[Sigia-l] IA and Traditional Software

[Jim Mathias]

Madhu, I enjoyed reading this posting--and in many cases I can't argue
with you.  However, you can't argue the fact that some software
products--particularly "enterprise" software products-- can't possibly
meet the needs of diverse "enterprise" user communities "out of the
box".  My company, for example uses standards (like JAVA/XML/SOAP),
library profiles/protocols ( like Dublin Core, Z39.50, MARC, etc.) and
open-standard technologies to reduce the need for "services".
Furthermore, good documentation in many cases reduces the need for these
costly "services".  Most of our work is done around Federal Agencies,
State libraries, University libraries and library consortia--each of
which have very different needs and demands (Our product is really a
bundled, application framework for information sharing, digital
libraries, and content/knowledge management).  For years, we attempted
to be everything to everyone--to provide a turn-key product to meet the
needs of all of our customers--and we've learned that it to do that is
cost prohibitive.  That is, to develop a COTS product for libraries --
each library would have to either adhere to our way of thinking--or they
would have to "somehow/somewhere" absorb the cost of our development.
Most libraries aren't in a position to do that. 

In our case, If our customers have basic JSP skills, there's little need
for them to incur fees for "services"--and our ongoing
research/development costs are greatly reduced--keeping our products
affordable. That's is the true meaning of "flexibility/scalability".
STANDARDS.

Jim Mathias
Blue Angel Technologies, Inc.
Jim.Mathias at BlueAngelTech.com
610-917-9200 x4124 / ICQ# : 164104471
www.BlueAngelTech.com


-----Original Message-----
From: Madhu Menon [mailto:webguru at vsnl.net]
Sent: Friday, August 02, 2002 4:13 PM
To: Listera; 
Subject: Re: [Sigia-l] IA and Traditional Software


At 11:46 PM 02-08-02, Listera wrote:
I have personally sat in on seminars where MS people told attendees
(mostly
consultants) how depth and complexity (read 'obfuscation') in their
software
created billable hour opportunities for 'partners', with a glee in their
eyes.

Alas, this story holds true for more that just Microsoft. Most
"enterprise" 
software applications suffer from this problem. Many a time, the company

that develops the software also has an in-house "services" team, which 
offers exorbitant "consulting services" to help you configure it for
your 
needs. There's a big conflict of interest there. If they actually made
the 
software easier to use, clients might - shudder! - figure it out for 
themselves, and then how would they make all that service revenue? Of 
course, unwarranted complexity and bad software design is positioned as 
"flexibility in features". :p

I'm sure you've encountered non-MS software that had the same issues.
Need 
I take names?

Regards,

Madhu
(MCS are expensive airheads!)


<<<   *   >>>
Madhu Menon
User Experience Consultant
e-mail: webguru at vsnl.net

------------
When replying, please *trim your post* as much as possible.
*Plain text, please; NO Attachments

ASIST Annual Meeting:
http://www.asis.org/Conferences/AM02/index.html

ASIST SIG IA website: http://www.asis.org/SIG/SIGIA/index.html
________________________________________
Sigia-l mailing list -- post to: Sigia-l at asis.org
Changes to subscription: http://mail.asis.org/mailman/listinfo/sigia-l