The response in Parliament to last week`s announcement that Microsoft plans to supply free software to schools throughout SA shows government`s lack of understanding of the future of software, says Dwayne Bailey, director of Translate.org.za.
Translate.org.za is a local organisation dedicated to translating open source software into indigenous languages. Bailey says that by only teaching pupils to use Microsoft products, the country will "not prepare our learners for the future," a future he sees built around open source software.
Nevertheless, Bailey says any support offered by IT companies to assisting education in the country is valuable, and he does not write off the donation as simply a marketing tool. He does, however, have concerns over the details of the agreement between government and Microsoft, particularly as the donation may preclude running other systems, such as open source software, alongside the Microsoft software.
It is a concern echoed by Evan Summers, director of Linuxlab, a local organisation dedicated to placing recycled and low-cost computers into schools throughout the country using Linux software. Summers says Microsoft`s donation "might reflect a serious strategy to counter open source by donating licences to schools (and universities), with a view to entrenching their monopoly".
Stefano Mattiello, MD of Sun Microsystems South Africa, warns: "Upfront costs are not the issue. Ongoing costs are what really matters."
Mattiello says the donation may well lock schools into using Microsoft software and he warns that education authorities must "be aware of what they are getting into".
He adds that while he has no qualms with anyone getting involved in education initiatives, government initiatives should not be product-specific. "This is not about a product. [Education] initiatives have to be non-product aligned."
However, most critics do acknowledge that the donation removes a significant stumbling block to providing affordable ICT infrastructure: cost. Summers says that from an open source point of view, the donation of free software "levels the playing fields where open source must now stand on its technical merits".
Bailey agrees that the fact open source software is free should not detract from the true benefits of the software. "There are still strong technical merits to open source software," says Bailey, "especially with regard to recycling of older PCs and ease of support." Summers says "the argument that open source is good because it`s free should never be the one that we emphasise above technical merits".
Bailey is concerned that if Microsoft places its software in schools throughout the country, and other players are excluded, the company would "have the SA market wrapped-up".
He is also concerned that the choice of Microsoft software will not adequately prepare learners. "Open source is the future and we need to prepare our learners for the future," says Bailey. "The reality is that people are investigating alternatives [to proprietary software]. By offering free software, Microsoft has removed the cost factor from the picture. However, while it is great on a cost basis, it is not great when preparing learners for the future."
Share
