The most important thing is that this switch is seamless. I don't usually deal with the issues of permissions, however, to the best of my knowledge the average (or majority) users in my area do not have the need for this. So if and when we do switch to xythos I think the most important thing is for the mapped drives that show up in My Computer to be named the same as they are now. This will cause as little confusion as possible. Especially since so many other systems will be changing in the next few months.
Also, Matt mentioned to me that he was not able to upload a file bigger than 2gigs. This is something that we will need to test further. I personally don't have any files that are that size, but I do have users that have data sets that are probably that big. Whether they use or shouldn't be using dragon already to store these files I'm not sure about. Since we have the new quota restrictions in place, this might not be an issue. However, I'm sure there will be cases where people want to put up 2+ gig files and we will have to accommodate them. -Hammond
I got a 2g+ file up using a mac; lots of wonky behavior though, but I suspect this is due to Xythos being off network. Still no luck on getting a 2+ file up using Linux and haven't heard from Xythos in regards to Linux client. Didn't really see the others in any depth. I'm also not convinced a CMS is necessary for the problem I believe we're trying to solve. A reorganization of the filesystem/servers would solve 90% of the problem (as I understand it) at considerably less cost and client impact. — Matthew Elson 2007/02/25 19:13
I also am concerned about drive mappings being replicated for Windows users. Xerox does not allow drive mapping, but Xythos does and also allows multiple mappings. Matt and I have been testing large file transfers to the demo servers, but this was initially impeded by a lack of space on the Xythos server. It is slow (regardless of platform, but the files do transfer). I'm assuming that it would be faster if was all on our network.
I like the Xythos web interface better than Docushare, it just seems more intuitive to me. Perhaps because the icons are labeled. -Jolee
I don't feel like I have a complete overview, but I have to say that I was impressed by Stellent's web component. If their editing construct works they way they claim it does, it would simplify a good many of the web editing dilemmas I am currently running into on the faculty sites. When I described some of what we had seen to the web folks in Communications, they were also excited about it. Of course, the Stellent people never really answered James' question about how their product would intersect with a PHP/MySQL server. And unfortunately, we didn't see much about permissions and collaboration, but it did look like they were offering the kind of mapped-drive interface we are looking for. -Kevin
After a bit more experimentation and reflection, I've distilled my concerns about Xythos into three broad areas:
- Xythos doesn't seem to offer a single interface that is optimal for all activities. Permissions can only be set through the web interface, but uploading more than one file at a time can only be done through the mounted drive. I worry that we will be replacing one kind of complication with another.
- Neither of the interfaces automatically shows clients all of the files and directories to which they have some kind of access.
- Xythos handles only static web pages. Even the simplest sites I am setting up for faculty involve some kind of server scripting, if only to manage elements common to more than one page. The alternatives are 1) to have 'tall' pages that are awkward to navigate or 2) to maintain common elements redundantly on multiple pages. Neither of these options is anywhere near as satisfactory as server scripting.
There's not really any new content here, but I found the organization and simplification helpful, if only for myself. –Kevin 3/26/2007
