- From: Stephane Boyera <boyera@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2008 11:30:54 +0200
- To: Bill Gillis <bill@efrsource.com>
- Cc: public-mw4d@w3.org, Matthew Mitchell EFRS <mmlmitchell@gmail.com>, "Robert B. Textor" <robertbtextor@comcast.net>
Hi Bill, > In our discussions there has not been much said about the cost of > downloads, but my perception is that this indeed is an issue for many in > the developing world who utilize PCs. I like the kiosk idea described > in this article where individuals can go to a central location and > download software onto a CD so they are not relying on expensive access > time to download desired software. Yes, i agree with you about the cost of download. I never ever thougth a bout that till i visited the University of Cape Town (UCT)last year, and realized that this is indeed a big problem. they are even thinking of having student using iphone as computer. While i thought the 2GB storage is a strong limitation, they were explaining me that, at the opposite, it's a feature they were looking for because of the cost of downloads. So this is a point to take into account indeed. About the kiosk model, this is also another very interesting model against the cost of Data access. Still at UCT, Gary Marsden has developed project around this idea for mobile phone: a kiosk where you can download things to your mobile. It is very interesting using bluetooth. he published an article about it at MOBILEHCI 2007 (i cannot find the exact reference but from Gary's blog: http://web.mac.com/hciguy/iWeb/udev/Under%20Development/1B8F4A6C-17AE-45EA-A3C8-0790F924E003.html or also from Gary's HP http://www.cs.uct.ac.za/~gaz ). Those are promising models agains the data access availability problem on prepaid card, and also against the cost barrier. > I can certainly envision an > Optimistic future where "developing world" research > institutions actively create multiple innovative open source software > solutions for mobile browsers and applications that are culturally > appropriate within each region's particular context. A challenge to > implementation, should this reality emerge, will be the cost for users > of downloading that software onto their phones. The kiosk to dispense > open source software, is an interesting one. exactly. > As I listen to the on-the-ground stories, it does appear to me that > somewhere in the mix of solutions needs to be more "home-grown" web > browser and mobile web application software developed within the > cultural context of the developing world. At the moment, we often are > trying to modify software that was developed for a very different > context to realities that are present in developing countries. In some > ways, efforts to leverage SMS capability already available on many > mobile phones is a good example of that. It works to meet a local > need, but it is a pragmatic solution, modifying in innovative ways a > software solution developed for a different context and purpose. I do > not suggest this is a bad idea, but probably in the longer term, not the > best approach to optimizing the possibilities of the mobile web. I tend to agree with you here. I'm convinced that existing mobile browsers, and mobile applications in general are not contextually adapted for rural communities. Just concerning the case of mobile browser, they have been developed for people with previous web experience on desktop. So they find the exact same model, and it's a friendly interface, even the downloading model is similar, based on a "always connected" model. I'm sure there is place to design a browser interface more natural for those without prior desktop experience, and that could take into account the connectivity specificity (e.g. an example: you might want to look at a downloading model that would queue requests and complete them when a network or a kiosk is available, and then warn the users when done). For now, all the handset manufacturers have designed an emerging market product line. Some of them are taking into account the specificity of the local conditions in different ways(making handset more dust-proof, more solid, adding a flashlight,...), but that's just about the form factors: inside, always the same system, with the same applications, designed for another context. > The business question that appropriately is asked by the software > developers who are in the business of creating software for mobile > devices is: "would there be a market if they were to go to the expense > of substantially modifying their software to the multiple developing > world contexts?". Since there is indeed not just one developing world > context, but rather many nuanced differences among regions of the > world, the business problem is even greater. I do not mean this in a > critical light. This is the appropriate question for somebody in the > business to ask before going down that path. It does, however, remind > me of my own experience in the higher education world. In that previous > role, I had many conversations with US university administrators > who wanted to determine if there is enough "market" to translate > curriculum developed for US audiences into multiple languages and > delivered via distance education to the developing world. This has > proven to not be the right focused question to ask, as in general the > context of the curriculum developed for US audiences, often is not what > is needed in developing countries. Relevance requires much more than > language translation and minor tweaks. What does appear to be > successful is when university faculty within "developing countries" > establish relationships and draw on expertise from the "developed > countries", but in the end build the curriculum from the "bottom-up" > within their own context. I was interested in what Fisseha Mekuria has > been doing in Uganda for example. Seems to be working.. what to say else that i 100% agree ? In another context, i believe the success of the Web is coming from this "bottom-up" approach, where anyone is able to make content that is relevant for him, and for the communities he is involved in. At the opposite, the WAP experience on mobile was a complete failure because, imho, it was a top-down approach: operators were willing to see what are the services/content people would like and then developping them. Here i've the same view, the success will rely on enabling people from developing countries to make the content and services on mobile phones they need. Of course, there are technical limitations that needs development (e.g. how to make accessible content for illiterate people), but the major goal is, imho to focus on how to empower people, how to create the conditions of seeing lots of people developing new content. It is also key to involve those who have grassroots experience in groups like MW4D to identify the technological limitations, and make appropriate changes. SO i'm glad we are sharing this vision ! > We may need to see more of this "home-grown" approach from the software > development side to create browser technologies and mobile web > applications that meet the needs of the developing world. Here i've a bit less optimism about mobile browsers! i don't believe that we could easily see a new mobile browser coming from the ground. The task of developing a browser, that would work on all mobile OS, is very difficult. Moreover, most of the very low-end phones are completely closed devices, where you cannot add anything. My personnal hope is that with MW4D we create an inter-disciplinary forum that involve browser makers, and handset manufacturers (they are already some here) and building all together a shared view, may bring real change in what we found on the market. At W3C we had similar success in various domain, with such approaches. Cheers Steph > > cheers, > > Bill Gillis, Co-founder > EFRsource Inc. > +1 509-432-4243 > bill@efrsource.com <mailto:bill@efrsource.com> > http://www.efrsource.com <http://www.efrsource.com/> -- Stephane Boyera stephane@w3.org W3C +33 (0) 4 92 38 78 34 BP 93 fax: +33 (0) 4 92 38 78 22 F-06902 Sophia Antipolis Cedex, France
Received on Friday, 20 June 2008 09:31:43 UTC