I am currently in the process of loading up my test environment with the top 6 open source and free learning management systems (LMS). Moodle and Ilias are going up first. Part of the decision making process stems from cost; free systems have moved to the top of the tree becuase they are FREE. The next part of the decision making process is whether or not the system is adequate or "good". All 6 of these LMS are rated and stable and have good communities to support them. Being "rated" in this case means that they work, have worked, will be working, and people using them don't hate them. This is how I know they are in the top 6 LMS available! People have been writing and review LMS since the LMS boom, and I have no need of reinventing the rating wheel. All I need to do is rate those rating the system. Nice. Part of the process of choosing an appropriate tech system lies in loading the demos with actual content. Sending the decision makers to the application's website and telling them to play with the demo is useless unless those deciding on the application are already familiar with all the applications and very comfortable technically. This is usually NOT the case. And, letting the tech geeks make decisions for the whole group is an abdication of the group's responsibility and makes the tech geek responsible for too much. Many groups will try to make the tech decision go away, but retain the right to complain if they hate the geek's decisions. Avoid this by getting buy in from the decision making tree/group. Another reason why I like the multiple demo install with actual content is because it allows for evaluation of content at the same time as evaluation of the system. Most groups have no idea that they really should have all their content together before doing anything; they rely on organic accretion of content and end up with lame sites that are poorly organized and full of headaches for their volunteer web lackeys. The use of actual content also makes the system more attractive, as the test user's are more interested in seeing their nice content than they are in the way the admin functions are set out. They will learn in the process of application evaluation to look very critically at the way they materials are presented, and the tech people should learn from watching the testers more about what they - the group wanting the application - really want. It has happened more than once that the inability to define what is wanted finally finds a fix when the testers actually see the function they were looking for! Anyway, back to the load up!