CONTENTdm vs. Netcore Unbxd

CONTENTdm is well-suited for smaller organizations as a simple solution to present a digital collection on the web. If your need is complex and requires digital preservation as part of the workflow, it may not be the best solution.

Incentivized

Best scenarios: To explain to the customers how the product works in searching any operation and to give the demo to customers. Less appropriate: To describe the customers in a very short span of time.

• Constant URLs
• User interface is good
• Run by OCLC, not likely to disappear

Incentivized

• Auto suggest widgets
• Visual workbench
• A/B testing

• As a digital asset management system, one would expect the capability of managing preservation, which CONTENTdm lacks.
• Lack of batch updating and other advanced metadata management capabilities.
• The usage statistics does not work, and the company is not planning to fix it, at least based the interaction with tech support staff. Customers were referred to use Google Analytics.

Incentivized

• Animated toons
• Some short video explanations
• Fast and ready suggestions

We selected CONTENTdm because it had a good reputation, was used by many institutions, provided a good product, and supplied feedback and monthly reports. We are wondering about DPLA and if that will be the next evolution or platform.

Incentivized

They have some good graphics and displays for overall reports. Reports and data analytics reports are having good insights into all the data. The reports are enough to calculate each time series analysis.

• It helped us to get started with our digital collections projects at a relatively low cost.
• As our needs grew, it became apparent that we needed something more powerful, and that provides better workflows and better statistics and is able to handle the whole life cycle of digitation projects.

Incentivized

• Positive impact: Reports , Speed of report generation.
• Negative feature: AI feature : sometimes it didn't work.