Second Opinions

A College Grapples with 'Judicial' Records

By Joe Kashi

THIS SCHOOL'S problem reflects a certain remaining immaturity of the Information Age -- there's no obvious lingua franca that allows proprietary programs to seamlessly interact with each other without a great deal of expensive customization.

After spending (read: wasting) a great deal of my own money over the last decade or so, I've come to the personal conclusion that taking incremental steps, using technology about one generation behind the leading edge, is the most efficient way to solve most computing problems. Eighty percent of our benefit really does seem to derive from the first 20 percent of our effort. So, essentially, cost-conscious users can skim the cream while implementing a less expensive and more reliable system.

Colleague is a well-regarded and widely-implemented vertical market software system that's specifically designed for colleges and universities. Vertical market programs like Colleague tend to be somewhat inflexible, but highly efficient within their specific market niche. The decision by this school's I.T. department to retain Colleague makes good sense for the college and Student Life realistically must work within those constraints.

Colleague can deliver information using a standard browser, a personalized Web portal page, or its own user interface. Using a browser or portal interface to Colleague makes the most sense for Student Life, because modern browsers can display optical imaged if they're stored in standard formats. Using a standard optical image format like .tiff or .pdf also eases Student Life's later transition to closer integration with Colleague.

The current campus network runs on Novell NetWare and will migrate to Windows NT / 2000. Neither of these network operating systems pose any constraints. Student Life will need to work with the I.T. department, though, to arrange for storage of any optical images in a central location accessible to all authorized users and to arrange for appropriate security and confidentiality measures.

Once the data directories and file security have been correctly established, then Student Life will need to implement the actual imaging hardware and software. The first and most important decision is what optical imaging file format should be used. Generally, I prefer either .tiff or .pdf, with the nod going to .pdf in most instances. It is widely used, is the defacto U.S. Government standard, and Adobe's regularly updated Acrobat viewer is broadly available on the Internet without charge.

If you decide to use .pdf, then you must use Adobe's Capture software to actually image and store those optical images. Although Capture is a proprietary program, that's not proven to be a problem to date, given the broad acceptance of the PDF format. In that regard, Capture is about as proprietary as Microsoft Word, though not as ubiquitous. How Capture is installed and configured depends in part upon the scanning hardware that's chosen.

However -- a word about desktop computer operating systems. Although Windows NT is touted as a more reliable desktop operating system, NT seems to be more troublesome when working with scanners. Windows 95, which is installed on Student Life's current computer system, is really too old to be fully reliable with more modern software. Windows Millennium Edition is too new to have established any track record for reliability and software compatibility although its focus upon multimedia suggests that ME will ultimately be a good operating system to use with optical imaging. By default, that leaves, for the moment, Windows 98 SE as the best choice.

It's possible that Student Life might be able to upgrade its existing Windows 95 computer to Windows 98 SE, and should do so if that's technically feasible, assuming that they do not have enough money to buy a new computer system. However, any computer running Windows 95 is at least two years old and probably a lot older than that. Even if this system continues to be reliable in the near future -- and that's a big if because repair parts for three or four year computers are very difficult to find -- an older computer simply doesn't have the computing power to run modern optical imaging programs acceptably fast.

Thus, we recommend that Student Life firstly buy a fast new Windows 98 SE computer system, running at least 700 MHz and using at least 128 MB of installed SDRAM. Such a computer system probably will not cost more than about $1,000 street price. To that, they'll need a larger monitor to comfortably view imaged documents. Nineteen-inch monitors are a good compromise, are widely available, and usually don't cost more than about $450 for a good first tier ViewSonic monitor. I've seen perfectly usable Sylvania systems for as low as $269 at the Anchorage Costco.

Student Life's next decision is its scanner. Assuming that they have a somewhat tight budget but need a reliable and fast scanner, then there are only two realistic brands from which to choose: Hewlett Packard or the lower end Fujitsu scanners.

Standalone HP scanners like the 6250/6350 series are reasonably fast and fairly reliable. Although the lower end 6200/6300 series does not include the necessary automatic document feeder, the 6250/6250 do. If you're imaging more than a few pages of paper a day, then you'll absolutely need that automatic document feeder. The 6250 and 6350 scanners are widely available and usually have a street price around $500. HP sells several versions including USB and SCSI interfaces. Always choose the SCSI interface for any scanner: although a little more expensive and complex to purchase and to initially set up, SCSI is the most reliable and proven scanner interface. USB and parallel port scanners tends to be slower and less reliable. If you're connecting a SCSI scanner, then you'll need an SCSI card in the computer that runs the scanner. I like the Adaptec 2910 series. It's very standardized, reliable and well recognized by setup and application programs. A 2910 SCSI card usually costs about $90 or so.

Fujitsu scanners are typically a little more expensive but faster and more reliable: they're exclusively intended for regular office use. Most Fujitsu scanners require the SCSI interface. Expect to spend about $900 or more for an entry level system with an automatic document feeder, money that's probably well spent. Given the choice and sufficient budget, I'd opt for a Fujitsu Scan Partner.

Before purchasing the scanner and installing an appropriate SCSI card, Student Life needs to be sure that whichever scanning program they choose can work with the scanner that they intend to purchase. Adobe Capture does support a wide range of scanners but supported scanners tend to be replaced by new models faster than software vendors rewrite their hardware interfaces. If there's a hardware/software compatibility problem, then a program like Kofax Adrenaline ( about $395) usually works.

Once Student Life begins to scan its documents and to store them on the same network server that supports Colleague, then they'll be able to access those using a browser or using Groupwise.

Very likely, they'll be able to continue using their existing judicial process workflow in Groupwise, adding to a workflow message a file reference to the associated imaged document. If Student Life uses .pdf, then clicking upon that document reference should start the Adobe Acrobat viewer and display the document as an adjunct to Groupwise.

Student Life users should also be able to remotely access those .pdf documents using a late version web browser, either through the Colleague portal or by directly pointing the browser to the judicial process documents on the server. In either case, downloading the imaged document into the browser would start Acrobat and display the document.

Over time, the school's I.T. department should be able to incorporate .pdf files co-located on the Colleague server with the overall Colleague portal, being sure, of course, to implement careful security measures.

Joe Kashi practices law in Soldotna, Alaska.