Thing 22

I chose to look at SEOMOZ.org to see what that site lists as significant web 2.0 sites and tools. I noted that Mango previously won SEOMOZ's award for one of the best in education category, so that validates our choice of a language database. SEOMOZ has some interesting tools and articles about optimizing your site in the search engines (i.e., internet marketing). This is probably of greater interest in the corporate world, but visibility is always a good thing for libraries as well.

Wikis -- Thing 21

Wikis have great potential as a means of sharing expertise. The collaborative efforts of a group of experts can result in a powerful resource. Unfortunately, wikis such as wikipedia have diluted respect for this "thing". While nearly everyone I know has visited wikipedia, most have learned to look for the tags telling you that verification is needed, and to apply a healthy dose of skepticism to the postings. I prefer to use professional wikis (i.e., created by professionals in a specific field). An example is structuralwiki.org by structural engineers. It is well-organized, and includes a good glossary of terms as well as discussions on engineering topics, software reviews, and a directory of engineers. So if you want to know what a purlin is, or about finite-element analysis software, here is your opportunity.

Podcasting -- Thing 20

Podcasting, and vodcasting, are widely available and are often the "means of choice" for sharing information and training workshops. For this "thing", I tried three different audios. I listened to a portion of a book at nancykeane.com. This was very high quality, by a professional reader. I also listened to a podcast from the Denver Public Library. I would rate it as middle of the road: it would have benefited from a more animated vocal. Without a visual component, the vocal becomes extremely important. The sound was clear (without any background noise). Lastly I tried the teen poetry contest from the Woodcrest branch of Los Angeles Public Library. Again the sound was clear. Because these are amateurs, the quality varies with each person, but the enthusiasm was obvious. Maybe there is an opportunity for our library to podcast the youth poetry and/or storytelling auditions.

Hulu -- Thing 19

While Hulu has a lot to offer, viewing on a computer may not be appealing to many users. Yes, you can hook your computer up to a different monitor to get the "big screen" effect, but many will not. Also, having to contend with commercials is not very appealing, but is not much different that a video DVD (especially if you select to view all the commercials up front). So that's the down side. The up side is the extensive library of offerings, and the instant availablility -- no "it's checked out by someone else", no damaged media, and no losses.

In the future, it would be great if subscriptions to series or genres were offered, and patrons could download (like they do with ebooks). That might be the answer to the endless issue of providing everyone's favorite TV series on DVD.

Hulu's advertising revenue is growing by leaps and bounds, indicating that it is a big success -- and is recognized as such by companies marketing their products. And, as you see in the news, Netflix is stiff competition for Blockbuster

To revisit a prior "thing" on cloud computing, I saw recently that Office 2010 is supposed to be available from the cloud; i.e., you would download and use only the relevant parts. I am not sure how the licensing will work, but sounds like a good concept.

YouTube

Here we are at thing 18 or 20 -- the list and heading says 18, but the text says: "For Thing 20, spend some time watching library-produced videos on YouTube." (Yes, I really read what is posted for each thing.) But YouTube is such a biggie that we could make a case for it counting as more than one thing.

What's good about YouTube? Nearly everyone knows about it. And there are lots of entertaining videos.

What's bad about YouTube? Nearly everyone knows about it. And a lot of inconsequential "stuff" gets posted.

I looked at "The Adventures of Super Librarian" and found it mildly entertaining. I searched for Molly Ivins Library and saw a visual tour. On the music side, I tried Lady Gaga, then Taylor Swift at the Grammies and finally Stevie Nicks from 1976.

My next venture was to music for concentration. An interesting concept, and some good music was retrieved.

So YouTube ranks fairly high for entertainment and curiosity. But would I use YouTube for research? A big NO at this stage. Why not? Primarily it is too difficult to determine the accuracy and completeness of the information retrieved. Secondarily, I learn from words as much -- or more -- than from visuals. However, I recognize that others may learn differently, and that the medium may develop in a way that is more friendly toward serious research.

Music Streaming

I tried Last.fm for several types of music, from baroque / classical guitar to classic rock to French. The suggestions were interesting: Claudine Longet referred me to Bridgette Bardot (I did not know she had recorded a bossa nova song).

It is likely that many people use sites of this type to sample music, and to locate songs and artists that are difficult to locate. Those who have favorites are more likely to buy a CD (or iTunes) copy. It may have some impact on the checkouts of music CDs. However, not everyone will want to be tied to the computer when listening to music.

Personally, I listen to music either live or in my car, not at my computer. So I will probably not be a heavy user. The world is a noisy place, and I rarely think more sound is desirable.

To revisit a prior "thing", here is an interesting link to an article about using social networking in your personal finances:
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/social-media-sites-can-save-you-money-2010-03-25
Prior to 23 Things, I probably would not have read this. So thanks for broadening my horizons.

Google Docs

I tried the documents, presentation, spreadsheet, and forms options. The tools are generally easy to use and reasonably powerful for shareware not requiring a license. However, users of Microsoft Office will probably not be motivated to convert. Sharing files sounds great, but it did not work for me. I created a document (logged in with my gmail account), then shared it with editing options with my City account and with my Yahoo account. In both cases (and with multiple attempts), when I tried to access the document, I got a server error:
Server Error
Google Docs has encountered a server error. We are looking into the problem now.
You might be able to download your document by right-clicking it in the main docs list. Select "Export as" and the format you prefer.
To discuss this or other issues, visit the Google Docs Help forum. To see the status of Google applications, check the Google Apps Status Dashboard. (report #k+LEWF6MXe1l+ZUg)
Maybe it would work with two gmail users. So document sharing gets rated as "good idea, bad execution".

The concept of cloud computing makes sense and is likely to become more heavily used. I recently heard an author say that he stores his manuscript this way. Certainly Google's server (or Microsoft's if using Office Live Add-In) should be better protected from fire, flood, theft, power failure, etc. than a personal computer is. And, one would hope, it is also more secure from assaults by hackers or viruses.