The OLPC's XO-3 planned for 2012 at $75 per unit.

The OLPC’s third incarnation of the $100 laptop, X0-3, will represent another cutting edge amalgamation of technologies, combining display technologies used in Amazon’s Kindle with the multi-touch interactivity of Apple’s iPad and new tough lightweight case plastics to enclose it all.

The MIT Media Lab is expecting to deliver the product to a price point of $75 and some two years ahead of schedule. The operating system is likely to be based on Google’s Android and run an ARM processor.

Google's Android OS on a test tablet.

Nicholas Negroponte, Director of the MIT Media Lab says that in 2011 we can expect to see a version using glass, but that the all plastic version won’t exist until 2012. The product will be hard wearing and be almost “extruded” into being.

Clouds reflected in a building facade.

In the late 1980′s, timeshared computing resources allowed enterprises to gain reliable, high-performing computing services without the overhead of in-house computing infrastructure. Cloud computing targets the same enterprises, however, without the lock-in or inherent “stickyness” that timeshared computing service providers created and benefitted from.

The commoditisation of cloud services has been able to go further than timeshared systems because of a number of factors: high-speed, reliable and pervasive network infrastructure, the open source movement, smarter ways of deploying applications on shared infrastructure, operating system, server and software virtualisation; and a more mature entprise consumer who understands more about the true cost of system ownership.

The argument to get into the cloud is compelling and some large players are betting the farm on it. Marc Benioff, CEO of Salesforce.com, in an interview on CNBC this morning, cites that “software is dead” and that “the cloud just makes good  business sense, let alone environmental sense”. His large customer base is proof that others feel the same way he does. Salesforce.com has over 77,000 customers, including the US federal government and even Cisco and Google.

So why is cloud computing possible today and why is it likely to be an unavoidable and seismic shift in the enterprise computing services market? There are six factors making the cloud a sensible step. First, it makes pretty good business sense because it is elastic: you only pay for what you consume so the enterprise avoids creating cost sinks. You can consume services when you need them and dispose of them when you don’t. Second, the services can be charged for like a utility such as electricity or water. You only pay for services you consume. Services may be acquired under contract too, but often the elasticity is more important than predictability of the cost (predictability of the cost is often not an issue as an upper limit is usually easily calculable). Third, cloud based services reside on a well connected set of servers so moving information to other parts of your cloud or to the Internet is a trivial affair. Fourth, services can be provisioned on-demand and typically without human intervention. Fifth, and perhaps the most compelling, costs to provide the hardware, software and internetworking can be leveraged across many customers creating significant economies of scale, especially at the computing, services and administrative layers. Sixth and finally, the savings to the environment are likely to be huge. Concentrating systems into large data centres and sharing resources reduce the overall quantity of computing resources, including electricity for power and cooling, needed around the world.

There are essentially three service models for cloud-based services: software-as-a-service (SaaS), platform-as-a-service (PaaS) and infrastructure-as-a-service (IaaS). The highest level is SaaS, this is Salesforce.com and Netsuite. It provides software, a hosted operating environment and shared infrastructure in order to deliver one or more software services. SaaS might be to acquire CRM or an ERP system services – more SaaS providers are appearing everyday including Google with their suite of office productivity tools labelled Google Apps. The next level of service provision down is Platform-as-a-service and can be likened to a suite of tools for developers to write applications on and the required hosting environment for those tools to run on. One could buy Ruby on Rails, LAMP or a Microsoft toolset from a PaaS provider. Finally, the most basic configuration of service is the Infrastructure-as-a-Service which is effectively network accessible hardware, operating system and network administration tools. What a customer of IaaS buys is computing power, storage and bandwidth/throughput. The computing power can even be arranged as a virtual data centre when clusters of servers are bought as an IaaS offering.

Apart from making good business sense for enterprises here in developed countries, there will be a raft of less developed countries that will stand to benefit significantly if their enterprises and governments can connect to cloud-based infrastructure, platform and software offerings. In some countries the engineers and experts that design, construct and maintain data centres simply don’t exist. It could be because of “brain drain” or years of civil war or an education system that is still developing – for whatever reason, without these critical human resources, the data centres cannot exist there. Consequently without cloud-based savings, enterprises there cannot attract the same cost savings that enterprises in the more developed countries will attract, making their products/services cost more and themselves as enterprises less globally competitive.

Other issues pertaining to the environment on-the-ground in less develped countries will further solidify the role of cloud-based service provision. In less developed countries, issues affecting the security of high-tech infrastructure may arise, for example in Papua New Guinea security problems are common among mobile operators and their cell phone base stations which are often vandalised. The provision of utility electricity may be unreliable due to poor energy infrastructure like the case of some Pacific island countries. In some cases, software is not available due to holes in national policy on intellectual rights protection or poor legal systems which prevent software authors from bringing their wares into the country, as was the case in Indonesia a decade ago. Finally, we have to remember that over 3 billion people live in BRIC countries and as these countries continue developing, their growing need for stable enterprise services will force them to turn to the clouds.

In my opinion, the clouds are rolling in are already overshadowing the desktop paradigm – this will continue as the Internet becomes ubiquitous.

The "green" button on a computer keyboard.

The term “green” ICT refers to an ever expanding set of practices, technologies and policies aimed at reducing our environmental impact. “Green” ICT focuses on reducing this impact in two ways: (i) by lowering the environmental effect of the technology we create and use, and (ii) by using technology to enable the reduction of the environmental effect in other industries.

Direct Effects

Lowering the environmental impact of the technology we create and use, also known as the direct effects of ICT, is the most frequent objective of citizens, businesses and governments. In 2008, Gartner Research, a global ICT research firm calculated that ICTs are responsible for emitting 2% of the world’s carbon, putting the ICT industry on par with the airline industry.

The way in which ICTs are developed, manufactured, distributed, used and disposed of is being reconsidered to account for the multiple possible environmental impacts caused. ICTs impact includes: global warming, energy consumption, material toxicity, resource depletion, land use, water use, ozone layer depletion and even biodiversity.

Citizens, businesses and governments, as consumers of ICTs, play two roles in reducing the direct effects of ICT on the environment:

[1] We shape the ICT market. By purchasing ICTs from manufacturers and distributors that act responsibly towards the environment we encourage those manufacturers – we implicitly avoid rewarding other manufacturers who do not prioritise the environment in their business practices. Manufacturers that don’t act responsibly towards the environment will either go “green” or  go out of business.

[2] We can use ICTs in energy-efficient ways. We can:

• turn on the screensaver on our computer to turn the monitor off after a few minutes of inactivity;
• remove our phone and laptop power adapters from the wall socket when they are not charging our devices;
• use energy efficient LCD monitors, instead of older CRT monitors;
• look for better “Energy Star” rated appliances in our homes and offices;
• use thin-client technology to share out a single computer to many users at the one time;
• use cloud-based applications; and
• ‘time share’ computers using USB flash drives and virtualization allowing a single computer to be used in turn by a limitless number of users.

Purchasing from environmentally responsible manufacturers and distributers of ICTs and using the ICTs we already own in energy efficient ways, will not only reduce the direct effects of ICTs on the environment but will also save us money through lower energy bills. The savings should not be underestimated – one government department in the Pacific conducted an energy audit of their ICT and discovered that reducing the energy used by its ICT could save enough to increase their existing workforce by 20% with the savings made from managing their ICT energy consumption better!

Enabling Effects

The direct effects of ICT on the environment are substantial. However, using ICT to lower the environmental impact of other industries, the enabling effects of ICT, is where the largest reductions in environmental impact are to be made. Intelligent transport systems can help reduce traffic congestion and road miles. Using videoconferencing can help to avoid the need for physical travel. Online collaborative tools can enable less physical travel as well as better decision making and a wider sharing of best and good practices. Intelligent energy networks can balance energy in the network so it is not wasted and can also facilitate remote meter reading. Smart buildings can be more energy and thermally efficient. Smart supply chains can also lead to less physical transportation and storage of goods. There are numerous environmental challenges to which ICT can be applied.

Applying ICT to these existing energy problems is not something to be done in the future, it can and is being done today. It is well underway in fact and businesses and governments the world over are already embracing the solutions. Home working projects, funded by Microsoft Corporation, are helping government agencies to reduce the amount of travel undertaken by its employees. UPS, a global parcel delivery service, reduces its fuel consumption by planning routes so that trucks do not have to turn across traffic – this may sound trivial until it is considered that the company has 88,000 vehicles and delivers some 15 million parcels every day. Siemens, a global electrical electronics and electrical engineering firm, has devised algorithms to control building ventilation, heating and cooling and applies these techniques to hospitals, schools, banks and industrial sites all over the world. Tandberg, a video conferencing equipment company, recently implemented videoconferencing for 200 of Vodafone’s offices around the world to reduce employee travel. Finally, video-on-demand is set to replace physical DVDs and CDs which alone would save 120,000 tonnes of carbon in the EU alone.

Apart from the reduction in environmental impact, organisations around the globe are reducing their costs by thinking “green” and the savings can be substantial. It turns out that reducing the amount of resources one uses also reduces expenses and improves global competitiveness. Organisations around the globe are embracing new ways of ‘doing more with less’ – less energy, less materials, less travel, less cost and less environmental impact.

Powering a mobile phone using D-cell batteries in Papua New Guinea.

Conclusion

As citizens, businesses and government departments we can utilise different ICTs to help us minimise our environmental impact – whilst also saving money. Whether it is turning on our computer screensavers, removing our phone chargers from the wall socket when not in use, installing low-power light bulbs in the office or just printing fewer documents each day; it is within our power to save our natural environment and critical for our natural environment to save power and other resources.

This is an adaptation of an article written for the Provincial Government of Nanggroe Aceh Darussalam, Indonesia by ICTD Corporation. ICTD Corporation specialises in the provision of consulting & advisory services for the design, planning, implementation and review of e-government initiatives and field research in developmental ‘leapfrogging’ in the area of ICTs. The author, Tony Willenberg (tony.willenberg@ictd.com), is managing director of ICTD Corporation and based in Sydney, Australia.

Welcome, to this the first article of a new series of monthly articles on information and communication technologies for development (ICTD) written for the national planning & development agency of the province of Naggroe Aceh Darussalam (NAD). The series is intended for the non-technical reader. The aim of this series is to broaden the view of what ICT is and to take a lot of the mystery out of it so it can be used more effectively, in a way that suits the people of Aceh and our culture and customs, and to enjoy a better quality of life because of it.

The world is rapidly changing and there can be no doubt that ICT is firmly placed at the center of that change. Changes are seen in how people live from day-to-day, how people educate their children, how people interact and communicate with each other, how people find work, the kinds of jobs that they can do, how government conducts their “business”, how citizens interact with government, and how information moves between organizations. The changes are significant, permanent and ICT cannot be removed from the equation – ICT is at the heart of most of the observed changes. The constant factor is that ICT will continue play a sizable part of every aspect of human existence.

BAPPEDA, the provincial arm of the national planning and development agency within the Government of Indonesia, continues to work on the social and economic development challenges facing our province and nation and has a deeply renewed emphasis on ICT and how it can be used as social and economic developmental tool.

So, let’s start by understanding what ICT is. Later we will explore its uses and possibilities.

Most of us have come into contact with ICT as we use mobile phones, a PC, or access the Internet to use email and “surf the web”, but ICT is not just about dealing with phones, computers and the Internet. ICT is a broad, mature, well-structured and diverse social & scientific discipline encompassing an wide and deep body of knowledge.

Planning, designing and implementing ICT initiatives demands knowledge of: new processes and methods for doing things, new ways of applying financial resources, new business and service models, new jobs and learning and training pathways, new environmental impacts, new organizational structures and methods of governing those structures, new policy, legislation and regulatory frameworks, new cognitive and psychological science, new human behaviors and physical interactions, new branches of mathematics and physics, new language…and, yes, of course, there is also an expectation that one is accustomed to new hardware, software and ways of networking them.

Incorporating technology into an environment, whether that environment be a private sector enterprise, a non-governmental organization or a government agency, can only be sustainable and effective if all aspects of ICT are accounted for in the planning, designing and implementing of an ICT project. Accounting for financial resources, human resources, risk, timing, environmental sustainability, procedures, protocols, existing institutional structures needs to occur – without such considerations made, the ICT projects are destined to face challenges if not failing altogether. The number of international development ICT projects that are challenged or have failed altogether are numerous and easy to find. The common link among these projects is that they often failed to account for technical and organisational factors. Challenged or failed projects often exhibit a “gap” between the technology and the organisation.

For us to harness the power of ICT we must recognize that ICT is no longer just about hardware, software and networking – attending to only technology-related factors is an outdated and over simplistic view of ICT and ICT governance. ICT is a deep and wide discipline and understanding this, as a “first step”, will help us engage the right people, foster the right relationships, expect the right attributes in our organisational managers and develop the right skills within our organisations – to realize and enjoy the benefits that ICT can provide our organizations and government agencies is possible when ICT is seen as not just a driver of change or a facilitator of change in the organisation, but seen as the change to the organisation itself.

This is an adaptation of an article written for the Provincial Government of Nanggroe Aceh Darussalam, Indonesia by ICTD Corporation. ICTD Corporation specialises in the provision of consulting & advisory services for the design, planning, implementation and review of e-government initiatives and field research in developmental ‘leapfrogging’ in the area of ICTs. The author, Tony Willenberg (tony.willenberg@ictd.com), is managing director of ICTD Corporation and based in Sydney, Australia.

Google Apps: This is a set of online office productivity tools like email, chat, word processing, spreadsheets and presentation software. It runs great in Google’s browser (called Google Chrome), but is not to be confused with Google’s App Engine.

Google App Engine (GAE): This is a sandboxed hosted environment to run computer programs written in Python and Java. The sandbox disallows applications from accessing the server hardware directly and enables Google to marshall and proxy certain resource calls so that it can charge for utlisation of the infrastructure on which the application is hosted (CPU, disk, network bandwidth).

Google Web Toolkit (GWT): This is a Java-based API which allows you to create client-side AJAX-based software linked to server-side Java servlets using pure Java code. The server-side can be hosted as a Google App Engine, but need not be – it can be hosted on any web server running the Java Servlet API.

Google has done a good job of simplifying the software development and deployment process and using one or more of the development environments they provide makes it easy to write software and deploy it for the world to use. We are likely to see more offerings from Google in this product space as it moves into the operating system market and “dukes it out” with Microsoft in the years to come.

Google Goggles: An Android-based application, i.e. available on mobile phones only (at this time), which augments what the phone’s camera sees with Google search results. Effectively, you can use the phone’s camera to lookup information on Google’s search engine. For example, point the Android-phone to the Golden Gate Bridge and press search and Google Goggles will recognise what it is seeing through the camera and use that information to conduct a Google search – the result is information about the Golden Gate Bridge retrieved from Google’s search engine. Goggles will, in time, also enable visual language translation. Simply point the Android-phone’s camera to text written in say German and the Google Goggles will lookup the text, translate it and feed it back to you audibly or visually in English.

The arguments seem compelling at first glance, but in reality there are a number of challenges experienced with FOSS:

Firstly, the low or no cost of FOSS only reflects the initial cost of the system. The total cost of software typically comprises three cost elements: (a) an upfront cost, (b) an ongoing cost and (c) a series of ongoing indirect and opportunity costs. FOSS has a low upfront cost element, but usually comes with high ongoing and indirect costs due to higher costs to locate and retain technical support. The cost of upgrading from FOSS is usually higher too because upgrade paths from one version to the next cannot be controlled as well as COTS software – many people contribute to the source code which makes up a FOSS product.

Secondly, the claim that FOSS avoids “locking in” a user to a particular commercial supplier is possibly false because it does not illuminate other forms of “lock in” which a user faces. Users of FOSS are often “locked in” to the product itself – a product that nobody or no company can support and a product which can be impossible to upgrade from. The user in effect becomes locked in to their own decision to use FOSS. The intellectual property behind FOSS is donated to the public domain and so it is not owned by any one company or person, the implication being that no one company or person takes ultimate responsibility for technical support of the users of the FOSS product – users have to be more technically independent and proactive when addressing their technical support needs. COTS authors usually reinvest a large part of their revenues back into technical support mechanisms to ensure their users get the most out of the COTS systems. COTS authors reinvest in technical support for their clients by building help desks and establishing telephone hotlines, writing documentation, providing online chat operators, developing training courses, setting up online communities of practice, and publishing lists of helpful information like “tips & tricks” and frequently asked questions (FAQs). The same quality and quantity of FOSS technical support is rare to find in one source. Typically technical support needs to be harvested from online user groups. There are instances of companies that “add value” to FOSS products but they charge for their version of the FOSS application and so by definition this excludes them from being considered FOSS due to the software charge.

Finally, the more philosophical attribute, that FOSS is consistent with the basic principles of open government because informed people can open and inspect source code may be flawed. The openness of government does not make sense when the granularity of the processes to be “opened” are so fine grained. An analogy: it would be difficult to argue that the inner workings of a photocopier must be visible to all for it to be accepted as an artefact that supports open government administration and therefore utilized by a government agency. A photocopier provides an organisation with certain ‘services’ and those services should be considered atomic or indivisible – they should be considered fine-grained enough to not warrant any further decomposition or revelation. The concept of open and transparent government processes taken to that level of detail does nothing to add value to the way in which a government serves its citizens. In fact, if a photocopier manufacturer could not protect and conceal its intellectual property and had to make it “open”, it is likely they would not be able to maintain a commercial business and future iterations of their photocopier may be jeopardised – government without access to a photocopier, because the photocopier is no longer profitable to build in an open way, may indirectly subtract value from government and its citizens. This is an exaggerated example, but the principle is the same. If opening a process adds no value or does not remove risk that a government process can be hijacked, then the reason to open the process is moot.

The aim of the framework is to promote a comprehensive approach to ICT projects and programs based on what has been learned over the last 20 or so years in the commercial world across developed countries. The framework is simple. It divides up an ICT program into six areas of attention: (i) policy, (ii) human resources, (iii) process, (iv) natural environment, (v) the commercial context and(vi) technoware. Each area of attention then uses a simple scale to reflect the degree of maturity of the planned or incumbent ICTD program or activity. The framework has already been used in a number of international development projects and has been warmly received. In Kiribati, where power is expensive due to it being produced by diesel generation, the framework helped to expose significant cost savings to be made by using more energy-efficient mechanisms for computing (using thin-client technologies).

Greater savings in recurrent costs, of course, increases the sustainability of the initiative. In Indonesia, where free and open source software is popular and is frequently adopted by government agencies, the framework helped to illuminate existing government policy on the use of open source and showed how the commercial context would be able to play a positive part sustaining the government’s planned ICTD initiative. The framework is intended to be ‘lightweight’ and to be descriptive, as opposed to prescriptive. It is intended that it be used to guide assessment, design and analysis of ICTD initiatives and also to assist with the setup of a sound monitoring and evaluation scheme for the activity.

He explained how the broadcasting system will require enormous amounts of digital bandwidth between the broadcaster and the TV receiver and will be based on existing IP protocols but requiring next generation digital networks.  Dr Yumita also cited the significant progress made on “wide field” TV imagery, a display system which allows TV pictures with a 100-degree field of vision or more to be broadcast and displayed. Today’s widescreen TV typically displays a field of vision less than 30-degrees or so but humans often depend on at least 100-degrees of view. He explained that the new broadcast protocol is being designed to prepare for wall and ultra-large screen TV formats.

Efforts made by the telecommunication carriers to reduce their carbon footprint have been significant but more is yet to be done, according to Vestberg. Ericsson cites that around 8-10% of an  mobile carrier’s operational expenditure is attributed to powering base stations. Over the last 10 years Ericsson cites a drop in energy consumption of their base stations by as much as 90% through an intentional tactic to use energy more efficiently and to introduce more energy efficient radio equipment. Another carrier cited their commitment to power 118,000 US base stations with alternative energy over the next 3 years. Rajiv Mehrotra, CEO of VNL Technologies, a company which has pioneered the fully solar powered base transceiver station (BTS), cites that a zero-emissions BTS is possible. Their flagship BTS product can be installed by two people in under 6 hours from 6 boxes – the CEO likening the process of setting up the green BTS to assembling IKEA furniture! Another cited example of how ICT can enable energy efficiency among all industry sectors was the use of teleworking, teleconferencing and telepresence. A typical NY to Geneva flight produces 1000 times more carbon than a week long videoconference according to Robert Conway, one of the panel members. Vestberg made it clear that green ICT and eocnomically and socially responsible ICT are one in the same, all members on the panel agreed.