WALUBENGO: Queries over Microsoft's laptop deal

The announcement that Microsoft will provide funding for computer programmes in Kenyan schools has caused a storm in social media. 

The debate is whether our Standard One pupils are better off with Microsoft software on their laptops as compared to other alternatives such as Open-Source software.

The Kenya Publishers Association has added its voice on the debate saying that Microsoft is likely to come with content that is more tailored to the West.

Software is the "fuel" that runs the physical device which in this case is the laptop.  There has been two clashing philosophies around software - the Proprietary vs the Open-Source groups.  

The proprietary group believes that software is an intellectual property whose code (instructions) should be closed, patented and commercialised to make profit; enabling the owners to generate the next generation of software.

The Open-Source group believes that software is like a food recipe, in that it is simply a piece of instruction that should be open and freely accessible to anyone who wishes to cook. 

The money should be made in the serving (installing and customisation) of the food cooked (software) rather than selling the recipe (code).  They argue that there is bigger social benefit in such a model as compared to the proprietary model.

There are many software battlefronts where these two groups clash but non is more visible than the clash between Microsoft's "Windows" Software versus the Open-source "Linux" Software.

Microsoft Windows is a leading global software used by most business enterprises and costs roughly 20 per cent of the cost of owning the hardware. 

In other words, if the government laptop is going for around Sh30,000, Microsoft will pocket approximately Sh6,000 for each laptop bought for the Standard One pupils.

For a million laptops, Microsoft will rake in Sh6 billion from this project annually if the government decides to partner with it.

The Open-Source software is free but with related installation and customisation costs, that should be much lower. 

If the government opts to install Open-Source software as has been the practice with other governments that have experimented with the One Laptop Per Child (OLPC) project, then one can argue that we could be sparing Sh6 billion per year, money that could find use in other national priorities.

However, it is premature to reach such a conclusion. 

This is because two months into the Jubilee government and despite persistent requests, we are yet to see the educational blueprint for the laptop project.

Where is the document that defines the learning objectives and outcomes of giving the pupils laptops? What is it, in specific terms that we want our pupils to acquire after using the laptop for one year? And how will we assess if indeed they acquired such knowledge and skill?

It is only after interrogating such a document that we can tell whether the Microsoft partnership is a good deal or a con.

In the absence of such a document, we should expect additional State House photo sessions - with many other global software and hardware vendors wishing to expand and grow their markets.

After all, ours is a free-market economy revolving around the willing buyer and willing seller notion.