18 Jul 17:50
Re: RE: vendors and usability
On Mon, Jul 18, 2005 at 07:51:58AM -0700, David Walker wrote: > >> I still think we should try > >> to split the user interface away > >> from the rest of the system I think I finally understand what you mean by this. Interestingly, the open-source ILSes have this feature built in (I assumed that proprietary systems did too, hence my confusion). Koha for instance, has a system of templates that allow any web designer to completely overhaul the look and feel of the interfaces without needing to know anything about the programming languages that Koha's written in. Here are some examples of vastly different 'skins' for Koha's OPAC: http://search.athenscounty.lib.oh.us http://library.lgnz.co.nz/cgi-bin/koha/opac-search.pl http://opac.lianza.org.nz/cgi-bin/koha/opac-search.pl http://opac.eeo.katipo.co.nz/cgi-bin/koha/opac-main.pl http://opac.liblime.com The same thing has been done with the librarian interfaces. > Most academic libraries have a half-dozen or more local systems besides > the catalog, usually from multiple vendors, as well as access to 100s of > remote databases, most of which have serious interface problems. > > What my users need is not a better OPAC interface. They need a simple, > intuitive interface that spans *all* of our systems. > > Vendors simply cannot create that for us. The only way libraries can > offer our users the seamless experience they expect, is through APIs. Some vendors can. > In that way, we can become co-creators of technology, rather than merely > consumers of technology subject to bad interfaces and economics. You can't imagine the frustration I experienced working for Nelsonville Public Library soon after we switched to Koha trying to get this very point accross. I tried doing presentations on Koha, highlighting economic benefits and usability/functionality control; I tried hosting seminars explaining how to install/migrate/manage Koha; I tried hosting Kohafests at the state level conferences actually stepping people through the processes involved; I even tried pushing open-source software as one of the main focuses in Ohio's Technology Task Force report a couple of years ago. Finally, I gave up on working from the inside and started a company offering full vendor support on open source in libraries. When I first started working at Nelsonville, I figured that since most libraries are publicly funded they'd be supporting public domain software. But instead, the vast majority of folks use proprietary systems. My question is: why do libraries not see the connection between their needs for control over software and lower costs, and open source? Why don't more libraries invest their money in building public domain systems that better meet their needs?
I remain perplexed, -- -- Joshua Ferraro VENDOR SERVICES FOR OPEN-SOURCE SOFTWARE President, Technology migration, training, maintenance, support LibLime Featuring Koha Open-Source ILS jmf@... |Full Demos at http://liblime.com/koha |1(888)KohaILS _______________________________________________ Web4lib mailing list Web4lib@... http://lists.webjunction.org/web4lib/
.
> In that way, we can become co-creators of technology, rather than merely
> consumers of technology subject to bad interfaces and economics.
You can't imagine the frustration I experienced working for Nelsonville
Public Library soon after we switched to Koha trying to get this very
point accross. I tried doing presentations on Koha, highlighting
economic benefits and usability/functionality control; I tried hosting
seminars explaining how to install/migrate/manage Koha; I tried
hosting Kohafests at the state level conferences actually stepping
people through the processes involved; I even tried pushing open-source
software as one of the main focuses in Ohio's Technology Task Force
report a couple of years ago. Finally, I gave up on working from the inside
and started a company offering full vendor support on open source in
libraries.
When I first started working at Nelsonville, I figured that since most
libraries are publicly funded they'd be supporting public domain software.
But instead, the vast majority of folks use proprietary systems.
My question is: why do libraries not see the connection between
their needs for control over software and lower costs, and open source?
Why don't more libraries invest their money in building public domain
systems that better meet their needs?
I remain perplexed,
RSS Feed