Library Technology Guides

Documents, Databases, News, and Commentary

Select another Product Report:

Statistical Report for Simple Little Library System

Statistics according to type and size categories

The following table presents the 2021 results according to the type and size of the library.

2021 Simple Little Library System Responses by Sector
Simple Little Library SystemallAcademicPublicSchoolConsortium
smallmediumlargesmallmediumlarge
navgnavgnavgnavgnavgnavgnavgnavgnavg
SatisfactionLevelILS1 00000000
ILSFunctionality1 00000000
PrintFunctionality1 00000000
ElectronicFunctionality1 00000000
SatisfactionCustomerSupport1 00000000
CompanyLoyalty1 00000000


1 Responses for Simple Little Library System in 2021

0 Responses for Simple Little Library System in 2020

0 Responses for Simple Little Library System in 2019

0 Responses for Simple Little Library System in 2018

0 Responses for Simple Little Library System in 2017

0 Responses for Simple Little Library System in 2016

0 Responses for Simple Little Library System in 2015

0 Responses for Simple Little Library System in 2014

0 Responses for Simple Little Library System in 2013

0 Responses for Simple Little Library System in 2012

0 Responses for Simple Little Library System in 2011

0 Responses for Simple Little Library System in 2010

0 Responses for Simple Little Library System in 2009

0 Responses for Simple Little Library System in 2008

0 Responses for Simple Little Library System in 2007

Comments (survey2021)

We needed a more affordable fully-Cloud alternative to CS/TextWorks, having formed the view that InMagic / Lucidea were no longer actively supporting the smaller (one-person) library market. We looked at many alternatives, including library-ready systems and the possibility of customising relatable database software that could reside on our Intranet. However we realised that we lack the resources (time, expertise, budget) to customise anything. Simple Little Library System (SLLS) emerged as the standout product that met all of our needs - particularly for its scalable pricing (80% saving on what we had been paying). It also has two features that we need: (1) the ability to add hierarchical subject taxonomy and (2) the ability to attach full text files (for our own publications). We were able to do the conversion to SLLS without extensive support or training - we paid a very reasonable set fee for assistance with record migration. (Library type: Special; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)

ILS