Re: [CODE4LIB] Why are we afraid to criticize library software in public?
Aside from niceness, NDAs and fear of litigation, there are other factors that influence the lack of detailed product information and critiques. A lot of patrons may use library systems but often their interaction is limited and indirect with a specific vendor's product. It is often rebranded, customized and integrated with other products to meet a specific library's needs. The patron often has no idea which product they're using and might make only occasional use. Given the situation, I wouldn't expect the volume of popular blog posts, comparisons and bug reports as for something like Firefox or Microsoft Word. Even comparing to other back end software, I'd expect something like relational database or payroll software to see broader use and adoption across industries than certain library systems. With more use and evaluation, I'd expect to see more public feedback and complaints about the software in a Google search. The library community can be relatively small, specialized and niche compared to other markets. As a comparison, I once worked for a large original equipment manufacturer (OEM) that sold computers to end users. They were looking to move from their home-brew phone technical support, ticketing and CRM system to a commercial product, preferably with focus and experience with our industry needs. I was involved in some of the evaluation and meetings with vendors. We ran into some similar problems of not being able to find many public critiques or much information about significant bugs or problems (NDAs?). Of course, vendors had their lists touting prominent customers. They even gave us a contact or two at companies using their products who would say generally nice things about them. However, really useful information was most likely to come out of our own testing and evaluation, along with informal back channel sources, not from the vendor or public information available on the Internet. In other words, I think there is more at play here than librarians simply (and stereotypically) wanting to play nice. It seems to be more or less the case with other niche products in other industries, too.
Re: [CODE4LIB] Why are we afraid to criticize library software in public?
+1 On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 4:36 PM, Jonathan Rochkind rochk...@jhu.edu wrote: On 1/25/2012 1:13 PM, Kyle Banerjee wrote: itself. For example, there's a system used for many digital archives that splits a field in two anytime a field that needs to be represented by an XML entity is encountered. Name withheld to protect the guilty. Why are we so eager to 'protect the guilty' in discussions like this? Our reluctance to share info on problems with software we use (because of fear of offending the vendor?) means that it's very difficult for a library to find out about the plusses and minuses of any given product when evaluating solutions. Don't even bother googling -- nobody will publically call this stuff out on a blog, or even in a public listserv! It's on private customer-only listservs and bug trackers, or even more likely nowhere at all. When you want to find out the real deal, you have to start from scratch, contact personal contacts at other institutions that have experience with each software you are curious about, and ask them one-on-one in private. Wasting time, cause everybody has to do that each time they want to find out the current issues, so many offline one and one conversations (or so many people that just give up and don't even do the 'due dilligence'), only finding out about things your personal contact happened to have encountered. Why can't we just share this stuff in public and tell it like it is, so the information is available for people who need it? If you want to find out about problems and issues with _succesful_ software that isn't library-specific, it's not hard to. You can often find public issue trackers from the developers, but if not you can find public listservs and many blog posts where people aren't afraid to describe the problem(s) they encountered, there's no 'protecting of the guilty.' Hint, this is part of what _makes_ such software succesful. Jonathan
Re: [CODE4LIB] Why are we afraid to criticize library software in public?
http://journal.code4lib.org/articles/4438 see KOHA section. Markus Fischer Am 25.01.2012 22:47, schrieb Ethan Gruber: +1 On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 4:36 PM, Jonathan Rochkindrochk...@jhu.edu wrote: On 1/25/2012 1:13 PM, Kyle Banerjee wrote: itself. For example, there's a system used for many digital archives that splits a field in two anytime a field that needs to be represented by an XML entity is encountered. Name withheld to protect the guilty. Why are we so eager to 'protect the guilty' in discussions like this? Our reluctance to share info on problems with software we use (because of fear of offending the vendor?) means that it's very difficult for a library to find out about the plusses and minuses of any given product when evaluating solutions. Don't even bother googling -- nobody will publically call this stuff out on a blog, or even in a public listserv! It's on private customer-only listservs and bug trackers, or even more likely nowhere at all. When you want to find out the real deal, you have to start from scratch, contact personal contacts at other institutions that have experience with each software you are curious about, and ask them one-on-one in private. Wasting time, cause everybody has to do that each time they want to find out the current issues, so many offline one and one conversations (or so many people that just give up and don't even do the 'due dilligence'), only finding out about things your personal contact happened to have encountered. Why can't we just share this stuff in public and tell it like it is, so the information is available for people who need it? If you want to find out about problems and issues with _succesful_ software that isn't library-specific, it's not hard to. You can often find public issue trackers from the developers, but if not you can find public listservs and many blog posts where people aren't afraid to describe the problem(s) they encountered, there's no 'protecting of the guilty.' Hint, this is part of what _makes_ such software succesful. Jonathan
Re: [CODE4LIB] Why are we afraid to criticize library software in public?
Salvete! *Warning Ranty. Brooke's Ideas shouldn't actually be consumed by anyone, ever.* Why are we so eager to 'protect the guilty' in discussions like this? Our reluctance to share info on problems with software we use (because of fear of offending the vendor?) means that it's very difficult for a library to find out about the plusses and minuses of any given product when evaluating solutions. I think the root of evil here is that criticism often runs counter to the Prime Directive of Library Science which is Thou Shalt Be Nice. On the surface, that's a wonderful directive. It makes a lot of sense. We give people stuff, they have no real incentive to give it back, but it works. Because at the end of the day, most people are Nice. Most of the time, there's absolutely no harm in being Nice. It's great for fundraising. It's wonderful for reference and reader's advisory. Nice works probably about the same rate that Dewey avoids scattering. However, you've hit on a rocky patch. Nice does us no good with most vendors. Nice also does not tend to do us any good in advocacy. Nice really sucks in salary negotiations. Nice becomes unhitched and somehow twists into passive aggressiveness when it comes to vendors. Don't even bother googling -- nobody will publically call this stuff out on a blog, or even in a public listserv! It's on private customer-only listservs and bug trackers, or even more likely nowhere at all. When you want In the before time, when I was at a medium urbanish Library that was swapping systems, I did bother to do a shotgun google. I simply put in the name of the products + bugs and tripped on a lot of not Nice statements. It was very simple and probably very sloppy. I was not a degreed Librarian at the time, but hey, the ratio of hits bore out. The bad products that we bumped into at the time all had way more documented bugs. Not that more bugs is necessarily a bad thing if folks address them, but a lot of the hits related to lonng wait times for fixes. So I disagree here. Google away. You might turn up naught, in which case, I'd worry, because you're right about stuff being shuttled behind the vendor curtain. Also, it might be an imperfect beast, but the Library Automation Survey does vaguely sketch out who's jumping ship for what and how crap customer service might be. It does evolve every year, but I totally understand if you think a year is too damn long to wait for ILS data. to find out the real deal, you have to start from scratch, contact personal contacts at other institutions that have experience with each software you are curious about, and ask them one-on-one in private. Wasting time, cause everybody has to do that each time they want to find out the current issues, so many offline one and one conversations (or so many people that just give up and don't even do the 'due dilligence'), only finding out about things your personal contact happened to have encountered. *nod* This is part of good footwork though. If someone doesn't bother with a Google shotgun search, doesn't bother with Library gossip, does a really sketchy review of a product and then signs on the dotted line, they get what they've got coming. One of the real evils here, all sarc aside, is that Librarians sign contracts with non disclosure agreements. That promotes the way things are currently done, since we're masochistic enough to stick the hello kitty ball gag in our own mouths. You are absolutely correct that it's unnecessarily time intensive and inefficient this way. It's kind of a feudal throwback, yes? Why can't we just share this stuff in public and tell it like it is, so the information is available for people who need it? We should. If we avoid non disclosure we _can_, which means it's possible in future to move this to we *will*. :) If you want to find out about problems and issues with _succesful_ software that isn't library-specific, it's not hard to. You can often find public issue trackers from the developers, but if not you can find public listservs and many blog posts where people aren't afraid to describe the problem(s) they encountered, there's no 'protecting of the guilty.' Hint, this is part of what _makes_ such software succesful. Mmm hmm. This also allows for folks to collaborate and fix stuff. Cheers, Brooke
Re: [CODE4LIB] Why are we afraid to criticize library software in public?
Why are we so eager to 'protect the guilty' in discussions like this? Why can't we just share this stuff in public and tell it like it is, so the information is available for people who need it? I agree that the practice is unfortunate as I personally believe that critics are the ones who care, but there are a number of practical considerations that don't lead me to believe the situation will change soon. Our profession is very risk averse. This makes people more inclined to adopt a CYA posture because anyone knows that if you say anything that could influence someone's rice bowl, you could have to answer for it even if it is 100% true. Even when legal considerations are not an issue, mistakes are viewed as evidence that someone screwed up rather than as an essential part of developing services, and anyone who makes one won't be trusted until they can prove it won't happen again. People who don't do the work don't appreciate the sausage making process for what it is. When you shine lights in the wrong places, you take away peoples' ability to balance competing priorities by diverting disproportionate attention (and therefore resources) to issues that could be a total distraction. Ironically, being too open makes high value information harder to come by. If someone trusts you with negative information about their own product to help you understand a problem, you have to find ways to use the information for good that don't involve getting others bitten in the butt. Betray peoples' confidence, and they won't share. So how are you supposed to figure out what's actually going on? Learn how to ask the right questions by getting as much unfiltered info as possible from as many sources as possible. Help people with weaknesses they reveal rather than letting them get flogged in public for them. And don't let perfect be the enemy of good. One factor that paralyzes many environments is that progress stops whenever a fault is acknowledged rather than figuring out what's the best overall path. People who want to get things done clam up fast if raising issues gets you sent to meeting hell where nothing ever happens. kyle
Re: [CODE4LIB] Why are we afraid to criticize library software in public?
Kyle Banerjee writes Our profession is very risk averse. But fortunately we don't have any stereotypes around here. ;-) Isn't the vendor the one the name of which starts with O, and the product name ends with M? Cheers, Thomas Krichelhttp://openlib.org/home/krichel http://authorprofile.org/pkr1 skype: thomaskrichel
