[NHCOLL-L:484] Re: natural history collections database

[Panza, Robin]

>>>I'm curious as to which databases are being used in natural history
collections ie. birds, mammals,herbariums etc.<<<

At Carnegie MNH we're using Paradox 4.5 (actually, everybody but me is--I'm
still on Pdx 3.5).  This is the DOS-based version of Paradox.  I don't care
for the Windows version, but then I dislike Windows.  A couple of us have
experimented with MS Access and were thoroughly unimpressed.  Like
Pdx/Windows and most other Windows software, there are far too many pre-set
defaults that can be difficult to override.  One thing I love about Paradox
is that its programming language is so simple that even a novice can use to
customize.

One big advantage to collection-management software (BIOTA, Muse, Specify,
etc.) is that a lot of the customization needed for CM has already been
done.  One big disadvantage is that they need to satisfy such diverse
collections that they can sometimes be unwieldy for one's particular CM
needs.

In my opinion, the biggest issues are:
1.	Ease of customization.  
(a)If one gets a system set up by a consultant or a "computer guru", that
person may not be there to tweak the system when you decide to add features
that you hadn't thought of at first.  Our consultant quit (got a better
offer) with some departments not yet started and my department mid-setup.
It was up to me to learn to program, get us functional, and later adjust the
system.
(b) A guru often doesn't believe you need certain features.  The previous
incarnation of our CM system was on a mainframe, programmed by our data
services department.  We collection managers had to fight furiously for 2
years to get a global change ability, and never did get satisfaction on
other features.

2.	Long-term customer support.  One fear with pre-fab CM software
developed by a university or another museum is that there may no longer have
support if the developer, often a student, moves on.  There is no one to
overcome glitches or adjust features (back to issue #1).

3.	Ease of transfer to other programs.  
(a) Sooner or later you're going to want to change hardware or software.
Will you be able to easily shift your catalogue to the new system?  For
example, one of our departments lost data during the switch from mainframe
to PC.  Does your software "talk" to other software?  Can it download to,
say, ASCII delimited?  
(b) Can it download easily to, for example, a word processor for specialized
uses?  We transfer loan data to a word processor to fill out pre-printed
loan forms.

just my opinion,

Robin

Robin K Panza                         panzar at carnegiemuseums.org
Collection Manager, Section of Birds          ph:  412-622-3255
Carnegie Museum of Natural History       fax: 412-622-8837
4400 Forbes Ave.
Pittsburgh  PA  15213-4008  USA