ver:
http://www.eldis.org/cf/search/disp/DocDisplay.cfm?Doc=DOC18686&Resource=f1ict

>Comparison study of Free/Open Source and Proprietary Software in an
>African context: implementation and policy-making to optimise community
>access to ICT
>
>Benefits of using Open Source software in Africa are less than predicted
>Bridges.org / Bridges.org , 2005
>
>This surveys looks at the software used by public-access computer labs in
>Namibia, South Africa and Uganda. It compares the benefits of using
>Free/Open Source (FOSS) products rather than their commercial
>alternatives, looking at:
>the range of factors that affect software choices
>the realities of the current situation in Africa
>the long-term implications of software choices for Africa.
>
>The key obstacles which characterise the software choice for public
>computer labs in Africa include: labs lack awareness of the implications
>of software choices; staff do not have the necessary skills or time to
>investigate software options; labs cannot afford to buy proprietary
>applications or download FOSS applications from the Internet; and often
>local procurement channels are not available to provide information and
>deliver software.
>
>The report finds that both FOSS and proprietary software can be used
>effectively in public computer labs in Africa, but different challenges
>must be addressed depending on the type of software used:
>FOSS has been used with success in large, carefully-designed,
>well-implemented projects
>FOSS use in small, independent, remote computer labs ( where technical
>skill are often low) has proven more difficult. Familiarity and experience
>with proprietary software are more widespread and lab managers are more
>likely to find help from a friend or colleague if they use the most common
>applications
>the fact that FOSS is available free of license costs has little financial
>benefits for African labs, which almost never pay for the software they
>use because of donations and unlicensed copies
>software choices can help reduce the cost of hardware, which constitutes
>the most significant expense in public computer labs. Specifically, the
>popular thin-client systems found in many FOSS labs can offer very good
>value for money, because they run on cheaper (usually older, and less
>powerful) hardware. When well-configured and installed on reliable
>hardware, these software systems also require little ongoing maintenance.
>
>But ICT projects struggle with fundamental difficulties that go beyond the
>choice of software. The current models for public computer labs in Africa
>are not self-sustainable, regardless of whether they are using free/open
>source or proprietary software. And subsidies are harder to come by as
>projects fail to deliver concrete social impacts.
>
>The report also reflects on policy issues around ICT investment. Specific
>software applications (whether FOSS or proprietary) that could make
>computers more useful to local communities (such as putting ICT to work to
>improve healthcare and education, and designed with cultural factors in
>mind) are still missing.
>
>If proprietary software vendors pay closer attention to the practical
>problems facing public computer labs, and build on the commitment to
>deliver on social and development goals, their value proposition for
>Africa remains high.
>
>The momentum in Africa is currently in favour of FOSS, whose supporters
>are riding on a growing wave of enthusiasm based on successes in other
>developing countries. FOSS supporters in Africa have an opportunity to
>capitalise on this enthusiasm, but need to overcome serious hurdles to
>translate the hype surrounding FOSS into tangible benefits. Above all they
>need to support communities of software developers who have the means and
>interest to develop and maintain locally relevant applications. [adapted
>from author]
Nearby jue 09 jun 2005 12:22:29 AST