As we all know, the new eNatis system has been troubled by problems from day one of its implementation (and probably prior to that too!). One of the major problems they have been having is scalability with the high transaction load. Detail on the problems encountered has been rather sketchy and typically bureaucratic.
The biggest problem here is that this R408-million-of-taxpayer's-money contract was awarded by government to, well um, a consortium which includes a percentage ownership by a parastatal? Keeping it in the family I guess. Having worked with arivia.kom in the past, I can tell you in my professional opinion that they are not capable of providing the technical resources required for a project such as this. By simply reading the tasima web site profiles
of the companies involved one can easily see that none of the companies express software development as their core competency.
Putting aside the (in)competency of the tasima consortium
, and considering the fact that this is ultimately a public-owned and sponsored system, shouldn't the architecture of the system be put up for peer review by the IT professionals of this country? Assuming my input and feedback were considered I would be more than happy to spend a half hour perusing their architectural design, server sizing and connectivity proposals and giving professional, relevant feedback. Think of it as the spirit of "ubuntu" for the greater good (and sanity) of the entire vehicle industry. I'm sure many other IT people would feel the same.
The peer review will also allow young IT professionals to learn about how a large project is designed and could lead to better systems in all segments of the industry.
Come to think of it, shouldn't it be made compulsory for all
of government's IT projects be put up for public perusal and feedback by industry experts? Makes sense and cents to me.