[4 Responses to an earlier post. That post is below
followed by the responses, including one from OUP.]
From: Margaret Porter <G.M.Porter.2_at_nd.edu>
>
>We are currently testing the web version of the OED from Oxford Univ.
>Press. What really has us wondering is the pricing of this product,
>essentially a static dictionary, priced at $2,700/year. We have the CD-ROM
>version of the OED, but apparently there are enhanced search and display
>capabilities in the web version. However, doesn't this seem like a terribly
>high annual fee for leasing access to this product.
>***************************************************************
>
>G. Margaret Porter
>Librarian, Reference Department
>University of Notre Dame
>Notre Dame IN 46556
=======Response #1==========
From: Dianne Cook <cookdc_at_post.queensu.ca>
I wonder if you are correct in your pricing -- perhaps
if you are part of a major consortium. We found their
pricing even more outrageous than your note indicates.
The blurb I have gives the price as $795 US for the first
2500 students plus $.40 per student thereafter. We were
offered a chance to join in a consortium purchase on the basis
that for a consortium of 3,000,000, the price goes down
to $.28 per student FTE.
I believe American institutions were able to come up with a consortium
of 4,000,000. In Canada, with a population of about 30,000,000
I believe that it is highly unlikely that we could put together
a consortium of 3,000,000 people needing regular access to a 30-volume
dictionary. Furthermore, developing and maintaining such a
consortium is a time consuming (and therefore expensive) process.
The subscription pays for the addition of 1,000 words every
three months, but for us that works out to over $1 per word.
I wish the whole world had told them to go back to the
drawing board on pricing.
Of course, Canadian institutions are funded in Canadian
dollars, so for us the hit is about 50% more.
Aside from this product, we are concerned about the trend to
move encyclopedias and dictionaries that used to be one-time
costs to annual electronic subscriptions.
==========#2=============
From: "Marvin C. Guilfoyle" <mg29_at_evansville.edu>
Yes, $2,700 per year seems like a very high annual fee for a static
refernce book--even the OED. I'd ask myself whether the online version
would be used so often and in such unique ways and from such isolated
places that the paper copy wouldn't be perfectly adequate.
It is now (or soon will be) possible to have almost every type of
reference work in electronic form. The question is do you need it that
way? Many years ago, one computer columnist, in response to a computer
usage question, said that when it makes more sense to use a pencil rather
than a computer, use the pencil. When paper is adequate, use paper.
Marvin Guilfoyle
Acquisitions & Collection Development Librarian
University of Evansville Library
1800 Lincoln Avenue
Evansville, IN 47722
Voice: (812) 479-2247 Fax: (812) 471-6996
============#3==============
From: "Tony Schwartz" <tony_at_delphinus.lib.umb.edu>
A basic problem with the OED model is that we lack what is called a
"functional-FTE count" for specialized databases which might get rather low
(even though deep) usage within a larger population of potential users. The
price might be 20-30 cents per FTE, but the question is how many people
(FTEs) will actually use it?
Providing such a database on a non-networked CDROM for a fraction of the
networked price could be much more cost-effective (leaving aside the
predictable cries from OED enthusiasts that its usage would not be "relatively
low" and that other features of networked access, such as updating, are
important considerations, too). I know of no generic "solution" to how one
arrives at a functional-FTE count, other than perhaps negotiating a license
that would make the first-year trial (based on actual usage statistics) more
affordable.
Tony Schwartz, U. Mass., Boston
==========#4 From OUP=============
From: Royalynn O'Connor <ROY_at_OUP-USA.ORG>
I do not want this response to be read as a sales pitch, but I was floored
by the recent posting which gives the impression that the OED Online is a
*static* dictionary. I've copied a section from our PR material (apologies
for the tone!) which describes the $55 million OED Revision Program.
Complete details are available at http://www.oed.com Additionally, a
guided tour detailing enhancements and functionality is available at:
http://www.oed.com/public/tour
Lastly, Library Journal reviewed the OED Online in their May 1, 2000
issue: see http://www.libraryjournal.com
--------
The Oxford English Dictionary-the standard in lexicographic excellence
for over one hundred years-is undergoing its first major revision. The
OED lexicographers-the largest dictionary team and humanities research
project in the world-are in the process of reviewing each entry-new
words and usages will be added, and every word and sense in the
Dictionary will be reviewed by the editorial staff, resulting typically in
revised etymologies, rewritten and expanded definitions, and additional
documentary evidence from both earlier and later time periods to those
currently cited. Both the OED revision program, and accompanying
program for new words, is funded by Oxford University Press, which
has committed $55 million dollars to this endeavor.
Over the next decade readers will be able to watch the Dictionary,
described in the New York Times as "the greatest work in
dictionary-making ever undertaken," develop and grow. As the year
2000 progresses, more than 3,000 additional words (some revised,
some new) will be released online. Many thousands more new and
revised words will be added quarterly to the OED Online until 2010,
when the full revision is expected to culminate. Chief Editor John
Simpson notes: "Delivering the Oxford English Dictionary online will
represent the achievement of a major goal, but this is only part of the
story." More than 300 staff and advisers are completely revising the
Dictionary- the first revision since it was originally completed in 1928."
Although it is still in its early stages, Simpson believes that the revision
could double the length of the Dictionary, taking the number of words and
phrases from 640,000 to 1.3 million-as the Dictionary tracks the ongoing
development of World English, as well as uncovering thousands of
hitherto unrecorded words from the history of English.
-----------------
Royalynn O'Connor
Online Product Director
Oxford University Press
Received on Wed May 24 2000 - 13:17:31 EDT