Are ESS trying to make it harder to migrate away from to SIMS?

[LeMarchand]

We are remaining with SIMS and trusting that their cloud modules will all come through. I'm relieved as migration & training was looking like a mammoth undertaking and at least we've saved ourselves that task. I will have retired by then so I'll never see a migration away from SIMS, thank goodness.

 

I've heard this is due at around the same time George R R Martin finishes writing his "Song of Ice and Fire" series.

 

All my sites are KS1/2 so our MIS needs aren't as stringent as others but we haven't looked back since ditching SIMS.

[Ditto]

Just reflecting on this thread. I ran Progresso for 4 years. I know it was much improved from first release and missed the time it was called 'Depresso'! In hindsight, listen to the issues with SIMS, Arbor and Bromcom, it was far better at the end than it got credit for. Didn't do them any good though -it's gone now.

[msi_school]

The schools I have been involved with who don't want to move from SIMS are in that position because they don't want to change any of their ways of working. I have had conversations with SLT who tell me all the things about a new MIS that are better but then say something about assessment or timetabling is holding them back.

 

I also agree that Cloud based is a very double edged sword, changes are made to the system outside of your control and you are reliant on the internet, these are issues that can be seen and pointed at by any member of staff where as the fact it is saving hours of IT time and you have not replaced a SQL server is invisible to the users.

 

I have also found cloud based systems do tend to slow down at registration times and during popular report windows and I could throw hard ware at these issues on prem but cant in the cloud. Infact if any Cloud MIS people are reading this you are missing a trick by not selling different tiers of server power/contention.

[Ditto]

I appreciate the consternation at our remaining with SIMS for the time being. In response:

 

1. Yes, we did ask the same questions of all providers.

2. SIMS is not in the same situation as if it was being selected now. It is our in-place solution with all the reports, Wonde connections, PowerBI reporting, Salamander scripting stuff that we need, the complexity growing with each year. Plus dual 2-week timetables for junior and senior school. It may be clunky, but it works.

3. So many of the providers fell down on a key requirement or needed more third-party stuff to work.

4. Arbor is not a solution for an independent school.

5. I hate an on-premises MIS as much as anyone, and further hate having to support Remote Desktop to make it usable at home.

6. We honestly could not find a product that we felt we could migrate to without enormous disruption to the school and catastrophic loss of functionality.

 

I was gunning for Bromcom, personally, but it still has too many holes.

 

This is really helpful. For me, what is really important is the review of MIS happens and if a school decides to stay with what they have - fine.

 

2. This is interesting, as if you went to formal tender, you wouldn't be able to do that, as United Learning and tax payers learnt at great expense.

3. Could you give more details or what they were.

4. Did you review iSAMS and decide that wasn't up to your requirements too.

5. I'm with you there.

6. Others need to accept this - you did your review and made a decision

 

The only other point I have, is in terms of inefficiencies across all MIS, which would be the top 3 say. Then, which provider is more likely to address those over the next 5 years?

Edited February 2, 2024 by Ditto

[MartinT]

3. Could you give more details or what they were.

 

Some examples from our notes:

iSAMS: admin reporting limited or must be created by them

Engage: own timetabling limited, odd licensing for users to write data which could prove very expensive

Veracross: odd Americanisms, links with Firefly (which we're getting rid of), use of non-UK terms

Bromcom: no multi-timetable functionality, registers cannot be updated simultaneously, big potential additional storage costs

SIMS: non-cloud, horrible client, InTouch designed by a child, insufficient cloud components, patching/update responsibilities

[supportman]

Bromcom: no multi-timetable functionality, registers cannot be updated simultaneously, big potential additional storage costs

 

That's useful to see the notes. We did a similar exercise when all the salespeople came in.

 

We have a 2 week dual split timetable here and have no issues with it as far as I know. We do use Keith Johnsons timetabler though and not the bromcom software to create the timetable.

We take registers on iPads and web every lesson and don't have an problems there.

Never paid anything extra for storage. But we did buy some SMS and SMTP credits at some point i think. That was the only additional charge. I do agree that those could have been included in the base cost.

[MartinT]

We have a lot of exams and reports documents which amount to around 20GB. I don't remember the additional costs but Bromcom kept it well hidden until we found out from another school.

[Primus]

I appreciate the consternation at our remaining with SIMS for the time being. In response:

 

1. Yes, we did ask the same questions of all providers.

2. SIMS is not in the same situation as if it was being selected now. It is our in-place solution with all the reports, Wonde connections, PowerBI reporting, Salamander scripting stuff that we need, the complexity growing with each year. Plus dual 2-week timetables for junior and senior school. It may be clunky, but it works.

3. So many of the providers fell down on a key requirement or needed more third-party stuff to work.

4. Arbor is not a solution for an independent school.

5. I hate an on-premises MIS as much as anyone, and further hate having to support Remote Desktop to make it usable at home.

6. We honestly could not find a product that we felt we could migrate to without enormous disruption to the school and catastrophic loss of functionality.

 

I was gunning for Bromcom, personally, but it still has too many holes.

 

Is it wise to keep growing the complexity and dependency on SIMS when its future is in question? As others have said when they eventually launch their new product (in about 2035 if they still exist) it'll be the exact same situation - you'll have to migrate everything, things will break, not be the same etc and you'll be stuck on their timeline.

 

RDP is the single biggest ransomware vector - being able to close that hole is quite a big one.

Edited February 2, 2024 by Primus

[Dr_Zeux]

We have a lot of exams and reports documents which amount to around 20GB. I don't remember the additional costs but Bromcom kept it well hidden until we found out from another school.

 

Yes, as soon as you go above 10GB for storage, Bromcom will charge you - assessment reports take up a lot of space!

[localzuk]

Yes, as soon as you go above 10GB for storage, Bromcom will charge you - assessment reports take up a lot of space!

That bugs me a lot to be honest, considering how cheap storage actually is these days. For top speed premium blob storage in Azure, it costs 12p per GB...

[Dr_Zeux]

That bugs me a lot to be honest, considering how cheap storage actually is these days. For top speed premium blob storage in Azure, it costs 12p per GB...

 

 

Oh, is that per year, per GB? They are partnered with Microsoft...

 

 

Here's their pricing for extra storage:

The default storage limit for a secondary or all through school is 10GB.

Additional storage can be purchased by emailing [email protected]. The prices for the academic year are below:

Additional DMS pricing:

DMS Storage prices

[localzuk]

That's per month per GB @dbluston. So per year would be £1.44 per GB. So, for the £360 they charge for 20GB, you'd get 250GB with Azure premium blob storage.

[Dr_Zeux]

That's per month per GB @dbluston. So per year would be £1.44 per GB. So, for the £360 they charge for 20GB, you'd get 250GB with Azure premium blob storage.

 

Feel free to feed that back to Customer care, they're already dealing with a number of my complaints...

[dmj]

Google storage pricing is 1.8p per GB per month or 2.1p per GB per month for multi region. It's even cheaper for coldline or archive

I knew azure was more expensive, but five times the price? Are you sure those figures are accurate? @localzuk

[localzuk]

Those are in premium storage @dmj - so high speed SSD. For "normal" hot storage it drops to 1.5p.

 

But we digress from the thread...

[Ditto]

For comparison, we use a non school MIS in the charity sector - we store a lot of documents and images. We have the equivalent of 14,000 staff/pupils. Base system includes 0.5GB of document storage. We are paying £150 extra per annum for 50GB. So that's £3 per GB, a bit more than double the £1.44. They weren't MS storage when that was priced, but they have moved that way now. The multiples are quite extreme. I wonder how many schools pay for extra storage?

[dmj]

Those are in premium storage @dmj - so high speed SSD. For "normal" hot storage it drops to 1.5p.

 

But we digress from the thread...

 

I see. I was quoting bucket prices, access time isn't determined by the type of disk they just scale as needed

[Dr_Zeux]

For comparison, we use a non school MIS in the charity sector - we store a lot of documents and images. We have the equivalent of 14,000 staff/pupils. Base system includes 0.5GB of document storage. We are paying £150 extra per annum for 50GB. So that's £3 per GB, a bit more than double the £1.44. They weren't MS storage when that was priced, but they have moved that way now. The multiples are quite extreme. I wonder how many schools pay for extra storage?

 

I suspect loads - storage capacity to 10GB builds up very quickly when you start uploading Assessment reports, and not much else...

[Damon]

I had a chat with Bromcom about those storage prices too but they are pretty much running them at cost. From what I understand it's due to the way the documents are stored, i.e. in the database as opposed to just a storage container. They are investigating alternative options though. If you're using tons of space up on Assessment reports you probably need to compress images in your templates. SIMS used to fall over if you had a larger file size with templates and since then I've gotten into the habit of using Word's built in tools to compress any school branding before uploading the template. Any saving is multiplied by the amount of times you use it.

[Damon]

What confuses me about this SIMS IPR stuff is that all MIS suppliers are paid up dev partners of ESS, meaning they have their own copy of the SIMS training databases. Where exactly is the IP that they don't have access to already?

 

This is all just delay tactics, after some furore and legal action they might have to eventually relent but by then they will have scared enough schools into staying on SIMS, just at a time when they are trying to do deals on 3 year contracts.

[synaesthesia]

Well, if they can't make money selling an old product, maybe they can do it by suing those 3rd parties and schools...

[dmj]

From what I understand it's due to the way the documents are stored, i.e. in the database as opposed to just a storage container. They are investigating alternative options though.

 

The more I read about Bromcom infrastructure, the longer the barge pole gets.

Storing documents in a database is just wacko for a SaaS provider.

[Damon]

I could be wrong in my understanding but either way, I think a change to the current approach would be well received.

[Ditto]

What confuses me about this SIMS IPR stuff is that all MIS suppliers are paid up dev partners of ESS, meaning they have their own copy of the SIMS training databases. Where exactly is the IP that they don't have access to already?

 

This is all just delay tactics, after some furore and legal action they might have to eventually relent but by then they will have scared enough schools into staying on SIMS, just at a time when they are trying to do deals on 3 year contracts.

I couldn't see Arbor in the list, but perhaps I am looking in the wrong place? Perversely, I did see Bromcom, but someone in an earlier post in this thread said they had gone on hold as a result of the December statement. I'm inclined to agree with you that it is a scare/delay tactic. FUD is truly still alive!

[Ditto]

The more I read about Bromcom infrastructure, the longer the barge pole gets.

Storing documents in a database is just wacko for a SaaS provider.

Out of interest, what is the preferred SaaS document storage model nowadays. I remember when on Progresso, we produced fantastic looking end of year reports - really good looking, a lot of detail, agreeably branded, but several pages long. We stored other sizeable documents too. At times, I considered just storing a link to our near limitless Google Workspace. We could control access rights nicely, but it never felt quite right.