tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8137713.post7727643553339854666..comments2024-03-19T16:26:45.863-04:00Comments on Digitization 101: ArchivalWare vs. CONTENTdmJill Hurst-Wahlhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16355882159165026398noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8137713.post-74756397866863566192013-10-10T13:35:13.973-04:002013-10-10T13:35:13.973-04:00I have worked with Archival ware for a few years n...I have worked with Archival ware for a few years now and I will not recommend it to anyone. Apart from their support cost which is truly atrocious, the support itself is not that great. They have an online support system which should work great but it all depends on who you get on their end. It is hard to use and unless you have strong technical skills and a good knowledge of Dublin Core, please don't go with it. The public interface is not as attractive as its competitors. ContentDM has had its own share of woes so I am looking at other alternatives. While no software will fulfill all the requirements, I want to go with the one that I can maintain without relying too much on the support that these companies tout about. I hope this helps you decide. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8137713.post-80675224858832218292010-02-04T11:54:13.003-05:002010-02-04T11:54:13.003-05:00CONTENTdm is a serious problem at my organization....CONTENTdm is a serious problem at my organization. The Project Client for building and transferring collections to the application server is fairly buggy in version 5.2. Handling of the OCR licenses (ABBYY Fine) is inflexible. Transfers to the application server, so that collections may be viewed on the web, are nearly interminable due either to connection issues at the OCLC server host, or bugs in the Project Client. Documentation is scanty, at best, scattered throughout several "how to" guides, tutorials, and webinars.<br /><br />While customer support is generally professional and responsive, it's hard to make up for a combination of flawed product and flawed hosting service.<br /><br />Unless you're planning to turn over all aspects of creating the digital collection to OCLC, and at some seriously stiff prices, you may find wrangling with this software/service a headache that eats up a lot of time and resources.<br /><br />You should give CONTENTdm and associated products and services a very thorough and diligent test drive before making the investment.<br /><br />85% of the functionality of this software can easily be delivered by Adobe Acrobat and Apache, for a fraction of the cost.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8137713.post-39158112613199264622007-08-06T14:50:00.000-04:002007-08-06T14:50:00.000-04:00We ended up selecting SirsiDynix's Hyperion since ...We ended up selecting SirsiDynix's Hyperion since we were switching our ILS to Unicorn and a) what we saw looked good and b) we got a good package deal. As Jill mentioned in a previous post, it's very difficult to do a true comparison of the various digital object management packages available. After the fact, Hyperion ended up being a terrible choice. We're switching to ArchivalWare, and I'm hoping it will be better. From what I've seen, it should be. The alternative to switching to AW from PTFS through Sirsi would have been to fight for a full refund on Hyperion and start over with something like ContentDM, something I wasn't particularly keen on doing.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com