RE: White paper on the potential next steps on mobile web in developing countries

I enjoyed reading your most recent iteration "The Mobile Web to Bridge
the Digital Divide"...very valuable contribution in my view.

You characterized in your 2 March 07 e-mail a debate:

"there is nothing to do, just wait one or 2 years and then the average
mobile phone in DEveloping countries will be the same as the one we have
today in the developed world"

VS

"we should not expect the same process taking place in the developed
world (as of today, almost nobody in eg europe have a phone older than 2
or 3 years, and with very low capabilities ) to append in the developing
world because of the grey/second hand market or because people would
focus on products aimed at their market (cheap and reliable for hte
specific condition). So we should expect to fit with the specific
devices existing in the developing world."

In my view one of the primary goals should be to make this debate not
relevant.  I can think of little evidence to support there is a future
where people around the world will be accessing the web in the same way,
with the same devices, and for the same purposes.  That in fact is not a
world of communication equity, but one where technology has dictated
opportunity/access to digital capability rather than the needs of
"people" which vary greatly from place to place and culture to culture.
There seems to be an assumption that simpler solutions which make
potential applications on "lower end" devices are inferior to higher end
"newer" technology that offers richer experiences.  Particularly at this
phase where for a significant portion of the world is new to the the
entire concept of digital communications, implementing strategies that
rely on people around the world having "new state of the art technology"
(or at least only being one generation behind?) sets us up for failure.
Especially if the "new technology" while much richer in communication
potential adds complexity and cost.

In my view, the greatest role W3C can play in this evolving global
opportunity is to advocate the greatest equality of access to web based
applications across multiple devices...that is people should not be
"left behind" because they are unable to afford or do not have access to
the latest devices and people should not have to have the newest devices
to benefit richly from web-based technologies.

Another small observation is that the apparent driving force of the
spread of mobile technologies in the "developing world" may be quite
different than in the "developed world".  In fact the term "mobile
technology" has a bit of a developed world bias in my view.  The value
proposition of handheld wireless devices in much of the developed world
hinged significantly on the mobility that those devices offer.  But I
would observe, that these devices are for the most part supplementary
communication devices not full replacements for laptops, PCs and fixed
line communication.  For example at the recent W3C Mobile Web workshop,
most all of us had our laptops out and active even though we had cell
phones in our pockets.  My sense in the developing world, is that the
value proposition driving deployment of mobile communication
technologies may be much more affordability.  Mobile phones can be
purchased more cheaply than laptops or PCs and the wireless
communication systems supporting those devices are less expensive to
deploy and more quickly than the fix wire option.  But I am not
convinced for many first time digital users on the other side of the
divide, the reason for a focus on "mobile web" is actually mobility.  

I mention this for two reasons:  1) if my assumption is correct, the
value proposition driving technology development in the dominant market
responds to a very different consumer need than what is typical on the
other side of the divide.  Consequently, there is no particular reason
to think the current evolutions of technology are responsive.  It is
quite appropriate in my view to think about a different category of
appropriate technololgy to respond to a need for "affordable and simple"
but rich access to digital capabilities.  One size should not fit all.
Also I think as W3C moves forward with this initiative, it will be
important you don't lose track of other PC-based solutions as well...It
may be that technology will continue to evolve in a way the PC's (or
laptops) will continue to be less expensive and battery storage devices
will continue to leap frog in development in ways that these devices
ultimately provide the low-cost rich application solution that is
desired by many on the other side of the divide.  These technologies in
combination with very inexpensive digital storage and play devices can
be very powerful tools.  I really don't know this to be true or a
reasonable possibility, but I think caution is appropriate to not rule
it out one set of technology solutions in favor of a different one.
That is, the basic principle for people on both sides of the digital
divide is that we should aim for policies and standards that allow them
to access a rich array of digital opportunities using the means that is
best for their own indiviudal situation and cultural context.

Again, many thanks for advancing the debate.

bill

-----Original Message-----
From: public-mwi-ec-request@w3.org [mailto:public-mwi-ec-request@w3.org]
On Behalf Of stephane boyera
Sent: Friday, March 02, 2007 12:44 AM
To: public-mwi-ec@w3.org
Cc: 'Venkatesh Choppella'; public-mwi-ec@w3.org; jan.chipchase@nokia.com
Subject: Re: White paper on the potential next steps on mobile web in
developing countries


[removing people from the to or cc who are in public-mwi-ec@w3.org list,
just keeping Jan and Venkatesh who are not on the list. If they wish to
be on it, they could drop me a mail]

I've the feeling that there are 2 separate discussions here, and each
one is important

- About handsets and technology
The few messages i read on this subject here are reflecting the two
major opinions i've been facing within W3C and also discussing with
other organization. The 2 positions are :

there is nothing to do, just wait one or 2 years and then the average
mobile phone in DEveloping countries will be the same as the one we have
today in the developed world

VS

we should not expect the same process taking place in the developed
world (as of today, almost nobody in eg europe have a phone older than 2
or 3 years, and with very low capabilities ) to append in the developing
world because of the grey/second hand market or because people would
focus on products aimed at their market (cheap and reliable for hte
specific condition). So we should expect to fit with the specific
devices existing in the developing world.

Personnaly, i've no idea who is right and what is the right approach. If
analogy would work, then looking at other products may help. Eg for
cars, one travelling in the developing world would understand that the
timeframe for new cars to come to the developing world is perhaps 20 to
30 years, and even after that time, there is still half of the cars
which are from the older cycles. But i'm pretty sure, we can't compare
the two markets.

So eventually, i think that to have an idea on which of the two options
we should bet to build on, it is very important to gather datas on what
are the characteristics of eg 80% of the phone in eg few countries in
south-east asia, africa and latin america.

If somebody has an idea on how we could proceed to gather such datas, i
think it would be of primary importance.



- About services and audience

It think here the discussion triggered by Ken is a bit different. Since 
i started working on this subject about a year ago, i think that i have 
this approach : what are the needs for the population ? That said, if i 
agree that the point is not to provide web access to rural communities 
or under-priviledged population, i don't think that we should oppose 
technology vs social approach.
I think this is the 2 parts of the same approach, and we should tackle 
the problem by both ends. my view is that by providing technologies, you

trigger needs : that sounds like liberal consumerist view, but this is 
not: example : who thought that sms may help rural communities before we

saw the first applications providing services which are really useful, 
help people and imporve their daily lives ? nobody it think.
Now, i'm understanding that people are saying : well we have voice and 
sms service and this is enough to provide minimal services.
I agree that we can do something with such technology, but i do think 
that enabling a better technology, the web, would allow people to answer

needs in a better way, or more approprietly. In few words, my view is 
that yes we should work on understanding the needs, and seeing how we 
could answer them with existing technology, and at the same time, we 
should also working at enabling better technologies for better answers.
So work for a better today and also work for an even better tomorrow at 
the same time :)

(if people are interested i wrote a paper i will present at ist-africa 
2007 conference in hwich i'm exposing my view on why i think the mobile 
web is a better technology than sms : the mobile web to bridge the 
digital divide ? 
http://www.w3.org/2006/12/digital_divide/ist-africa-final.pdf )


Stephane
-- 
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 Saturday, 3 March 2007 00:32:24 UTC