[Web4lib] An Analysis Of Open Source ILS Market Penetration

[K.G. Schneider]

Color me Monday-dumb, but did we expect anything else? These products
are very new, by the yardstick of library automation, and an ILS
migration is a big commitment that takes a lot of time. You have to be
both desperate and determined to change your ILS--and though that
describes quite a few libraries, then they still need time to evaluate,
plan, and deploy. I'm not sure what the report demonstrates except the
"slow-moving barge" syndrome. Or am I missing something? 

Karen G. Schneider
kgs at freerangelibrarian.com

On Mon, 15 Oct 2007 11:50:34 -0400, "Blake Carver" <lists at lisnews.com>
said:
> An Analysis Of Open Source ILS Market Penetration
> http://features.lisnews.org/features/07/10/15/118229.shtml
> This ILS Market Analysis was written by Bob Molyneux contains
> preliminary figures might be of interest to the web4lib readers.
> Bob looks at which U.S. public & academic libraries currently run open
> source ILS software, and how Koha and Evergreen usage stacks up.
> 
> "There are a number of ways one might measure the impact of open
> source ILS software on U.S. public libraries but I think these
> preliminary figures are suggestive: that few of these libraries
> actually use open source software as a means of supplying their ILSs.
> Of course, we know that many more have announced and the market is
> dynamic. When I revisit these figures, I suspect the numbers will
> change but the size of the library market is quite a bit larger than
> the open source community has supplied. Its impact on the market is
> around 1%, depending on which measure one uses and by the restrictive
> criteria I use here."
> 
> You can read the report and see his tables for comparison at
> http://www.lisnews.org/features/07/10/15/118229.shtml
> 
> -BLake Carver
> LISNews.org
> _______________________________________________
> Web4lib mailing list
> Web4lib at webjunction.org
> http://lists.webjunction.org/web4lib/