I understand the need that libraries have to reinvent or update their models due to the way the web is/has changed. What i am confused about is the vendors. They are upgrading and developing newer software to meet these demands, yet they dont work with the old systems? They need to start over? Some libraries feel some of the technology is fine while other see that it isnt enough for their users?
Also as new solutions are provided, and a library goes with a "standalone" product--if there are issues, (cost and interoperability) why would they choose to use that? Then basically, the article stated that a full blown open source ILS would get the library back to where it started functionality and the money they saved would need to be invested in tech. support and documentation. They why would they redo the entire system if it takes them back to the start and they still have to spend more money? This just confused me!
1 comment:
yes, this is an excellent question. ILS cost money and time to be implemented into a library. The good thing is that after the implementation, there is one system rather than several to support all the library services. But it is true that without standardization it is still an issue that whether this ILS would survive in long run, and if it fails what would left for the library
Post a Comment