I pretty much agree with everything you say below but I wonder if there
is a subtle difference between your 'in the cloud' view and the
'SaaS/ASP' view outlined in the original message.
I tried to unpick a similar distinction in a recent talk at the UCISA
Management Conference [1] (a conference that is primarily targetted at
university computer centre directors) where I was talking about the
differences between the 'shared service' agenda and 'Web 2.0'.
The shared service agenda is driven largely top-down by government and
institutional policy (in the case of Higher Education often mediated by
the JISC), primarily as a way of saving costs thru greater efficiencies.
I sense that this is where the original SaaS/ASP view was coming from?
The move towards 'in the cloud' (though in my talk I was focussing on
Web 2.0) is driven largely bottom-up, either thru individuals or
departments, recognising the 'network' and or 'social' benefits of that
approach (as you indicate in your opening para).
I guess that this distinction doesn't quite play out in the same way in
the museum context because of the differing nature of the 'institution'
and its 'members' but my guess is that there are still some significant
differences, particularly in terms of who is in control and what the
business drivers are ??
Whilst these approaches are not necessarily in conflict with each other,
they are different and, I think, probably need to be acknowledged.
[1] http://tinyurl.com/3jkk4m (though the presentation is all pictures
so you won't get much out of it currently)
Andy
--
Head of Development, Eduserv Foundation
http://www.eduserv.org.uk/foundation/
http://efoundations.typepad.com/
[log in to unmask]
+44 (0)1225 474319
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Museums Computer Group [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On
> Behalf Of Mike Ellis
> Sent: 22 May 2008 09:56
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Collections Management Systems as hosted applications
>
> Hi Nick
>
> Great question, and thanks for asking it...
>
> The "in the cloud" stuff is very interesting: conceptually,
> SaaS is the only way to go for all the reasons you outline in
> your email:
> centralised, manageable, cheap, single development path. You
> also missed a big one - it would also allow for a very
> interesting collaborative environment. Imagine - for instance
> - that your CM system had the option to "expose object to
> other curators" so you could ask questions of other museum
> experts "in the cloud". And then consider the social (public)
> aspects as well...?
>
> The issues that Seb raised are very real - computing in the
> cloud is still (no matter how good our bandwidth is right
> now) slower than desktop, especially with images or media
> files. However, I do think that good, contingency-based
> systems can be specified with these network issues in mind.
> For example it'd seem sensible to design systems that allow
> for local editing of assets, but have cloud storage built in.
> I use a couple of systems for instance (Carbonite and
> SugarSync) that - very effectively - sync data from my
> various computers to the cloud. In a badly designed system,
> I'd notice ("sorry, bandwidth is being hogged by system X"),
> but instead these "trickle" data up to the cloud and provide
> clever UI's that let you work with files even while they're
> being synced.
>
> With the continuing growth of WPF and Adobe AIR (see previous
> thread on MCG), the desktop/cloud divide is getting more and
> more blurred: system designers are caching locally, uploading
> during "quiet" times, providing interfaces that only ask for
> the specific asset (or segment of asset) that you're working
> on right now. It's only going to get more pervasive, but the
> systems need designing with realities in mind: managing your
> 50Mb TIFF file in the cloud is going to be a nightmare unless
> these realities are taken into account.
>
> The other massive issue I think is a "soft" one: not the DP
> issues (these can be solved), nor the security issues (these
> too have/can be
> solved) - instead it's about "my stuff being OUT THERE
> somewhere rather than in a machine that I can see". It's
> deeply unsettling psychologically for the current generation
> of computer users to envisage a truly "thin client" scenario.
> In all reality, your data is going to be way, way safer on
> Amazon S3 than on some dodgy 8-year old, non-backed up server
> in the middle of your museum somewhere...BUT...it just feels
> weird for it to be "in the cloud", doesn't it?? I'm
> geektastic and I struggled with this:
> http://electronicmuseum.org.uk/2007/08/10/archiving-data-to-th
> e-cloud/.
> System design can go a certain distance to helping this, but
> humans need some stroking, too...
>
> Ultimately [finally gets to the point], yes, I'll put my neck
> on the line and say that pretty much EVERY system will or
> should end up in the cloud, including museum CM systems. But
> it'll need some very clever UI and system design - not to
> mention stroking - to get us there.
>
> Cheers
>
> Mike
>
>
> Mike Ellis
> Professional Services Group
>
> Eduserv
> [log in to unmask]
> tel: 01225 470522
> mob: 07017 031522
> fax: 01225 474301
> www.eduserv.org.uk
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Museums Computer Group [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of
> Nick Poole
> Sent: 21 May 2008 23:19
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Collections Management Systems as hosted applications
>
> Dear MCGer's,
>
> I was wondering whether I could enlist your help in a research paper
> which the Collections Trust is considering at the moment. We
> are looking
> into the potential for museums to move towards the use of Collections
> Management Systems as remotely hosted, browser-accessible
> applications.
>
> With the rise of utility computing and improvements in bandwidth, it
> seems as though many industries are revisiting the Application Service
> Provider model
> (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Application_Service_Provider) as a
> cost-effective way of managing both applications and data. On the face
> of it, there are some appealing benefits to the ASP (not Active Server
> Pages) model for Collections Management Systems. These include:
>
>
> * Centralising (and therefore simplifying) the
> upgrade path for
> software
>
> * Enabling developers to rollout extensions to functionality
> globally across their client base
>
> * Reducing the requirement for local data storage and
> management
>
> * Potentially facilitating the processes of Digital
> Preservation
> for museum data
>
> * Potential cost-savings on technical support and development
>
> On the other hand, there is the risk that museums could
> perceive a move
> towards an ASP-based CMS as a loss of control or potentially
> integration
> with other museum systems, or that connectivity isn't robust enough
> provide a service as reliable as a Local Area Network/client-side
> application.
>
> The cost-savings and efficiency gains of this development could
> potentially be significant, but at the moment we have no
> clear evidence
> about how this model might be/is being applied. I would therefore
> welcome any and all thoughts or comments on this issue, and
> particularly:
>
>
> - Is anyone on the list using a Collections Management System
> under an Application Service Provider model?
>
>
> - Are any software developers on the list already
> providing or
> planning to provide such a service?
>
>
>
> - What do people think would be the reaction to this
> if it were
> to become a clear direction of travel for information systems?
>
> Hope you don't mind acting as a reference group, but if there's
> sufficient interest, we'll follow up with some concerted research and
> publish a paper on it later in the year.
>
> With thanks,
>
> Nick
>
>
>
>
> Nick Poole
> Chief Executive
> Collections Trust
>
> www.collectionstrust.org.uk
> www.collectionslink.org.uk
> www.cuturalpropertyadvice.gov.uk
>
>
> Tel: 01223 316028
> Fax: 01223 364658
>
>
> Until the end of April 2008, the Collections Trust's legal
> trading name
> is: MDA (Europe) Ltd
> Company Registration No: 1300565
> Reg. Office: 22 Hills Road, Cambridge, CB2 1JP.
>
> The Collections Trust believes that everybody, everywhere should have
> the right to access and benefit from cultural collections.
> Our aim is to
> develop programmes and standards which help connect people
> and culture.
>
> The Collections Trust was launched from its predecessor body, the MDA,
> in March 2008.
>
>
> **************************************************
> For mcg information and to manage your subscription to the list, visit
> the website at http://www.museumscomputergroup.org.uk
> **************************************************
>
>
>
> Unless otherwise agreed expressly in writing by a senior manager of
> Eduserv, this communication is to be treated as confidential and the
> information in it may not be used or disclosed except for the purpose
> for which it has been sent.
> If you have reason to believe that you are not the intended recipient
> of this communication, please contact the sender immediately.
> No employee or agent is authorised to enter into any binding agreement
> or contract on behalf of Eduserv or Eduserv Technologies Ltd., unless
> that agreement is subsequently confirmed by the conclusion of
> a written
> contract or the issue of a purchase order.
> Eduserv (Limited by Guarantee) - company number 3763109 - and
> Eduserv Technologies Ltd - company number - 4256630 - are both
> companies incorporated in England and Wales and have their registered
> offices at Queen Anne House, 11 Charlotte Street, Bath, BA1 2NE.
>
>
> **************************************************
> For mcg information and to manage your subscription to the
> list, visit the website at http://www.museumscomputergroup.org.uk
> **************************************************
>
**************************************************
For mcg information and to manage your subscription to the list, visit the website at http://www.museumscomputergroup.org.uk
**************************************************
|
