Library Technology Guides

---

Volume 4 Number 06 (June 1984)

Cost estimates for integrated micro-systems

The editors have received a number of inquires resulting from the piece on automation options for smaller libraries published in LSN Vol. III, No. 11 (November 1983). Many of the questions relate to the costs of integrated multi-function, multi—user microcomputer-based systems offered by the turnkey vendors. These systems will be the subject of detailed future study by the editors. This brief discussion on costing has been developed to offer some background as it relates to integrated, multi-user, multi-function micro-based library systems.

Probably because the profits realized from the sale of microcomputer-based systems are significantly lower than those from the more common mini-based systems, vendors do not appear to have sufficient resources available to invest in helping potential customers clarify their system requirements to the extent that is common in the mini-based market. On-site demonstrations are usually limited only to the most serious of prospects. Therefore it is essential that a library clarify and define its exact requirements before approaching potential vendors.

Post-sale support is also more limited with these lower-cost micro-based systems. Fewer days of profiling and training are offered as part of the system price. Additional days, if available, are charged at a rate of $390 or more per day plus expenses.

There are a number of vendors who are capable of responding to requests for microcomputer-based integrated automated library systems. These include AdLib (Advanced Library Concepts), CTI (Computer Technology Inc.), Dynix and, possibly, OCLC. CLSI also promotes an integrated, multi-user, multi-function micro-based system but the system does not usually fall within the price range in which smaller libraries are seeking to meet their needs.

The available micro-based integrated library systems fall into one of two quite distinct categories. Those offered by AdLib, CTI and Dynix are mounted on “true” multi-function, multitasking microcomputers. Currently, this type of system will support up to a total of some eight peripheral devices--terminals, dial access ports, or printers. Exact prices are dependent on the number of terminals required and the functions for which the software is purchased. The lowest price for a system capable of handling all automated functions and supporting up to four peripheral devices appears to be in the region of $50,000. This price will vary depending on the nature of the peripheral mix selected by the library. One of these systems configured to accommodate the maximum number of peripherals and functions could cost up to $90,000 or $100,000.

The second type of so-called microcomputer-based system is actually configured around a stripped down minicomputer which retains the architecture of the larger machine. The DEC PDP 11/23-based system offered by CLSI falls into this category. While this system is capable of supporting a larger number of peripheral devices—up to a total of 14—the starting price is higher as the central processing unit and disk drives are more expensive and the software more sophisticated. Prices for systems with eight peripherals tend to start at $90,000 and go to $130,000 and more. It is not usually practicable to configure a system on a stripped down mini with fewer than eight terminals and printers, etc., as the true micro-based options tend to fill this niche. The larger systems based on stripped minis become non— competitive in price when compared with true minicomputer—based configurations.

Another difficulty in positing costs in the absence of exact specifications lies in the way in which vendors bid their prices. Some separate out hardware and software costs item by item; others do not. Pricing policies and presentations also change as vendors seek to adopt a more favorable stance in the increasingly competitive market. This is particularly the case in the micro— based system market where vendors realize a lower profit on hardware components and currently have less prospect of making up additional revenue at a later date by selling their clients additional hardware.

A final element of uncertainty is the entry of OCLC into the market. OCLC is presently developing a series of small systems options and is expected to introduce them at the American Library Association Conference in Dallas. While the processor may be the relatively powerful Data General S/120, the price will be kept down by limiting disk storage, limiting the Meditech license for the MIIS/MUMPS system software to 6 ports, offering only a standard profile, and keeping down the cost of selling. Systems may be priced as low as those available currently from AdLib, CTI, and Dynix. The lower end of the market may, therefore, become increasingly competitive.

Automation option for school libraries

Gaylord Bros., Inc., whose online catalog system was described in the previous issue of LSN, has now released software for automated library functions aimed specifically at the school library market. The Gaylord School Library Management System supports the automation of circulation, acquisitions and an online catalog. The software may be used on microcomputers which use the CP/M or MS/DOS operating systems. Systems using CP/M must be configured with 64 KB of internal memory; those with MS/DOS require 128 KB. Appropriate hardware includes the Apple II Plus, Apple lie, IBM PC and the Franklin Ace. Hard disk storage is required.

The circulation module handles check-in and checkout, the trapping of delinquent borrowers, fine accounting, the issuance of overdue and fine notices, and the identification of items to be placed on reserve. The online catalog module will accept the input of records from bibliographic utilities and other machine-readable files. It supports a variety of search options, including truncated and keyword searching and Boolean logic. This module also supports subject and author authority control. The acquisitions module identifies duplicate orders, outputs printed order forms, and supports fund accounting. As the system is not designed for multi-user, multi-function micros, only one module can be accessed at a time, and only by a single user.

The software package is priced at $1,495.00 and software maintenance is available for $200.00 a year.

[Contact: Gaylord Bros., Inc., Systems Division, Box 4901, Syracuse, NY 13221-1901; (800) 448—6160.]

Boss, Richard W., Ownership of machine-readable records: a neglected consideration in retrospective conversion

OCLC's recent copyrighting of its data base focuses attention on an issue of significance for all libraries engaged in creating machine—readable records--both in current cataloging and in retrospective conversion. The issue is that of ownership, or a library's right to use and re-use the records it has created.

Little attention has been focused on this issue until recently. This is understandable. Most libraries joined a bibliographic utility to improve cataloging productivity rather than for the express purpose of creating machine-readable records. A library interested in automating and embarking on a retrospective conversion project confronts an almost overwhelming mountain of decisions. These encompass the nature of the data base: full-length or brief records, MARC or non-MARC; the cataloging standards to be followed: AACR2 or a mix of AACR1 and 2; the extent of recataloging; and the approach to authority control.

Once a library's requirements in these areas have been determined, an appropriate method of conversion must be chosen, an equally daunting task. How will the conversion be undertaken? Will all records be created de novo by keying, or will a matching and extraction option be used? Should such matching and extraction be done off line or online? If off-line, how will the search keys be entered: on typewriters using optical character recognition (OCR), or on personal micros? If an online approach is sought, what system should be used: a local stand-alone system, a commercial bibliographic service, or one of the bibliographic utilities? Will the work be performed by the library's existing staff, by staff hired especially for the conversion, or by staff supplied by a contractor? Where will the personnel be accommodated: in the library or offsite?

Unfortunately, these questions cannot be resolved academically. The answers depend on the appropriateness of available resource files of machine-readable records, and the cost of the various alternatives.

Among the plethora of immediate issues and concerns, questions of the library's right to future use and reuse of the finished file may easily be accorded a lower priority. This tendency is reinforced by the fact that a library usually undertakes conversion with a very specific purpose in mind. Most often, this is to use the file to load into an automated system to support current operations, or to provide input to a state or regional project for the development of a COM or online union catalog. Again, the immediacy of, and commitment to, that purpose discourages consideration of the other possible uses that the library might wish to make of the file in the future. Such future uses might include withdrawal of the file from a shared local, commercial or utility system for mounting on a competing system; duplication of a subset of the file on a different support system for a special purposes union list; or contributing the file to a shared automated system to support cataloging and/or conversion by other libraries. The spectrum will vary depending on the individual library.

The only factors which are constant are the likelihood—a likelihood that increases as the range of automated system operations and approaches increases—that a library will wish to use its file of machine—readable records for purposes other than those envisaged when the file was created, and the fact that a machine-readable file of library holdings represents an expensive and valuable resource. These constants dictate that a library pay careful attention to reuse conditions when assessing its options for retrospective conversion. A resource file which offers a 95 percent hit rate when matched against the library's collection and supports conversion for $1.00 per record may not be the attractive answer that it first appears if it carries significant reuse restrictions.

Different producers and suppliers of machine-readable bibliographic records have different reuse conditions and policies. The MARC tapes produced and distributed by the Library of Congress are in the public domain and thus are freely available for reuse. However, if obtained indirectly from a service organization which undertakes additional editing or input to the records, the situation may change.

A different situation obtains in relation to the “availability” of machine—readable records which present Library of Congress cataloging that was not included in its machine-readable record service. These manual records have been converted into machine-readable form by Carrollton Press and, while the cataloging on which the resulting REMARC file is based is in the public domain, the machine-readable records resulting from the conversion are not. Carrollton seeks to recoup the expenses of the project by selling the records to libraries at $.50 per record. To ensure a continuing market, the company has developed a contract which clearly defines how a library which purchases REMARC records may use them:

5.1 The Library may, without restriction or limitation reproduce or transfer in hard copy or microform the information contained in the REMARC . . . records delivered to the Library. The Library may also transfer in machine—readable form an abbreviated portion of each REMARC . . record, provided that the total number of characters transferred shall not exceed cumulatively one-half of the total number of characters of the . . . record for each title. All reproductions or transfers of the REMARC . . . records, no matter what their form or method, shall contain the REMARC identifier code.

5.2 Except as provided in Section 5.1, the Library shall not transfer in machine—readable form the REMARC . . . records into the possession of any individual, corporation, firm, partnership, association, library, network, utility or any other person unless such person has entered into an agreement with Carrollton concerning the use, reproduction and transfer of its PEMARC data base.

The Library may allow online access to its REMARC data base for reference or interlibrary loan purposes, but shall not allow such access for the purpose of transfer to the possession of another person of REMARC data in machine language of more than 50 percent of the characters in any record. The Library shall use its best efforts to prevent unauthorized transfer of REMARC records to parties with no agreement with Carrollton, . . ."

The REMARC agreement imposes usage restrictions which appear to accommodate many of the potential reuse requirements of libraries, allowing the records to be output in COM and other non-machine-readable listings, and permitting applications such as machine-readable reporting to union catalogs. However, the conditions which would apply to a library mounting its REMARC records on a local automated system shared by other libraries which may wish to access the records for cataloging purposes have to be negotiated. Many libraries have successfully negotiated such arrangements, and Carrollton Press has, on occasions, agreed to supply a small number of REMARC records in very specialized subject or language groupings for unlimited reuse by libraries. In at least one case of a specialized language grouping, the editors have verified that this reuse waiver included the right for the libraries to mount the REMARC records on a publicly accessible bibliographic utility where they could be used to support cataloging by other libraries.

Until recently, the major source of restrictions on usage were those imposed by record producers such as. Carrollton Press. The situation appears to have changed with OCLC's registration of ,its data base. While the utility has been silent on the practical implications of this action, approved by the Copyright Office in mid-March 1984, it serves as notice to libraries that the reuse of records obtained from the utility might be more stringently policed in the future.

OCLC recently introduced new contractual language into its retrospective conversion agreement for libraries performing such activities on the OCLC system. The contract states, in essence, that a library undertaking such conversion:

1. assigns to OCLC a perpetual royalty-free worldwide right to use the records created in the conversion in the OCLC data base, and
2. has the right to use the records in any manner it may elect . except that it agrees that it will not transfer the record to a third party other than:
   • other members of OCLC
   • a vendor that performs services for the library that requires the use of the records; in which case, the vendor is required to sign an agreement to the effect that it will not retain a copy of the record in its files
   • a non—OCLC member subject to conditions to be negotiated with OCLC.

Because of the relatively recent introduction of the new contract, the editors were not able to identify any examples of record transfers made under the conditions of the third exemption. However, enquiries made of OCLC suggest that it might be possible to negotiate reuse conditions appropriate to a library's future needs. Spokespersons for OCLC stress that the utility's interest is in protecting its commercial viability rather than in limiting the activities of libraries.

Although many sectors of the library community strongly opposed OCLC's registration of its data base, a number of libraries have apparently followed suit and applied for copyright registration of their own data bases. Again, the implications of these actions are as yet unclear.

In reaction to the protests that greeted OCLC's notification of application for copyright, RLIN—-the other major utility--announced that it would not seek to copyright its data base.

The overall implications appear clear: a library should ensure that the value of its data base is not undermined by usage restrictions not thoroughly understood at the time the file was created. For many libraries the cost of developing and maintaining a data base of machine-readable bibliographic records is at least equal to the cost of hardware and software. The data base has a potential life expectancy much greater than the five to ten years of the hardware and software in a local system.

Micro-based interlibrary loan request system from Colorado

In association with a group of public libraries in Colorado, Analytical Processes Corporation has developed an interlibrary loan messaging system to be used in conjunction with the dBASE II data base management system and an appropriate telecommunications package. Suitable micros include the IBM PC, Apple II, Radio Shack and any machine capable of running CP/M-80, CP/M-86, or MS/DOS.

The BOOKPATH software provides for the one-time entry of the names and addresses of libraries, and allows these records to be accessed by name or library code. It accommodates requests for all types of library materials, providing fields for recording author, title, and subject and up to 200 characters of notes. Requests may be output on ALA interlibrary loan forms if required, or transmitted to another library, using BOOKPATH or an electronic mail system.

Prices for BOOKPATH had not been established at the time this report was prepared.

[Contact: Analytical Processes Corporation, P.O. Box 1313, Montrose, CO 81402. Interested libraries in Colorado should contact John Campbell at (303) 249-1078. Other libraries should contact Jesse Tarshis at (303) 249—1400.]

CHECKMATE available in multi-user configuration

The Cooperative Library Agency for Systems and Services (CLASS) has announced the release of a multi-user version of its CHECKMATE serial control software. Designed to be used on the TRS—80 Model 16 micro with the Xenix operating system and a hard disk of at least 8 MB, the CHECKMATE MTS (Multi-Terminal System) allows up to three users to simultaneously access the system for check-in or reference lookup. The MTS software costs $4,500.

[Contact: CLASS, 1415 Koll Circle, Suite 101, San Jose, CA 95112; (408) 289—1756.]

Paper that outwits the photocopier

The selection, maintenance and care of photocopying equipment is a standard concern of library administrators. Just when we thought that the technology and price of such equipment had reached a reasonable balance, along comes non-copiable paper.

The serendipitous result of an attempt to copy a page on which coffee had been spilled, NOCOPI products are being marketed by several major paper manufacturers in the U.S. and other countries. Applications for which the treated papers are targeted include commercial and national security documents, credit cards, tickets and currency. When documents printed on the paper are placed on copiers, the result is a totally black image. The paper is expected to sell for around $.10 a page.

States enact computer crime legislation

Some 23 states have now passed computer crime laws. The states which first passed such legislation made it a crime to access a computer and maliciously damage data, commit fraud or acquire confidential credit information. The more recent legislation is broader and makes it illegal to attempt to gain unauthorized access to a computer for any reason. Librarians in the following states may wish to inform themselves of the laws which apply in their cases: Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, New Mexico, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Tennessee, Utah, Virginia, and Wisconsin.

Major videotex project launched

ADP, the automation service bureau, has begun testing a home banking videotex service in 20 market areas. Joining ADP will be 19 financial institutions, each paying up to $500,000, depending on the number of terminals served. Another 12 financial institutions have opted to be “observers” for a substantially lower fee. The system will include funds transfer and automatic bill paying capabilities. Two Digital VAX super-minis will support the system. Plans are to use AT&T's $900 Sceptre cordless videotex terminals and possibly later some personal computers. Several pricing strategies will be tested. The significance of the trial is the large sums of money which the participants are willing to invest. Of the some 250 videotex trials which have been undertaken in the U.S. to date, few have gotten the providers to make more than token investments.

The support of information providers is clearly a key factor in the success of the technology. The oldest installations are in Britain, but usage is limited. In contrast, there is rapid expansion underway in France, with the 175,000 videotex terminals installed as of late 1983 to increase to 1 million by the end of 1984 and 3 million by the end of 1986. It is estimated that at this time there are only 250,000 users in all of the world outside France.

Were the technology to succeed in the U.S., it could be used to provide access to library catalogs and other files to homes and offices.

Teleconferencing running out of steam?

Teleconferencing--a technology which the American Library Association has already tried on several occasions—is growing at a rate of only 5 percent a year according to industry sources—a very low figure for a “leading-edge” technology. Teleconferencing—which involves the combination of two—way television with telephone, telex and facsimile to support meetings in which the participants are scattered--was a market of less than $75 million in 1983. Only one in 20 Fortune 500 companies are using it. Several factors appear to have affected the growth of the industry: the cost is high ($500,000 to build a single room or $1,000 an hour to rent a facility), some people like to travel and don't want that taken away from them, people need to be able to communicate through handshakes and direct physical contact, the vendors don't appear to understand the needs of users very well, and there is a lack of standards—-there are at least three incompatible systems.

Altertext converts text

Altertext has announced the “Communicator,” a screen-based protocol converter that can read and write floppy disks used on personal computers or provide direct linkage between incompatible pieces of computer equipment. It permits direct exchange of texts, formatting and other commands, and codes between word processors, typesetting equipment, and computers. Virtually any combination of incompatible computer-based devices can communicate through the device. The data can be received via telecommunications channels using a modem, or directly from another computer-based device via connecting cables. Both asynchronous and bisynchronous interfaces can be used. Data transmission rates of 300 to 19,600 bits per second are accommodated. In addition to its conversion capabilities, the unit is equipped with a CP/M operating system so that it can be used as a standalone desktop personal computer. The system is priced at $12,000.

[Contact: Altertext Inc., 210 Lincoln Street, Boston, MA 02111, (617) 426-0009.]

---

Maintained by Marshall Breeding

Copyright 1994-2024