Comment by Mezzie
5 hours ago
LMSes have to balance a lot of directly competing needs.
It has to be simple enough for the average person to use (both on the learner side and the instruction side) and have enough complexity to allow for a lot of flexibility in setup because every organization is slightly different. They have to support 50 million file formats and everything has to be backwards compatible until the end of time and everything has to load properly and quickly on 50 million different device/OS/browser combinations. Yes, there's SCORM as a standard, but even that is rickety, and an LMS that doesn't support non SCORM files is dead in the water anyway.
They're simple(ish) in code, and a nightmare in requirements.
Everything you say is true, and yet it's clear you've never used Canvas.
Canvas is decidedly, not fast, fails to display even trivial files (such as source code) as well as more complex files that should just be handled by the browser (such as video), and it has a non-intuitive, verbose, and tiresome interface that would have felt old-fashioned 20 years ago.
Yes, I should have said 'in theory', because there always ends up being compromise and usually that's the thing that's chucked out first.
LMSes frankly run like shit. I don't work with Canvas right now, but every one I've used has run like shit.
However, there are reasons that the complex files aren't handled by the browser: tracking and persistence. It isn't enough to make a video file watchable, it then needs to be tracked in the same system as every other training/educational material and in the same way. If you don't care whether the students actually watch the video, then yeah, throw them a YouTube link or embed a video on a personal site or just have the LMS serve a basic embed. But being able to track video, make it mandatory, make it so that it can't be fast forwarded/people can't skip to the end etc. all matter when LMSes are used for topics that are required for compliance and regulatory purposes.
I don't disagree on the interface(s). Ours is a farce and I hate it.
It's likely that they're so bad precisely because of the simple tech and complex requirements. Simple tech doesn't mean 'easy' or 'not time consuming'. But it means you're looking for developers who have a decent level of technical proficiency (to handle the numerous edge cases and flexibility the systems demand: it's not hard but things like the data structures need to be well thought out and every single piece of the system is integrated with one another in most LMSes so you can't silo work as easily) and who want to work on problems that aren't hard and require dealing with a lot of unreasonable people (in the form of their requirements). You have to allow/design for a lot of stupid things because otherwise people will throw tantrums about it.
Then on top of that, you're developing something that doesn't directly generate profit, so nobody is going to pay for it or appreciate the work you put in.
Then on top of THAT, they're fairly insulated from the actual end users.
It's just a recipe for shitty software.