They only suck ’cause we let ‘em
I’m consistently frustrated and amazed by the inefficiencies of professional library software. In general, it’s bad, but when it comes to customizing interfaces and integrating components, they’re pretty much universally hopeless. We rarely ask for better. Like whipped dogs we slink around accepting whatever the vendors bestow upon us. It’s strange to me that we’d never put up with sub-standard services in other life arenas - static on our phone lines, for example, we’d get on the horn and demand better - but when faced with ineffectual software, we take it.
Karen Schneider explains this beautifully in her response to Casey’s post: Q: Why Do Some Things Suck?.
The problem is that the people making decisions are still in a box where they believe they need to purchase A, B, or C and continue providing services The Way They Always Done It. In some ways they
May 6th, 2006 at 8:27 pm
Something to consider about why libraries end up with bad interfaces (at least as far as catalogs go) is that it might be that the people who use the interface (and help the public use it) are not the people who decide which interface to use. In my case, I work in a library that’s part of a 36-member consortium, and our catalog software (Dynix’s Horizon v7.3) was chosen by a committee at the consortium level (it was in place before I got there, so I don’t know what kind of input from libraries they asked for).
The problem here is that they had to pick an interface that worked for the lowest common denominator library, and not the interface most purely user-friendly. And, probably more so than usual, the budget was a factor. Plus, now that it in place, it is maintained by people who are not librarians, and that don
May 6th, 2006 at 8:49 pm
Another rant I’ve been on at my library lately is about how we organize information on our website. I
May 7th, 2006 at 10:58 am
[...] Brian’s comment at RemainingRelevant should resonate with many of us: Something to consider about why libraries end up with bad interfaces (at least as far as catalogs go) is that it might be that the people who use the interface (and help the public use it) are not the people who decide which interface to use. [...]
May 8th, 2006 at 6:54 am
Brian #1 - I think you, and Casey are absolutely correct. It’s not enough if one or two of us are raising our expectations and attitudes about library software - we all need to. What if you printed out the pledge and sent it to the consortium? Or pointed to Casey’s blog? Reconnaisance? Slipped papers under doorways?
Brian #2 - This is the best reason for focused usability testing. I’ve found that even as a qualified web developer it’s too easy to get into a ‘because I said so and I’m the [blank] arguments’ with librarians. Both of us have expertise and so it’s a draw. SO you need to point to good evidence of what USERS want gathered from them - bonus points if you can get the naysayers to participate in the testing process. If anyone in a library STILL insists on a public interface their way instead of the way the users would like - well - then - I’d call them names and push them down. ‘Cause they’ve got no business in libraries.
August 17th, 2006 at 6:44 pm
I like you site. Visit Test 0cbc6611f5540bd
December 4th, 2006 at 5:56 pm
[...] I feel some particular kinship with WPOPAC having participated in many boisterous conversations about online library resource provision and the ins-and-outs of interface design, I feel like a very stakeholder in the project. [...]