Compare CONTENTdm and ResourceSpace 
- Users report that CONTENTdm excels in its metadata management capabilities, scoring 9.0, which reviewers mention is crucial for organizing large digital collections effectively. In contrast, ResourceSpace has a slightly lower score of 8.5 in this area, indicating it may not be as robust for users with extensive metadata needs.
- Reviewers mention that CONTENTdm's integration with creative software is a standout feature, scoring 8.7, which allows for seamless workflows for users in creative industries. ResourceSpace, however, falls short with a score of 6.8, leading users to express concerns about its compatibility with their existing tools.
- G2 users highlight that CONTENTdm's file types support is strong, with a score of 8.5, making it versatile for various digital assets. ResourceSpace matches this score but users report that CONTENTdm's handling of specific file types is more reliable based on their experiences.
- Users on G2 note that the search functionality in ResourceSpace is superior, scoring 8.0 compared to CONTENTdm's 7.7. Reviewers mention that this makes finding assets quicker and more efficient, which is a significant advantage for daily operations.
- Reviewers mention that the quality of support for ResourceSpace is rated higher at 8.4, compared to CONTENTdm's 8.0. Users report that they have had more positive experiences with ResourceSpace's customer service, which can be a critical factor for organizations needing timely assistance.
- Users say that the analytics capabilities of CONTENTdm are lacking, with a score of 7.0, which has led some to feel that they are missing out on valuable insights. ResourceSpace does not have a score in this area, but users report that they would appreciate more robust analytics features to track asset usage and performance.
- SSO
- API access
The interface is very pleasant to work with, which is important when you spend hours at a time on record creation and metadata entry. The consistency of public interfaces between repositories with CONTENTdm instances for their digital collections is also...
The cost is pretty substantial for a small-scale repository, so it may simply be better to go with another option unless you are "piggy-backing" off of another institution's setup. When we used it, we had little control over features and formatting of...
ResourceSpace (RS) is easy to use. It does a great job of making media assets available to multiple users simultaneously. The search feature is quite responsive and has strong abilities for advanced searches. Setup is pretty easy, with a well thought out...
We recently lost 1,234 files due to "bugs" or bad code. I would not recommend this application for use in any professional environment.
The interface is very pleasant to work with, which is important when you spend hours at a time on record creation and metadata entry. The consistency of public interfaces between repositories with CONTENTdm instances for their digital collections is also...
ResourceSpace (RS) is easy to use. It does a great job of making media assets available to multiple users simultaneously. The search feature is quite responsive and has strong abilities for advanced searches. Setup is pretty easy, with a well thought out...
The cost is pretty substantial for a small-scale repository, so it may simply be better to go with another option unless you are "piggy-backing" off of another institution's setup. When we used it, we had little control over features and formatting of...
We recently lost 1,234 files due to "bugs" or bad code. I would not recommend this application for use in any professional environment.
