I think it's funny how a lot of these exercises begin by describing a new technology (wikis, flikr, etc.) and then act like there's some controversy over their inclusion in professional life. For instance, on the introduction to thing 18, it says "But no matter which side of the office suite platform you side with, on this both sides seem to agree; web-based apps have their place." Now, how does that sentence make sense? Web-suite platform? That's like saying "There's two sides to this issue, but they both place the issue in a (non-specified) place." What? Isn't that a double-negative or something to that effect?
I've used Google Docs for quite some time now, and I love the ability to create documents, and, what's more, the ability to save them and access them anywhere I have access to email. That's the really cool thing about OPTs--non-local storage. Again, I'm confused as to how someone could feel controversial over these new tools. I guess if you owned Microsuck I mean Microsoft, you might care. Who else does? The discrepancy between .doc and .wpd has bothered years and years of high school and college students, not to mention open office for Mac, whatever that file extension is. Who in their right mind can logically say that Google Docs isn't a good thing.
I tried out some of the spreadsheets. I don't think they have anything better or more user-friendly than Microsoft Excel per se, but they're free, and people can now use this technology without having to pay hundreds of dollars or (worse) downloading it from open-source site clones or mirrors that could expose their computers to viruses.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I agree. Google docs has saved me more than once. What a handy option to have available. It's great to be able to reach your material from almost anywhere but, to me, the biggest benefit is being able to collaborate with people on things. Handy when you're doing work from home or are working with people from other systems.
Your comments on the wording of the exercises are interesting. This one came to us pre-packaged and I'm glad that I didn't have to cook up all these things by myself. Still, there are things I would have done differently. Be careful about making too many suggestions, though. You might get pulled in to help design the next program - if we make it that far!
I'd be happy to help design the next program. I'd love to review the Web 2.0 awards in more depth, and possibly select another 23 things that information professionals should have facility with.
Has anyone read ?? books on the Libraries of the Future? It's hard to imagine, but it's probably going to be something like Gene Roddenberry's idea of the Computer in Star Trek the Next Generation:
1. Voice recognition technology will enable people to simply speak their information queries into an intelligent machine.
2. Information queries will have to be specifically defined, for instance: "Computer, I want to access photographs of the 1930s in rural Appalachia." The Computer will find results in Ethnographic collections in slide museums, newspaper photographs from old journals, antiquated ecclesiastical training manuals, and so forth. You'll have to tell the computer where you want to look, and narrow it by category until you find what you're looking for. It will force library customers to narrow their searches and pinpoint what they want and speak specifically.
3. Printed materials will become rather obsolete as magnetic ink-equipped tablets controlled by microchip replace the traditional book. People won't be borrowing books anymore, they'll be accessing them on freeware and downloading them.
4. The practical application for all this is that libraries will either lose funding and die, OR become corporations who provide access to information directories and databases for a fee. The Library as we know it will cease to exist as an actual physical location. Perhaps this fee is paid for by the State or the Municipal body, and we will still have "Public Libraries". We will also have private libraries, and university libraries. They'll just become known as Information Brokers.
5. People will still access the Internet from wherever they are as the PDA, cellphone, computer, and iPod all become merged into one thing. Apple has made one, but the iPhone is a pale shadow of what we're going to be able to use in the future.
6. Wait, don't toss out your M.L.S. diploma just yet! It will be librarians' jobs to sort all this information and categorize it. We will have to make it so user-friendly that even a simple person could find what they need. We're going to have to throw out the Dewey Decimal system of organization and the Library of Congress one. We're going to need something completely new. I think tagging is the key here. We're going to have to invent a really useful, flawless tagging system. And we're going to have to apply it to new semantic categories besides what the material is "about", its call number or author or subject. Think of image searching of the future. New tags and ways of tagging will have to be invented, and who better than librarians to do so?
Post a Comment