23 Things summary

I've enjoyed learning about Web 2.0 tools and their uses, particularly finding out about things I'd only heard of, and learning more about things I already use. So here's what I've particularly liked and disliked of the things that were new to me:


Hits

• Picasa. I still haven't been back but it was really easy to use and I've been very impressed with everyone else's pictures.
• Podcasts. Although I've used the BBC's Listen Again service for ages, I've found it much easier to have things pushed to Google Reader rather than hunting them down. Plus they're not taken down after a week so I've got a much longer listening window. I just wish they podcasted more programmes!
• Widgets. Because they were surprisingly simple to add.
  

Misses

• LinkedIn. Still sceptical about its relevant in the library world, I'm afraid.
• iGoogle. I like the theory but it's just too distracting for work. Also, I rarely use PCs other than my one at home and one at work, both of which are customised in different ways to my different needs.

Unsure

• Twitter. I want to like it but I haven't managed to get it incorporated into my daily routines. Perhaps I'll give it another go in the future.
  

Widgets

I found adding widgets to my blog and to my iGoogle page really easy, much easier than I expected. My biggest problem was forgetting my Yahoo log in for Flickr to retrieve my Flickr username. Oops. Once that was sorted out, it was simple enough to get the widget set up. I think to make it more worthwhile I'd need to add a few more photos to Flickr since a photostream of 3 is rather a pathetic photostream, but that's a long way down my list of priorities at the moment. At least they are 3 fine photos ;) Anyway, here is my iGoogle page, now featuring my Delicious bookmarks.

ThinkFree

Since GeoCat's failure to work is preventing me from doing any cataloguing, I may as well push on with Thing 20. I'd never heard of ThinkFree or any other Office 2.0 product so it was good to learn something new. Once I'd finally got it loaded, it was clear it was much closer to Microsoft Office in appearance and functionality than Google docs. However, it was also considerably slower than Google docs and doesn't appear to have any natural integration with OpenOffice which are both big drawbacks for me when comparing it with Google docs but I'm guessing it doesn't require users to have a Google account so may work better for professional collaboration. Overall, nice, but I'm going to be sticking to Google docs for personal use.

Google docs

I see from the dates of my documents that I've been using Google docs for about a year. The big advantages for me are portability and compatibility. I use OpenOffice at home whereas most public computers use Microsoft Office and sometimes refuse to open OpenOffice files which made attempting to work on a document very frustrating. Also, public computers aren't as willing to let you save documents to them before emailing them to yourself as they used to be so the fact that Google docs doesn't need to save to the hard drive of the computer you're using, or an easily forgotten memory stick, is great. I haven't had any problems with speed or the limited number of features, except that it doesn't integrated with the referencing software I use.

Because I'm studying for my librarianship MSc, I'm found far too often in the Bodleian reading articles or chapters and typing notes straight into a Google doc so I can copy and paste them into my assignments has made studying much easier than the pen and paper route. Google docs also lets me work on my assignments from any computer and acts as an external back-up in case of disaster at home.

However, I haven't used the 'share' options much; the only document I'm currently sharing is my sister's list of books she wants me to look out for! Perhaps that's something I can think about more in the future, but I doubt that anyone is particularly interested in my degree assignments that form most of my documents!

Wikipedia

I love Wikipedia! It's great for simple definitions, basic information about people, and overviews of topics. I know it's not 100% reliable and can't always be trusted, but that doesn't make it useless. As part of my cataloguing job, I've begun creating name authorities and Wikipedia is a fully accepted source of information for these, for instance, this is my citation of it to justify adding a date of birth for Hicham El Guerrouj:

100	1_ |a El Guerrouj, Hicham, |d 1974-
400	1_ |a Guerrouj, Hicham El, |d 1974-
670	__ |a Moroccan success, c2009: |b t.p. (Hicham El Guerrouj)
670	__ |a Wikipedia, Mar. 9, 2010 |b (Hicham El Guerrouj; b. Sept. 14, 1974, Berkane; Moroccan former middle distance runner)

It's excellent for putting things concisely in a form that can be readily transferred to an authority record. It's also useful for explaining concepts that need subject headings; a broad overview of a topic is often enough to suggest sufficient synonyms to find suitable headings. I'll say it again: I love it!

Wikis

I've had a bit of experience with wikis before. My department (C&RD) has had one for some time and although I haven't been particularly involved in it, I've been able to follow developments in the department, which was useful given the amount of change happening. However, its main use now seems to be as a room booking calendar which, while useful, rather lacks the interest of the initial set up. I get a weekly email summary of activity so I can see if anything more exciting is going on, which is a helpful reminder that it's there and keeps me up to date with it.

The nice thing about the Web 2 blog is that it uses WetPaint so I don't need to come up with yet another username/password combo to forget since I can use my C&RD blog sign-in. I had issues at the start because of using Internet Explorer 6 but since I prefer Firefox anyway for its tabs of usefulness, it was a good excuse to download it :) Then the Easy Edit button duly appeared and things became much simpler. The wiki was easy to use (I updated an OULS related link) and has a lot of information, mostly well presented and structured. It's a neat way of collating information that can be readily accessed by staff.

Twitter

Twitter seems fairly straightforward so far. Very easy to sign up to, adjust settings, find people, tweet, and find the #ox23 posts. However, the number of things related to Twitter is a little overwhelming. So many things with similar Twitter-related names that don't give much away in and of themselves! I may have to come back when I have more time to explore them more thoroughly. I'm slightly put off by the inanity of many posts but I'm sure there's good stuff in there; I've come across blog posts mentioning useful tweets and discussions so I guess it's a case of using it a bit more and deciding whether the pluses outweigh the cons.

LinkedIn

I'm rather underwhelmed by LinkedIn. There don't seem to be many people I know on it, and I don't see how the whole connecting thing translates into a real life benefit. I see why people would want to keep a professional profile separate from a social profile - there's too much potential for making assumptions based on Facebook - but I feel I'm missing something with LinkedIn. Perhaps it works better for industries other than libraries.

Facebook

I've been on Facebook for about 5 years when it hit my university just before finals, and was far more attractive than revising... I don't use it nearly as much now, partly because of a lack of time, partly because my social situation has changed since then, and partly because the novelty's worn off. I like it for keeping in touch with people I otherwise would have lost touch with, and for sharing photos, but don't use many applications or other add-ons.

I'm unconvinced about libraries and Facebook. I think the potential is there: it's where a good proportion of users are and can bring together tweets, information, catalogue links and news, making Facebook something of a one-stop shop, but I'm not sure that's how people use Facebook. Facebook is primarily a social thing, not study, and I'm sure I'm not the only one who doesn't want to be reminded about reading lists and opening hours when I'm trying to catch up with friends. I'm sure it works for some people, but I have doubts about its mass appeal.

YouTube

I've used YouTube before to search for videos of random things; it's great for that. For instance, a book I was reading featured several country dances so I used YouTube to find out what they looked like. It does, however, have an awful lot of dross on it, and so I don't use it regularly. It can definitely be used in the library world; I particularly like the idea of seeing demonstrations of using resources on it. I find that seeing someone do something can be easier than reading instructions without pictures so videos would be great if well-publicised.