I've read that use of SCORM is more preferable than IMS specifications. So I wanted to know what are main advantages SCORM has over IMS Content packaging? Does end user find differences between both the packages while using it in every case and if not, then is it advantageous to migrate from IMS to SCORM specification. This is what I have read somewhere:
"The key, mandatory difference between Scorm and IMS packaging is that in Scorm, each resource must be given an attribute of ScormType, to equal either "sco" or "asset". "sco" means that the resource supports the Scorm runtime protocol, allowing it to exchange data with the learning platform as it runs (marks, state, preference, communications etc.). So from the user's point of view, packaging brings no benefits, except that it makes the content transferrable to other systems. It is in supporting the runtime (and, if you like, sequencing -another add-on) that the user starts to see the benefit."
So can anyone please explain that what does it mean by "transferable to the other systems" and are IMS contents not transferable and how user can start seeing the benefits? Thanking you!
IMS vs SCORM isn't really an apples-to-apples comparison; IMS is an organization which has sponsored many different specifications, such as Common Cartridge (which uses SCORM!) and IMS Question and Test Interoperability (QTI). SCORM, on the other hand, is a collection of specifications bundled together by Advanced Distributed Learning (ADL), a U.S. government-funded organization.
In common practice, corporate LMSs will use either SCORM or AICC for course-to-LMS communication, whereas IMS's assorted specifications tend to be more common in the higher education market (used by higher-ed focused LMSs such as Blackboard, Sakai, etc.).
Since you haven't provided context for your question -- what audience are you developing for: Corporate training? College students? Something else? -- we can't really provide any guidance as to which one is best for your situation.
Side note: This is probably an appropriate time to mention the new Tin Can API, which is more flexible than SCORM, and provides a new approach for tracking both formal and informal learning.