The debate of Analog versus digital has raged since the day the first transistor appeared. I for one have embraced all things digital since the day the first CD player appeared, the Sony CP –101. In fact at one point I had the entire available CD catalog, the Sony “Jazz Sampler” and Billy Joel’s “52nd Street”. The quality of the 52nd street CD was far inferior from an acoustic standpoint however, it was a major advancement in technology over the LP record and the cassette tape.
As time went along CD’s became eminently more listenable as direct digital recordings became available. Several years after the CD revolution I went retro and purchased a tube stereo system (separate amplifier and pre-amplifier) along with a new turntable. I was amazed how much music I had been "missing" from my beloved digital format. I was even further amazed by how much better the CD format sounded when played through my analog system.
Enter the MP3 and the lossy format. No one can deny the convenience that is offered by today's MP3 players. I can now "carry" 300 albums on a device that fits in my pocket. Once again, I was able to improve the sound of my MP3 player by playing this new technology through my old analog technology. Even so, I have to admit, that the MP3 player sounded quite good on its own when it was coupled with good headphones. Or so I thought until last nights revelation.
Last night I downloaded Vivaldi's 4 Seasons conducted by Elmar Oliveira. My previous version of this recording was a damaged digital CD. However, I was intimately familiar with how this CD and piece should sound. The downloaded MP3 was a major disillusionment; the violins were still in the forefront of this wonderful piece but all the subtle layers of this piece were now muddled in the digital morass. Even my trusted analog playback could not rescue this recording.
It used to be when we made advancements in music playback that the quality of the experience (sound) was an improvement over the older technology. It seems to my ear that this is not the case and they we are only making technological advancements (smaller devices, more storage etc.) without a thought to how it sounds. My favorite Eels or Cake album can reside in the digital domain with no apparent loss of fidelity. Other albums need to breathe and still sound better in their original form LP and or CD; my ongoing solution is a hybrid environment.
How does the above relate to document management? My music story is analogous (sorry) to the changes in the document management world. When considering what medium to use as part of your document management strategy you need to consider the archive requirements as well as the fidelity (my apologies again) requirements. It could be that the best document management strategy ends up being hybrid system.
DRS is positioned to help you evaluate and deiced what is the best methodology for your important records. Please call today so we can begin our no charge evaluation of your current needs.
Thanks for reading.
Marc
Data Reduction Systems
Vice President, Business Development marcc@drscorp.com
Office - 908.687.5636
Expanding the potential. Fulfilling the promise.
Monday, October 18, 2010
Tuesday, March 9, 2010
Fending Off Digital Decay, Bit by Bit*
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/16/books/16archive.html
First off, I have to admit that I find my best ideas for my blog by reading newspapers and various blogs. I read “Fending Off Digital Decay, Bit by Bit” in today's (March, 16) edition of the New York Times and quickly pounced of the premise of maintaining an archive in our ever changing digital landscape.
Many years ago I worked at Fujifilm in the document products division read – microfilm. When microfilm was the unchallenged king of the archive it still had doubters as to the longevity of the medium. This was the case even after lab results proved that, if handled and stored properly, microfilm could last in excess of 350 years. Another plus for microfilm was the fact that as an analog technology, it would always be viewable using a light source and magnification. Fast forward to digital records (DR) and in short order, inadequacies with the DR medium come to light. In the Times article Patricia Cohen wrote, “Electronically produced drafts, correspondence and editorial comments, sweated over by contemporary poets, novelists and nonfiction authors, are ultimately just a series of digits — 0’s and 1’s — written on floppy disks, CDs and hard drives, all of which degrade much faster than old-fashioned acid-free paper.” Did I read this correctly, paper outlasting a digital record? The path seems clear, no more scanning for me…
I cite the above not so much to promote a move back to older analog technology, but instead use this as a cautionary tale of the potential pitfalls of a poorly managed document management strategy (DMS). When developing your DMS it is important to take into account the retention requirements of the documents in question. Not only doe this apply to paper converted to digital but to “born-digital materials — those initially created in electronic form” as well. This brings us to your DMS. There are two parts to a good DMS, one part of the equation is document retention requirements. The second part is document recall. Consider this, if you were to find a 5 1/4” floppy today with a document created using VisiCalc from back in the day, how would you propose to read the contents of said disc? Now apply this same thought to discovering a CD or DVD 20 years from now. One whose information was created with software and system from today's office environment. Today’s software hardware solution, is tomorrow's orphaned VisiCalc.
Is the solution then to do nothing and continue to live in a paper world? My answer is a resounding no. The sheer volume alone of today's information overload begs for a good DMS. It very well could be that for certain document types a hybrid system is in order. For example, when managing documents with an archive requirement beyond 10 years you need to consider the the life cycle of the document. Even though federal requirements might state you need to keep a document for a set period of time, the active life cycle of the document might fall far short of the federal archive requirement. My definition of a document life cycle is defined as the working life of a document. Think of a mortgage file a a document with a short term life cycle that is coupled with a longer term retention requirement. In a mortgage file scenario the strategy could be to use low a low cost hosted server for the beginning stages of the life of this document. After a pre-determined period, the document could then be migrated from the web server and written to, are you ready, microfilm for long term retention. This is only one small example of the thought that needs to be put into developing your DMS.
So were does this leave you and your organization? Have you carefully thought out and planned a proper DMS? Have you taken into account the retention and recall requirements for your documents? Bear the following in mind – “…archivists are finding themselves trying to fend off digital extinction at the same time that they are puzzling through questions about what to save, how to save it and how to make that material accessible”. With careful planning and consideration you can avoid placing your documents in a “Betamax” format only to discover, that you have been left holding the proverbial digital bag.
Thanks for reading.
Marc
Data Reduction Systems
Vice President, Business Development marcc@drscorp.com
Office - 908.687.5636
Expanding the potential. Fulfilling the promise.
*New York Times -
Fending Off Digital Decay, Bit by Bit
As research libraries and archives are discovering, “born-digital” materials are much more complicated and costly to preserve than anticipated
Sunday, February 21, 2010
Until Paper Is Extinct Scanning Solutions Are Important
Until Paper Is Extinct Scanning Solutions Are Important
I came across the above statement while reading the assorted Blogs that I subscribe to. This Blog entry brought back memories of the early days document management.
Some years ago I worked with analog document capture in the halcyon days information management. We all felt that analog document archiving was the precursor to the coming of the paperless office. He we are now some 25 years later and it seems that we are still in search of the paperless office. I decided to surf my way through the paperless office and share what I found with you:
From Small Business Trends - Entrepreneurs: Remember the Promise of the Paperless Office?
“When computers first started hitting every desktop, “experts” predicted we’d all be using paperless offices by the end of the 20th century. Welcome to the 21st century, with paper more ubiquitous than ever.”
From ArticleSnatch.com - Moving To A Paperless Office
“How long have we been hearing that the "paperless office" is just around the corner? That the latest digital office device or business-card-scanning program is the final ingredient for the long-awaited, enviro-friendly office? The battle cries for the paperless office began with the advent of personal computers that were actually affordable and productive enough to buy for the average business owner. That means we are entering the fourth decade of this movement, and are still a long way from the goal.”
From EfficientCEO.com - The Truth About The Paperless Office
“I remember being told as a kid that the year 2010 would bring about the flying car, teleportation devices and the paperless office. While I didn’t expect flying cars and teleportation devices to truly be here by now, I did actually think our world could be paperless. The term paperless was first introduced in a 1975 Newsweek article called “The Office Of The Future” (published June 30, 1975) which touted the concept of a fully automated office without paper. So why hasn’t it happened? The truth is, it has started but hasn’t been fully realized yet.”
In conclusion, paperless won’t just happen, it will take careful planning and execution to make this your reality. Good partners document management partners, like DRS, are crucial to helping you make the move to paperless. Why not give me a call today to discuss how DRS can help you meet your paperless goals.
Thanks for reading.
Marc Data Reduction Systems
Vice President, Business Development marcc@drscorp.com
Office - 908.687.5636
Expanding the potential. Fulfilling the promise.
Sunday, February 7, 2010
A Tale of Two Ideas - Under One Roof vs. Custom(er) Service
We have all gotten used to "Big-Box" (BB) shopping; buying everything we need from one store. In theory this is a great idea. I park my car once and I now have access to apples, an Apple as well tires for my car. Two of the vaunted promises of BB shopping are convenience as well as low prices. I'm sure that like me you have discovered that low prices come in package sizes and products that are not always what I was looking for. Truth be told, how many of us need a 5lb can of tuna fish.
These stores assume that you know exactly what you are doing and therefore need little help. This works well if you know how to install a toilet or hook up a complex home stereo system. Recently, I have begun a revolution of sorts, shopping at local specialty retailers when given the chance. Sure I might pay a few extra dollars for what I need but the trade off in savings yields other benefits. I can get exemplary service and the chance to purchase what I need, not a variation of what I need. Customer service will always trump marginal savings. In the long, the smaller local retailer will offer you support beyond your original purchase which in turn will trump the initial savings you might have realized at the BB retailer.
The same analogy outlined above exists in the business world as well. Companies will sometimes look at BB vendors and assume because everything is offered under one roof that they will get the best service, products and costs from this vendor. Then comes the tradeoff, poor customer service, products that are not the right fit and in the long run, higher operational costs. It seems to me that even big companies can at time be better served by smaller specialty companies - like DRS. We pride ourselves on offering solutions that fit our customers’ requirements; we do not sell solutions that require change by our customers’. Not only do we sell what our customers need, more times than not we are selling these solutions for less money than our BB competitors. To paraphrase Thomas Jefferson –a little revolution now and then is a good thing. Join the DRS revolution and evaluate all alternatives before taking the BB plunge, you won’t regret it!
Thanks for reading.
Data Reduction Systems
Vice President, Business Development marcc@drscorp.com
Office - 908.687.5636
Expanding the potential. Fulfilling the promise.
Monday, January 25, 2010
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
