fast processors, lots of memory and hard disk space.  Indeed, following the Microsoft announcement, the South African Minister of Education stated that only 10,000 schools are currently equipped to benefit from Microsoft's offer. 

This is not the first time that Microsoft has put forward the idea of providing technology support for schools. Late last year, the company offered to provide about US$1 billion worth of software, hardware, training and support to more than 16,000 of the poorest US schools as part of a proposed antitrust settlement.  In January, the judge in that case ruled against the proposal because he was not convinced that it represented a fair conclusion, so the donation never happened.  Critics of the deal, including Apple Computers and Linux software maker Red Hat, argued that the donation would have only served to solidify Microsoft's monopoly in the desktop operating system market by extending it to the education sector.  Many also noted the concern that students coming from a Microsoft environment will drive a need for Microsoft systems when they graduate and join the labor market -- forcing businesses and government to adopt Microsoft products.

The South African Government should take what it can get for free (especially end-user tools) and prepare and implement a sound plan for optimizing the availability of MS software in its schools.  However, it would be a mistake to assume that because South Africa will get MS software that this will automatically lead to improvements in educational outcomes; the Government needs to make certain that teachers and students are properly trained and able to benefit from the introduction of technology in schools. Microsoft should do its part in this regard by helping schools with technical support and software updates.  Evan Summers, of the South African Linux School Computer Lab Project, calls for "all organizations and companies, regardless of the platform they recommend, to participate in a constructive discussion and work together to achieve the real goal:  to deploy computer labs to every school in the country, and exploit that infrastructure to further education." 

But the real dilemma for the South African Government is that the short-term answer -- take the MS software donation and put it to good use -- poses problems in the long-term.  In the long-term, South Africa needs to foster its own software development and capabilities.  The Government should not be complacent in attempting to foster or facilitate a competitive domestic software development environment.  The position of NACI illustrates many of the points that developing country governments need to consider as they drive the adoption of information technology in their nations.  NACI describes the trade-off between the proprietary and open approaches to software as a choice between relying on foreign skills and developing local skills. If South Africa chooses the proprietary route, in the long-term the cost in many cases will be higher, and much of the expenditure goes out of the country.  NACI advises that South Africa should be developing local open source skills and paving the way to becoming a world class software development nation. 

The South African Government should focus on open source in its own development activities, its purchases, and fostering a local software market, while at the same time taking advantage of the free proprietary software for its schools.  There is no reason why Microsoft and open source software cannot and will not coexist, in South Africa and elsewhere.  But governments and the public may be well-advised to take a broad perspective on the issues and leave their options "Open".   

For more information contact:

Teresa Peters
executive director, bridges.org
Tel: +27 21 970 1304   Fax: +27 21 970 1305
Eml: tmpeters@bridges.org