<HTML>
<BODY>
<br>
>I thank Paul POULAIN for providing detail about contribution by<br>
>different developers.<br>
><br>
>> >So, some comparison of this sort (cost to benefit ratio, total<br>
>> >cost of ownership etc), which may help potential user or<br>
>> >decision maker to take infomed decision and not be misguided by<br>
>> >marketing executive of proprietary software<br>
>> <br>
>> That's not an easy question at all.<br>
><br>
>Agreed. But if respectable members on this list pool their<br>
>information to have a such type of white paper, then that will boost<br>
>usage and promotion of Koha.<br>
><br>
>Is there something like "Koha advocacy"?<br>
<br>
<br>
That wasn't my full answer at all. As I replied off list, the actual answer to that question is highly complex because the proprietary vendors charge based on a number of different factors, so you would have to compare the cost of Koha to the cost of a proprietary package on an individual library basis. That's not even counting a feature comparison or stability comparison, et cetera. <br>
I did say in my wiki that my server only ran me about $700 which would of course be much less today for comparable components. <br>
I don't think that this is a waste of time if it's something that you wanted to tackle, but it's certainly not something that I would want to help research. I'd rather help with documentation first. I think the biggest boost to usage will be the great idea that I believe Rachel had of visiting shows and showing people Koha first hand. I think Koha is catching on somewhat because there seem to be more articles in the works that mention it. I'm itching to see the 2.2 features as soon as the husband/systems administrator installs it for me. :) I'm always terrified that my data will disappear in a puff of smoke, but that didn't happen last time, so I'll cross my fingers for this time. <br>
<br>
Cheers,<br>
Brooke @ Hinsdale, MA
</BODY></HTML>