[OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] ***SPAM*** RE: ***SPAM*** Re: ***SPAM*** Re: Library Journal

[Deanna Frazee]

A few years back (probably at least 3), I was contacted by the SLIS at U of Texas regarding the creation of an open-source filter and time management system for public computers.  I signed on for updates about the project, but nothing else has every seemed to be said about it.  I hope another grad school will consider taking the project on if UT has given it up.

Deanna Frazee
Killeen City Library System
(254) 501-8995
(254) 501-7704 (fax)
dfrazee at ci.killeen.tx.us
 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: open-ils-general-bounces at list.georgialibraries.org [mailto:open-ils-
> general-bounces at list.georgialibraries.org] On Behalf Of Sharon Foster
> Sent: Friday, November 06, 2009 10:25 AM
> To: Evergreen Discussion Group
> Cc: JoAnne Westerby; Jenn Horwath
> Subject: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] ***SPAM*** Re: ***SPAM*** Re: Library Journal
> 
> I just want to chime in that I disagree with those who say we should
> not choose between proprietary and open source based solely on
> philosophical grounds. Even if everything that Abrams says about OSLS
> were true--and of course it's not--it's still no worse than
> proprietary software on every point; I don't think he really made his
> case that proprietary is "better." So why not decide on philosophical
> grounds? Why is our profession, which is all about sharing resources
> and ideas, even having this debate?
> 
> And after we've settled this issue, can we go on to talk about an open
> source solution for public computers (and staff computers, why not?)
> that includes time and print management--the only two pieces of the
> puzzle that are really missing?
> 
> Sharon M. Foster, JD, MLS
> Technology Librarian
> http://firstgentrekkie.blogspot.com/
> "Have you tried switching it off and on again?"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 9:34 AM, Cynthia Williamson
> <crwbookgirl at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Abram is indeed a salesman and I agree with the apologist label that
> someone
> > else applied.  My first instinct was to ignore his document but
> considering
> > that I could whip up this rebuttal in about 15 minutes, I can't resist
> > sharing. I was just finishing this up when Frances sent the itwire
> rebuttal,
> > I love that the non-library community is calling Abram on his
> > dis-information campaign, thanks for sharing.  I almost didn't post
> this,
> > but like I said, I can't resist.
> > Please edit and add to it if ya like - we can create our own "Open
> Source
> > for Libraries" document that is much more useful to libraries seeking a
> new
> > ILS solution.
> >
> > Cheers, Cynthia
> > Mohawk College
> > Hamilon ON
> >
> > TCO:  We handled our own migration to EG, a possibility that Abram
> doesn't
> > address. Our hardware costs were under $10,000CAD.  We migrated early in
> the
> > last year of our support contract with our proprietary system -
> essentially
> > having access to both systems for about 7 months.  We could never have
> > afforded to do that if we'd been migrating to a new proprietary system.
> Has
> > it cost us in time?  Of course it has, but I once spent the better part
> of a
> > year on a DRA to Dynix migration (not to mention the year before that
> > dealing with the whole RFP & decision making process) AND we spent @
> > CAD$180,000.00 on hardware, software and training - that was many years
> ago
> > and in a pretty small library system - I'd hate to think what a
> migration to
> > an SD system would cost today. But of course I wouldn't know would I?
> Those
> > companies ask us to sign confidentiality documents around quotes.  We do
> > have a develpment contract for some work from Equinox and no one has
> asked
> > us to sign any confidientiality documents around the work or the quote.
> The
> > time investment in learning about Dynix hasn't helped me much with other
> > systems - none of their standards or software are the same as anything
> else
> > I've encountered. The time invested in learning about and implementing
> EG
> > has given me sustainable, transferable knowlege that will help me and
> the
> > institution I work for well into the future.   Oh and yes indeedy it is
> free
> > like in kittens not beer but kittens last a lot longer than beer, much
> as I
> > enjoy a good beer, kittens are a way better ROI, don't ya think?  Last
> on
> > this point -  let's not forget about paying for own data when we migrate
> > from one system to another - we won't have to do that if we ever migrate
> > from EG.
> >
> > Opportunity Costs:  "Some software isn't compatible with open source".
> Is
> > he kidding?  Like any proprietary system is compatable with all
> software!!!
> > We had to pay for extra programming to make sure our former mythical
> beast
> > of an ILS was searchable in the federated search product that we chose.
> >
> > SaaS - FUD, total FUD mongering.  I have no comment.
> >
> > Features and Functions:  I'll admit that the EG cataloguing module isn't
> the
> > most user friendly thing I've ever used but since 90% of our cataloguing
> is
> > done by a vendor, it's not a great issue for us. We migrated from a
> pretty
> > old SD OPAC so for us the EG OPAC is more feature rich but I get that
> there
> > more bells and whistles in other SD products than the one we used.
> > As for SD being the most robust and feature rich system on the market???
> Why
> > did Georgia decide to build their own ILS?  Why is Queens PL suing SD
> over
> > what are essentially broken promises???
> >
> > Customization: "Probably the most attractive claim by the open source
> > community is its ability to be customized by anyone, for anyone. This
> claim
> > is technically true."  I almost want to say 'nuff said.  But I can't
> help
> > remembering being sold on being able to do minor customizations to
> Horizon,
> > only to find that stuff we did would be undone by minor upgrades.  At
> least
> > in EG we can track our own tweaks and just re-do them after an upgrade
> if
> > need be and we'll know what tweaks won't go with an upgrade, instead of
> > getting suprises because we made the tweaks and we can see the code.
> >
> > Security: I think this is just more FUD.  Others more qualified than me
> > should address this if possible.  update based on itwire post:  the US
> DoD
> > is embracing open source - think they'd do it if was generally not
> secure???
> >
> > Networking:  Doesn't relying on more open standards stand us in better
> > stead?  Keeping up with changes to browsers and operating systems is
> > difficult for all of us, proprietary or open source.
> >
> > Necessary Expertise:  I am aware of the budget cuts to libraries over
> the
> > decades that caused us to lose systems and other positions over the
> years.
> > So I lay no blame for giving up a lot of power over our own destinies.
> But
> > this loss has caused us to rely much too heavily on proprietary vendors
> > methinks. I think that building the "necessary expertise" is crucial to
> the
> > future of libraries. We are the organizing experts, as more and more
> digital
> > repositories are created, more open publishing at our institutions
> happens,
> > we need to be the ones who help with organizing and access to this
> stuff.
> > In many ways I agree with Clifford Lynch when he wonders about the cost
> and
> > time and effort being spent to create something that essentially already
> > exists.  But this is a case of going back to school, learning about our
> > principles and standards either again or for the very first time -
> taking
> > back ownership of our own systems is a very good thing.  If it feels
> like a
> > step backwards to some, so be it, eventually it will lead to huge steps
> > forward.
> >
> > Testing:  I've said this once and I'll say it again, is he kidding??
> Those
> > big proprietary systems are impossible to test thoroughly,  there is no
> one
> > who is familiar with the entire history of their development. I remember
> a
> > Horizon support guy telling me they'd never be able to release a new
> feature
> > if they had to be completely & totally sure that it wouldn't break
> > anything.  We're all familiar with waiting for others to apply patches
> and
> > do upgrades first to avoid that early adopter disaster.  This is
> actually
> > the way of a lot of software isn't it? Early adopters do take their
> chances.
> > At least right now, the EG and KOHA developers are all pretty intimately
> > familiar with their systems and if they don't catch "breaks" that will
> be
> > caused by an upgrade before they happen, they'll often be able to get to
> the
> > source and fix it with a really good patch, not a quick fix that causes
> > other problems, etc. etc. etc.
> >
> > Integration:  Mostly agree with what he says here, but would add that
> with
> > Open Source you're more likely to be able to understand compatability
> issues
> > 'cause you can see the code!!
> >
> > Community Driven:  I suppose I can concede that there is a big, mostly
> > thriving Sirsi Dynix community but has anyone ever rec'd a reply to a
> query
> > or problem almost instantly from SD developers???
> >
> > Scalability:  I think he goes into territory he doesn't know much about
> > here. Remember that Georgia didn't have enough confidence in any of the
> > proprieatry systems in that department. Yes EG was developed for a
> specific
> > consortium but Conifer and BC Sitka and others exist so the specifics
> for
> > Georgia haven't made it impossible for other consortiums to use EG.
> >
> > Speed:  This is such a red herring.  So many things can cause speed
> issues
> > it is almost impossible to decide that one system is faster than
> another.
> > Our EG system is totally zippy - but I know better than to say that is
> way
> > faster than the mythical beast that we left because we were part of a
> > consortium using a pretty old version of the OPAC - apples to oranges.
> >
> > Reliability:  I truly don't know how he has the nerve to discuss
> > reliability.  Think of what SD did to their Horizon customers. I still
> > struggle to contain my outrage about that and my library wasn't directly
> > affected!!  That DRA to Dynix migration I participated in?  Forced, by
> the
> > end of the life of DRA.  No software is totally reliable ... at least if
> the
> > EG community dies or forks irrevocably, we have our data and our system
> and
> > can keep it running just fine while we decide what to do next.
> >
> > Open Source and Libraries:  More FUD.  Lynch has already clarified what
> he
> > was saying.  Libraries need to explore open source and proprietary
> solutions
> > and based on their needs, I don't think it is a matter of open source
> all
> > the time but I gotta admit, we look for those first.
> >
> > SD on Open Source:  Who cares?? - just like I wouldn't listen to the
> tobacco
> > industry about smoking I'm not going to take advice on open source from
> a
> > company who stands to gain by turning libraries away from open source
> > solutions.
> >
> > Caveat emptor indeed!  I totally agree with him on that one and it is
> why I
> > would not go near SD with a ten foot pole, given a choice.
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Nov 5, 2009 at 9:23 PM, Deanna Frazee <dfrazee at ci.killeen.tx.us>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> I'm hoping this might help the library industry quit touting Abrams as
> a
> >> visionary among librarians.  He's a degreed librarian, but he's been a
> >> corporate guy for so long that I have my doubts that he is all that in
> touch
> >> with the realities of working in a library now.
> >>
> >> Visionary? No.  More like salesperson.
> >>
> >> Deanna Frazee
> >> Killeen City Library System
> >>
> >> ________________________________
> >>
> >> From: open-ils-general-bounces at list.georgialibraries.org on behalf of
> >> Schultz, Monica
> >> Sent: Thu 11/5/2009 7:27 PM
> >> To: Evergreen Discussion Group
> >> Subject: Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Library Journal
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Plus is great marketing for OSS, you know what they say "there is no
> bad
> >> marketing" lol...
> >>
> >> Monica M. Schultz
> >> PLS IT Director
> >> Tel: 650.356-2120
> >> Fax: 650.349.5089
> >>
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: open-ils-general-bounces at list.georgialibraries.org
> >> [mailto:open-ils-general-bounces at list.georgialibraries.org] On Behalf
> Of
> >> Mark Jordan
> >> Sent: Thursday, November 05, 2009 5:29 PM
> >> To: open-ils-general at list.georgialibraries.org
> >> Subject: Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Library Journal
> >>
> >> C'mon guys, I think spreading FUD is a perfectly natural response from
> a
> >> company that has lost customers to OSS ILSs.
> >>
> >> Mark
> >>
> >> Mark Jordan
> >> Head of Library Systems
> >> W.A.C. Bennett Library, Simon Fraser University
> >> Burnaby, British Columbia, V5A 1S6, Canada
> >> Voice: 778.782.5753 / Fax: 778.782.3023
> >> mjordan at sfu.ca
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > If more of us valued food and cheer and song above hoarded gold, it
> would be
> > a merrier world.
> > J. R. R. Tolkien
> >